Of course not. If anything I have come to like it more. Great glass. I simply would have made a different choice if one month ago I had the options I have now. Fortunately for me the option still exists, but with a little added hassle.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Questions for 42mm SF Users (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter quincy88
- Start date
I really like my SF 10s. But, I feel like having more magnification is better for those times you need it.
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
I really hope that your NL Pure x 12s give you everything you wish for. Certainly from your explanations and what we've heard about them, they will provide and be the perfect unit for your needs.
I've always personally felt that anything over x 10 is not "ideal" for general bird and wildlife watching but have an experienced birding colleague who upgraded to a Swaro' 12 × 50 EL and has no complaints. No doubt Swarovski have ripped up the old "rule book" and changed the goalposts slightly.
Good luck.
Absolute drivel...
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Jerry post 13,
My experience with the HT is very different fromm yours. I like the handling comfort of the HT a lot and I do not have difficulty in handling it or handling the focusser. A beautiful instrument and a pity the Zeiss stopped making it.
Gijs van Ginkel
My experience with the HT is very different fromm yours. I like the handling comfort of the HT a lot and I do not have difficulty in handling it or handling the focusser. A beautiful instrument and a pity the Zeiss stopped making it.
Gijs van Ginkel
I think up upgrade to the NL 12x42, I will have to compare them in a store against my Zeiss. I do really love my Zeiss though...
NDhunter
Experienced observer
I would not be in a hurry to go with 12x42, the reason is 12X is much harder to hold steady than a 10X.
It is all about physics, whether you have a forehead rest or not. Now if you want to tripod mount then go
ahead.
My experience with 12x is the Nikon SE 12x50 and the Meopta 12x50 Meostar HD. Both very nice binoculars,
but not for an everyday carry.
I really like the Zeiss Victory SF 10x42, now that size is great for all around.
Jerry
It is all about physics, whether you have a forehead rest or not. Now if you want to tripod mount then go
ahead.
My experience with 12x is the Nikon SE 12x50 and the Meopta 12x50 Meostar HD. Both very nice binoculars,
but not for an everyday carry.
I really like the Zeiss Victory SF 10x42, now that size is great for all around.
Jerry
NDhunter
Experienced observer
I have only tried an HT once, only found in one shop, I could not decide what finger to focus with.
And yes, I understand binoculars. And I do like Zeiss, I don't play favorites.
The Zeiss HT model was designed by hunters for hunters.....o
Jerry
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
I had no problems, logistically, with the HT, and admired it's qualities, but didn't personally love it or want one, on the few occasions I used one (none of them extended). Not a great data point but whatever I agree the SF is superior in pretty much every way, at least for my desires/uses.
I also agree that 12x is suboptimal for general birding use. I am still fairly young, fit, good arm strength, and can hold binoculars quite steady for hours on end when staring at the ocean from a boat or the like. I find the view through 12x tempting, but it's plainly clear to me that the greater stability of a 10x yields more useful detail than the greater magnification of the 12x. When I'm tired or in windy conditions it's also clear a 8x outperforms an 10x no matter what I do. Shy of electronically stabilized, or mounted to a finnstick/monopod/tripod, I just can't see a 12x as being an advantage over a 10x. I don't personally think the forehead rest will make a huge difference but am very open to try it and see.
I agree the SF is superior in pretty much every way, at least for my desires/uses.I also agree that 12x is suboptimal for general birding use. I am still fairly young, fit, good arm strength, and can hold binoculars quite steady for hours on end when staring at the ocean from a boat or the like. I find the view through 12x tempting, but it's plainly clear to me that the greater stability of a 10x yields more useful detail than the greater magnification of the 12x. When I'm tired or in windy conditions it's also clear a 8x outperforms an 10x no matter what I do. Shy of electronically stabilized, or mounted to a finnstick/monopod/tripod, I just can't see a 12x as being an advantage over a 10x. I don't personally think the forehead rest will make a huge difference but am very open to try it and see.
pbjosh
missing the neotropics
And to keep it on topic to the subject at hand, I still find the 8x42SF the best bin I've used, full stop, and my favorite bin. Based on specs and early reports, I'm not really tempted by the 8x42NL, I am more tempted by the 8x32SF. I'll trade off a couple percent FOV (either is enormous already) for a huge weight reduction. Perhaps an 8x32NL will come along and set the bar even higher for FOV, but that is mere guesswork thus far.
Jerry, the SF 10x42 is a spectacular pair of binoculars. A real joy to use. I'm glad I got them.
Maybe, one day I'll complement them with a 12x or 15x binoculars or get a scope.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I have only tried an HT once, only found in one shop, I could not decide what finger to focus with.
And yes, I understand binoculars. And I do like Zeiss, I don't play favorites.
The Zeiss HT model was designed by hunters for hunters.....o
Jerry
You have said this many times but I have to ask - wouldn't your hand position be identical to that of the SF?
The bin design is almost the same except for the bottom bridge. I tried an SF and found my grip identical to my HT....index finger on focus and three fingers below, very comfortable and falls naturally to hand. You are only talking about a few mm of difference in the thickness of the bridges so finger position should be the same....YMMV of course.
Last edited:
I have a 12x50 EL that rarely gets used, definitely a niche optic. On some occasions I use it with a monopod, and sometimes with a tripod if I’m sitting and watching. As others have stated the SF 8x42 gets the most use, and the SF 10x42 is the only 10x I am comfortable with. I have ordered the SF 10x32 for its increased FOV and lighter weight, and if it’s as good as reputed my wife may trade her SF 8x42 for the 8x32. We shall see.
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
Lee,
The HT doubts sound like the usual case of the better being the enemy of the (already) good. Perhaps better because of the great balance in the case of the SF. Since adopting a left hand forward approach my personal experience is a steadier handholding technique with any larger format binoculars - I think that advice came as part of the HT purchase, if I remember correctly.
Cheers,
Tom
I received a full refund on my SFs from Outdoorsmans in Arizona. I shop through them whenever I am getting something that is not available locally. They have always provided me with outstanding customer service.
I have put in my pre-order for a pair of NL 10s. Went with a one for one replacement. It is too bad I couldn't hang on to those SFs for a side by side comparison.
I have put in my pre-order for a pair of NL 10s. Went with a one for one replacement. It is too bad I couldn't hang on to those SFs for a side by side comparison.