Zeiss SFL 8x40 This Year's Best New Birding Binocular! (3 Viewers)

[LucaPCP]

There's a lot to be said for lighter weight, it makes a huge difference in the field for me. I probably should have just picked up a pair of 8x40 SFL's to go with my 8x42 SF"s instead of going on a porro binge and getting 3 pairs of 35mm porros

But's it hard to buy the 8x40 Zeiss if you already have 8x42. If only they made a 7x40 SFL.....they could have captured more of my $$$...instead I ended up buying retro 7x35 porros and a new pair of 10x35 E2's to get something lighter and smaller than the SF's

Yes, I love lighter weight, and I would have definitely bought the SFL 8x40, except that I own a pair of Leica UV 8x42 and it seems a bit excessive to get also the SFL... but the weight, eye relief, and wider field of view are very appealing.

 

[[email protected]]

There's a lot to be said for lighter weight, it makes a huge difference in the field for me. I probably should have just picked up a pair of 8x40 SFL's to go with my 8x42 SF"s instead of going on a porro binge and getting 3 pairs of 35mm porros

But's it hard to buy the 8x40 Zeiss if you already have 8x42. If only they made a 7x40 SFL.....they could have captured more of my $$$...instead I ended up buying retro 7x35 porros and a new pair of 10x35 E2's to get something lighter and smaller than the SF's

I understand not getting an SFL 8x40 if you already have an SF 8x42. It is just the same 8x magnification with a little less weight, and a smaller FOV. What retro 7x35 porro did buy? I am trying to think of one and nothing comes to mind. If weight is really important to you, there is the 8x30 SFL.

 

[[email protected]]

Yes, I love lighter weight, and I would have definitely bought the SFL 8x40, except that I own a pair of Leica UV 8x42 and it seems a bit excessive to get also the SFL... but the weight, eye relief, and wider field of view are very appealing.

That is what's nice about the SFL 8x40 and SFL 8x30. They are smaller and lighter than most binoculars with the same size aperture. You get the performance without the weight.

 

[dries1]

 

[MiddleRiver]

That is what's nice about the SFL 8x40 and SFL 8x30. They are smaller and lighter than most binoculars with the same size aperture. You get the performance without the weight.

I can only compare to Leica and FL's but on that basis, I agree with this statement. AND the IQ is top-drawer.

 

[[email protected]]

I can only compare to Leica and FL's but on that basis, I agree with this statement. AND the IQ is top-drawer.

What do you mean by IQ?

 

[MiddleRiver]

What do you mean by IQ?

Image Quality

 

[[email protected]]

Image Quality

Thanks! Yes, I agree, the SFL's have excellent image quality. That is one of the things I like about them. Also, the color purity is very good. The whites are really white, and the blacks are really black with no overtones of other colors mixed in.

 

[[email protected]]

This was a good review on the Zeiss SFL10x30 and SFL10x40, with some excerpts from it. They compare them to the NL pure.

Zeiss SFL Review | 10x30 & 10x40 | Insanely Good | Best In Class Ultralight Binoculars - Backwoods Pursuit

When we first considered putting together this Zeiss SFL review, we didn't really know what to expect. Zeiss Optics has made top notch binoculars, spotting

backwoodspursuit.com

"One of the signature features of these Zeiss SFL binoculars is how forgiving the eye box is. By “forgiving” I mean that they give you a fair amount of cushion” concerning the placement of your face/eyes in relation to the eye cups in order to get a full and complete field of view without having those annoying black spots. In this regard, the Zeiss SFL binoculars offer one of the most forgiving eye boxes on the market today. Because of this, the viewing experience is remarkable because you aren’t in a constant fight trying to avoid black spots as you move across hillsides glassing for animals.

Eye box forgiveness is something not often talked about in terms of binocular features, but when a binocular’s eye box is not forgiving, you notice. A perfect example of this is the Swarovski NL Pure. These are some of the most impressive binoculars we’ve ever tested at Backwoods Pursuit, and are the top performers in our review. Personally, I’ve been using them for a couple of years now, and they are fantastic. However, their eye box is not very forgiving, which can be frustrating at times when they move slightly out of the “sweet spot” in the eye box, making you fight black spots in the field of view.”


