New Zeiss binos 8x40 SFL and 10x40 SFL (1 Viewer)

[pm42]

I also tried them at dawn and at night, looking at stars but with a very bad sky (I'm in Paris).
The result is as expected: the 8x40 collects more light than the 8x32 and the 8x42 is slightly better, probably due to more light transmission.
Once again, this is just what I see and I'm not 20 anymore nor an expert in binoculars evaluation.

 

[NDhunter]

They arrived a few hours ago.
I had no time to test them properly but here are my first impressions after a half an hour of use:

They inspire confidence, build quality is very good, the pouch is just the right size (I won't use it but it is not ridiculous like others) and the rainguard and covers seem well designed, especially compared to the SF 8x32 and the covers of the NL Pure.

The focuser it slightly too stiff but there is a chance this will improved. Hinge is really too stiff too and this more of an issue. I'll ask my reseller.

The handling is ok but because I have relatively small hands, the barrel diameter is less confortable than the SF 8x32 and there is no comparison with both the NL Pure. But I can leave with it.

Optically, they are better than expected. I broad daylight, I do not see an obvious difference between the 4 binoculars. Well, let me be more precise: the SFL seem to have more contrast. So when comparing them with the NL Pure 8x42, the Swaro gives the impression of transmitting more light and being more "transparent" but the Zeiss contrast make them more Leica-like and this is intended as a compliment.
So I guess it will be a matter of taste and maybe some more experienced users will find differences I cannot see.

On the other hand, I like the wider FOV of the NL Pure and the SF: it makes me forget I'm looking through binoculars. This is also the reason why I use the Curio 7x21 instead of the Ultravid 8x20.

Here is a picture with from left the right: SFL 8x40, NL Pure 8x32, SF 8x32, NL Pure 8x42.

The photo is helpful, tell me about the NL Pure on the right, the photo shows an odd view of the focuser, diopter,
not sure. Can you help explain that.
Thanks, Jerry

 

[dries1]

Jerry that is the face brace for the NLs, an option to buy at $140.00.

 

[NDhunter]

Thanks, that explains it.
Jerry

 

[Troubador]

Thanks - the HD armour for me is pretty nasty - sticky, marks, feels soft and feels the sort of rubber that degrades (optically the HD 8x32s were quite nice though).

I have had a pair of Conquest HD 8x32 for 8 years now. I have used them from North Uist in the Western Isles to The Languedoc in the south of France in all weathers. I have laid on them while taking photographs of inter-tidal marine life, while taking photographs of Bog Orchids too and in France they were operated by my sweaty hands for many days. The armour has not deteriorated in any way at all.

To check how durable the Conquest's armour is, take a look at this video:

Of course none of this may make the Conquest's armour feel better to your fingertips (although I love its smooth texture) but it should at least reassure you that the armour is more than tough enough for the job.

Lee

 

[pm42]

Next episode:

The 8x40 have a bit of CA especially against a bright background such as a cloudy sky and the difference with the NL Pure is noticeable. But this is well contained and far less than what I remember from the Leica 7x42 for instance.

I talked to my reseller and he told me that the higher contrast is due to the lack of fluorite lens (no opinion on my side).
And that if I find the hinge too stiff, they will exchange it when they have some stock, if the new ones are better of course.

 

[binomaniac]

pm42, thank you for sharing your first impressions so quickly. What can you tell us about colors compared to SF and NL? I now have NL PURE 8X42 and I had SF 8x42. I didn't notice in the SF that greenish hue that some people are talking about. Do you have the impression that the new SFL also has that greenish hue or are the colors more neutral?

 

[pm42]

pm42, thank you for sharing your first impressions so quickly. What can you tell us about colors compared to SF and NL? I now have NL PURE 8X42 and I had SF 8x42. I didn't notice in the SF that greenish hue that some people are talking about. Do you have the impression that the new SFL also has that greenish hue or are the colors more neutral?

I'm not very sensitive to this. I'm pleased with the SF and the NL Pure. I found the SFL to be very close to the SF but I would need to do some tests with a camera of a spectrophotometer to give a definitive answer.

 

[Paultricounty]

I'm not very sensitive to this. I'm pleased with the SF and the NL Pure. I found the SFL to be very close to the SF but I would need to do some tests with a camera of a spectrophotometer to give a definitive answer.

Good morning,
So where do you place this optically in relation to the SF and NL? Is this just slightly below the top Alphas or slightly better than the high quality mid grades, like Nikon HG, Zeiss Conquest?

Do they have that true sparkle and wow effect we get with the best of the best?

Is the build quality similar in feel to SF?

last question, is there room for the fingers between barrels after your IPD is set?

Thank you

 

[pm42]

So where do you place this optically in relation to the SF and NL? Is this just slightly below the top Alphas or slightly better than the high quality mid grades, like Nikon HG, Zeiss Conquest?

I have no experience with Nikon HG and Zeiss Conquest. For decades, I used a Trinovid 8x32 BA and was quite happy with it.
I find the SFL below the top alphas but I like the image as much because of the extra contrast. I would like to have more FOV but you can't always get what you want.

Do they have that true sparkle and wow effect we get with the best of the best?

True sparkle is a matter of preferences. For instance, I did not have it with the SF but it is still excellent. I have nothing bad to say about it optically.
But with the NL Pure, it was love at first sight. However, when I compare them with the SF, differences are really subtle.

