Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions (3 Viewers)

[[email protected]]

Well, from the people who work for them would be a good start. Some will be using Swarovski binoculars just like anybody else. No doubt they will express any concerns they have to the powers that be.
Then there are the Research and development team, I reckon they will have a few pairs to play with. And they are probably more experienced and qualified than most. They should know what look for. These are the people that bring these wonderful product at affordable prices. I say affordable?

Whatever is said on these forums, Swarovski will already know, they're not stupid. Give them some credit.

"Whatever is said on these forums, Swarovski will already know, they're not stupid. Give them some credit."

I agree with that totally! What amazes me on this forum is how some people think they know more than the Optical Engineers and designers at Swarovski. Swarovski should have done this or that. This forum is full of "Armchair Optical Engineers". What it is is they don't understand the repercussions of doing this or that to the optical system. It is ridiculous.

 

[giosblue]

I think we're just binocular enthusiasts being enthusiastic about binoculars - in the same way you seem to be an enthusiast cynic being enthusiastic about being cynical about enthusiasts. Funny old world.

Enthusiast cynic, that's a new on me. You can be enthusiast or you can be cynical. To be an enthusiast cynic is a new on me.
But you're right,Yes I am cynical about some of the things posted on forums.
That's because I don't profess to know more than people who make these things. Like I said I not an optics enthusiast. For me not much to get enthusiastic about.
However, i to am looking forward to Henry's review of the NL. I am genuinely interested in his critical assessment of possibly the best binocular you can buy.

Having said that, no doubt Swarovski will have carried out their own critical assessment before bringing the NL to market. And on that note I will leave the discussion and enjoy my bins for what they are. EXCELLENT.

 

[Torview]

I`m obviously misinformed, I understood the majority of companies were very aware of public media spaces and forums discussing their products.

 

[giosblue]

I`m obviously misinformed, I understood the majority of companies were very aware of public media spaces and forums discussing their products.

No, I don't think you have been misinformed. I think that's probably true.
They are aware and I suspect they hang their heads in despair at some of the things they read. Public forums are there for all to see.

 

[[email protected]]

I`m obviously misinformed, I understood the majority of companies were very aware of public media spaces and forums discussing their products.

I have had several of the major manufacturers said they don't frequent forums like this because of too much misinformation. Maybe Charles from Zenray used to read them but the big manufacturers have no interest.

 

[etudiant]

The thing that stood out to me in Henry's last comment is that the optical performance of the two NL barrels differed.
That indicates the QC standards have not changed and that your chances of getting a cherry specimen remain the same as before.
I can only hope that Binastro's caution, that it takes a competent optician to properly set up a 115mm lens, is taken to heart by the ATX people.

 

[The BulbMogul]

The thing that stood out to me in Henry's last comment is that the optical performance of the two NL barrels differed.
That indicates the QC standards have not changed and that your chances of getting a cherry specimen remain the same as before.
I can only hope that Binastro's caution, that it takes a competent optician to properly set up a 115mm lens, is taken to heart by the ATX people.

The ATX115MM will be stellar in every bit except the price as that will cause the majority of the nitpicking and testing looking for that you know what.. I will have a 115mm as soon as i can find one here in States to go with my 95MM that has ZERO nitpicks by me as could not be a more happy camper..

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

etudiant, post 606,
I think that you drew the wrong conclsion, the companies I visited and certainly Swarovski checked if there were differences between the two binocular tubes, and if so, are they within the required precision limits. I think it is far to quick to draw conclusions as formulated in your post.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Canip]

I`m obviously misinformed, I understood the majority of companies were very aware of public media spaces and forums discussing their products.

I am sure they are aware, but I also think that they cannot and will not pay too much attention to all these contradicting recommendations from well-meaning forum members, or they will never be able to bring out a product in a reasonable timeframe and make money with it.

 

[etudiant]

etudiant, post 606,
I think that you drew the wrong conclsion, the companies I visited and certainly Swarovski checked if there were differences between the two binocular tubes, and if so, are they within the required precision limits. I think it is far to quick to draw conclusions as formulated in your post.
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs, I have no doubt that Swaro does these checks and has uniformity standards.
Still, Henry called out a noticeable difference in the optical performance of the two tubes. I think Henry does some of the very best work evaluating optics here on BF, so I take his comment seriously. It surely suggests that the NL quality is not more tightly controlled than before, based on some demonstrable evidence.

 

[NDhunter]

Gijs, I have no doubt that Swaro does these checks and has uniformity standards.
Still, Henry called out a noticeable difference in the optical performance of the two tubes. I think Henry does some of the very best work evaluating optics here on BF, so I take his comment seriously. It surely suggests that the NL quality is not more tightly controlled than before, based on some demonstrable evidence.

Chances are any small differences will not be evident to anyone but a tester looking for something to criticize.

So just relax and lets wait for more reviews.

Jerry

 

[henry link]

Just to clear up that one thing, while both sides have some of the same aberrations in similar amounts, what I was referring to was coma. It's significant in the left side of my pair, but negligible in the right side. It's not so unusual for some coma to be introduced in the process of collimation, but there's more of it in the left side than an optics geek like me would prefer to see. Soon enough I'll be posting enough about that and other stuff to put everyone to sleep.

