Rifle Scopes Geovid vs Victory RF

CoCaDoRi

revived old guy
Full Member
Minuteman
Oct 7, 2001
1,562
20
55
South Central North Dakota
Tried a search on this.. came up empty.

I have a pretty good deal on a 15X56 Leica Geovid or a 10X56 Zeiss Victory

Both obviously Bino/RF combo's.

Who has the experience to steer me in the right direction?
 

One-Eyed Jack

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 29, 2004
1,485
6
Minden, NV
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

The 15x may have too much magnification to be hand held. Personally, I prefer the 7x and 8x Leica Geovids to the higher powers.
 

dpreston

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter+
Feb 22, 2010
953
44
Western Pa
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

dont get the 15x unless you plan on using a tripod. I would go with the 8x geovids for handheld use.
 

iFENCEuin

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 6, 2010
171
1
46
North Carolina
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

I have been in the market and just purchased 2 pairs of Geovid 10x42 HDs for me and my brother. I looked at both and liked the Leica's much better than the Victorys. They arrive tomorrow....can't wait! I'll keep you posted.
 

propulsionclimbing

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
May 26, 2006
713
0
Henderson, NV
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

I have owned both. I sold me Geovids. They are a great binocular, but the Zeiss are brighter, better glass, and range a lot further. I was lucky to get 1200 yards out of my Geovids. You will get 1600+ pretty easily with the Zeiss. Both are great units, but the Zeiss are better.
 

threetrees

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Apr 4, 2011
552
1
41
Tirol
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

hrm. looking at the data sheets at the moment:

to be precise: geovid 8x56; zeiss victory rf 8x56

zeiss ranging to ~1200m, geovid to ~1300m
transmission: zeiss ~ 79%; geovid ~85 % (from allbinos.com)

the semireflecting mirror in the zeiss supposedly causes the loss. also note that the zeiss uses fluor glass for the normal victory line, but not for the victory rf line - a possible additional reason why the zeiss have notably less transmission.

i'd also be interested in a review of the new swaro el range binos. but then, it's either 8x42 or 10x42. 8x would be fine (for higher magnification i can use the rifle scope), and 10x is at the edge of what you can comfortably hold stable with a hand ... in both cases a 42mm objective is rather small for our area.

ideally i'd go for a bino with rangefinding capabilities at 10x50, including an angle measurement. in that respect it would be the new swaro again with 10x42. pretty sure the smaller objective size will be (to some extend) compensated by the higher transmission in the swaro bino (compared to a 10x? from zeiss)
 

bward

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
May 22, 2010
1,507
4
Oklahoma City, OK
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

The rangefinder in the zeiss is much better than the Leica. I've had both and sold the geovids.
 

bhoges

Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
Nov 11, 2003
897
120
Plainview,NY
Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

I have the 8x Geovid and I think they are extremely clear and produce no eye stain. I feel they are very easy to use seem to be easy align. As far as the ragnefinder I never have much luck on very long range non reflective targets. Great unit but there is only so far you can go with eye safe lazers.
 

Rthur

Philomath
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Apr 16, 2010
    13,191
    19,910
    53
    Not Chicago, Illinios
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    The range finder on the zeiss is good on coyote size targets to 800-900 yards in normal conditions. I have had returns to a mile on cattle in ideal conditions. As far as the glass goes on the zeiss, I wouldn't worry about that. I have had the 10x45rfb for a while and have been impressed with them from day one.
     

    ratton

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 21, 2009
    775
    107
    62
    Nevada
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    I own a pair of Zeiss 8x45 RF Binos. I compared them side-by-side with my friends Leica Geovid 10x40 RF. The speed of the rangefinder on the Zeiss was much, much quicker. The Zeiss omly ranged to 1200+ yards. I have ranged a Big Rig in excess 0f 1870 yards. The optical quality is about the same. Zeiss a bit brighter. Only downside to Zeiss are they are a bit heavier and bulky. Don't know about the new Swarovski RF but I am sure they are GTG too.
     

    threetrees

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 4, 2011
    552
    1
    41
    Tirol
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    what do you think of the 42mm objective? in our area hunting is done mainly at dawn and dusk, and i know few who use a 40mm objective for that ...
     