"First, let’s look at how the Zeiss SFL10x30 binoculars performed next to the NL Pure 10x32s. It might seem ridiculous to put these side by side given the enormous price difference, but I’m sure glad that we did. As expected, the NL Pures were far superior in field of view (360 feet @1000 yards vs. 396ft @1000 yards), but were only slightly better in edge-to-edge clarity. There wasn’t nearly as much difference as I expected, and surprisingly, the Zeiss SFL truly held its own in edge-to-edge clarity.

As mentioned above, the Zeiss SFL is far more forgiving in the eye box, which makes them much more pleasant and less finicky to use. However, to my amazement, I found that the Zeiss 10×30 SFL outperformed the Swarovski NL Pure 10×32 in low light. I was utterly blown away by, as this was completely unexpected. Pair that with the smaller size and lighter weight (22.8 oz vs. 16.2 oz) and it is an accomplishment. Now, I say this as a HUGE fan of the NL Pure, so I didn’t come to that conclusion lightly.

"I also found that I slightly preferred the color more in the Zeiss SFL, which was another huge surprise during our testing."

As with the 30mm size, the NL Pure offers better edge-to-edge clarity, which is no surprise there. What was surprising was how close it was. The Zeiss SFL 10×40 binoculars were not just excellent in edge-to-edge clarity, they were exceptional. Not QUITE to the NL Pure level, but close. In low light, the NL Pure definitely performed better than the Zeiss SFL, but I was still incredibly impressed with how long the SFL hung in there with the NL Pure; well past sunset and into hours beyond legal shooting light.

The color contrast and image clarity of the Zeiss SFL was nearly on par with the Swarovski NL Pure which is an incredible feat. They certainly weren’t quite on par with the NL Pure, but it was so close that unless you had them side by side you’d be hard pressed to see a difference."

"The Zeiss SFL binoculars are truly incredible, and the combination of features you get makes them absolutely stand out among the rest."

 

[j_2112]

There's a lot to be said for lighter weight, it makes a huge difference in the field for me. I probably should have just picked up a pair of 8x40 SFL's to go with my 8x42 SF"s instead of going on a porro binge and getting 3 pairs of 35mm porros

But's it hard to buy the 8x40 Zeiss if you already have 8x42. If only they made a 7x40 SFL.....they could have captured more of my $$$...instead I ended up buying retro 7x35 porros and a new pair of 10x35 E2's to get something lighter and smaller than the SF's

Hey Scott, bit of a late reply here but I'm currently trying out the 8x40 SFL. Denco is pretty much spot on in his OP. But, my biggest regret was getting rid of the 8x42 SF. Best glass ever right there I've tried. If you have the SF, don't git rid of them, and also, don't get the SFL. Focus is lack luster, FOV is too small, the magical weight balance is missing, low light capabilities are lacking (for reference my 8x42 nl just smokes this in low light performance, as does the SF). Diopter is cheap, etc... However all that being said, the SFL can be found cheap (1200-1500), the SF's are pushing 3k.

 

[Scott98]

The focuser seemed equal to SF on the two 40mm SFL's at the bird store, but you are giving up some aperture. I fight for every millimeter of aperture! If Zeiss comes out with 50mm SFL's that is definitely something I would love to try. Something innovative, like a 9x50, would be cool. The FOV was plenty wide for me.

 

[AlphaFan]

Hey Scott, bit of a late reply here but I'm currently trying out the 8x40 SFL. Denco is pretty much spot on in his OP. But, my biggest regret was getting rid of the 8x42 SF. Best glass ever right there I've tried. If you have the SF, don't git rid of them, and also, don't get the SFL. Focus is lack luster, FOV is too small, the magical weight balance is missing, low light capabilities are lacking (for reference my 8x42 nl just smokes this in low light performance, as does the SF). Diopter is cheap, etc... However all that being said, the SFL can be found cheap (1200-1500), the SF's are pushing 3k.

I have both a 10x42 SF and an 8x42 SFL. The SF and it is my “go to” glass for most handheld applications. The superbly sharp and easy view combined with the super smooth focus, exceptional balance and handling make them just a joy to use. However I loved using my 8x42 MHG for warblers and the woods. That was until the SFL came out. To me the SFL is the best I’ve found in this environment. It does everything the MHG does with a smidge better refinement in brightness, natural color saturation, smoother focuser. While I agree that the SFL doesn’t quite match the SF in these performance categories its size, weight and overall handling characteristics make a joy to use in this environment. IME both the SF and SFL handle much better as a handheld glass on those several hour walks than my NL Pure.