I can purchase a Victory FL (non Lotutec) or an Ultravid (non-HD) for about the same price. Neither will have hydrophobic coating, but the Zeiss will have the FL glass.
I'm looking at a 10x42 configuration. From my reading I've gathered that the Zeiss may have a better view, due to the ABK prisms and FL glass. However, I've read that the Ultravids have better contrast? And some say the Zeiss feel plasticy vs the super tough Ultravids.
I'll be using them for some hunting, but mostly just observing wildlife or whatever outdoors. I'm not super hard on my equipment so I can't imagine that I'd break either one. However, durability is always nice...just for peace of mind even.
Given the choice between the two, what would you recommend? Anything in particular that I should really be considering that may sway me one way or the other?
Thanks for the comments and help!
For my two cents, I would take the Zeisses. They're as good as the lotutec version optically and IMO just a little better than the non-HD Leicas.
I second that. I have FL 7 x 42s and Ultravid 8 x 42s. The FLs may feel plasticky to some but there's not a shred of evidence that they're less tough than the Ultravids.
Sean