    Macmathews

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 3, 2011
    283
    0
    46
    Ontario . Canada
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    I own geovids , LOVE them
    BUT for 1 handed use they are better for a lefty.

    Eg : archery its very hard to range with the right hand only and hold the bow in the left.

    Good thing I am a lefty

    IMO - if the price point is the same the ZEISS is a better buy.
    They have newer technology for both ranging and glass (vs the geovids at least)

    Having ranging bino's are the only way to go IMO.

    Kyle
     

    Opticsspecialist

    Gunny Sergeant
    Commercial Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Dec 9, 2009
    1,607
    26
    37
    Hammond,Louisiana
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    the swarovski el range would be the most comfortable of the rf binoculars. i love my el 10x42 binoculars and the new swaro range have the same design. out of the zeiss and the leica, i lead to the zeiss, it has a few more features and better beam divergence. the differences are really small and any of the 3 would be a great peace of gear. what are you using them for?
     

    michael_aos

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    I have the "Carl Zeiss Optical Inc Victory RF Binoculars (10x45 T RF)".

    I like them. They do seem a little brighter than the Geovid's, but I think I like the ranging interface better on the Geovids.

    Could just be because I used my Leica range-finder for years before I bought the binoculars.
    --
     

    threetrees

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 4, 2011
    552
    1
    41
    Tirol
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    @kyle: "They have newer technology for both ranging and glass (vs the geovids at least)" -> the rf binos from zeiss use non-fluorid glass. so (for an unknown reason) they use worse glass there than in their normal binos (could be connected to absorbtion of fluor glassis in the IR?)

    @jay: hunting in our mountains. mainly during dusk/dawn.

    my thoughts are ... well. pupille opens up to about 7mm, which will become less with age. so a beam diameter on the ocular of about 5-6mm is good. with a magnification of 8x, a 40mm obj is fine.

    however, if i go for 10x, i'd have to look at a 50mm obj. swaro has no 50mm. zeiss might do with a 10x56. leica (like swaro) only has 10x42. but then ... 10x might become a pain in the neck to use for an extended amount of time as its more sensitive to an unstable rest compared to 8x...

    which brings me back to 8x ... and here, for about 500 to 600 more, i can go from leica to swaro, which would range further and has an angle measurement included
     

    nfoley

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Supporter+
    Nov 15, 2010
    1,321
    188
    54
    Castle Rock, CO
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    I have the geovid 10x42s and love them. Excellent optics, and I get consistent ranges on green trees out to 1200yd, sometimes further.
    Having said that, as soon as the Swarovski EL RF binos hit the market my Leicas will be in the for sale forum.
     

    threetrees

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 4, 2011
    552
    1
    41
    Tirol
    Re: Geovid vs Victory RF

    because i just had the geovid hd and swaro el range both in my hands (both the 8x42 version):

    - notice that the swaro also has the button on the _left_ side
    (actually the main button on the top left; the mode changing button on the axis, accessable from the bottom also on the left)

    - at noon, i could not see a notable difference in glass quality. will try the coming week at dusk to compare at more challenging conditions.

    - despite what allbinos.com says, i could not see any coloured cables from electronics on the inside of the tube of the leica.

    - both leica and swaro are pretty much the same size.

    - illumination: both are red.

    - the aiming spot on the swaro is visible in the right tube, the data is shown in the left tube. for some reason (i'll retry), the distance/angle are rather 'low' in the field of view. i really have to look down within the swaro to see the number. the leica behaves alot better there.

    - also, the swaro display of the distance is under a somewhat odd angle. i'll have to check whether that can be rotated or something, but i doubt that.

    the swaro demo glasses are out. however, i was told that delivery is probably only starting in march 2012 or even later.

    so far, the real only difference i can see: swaro has an angle measurement included, but its display seems to be less friendly to the eye than the leica.

    give me one more week and i'll try to figure some more details.