Looking for comparisons between 8x32 SF and 8x40 SFL. (2 Viewers)

[Zedster]

So I'm looking for a new pair of bins to replace my elderly 8x30 SLC Mark IIs. I'm mostly looking at 8X30 or 32 bins but can't help but notice that the 8x40 SFL is very similar to the 8x32 SF in both size and weight. I wear glasses so eye relief is important. Close focus is important as the SLCs have abysmal close focus. Judging from their age and coatings I imagine the SLCs are not up to the image of either of these bins. I see that the SF has a wider field of view than the SFL but both are wide enough I'd think.

Thoughts?

 

[pm42]

I have both. It is a matter of preference. I do not use the SF 8x32 as I prefer the SFL 8x40 or the NL Pure 8x32. I do not know why but I never "clicked" with the SF.
But they are very, very good and Troubador's favorite if memory serves.

Handling and ergonomics are different and a matter of personal preference: the SFL is bigger and the focuser is stiffer.
Optically, the SF has a wider field and less CA but the SFL is no slouch.
I also prefer the SFL's rainguard and caps.

So do you want the top optical quality and wider field or a bigger diameter and exit pupil and consider they are worth x% less in optics, x being small, less than 10% I would say?

 

[Bill Atwood]

I also have both and some Swaro alphas. Hope to pick up an 8x30 SFL next year, then will pick 2-3 winners and thin the herd. The main difference optically that I see between the SFs and SFLs is shown in this figure on Zeiss' website:


The SF is on the left, SFL on the right. This effect is exaggerated here, but I definitely see it. Most of the time it is not really an issue when using the SFs, but it does interfere significantly with apparent contrast in low light conditions. The SFLs and NLs definitely give the LBJs in the underbrush a fair amount more "pop" when compared to the SFs.

[Edit: To be clear, the above diagram is to demonstrate the UHD concept of the SFLs. Zeiss does not claim the left part of the diagram is representative of the SFs, however l find the comparison appropriate with the caveat that the SFs are not nearly that green.]

The 8x32 SFs are the only SFs I've used and just picked them up a few weeks ago. As many others have said the ergonomics are great, especially the focus wheel. I even like the much maligned objective covers. They would be my everyday bin for the forseable future, EXCEPT for the green effect shown above. I will likely end up selling them, especially if the 8x30 SFLs performance is similar to the 8x40s.

ER - I wear glasses (very nearsighted and now a fair amount of presbyopia) and there is plenty of ER. I've got a 3/32" thick O-ring on the SFLs eyecups to help prevent blackouts. I don't find blackouts them to be too much of an issue with the SFs the eyecups completely down.

Close focus - I'm 5'5" and can almost focus on my feet with the SFLs. The SFs close focus is about 3-4 feet further away while I'm focusing on the ground.
FOV - the SFs are the winner although the SFLs are quite acceptable.

Focus speed - SFs' is good, the SFLs' very quick.

Focus wheel - SFs have the best ever. SFLs' focus is smooth but a bit too tight. I intend to send them to Zeiss for adjustment. Also the SFLs' focus wheel is more forward than I like.

Diopter adjustment - I really wish the SFLs had a locking one.

 

[Zedster]

I also have both and some Swaro alphas. Hope to pick up an 8x30 SFL next year, then will pick 2-3 winners and thin the herd. The main difference optically that I see between the SFs and SFLs is shown in this figure on Zeiss' website:
View attachment 1485631

The SF is on the left, SFL on the right. This effect is exaggerated here, but I definitely see it. Most of the time it is not really an issue when using the SFs, but it does interfere significantly with apparent contrast in low light conditions. The SFLs and NLs definitely give the LBJs in the underbrush a fair amount more "pop" when compared to the SFs.

The 8x32 SFs are the only SFs I've used and just picked them up a few weeks ago. As many others have said the ergonomics are great, especially the focus wheel. I even like the much maligned objective covers. They would be my everyday bin for the forseable future, EXCEPT for the green effect shown above. I will likely end up selling them, especially if the 8x30 SFLs performance is similar to the 8x40s.