So far, I like the SFL a lot and today, I was comparing them to the SF to answer another question and ended up thinking "wow, I prefer the view from the SFL".
When it comes to the NL Pure, the 8x42 is my favorite optically but too big & heavy for me as I travel and hike with a lot of photographic equipment. If not, it would be my main binoculars .

The NL Pure 8x32 and the SFL are the same size and weight but they are different and I cannot choose. I think I'll keep these two.

Is the build quality similar in feel to SF?

Except for the stiffness, this is what I feel. And I find the SFL accessories more convenient. For instance, my SF rainguard does not stay put and I did not used it that much.

Last question, is there room for the fingers between barrels after your IPD is set?

Yes but as I said before, I have relatively small hands so with the SFL, my thumb does not touch my middle finger whereas they overlap when I use the NL Pure 8x32. So I do not need a lot of room.

 

[Paultricounty]

I have no experience with Nikon HG and Zeiss Conquest. For decades, I used a Trinovid 8x32 BA and was quite happy with it.
I find the SFL below the top alphas but I like the image as much because of the extra contrast. I would like to have more FOV but you can't always get what you want.

True sparkle is a matter of preferences. For instance, I did not have it with the SF but it is still excellent. I have nothing bad to say about it optically.
But with the NL Pure, it was love at first sight. However, when I compare them with the SF, differences are really subtle.

So far, I like the SFL a lot and today, I was comparing them to the SF to answer another question and ended up thinking "wow, I prefer the view from the SFL".
When it comes to the NL Pure, the 8x42 is my favorite optically but too big & heavy for me as I travel and hike with a lot of photographic equipment. If not, it would be my main binoculars .

The NL Pure 8x32 and the SFL are the same size and weight but they are different and I cannot choose. I think I'll keep these two.


Except for the stiffness, this is what I feel. And I find the SFL accessories more convenient. For instance, my SF rainguard does not stay put and I did not used it that much.


Yes but as I said before, I have relatively small hands so with the SFL, my thumb does not touch my middle finger whereas they overlap when I use the NL Pure 8x32. So I do not need a lot of room.

Thx PM45,

They sound phenomenal. I think I’m going to have to try out a 10 x 40.

Paul

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

pm42, post 350,
If you often carry quite a weight of photogear with you it might be an idea to try the Curio 7x21. small size but great performance. And you hardly notice its weight, while it is directly available next to your photo equipment.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[pm42]

pm42, post 350,
If you often carry quite a weight of photogear with you it might be an idea to try the Curio 7x21. small size but great performance. And you hardly notice its weight, while it is directly available next to your photo equipment.
Gijs van Ginkel

This is what I do: see Better rainguard for the CL Curio for instance.
But they do not replace full sized binoculars so I end up traveling with the Curio and a pair of 8x32 and 8x42 or now 8x40. The Curio are perfect in certain circumstances but I take the "big ones" when hiking.

 

[Swedpat]

Interesting! Now we are just waiting for a 30mm SFL, right? 😛

 

[pm42]

Interesting! Now we are just waiting for a 30mm SFL, right? 😛

I think I'm gonna stop buying binoculars for a while and so far, the Zeiss Victory 8x25 is a good solution when one wants bigger than an ultra-compact like the Curio but smaller and lighter than a 8x32. This is my wife choice for instance.

 

[DrewskiMT]

I think I'm gonna stop buying binoculars for a while and so far, the Zeiss Victory 8x25 is a good solution when one wants bigger than an ultra-compact like the Curio but smaller and lighter than a 8x32. This is my wife choice for instance.

Thank you very much for all these thoughts! Sounds like you have a gem of an optic in your hands with the SFL. I’m not surprised. To hear the contrast is high (perhaps Leica like) is wonderful. I was reminded last night on a hike that the best pair of binoculars is the ones that you have with you/ will carry with you everywhere: I was hiking on a mountain and saw a redtail dive on a crow and then came across a huge Blue grouse that allowed me to approach to 30m. I left my 8x32 Conquests at home because I felt they were too heavy! They are not, I was lazy. Makes me think the VP 8x25 may come before SFL for me.

 

[pm42]

I left my 8x32 Conquests at home because I felt they were too heavy! They are not, I was lazy. Makes me think the VP 8x25 may come before SFL for me.

Photographers spend a lot of time agonizing about what the best gear is and in the end, the answer is always "what fits you best and that you have with you when you need it".
The same is true about binoculars I suppose.

 

[Maljunulo]

Many here spend time agonizing and hurling spec sheets and reviews at one another that would be much better spent just looking through the bleeping things.

 

[dries1]

The question is, do you feel the intensity and not the weight.

 

[Richard D]

I have had a pair of Conquest HD 8x32 for 8 years now. I have used them from North Uist in the Western Isles to The Languedoc in the south of France in all weathers. I have laid on them while taking photographs of inter-tidal marine life, while taking photographs of Bog Orchids too and in France they were operated by my sweaty hands for many days. The armour has not deteriorated in any way at all.

To check how durable the Conquest's armour is, take a look at this video

Of course none of this may make the Conquest's armour feel better to your fingertips (although I love its smooth texture) but it should at least reassure you that the armour is more than tough enough for the job.

Lee

I've no doubts about the armours protectiveness - it's the slightly squishy and sticky quality I didn't like. I'm pretty neutral on texture. Optically the 8x32's semed to punch well above their price point, I was mainly interested in whether the build quality of the SFLs were closer to the HD or SF.