Henry

 

[karmantra]

Just to clear up that one thing, while both sides have some of the same aberrations in similar amounts, what I was referring to was coma. It's significant in the left side of my pair, but negligible in the right side. It's not so unusual for some coma to be introduced in the process of collimation, but there's more of it in the left side than an optics geek like me would prefer to see. Soon enough I'll be posting enough about that and other stuff to put everyone to sleep.

Henry

Looking forward to your report to cure my insomnia! Thanks in advance

 

[dries1]

Henry,

I take it the coma was not under normal viewing conditions of 8X but stepped up.

Andy W.

 

[etudiant]

Chances are any small differences will not be evident to anyone but a tester looking for something to criticize.

So just relax and lets wait for more reviews.

Jerry

The central point I was trying to make, unsuccessfully, is that the variance detected by Henry is not unusual for current binocular QC standards.
I had hoped that the NL would raise the bar, but obviously am disappointed.

 

[binomania]

Hi to all. I have done a few more tests. I have a Zeiss SF 8x42 and an EL (latest version) 8.5x42 at home. With Binomania I am addicted to novelties and my luck is that I don't necessarily have to justify my latest purchase. Obviously it's too early to write a review, but i can tell you that:
The difference in balance, weight and field of view is immediately evident compared to the 8.5x42 EL. I prefer the new NL.
With the Zeiss SF , in these cases, the differences are minimal, the Zeiss is very well balanced and has a nice field of view, however the NL shows a sharper field at the edge (but it is not totally flat), more contrast and a more neutral tone.
The containment of chromatic aberration is excellent as well as the lateral chromatic.
I did some freehand tests with the forehead rest and without it and, personally, I don't notice any difference , thanks to the stable grip of this new binocular. I don't have a 10X42 NL with me and have sold the Canon 10x42, but from my memories, based on the details I have around the house, the forehead rest, does not replace a stabilized binoculars, sorry for those who believe it. There will certainly be an improvement in astronomical use and especially for those who buy the 12X, but, in my opinion, for birdwatching with the 8X; personally I think it is unnecessary
The only flaw is finding the correct position of the eyepiece hoods, which in my case, varies according to the lighting conditions and I often see reflections. I had a similar problem with the Kowa genesis 8x33. Let's say that - in this case - it is not an "Immediate" binoculars. Sorry for my bad english.

 

[Loud Green Man]

This thread has been something of a rollercoaster ride but I now have clear sight of the way forward and it’s simple:

I ping Swarovski Optik UK my address and their delightful and industry leading Customer Service Department kindly sends this Wildlife & Conservation Officer a pair of NL’s (head rest optional) for what we shall describe as an Autumn long in-the-woods assessment.

My pronouncement is not to be questioned please.

Thank you and “happy day” to you all.

LGM

 

[binomania]

This thread has been something of a rollercoaster ride but I now have clear sight of the way forward and it’s simple:

I ping Swarovski Optik UK my address and their delightful and industry leading Customer Service Department kindly sends this Wildlife & Conservation Officer a pair of NL’s (head rest optional) for what we shall describe as an Autumn long in-the-woods assessment.

My pronouncement is not to be questioned please.

Thank you and “happy day” to you all.

LGM

Hi,I think "watching" is the best thing.:t:
Good Observations

 

[PeterPS]

Hi to all. I have done a few more tests. I have a Zeiss SF 8x42 and an EL (latest version) 8.5x42 at home. With Binomania I am addicted to novelties and my luck is that I don't necessarily have to justify my latest purchase. Obviously it's too early to write a review, but i can tell you that:
The difference in balance, weight and field of view is immediately evident compared to the 8.5x42 EL. I prefer the new NL.
With the Zeiss SF , in these cases, the differences are minimal, the Zeiss is very well balanced and has a nice field of view, however the NL shows a sharper field at the edge (but it is not totally flat), more contrast and a more neutral tone.
The containment of chromatic aberration is excellent as well as the lateral chromatic.
I did some freehand tests with the forehead rest and without it and, personally, I don't notice any difference , thanks to the stable grip of this new binocular. I don't have a 10X42 NL with me and have sold the Canon 10x42, but from my memories, based on the details I have around the house, the forehead rest, does not replace a stabilized binoculars, sorry for those who believe it. There will certainly be an improvement in astronomical use and especially for those who buy the 12X, but, in my opinion, for birdwatching with the 8X; personally I think it is unnecessary
The only flaw is finding the correct position of the eyepiece hoods, which in my case, varies according to the lighting conditions and I often see reflections. I had a similar problem with the Kowa genesis 8x33. Let's say that - in this case - it is not an "Immediate" binoculars. Sorry for my bad english.

Grazie for your comments, out of which I find the following to be quite important:
-Compared to the Zeiss SF, the differences are minimal
-There are reflections in the oculars caused by side light, which can be reduced by adjusting the height of the eyecups (is my interpretation of your comment correct?).

Have you noticed any RB, or any glare when you look in the direction of the sun?

 

[binomania]

Grazie for your comments, out of which I find the following to be quite important:
-Compared to the Zeiss SF, the differences are minimal
-There are reflections in the oculars caused by side light, which can be reduced by adjusting the height of the eyecups (is my interpretation of your comment correct?).

Have you noticed any RB, or any glare when you look in the direction of the sun?

Hi. here's a first comparison of exit pupils.
I've used (free hand) my Olympus OMD E-M5. In the next days i will use a tripod and support for the binoculars
Today i will busy with my family. I will do some test today. Thanks for the attention