I held a thread on 'Zeiss SF 42 mm for astronomy' here at CN.
I'm in process to get a good high end bino. I know more light in vs astronomy is good but it has a price.
The new SF 42 mm is a very light bino but little long ( 17 cm ) and rather pricy for it's package.
But I think its pupil size of 5.3 and angle at 8.6 do sounds great ( I'm into the 8 X )
I heard many say, get a low price but quality parro instead if just astronomy. Wey better too.
Well a parro at 50 or 60 cm and no IS is not what I like really.
The roof is more compact and could be carry very easy on trips, trekk etc and be used for my telescope search also later on haning around neck.
I'm a guy belive new things almost all time get better. Old things and old technology is never leading edge.
I seen the SF it in daylight and that was of course great. I compared it to Swarovski EL 8.5 and it was ok but 'darker' ( in daylight ) I Heard of the Zeiss HT was best in light ( 93% ) But I thought SF was more clear ( in daylight )
But over to this thread. The Zeiss 2060S.
So how is it aganist a 42 mm Zeiss modern SF roof.
Here is what one source I talked to said ;
"Probably sharper over most of the field, and brighter because of larger exit pupil and newer coatings."
He also meant that a 650 USD Takahashi 22x60, which are "FAR better binoculars"
But as I said, I'm not into a parro that style.
So why do I ask on the Zeiss ? ( parro )
Well first it is a Zeiss, then it is VERY expensive. I know technology is very old here and/but it is 60 mm.
So the advice I got that a Zeiss roof SF 42 mm is give me better, is that correct.
The owner of this pice might has a ide if he look throu a Zeiss SF 42 mm and compare.