Ollin Magnetic Digiscoping System

PSA - New Sig Sauer Zulu6 HDX Pro's Are Trash

Chingon

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 3, 2021
Messages
200
Cross-posting here for awareness. I love my Gen 2 HDX 16's and jumped at the chance to give Sig more of my money on the 18 pro's. They are objectively worse at clarity, size, weight, batteries, stabilization... Sig only stands behind their "low light performance improvement".

This new gen is great way to lose money and gain frustration. If you do buy them just make sure to never look through the better and cheaper Gen 2's.


 
I think you could make the argument that for the $ they aren't worth the extra $500 over the 42s but to say they are trash is wild. I had a chance to hunt behind the 16 pros for a week and the omniscan was incredible. Better light transmission and improved color with the 50mm objective and new coatings. I never reached for my swaros or my spotter the entire week. Eye of the beholder I guess.
 
I think you could make the argument that for the $ they aren't worth the extra $500 over the 42s but to say they are trash is wild. I had a chance to hunt behind the 16 pros for a week and the omniscan was incredible. Better light transmission and improved color with the 50mm objective and new coatings. I never reached for my swaros or my spotter the entire week. Eye of the beholder I guess.
Thanks for the input, but did you actually run the Pro's side by side with 42's? I'm guessing you didn't. If so, please post up some pictures of the images to show an improvement.

For someone that hasn't used the 42's, or isn't looking through them side by side, they might seem pretty great. However, the idea of paying $500 extra for bigger, heavier, more battery hungry, LESS CLEAR glass is straight trash. Sorry, but that simply doesn't compute. Once Sig sends my 18's back I'll do a low light test off tripods to show that comparison. But to pay all that money and carry all that extra bulk for marginal performance improvement for only 5 min of the day? Epic fail.
 
I sold my 42s to make room for the 50s. We did have them side by side. Both 16s. I'm used to the omniscan now so it would be hard to go back to the 42s. Battery life was just fine I've been playing with them since launch week and they are still on the original batteries. Maybe the 18s are less forgiving?? Anyone have a chance to use the 14 pros yet?
 
Sorry - my data is buried in my cross post. Key points:

  • I've had my 16x42's for about a year and love them, ranted and raved. Excited about the improved glass advertised by Sig. Pre-ordered the 18 Pro's.
  • Received them and took them out, along with 16's, to do some glassing. Huh, not blown away despite the extra heft and supposedly improved glass.
  • Glass up some elk at about 2,000 yds. That's odd - I can count the points on the bull with my 16's but not my 18's. Must be because I haven't dialed in diopters or something? I was very steady off my tailgate as well.
  • Head to the range with my tripod. Dial in diopter for 18's, take the above photos getting each as focused as possible. 16's are clearly superior. What the heck?
  • Called Sig and they wanted proof that 18's were not better for an RMA - sent them these images and they sent a label (apparently that convinced them something wasn't right).
  • They call back and say, "These meet spec, go pound sand, thanks for your cash you moron." (paraphrasing)
Another guy on Rokslide did a similar comparison with the 16's side by side and is reporting similar decrease in performance, though no pics.

Sig advertising:
The ZULU6-HDX PRO Image Stabilized Binoculars set a new standard in optical clarity and stabilization with reengineered lens coatings, prescriptions, and settings that are built to impress even the most discerning optics aficionados.

To me, that's a slap in face to consumers. Stand behind your ads and your products.
 
Interesting, I see a field of view difference but the magnification difference seems nonexistent. How strange.
Nothing about them were as expected. The rep from Sig told me that with larger objectives, one should expect less clarity. WTF
 
The rep from Sig told me that with larger objectives, one should expect less clarity. WTF
That's an interesting comment too. I can maybe see how too much light coming in can distort the image but I have a pair of 12x50 Razor UHD's that are pretty damn clear. Just seems like they're out of focus, like a focus wheel or diopter adjustment.

I was thinking about getting a pair of these too....
 
Man if you’re already spending that kind of money I would have a hard time buying anything other than Swarovski ELs or SLCs. I still refuse to look through a pair of NLs because I don’t want to be tempted to cheat on my SLCs.
 
Man if you’re already spending that kind of money I would have a hard time buying anything other than Swarovski ELs or SLCs. I still refuse to look through a pair of NLs because I don’t want to be tempted to cheat on my SLCs.
Buddy of mine just got nl’s. I’m scared to look through them. I love my slc’s
 
Man if you’re already spending that kind of money I would have a hard time buying anything other than Swarovski ELs or SLCs. I still refuse to look through a pair of NLs because I don’t want to be tempted to cheat on my SLCs.
My hunting partner has Swaro BTX and the new NL’s. Unless we’re glassing a single spot for more than an hour, I have zero desire to use traditional “alpha” glass anymore. The gen 2 are just that quick and easy to deploy that I have no desire to constantly lug around tripods and take 5 minutes to get set up before I’m glassing.
 
Got my 18x50 HDX Pro's back from Sig with a note that they're amazing and I'm an idiot. Grabbed another set of 18x50 HDX Pro's from Sportsman's, as well as the new 16x50 HDX Pro's to compare against my 16x42's.

Bottom line - only the 18x50 pair that I got from Sportsman's could be imagined to be slightly better optically if you try really really hard. You get MAYBE two minutes more glassing time when it's dark. The difference between 18x50's was noticeable and repeatable. I could mix them up and pick which one was which based on image clarity. Sig must have pretty loose specs for their QC. The 16x50's were atrociously bad. Holy cow.

Save your money - don't buy the HDX Pro's.

Sig Sauer 16x42 Zulu6 HDX:
16_42_3.jpeg

Sig Sauer 16x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro
16_50_2.jpeg

Sig Sauer 18x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro #1
CL18_50_11.jpeg

Sig Sauer 18x50 Zulu6 HDX Pro #2
SW18_50_6.jpeg

These were taken during sunset, so the color isn't something that can be compared. I wanted to stick around until sunset to test the low light performance. No pics of that, but there was a very small improvement after last light. Not a $700 improvement for sure.
 
Man if you’re already spending that kind of money I would have a hard time buying anything other than Swarovski ELs or SLCs. I still refuse to look through a pair of NLs because I don’t want to be tempted to cheat on my SLCs.
I think the NL are on sale for a few more days ;) just do it! i did and although the price stopped my heart for a few seconds. They are so worth it!!
 
That's an interesting comment too. I can maybe see how too much light coming in can distort the image but I have a pair of 12x50 Razor UHD's that are pretty damn clear. Just seems like they're out of focus, like a focus wheel or diopter adjustment.

I was thinking about getting a pair of these too....
That doesn't make sense in any application i've seen. Bigger spotters in the same lineup are always revered for better better optics. Don't know how image stabilization would impact that.

I've yet to try these.. Just got the darn Kilo 10k G2s so hate to spend more $ on binos.
 
Yeti GOBOX Collection

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,301
Messages
2,016,528
Members
36,105
Latest member
JohnP62
Back
Top