ER - I wear glasses (very nearsighted and now a fair amount of presbyopia) and there is plenty of ER. I've got a 3/32" thick O-ring on the SFLs eyecups to help prevent blackouts. I don't find blackouts them to be too much of an issue with the SFs the eyecups completely down.

Close focus - I'm 5'5" and can almost focus on my feet with the SFLs. The SFs close focus is about 3-4 feet further away while I'm focusing on the ground.
FOV - the SFs are the winner although the SFLs are quite acceptable.

Focus speed - SFs' is good, the SFLs' very quick.

Focus wheel - SFs have the best ever. SFLs' focus is smooth but a bit too tight. I intend to send them to Zeiss for adjustment. Also the SFLs' focus wheel is more forward than I like.

Diopter adjustment - I really wish the SFLs had a locking one.

Thank you for that comparison. Obviously I need to find a place to test both but this is super informative

 

[Zedster]

I have both. It is a matter of preference. I do not use the SF 8x32 as I prefer the SLF 8x40 or the NL Pure 8x32. I do not know why but I never "clicked" with the SF.
But they are very, very good and Troubadour's favorite if memory serves.

Handling and ergonomics are different and a matter of personal preference: the SFL is bigger and the focuser is stiffer.
Optically, the SF has a wider field and less CA but the SFL is no slouch.
I also prefer the SFL's rainguard and caps.

So do you want the top optical quality and wider field or a bigger diameter and exit pupil and consider they are worth x% less in optics, x being small, less than 10% I would say?

Thanks so much for your impressions. I’ll admit I’m leaning towards the SFL

 

[Maljunulo]

Don’t read about them ….. try them, if at all possible.

If you ask ten people here, you will get at least twelve opinions, and all will likely be different.

 

[Zedster]

Don’t read about them ….. try them, if at all possible.

If you ask ten people here, you will get at least twelve opinions, and all will likely be different.

Well so far the SFL are leading two to nil

 

[Maljunulo]

I don’t see the greenish cast in my SF, and remember, you are not seeing what you will see, you are seeing what someone’s phone or camera sees.

 

[Richard D]

Ideally try and find a used Swaro EL 8x32 , Leica Ultravid and maybe Meopta's offering to compare as well. At the pricepoint all are good binoculars and it's as more which you prefer than which is 'better'.

 

[A2GG]

I’ve only tried these in store. I can’t really comment on the optics.
However I immediately preferred the ergonomics of the SF 8x32 more than the SFL 8x40. The SFL felt bulkier than I anticipated.

 

[Maljunulo]

I’ve only tried these in store. I can’t really comment on the optics.
However I immediately preferred the ergonomics of the SF 8x32 more than the SFL 8x40. The SFL felt bulkier than I anticipated.

Exactly! This is the sort of thing which produces endless discussion, and sometimes vehement pronouncements that glass a is therefor “better” than glass b.

It all comes down to what fits you and what you end up liking. All involve compromises of one sort or another, and you have to decide which ones you are willing to accept. You will have to adapt to whichever model you end up choosing, the binocular will not adapt to you.

I bought the SF 8X32, and in order to get those optics I had to accept whatever “flaws” (real or perceived) come along with that model. I have done so cheerfully, and am still amazed every time I use it.

I wish you the best of luck in your quest, and happiness at the end of it.

 

[fihoo]

I have both, and I prefer SFL 8X40.
They're sharper, brighter (in twilight), and the color is more neutral.

 

[dries1]

Now, if the SF and the SFL were priced the same, what would the outcome of opinions be? I wonder.

 

[Maljunulo]

Now, if the SF and the SFL were priced the same, what would the outcome of opinions be? I wonder.

If pigs could fly, we wouldn’t need airplanes.

 

[Bill Atwood]

Now, if the SF and the SFL were priced the same, what would the outcome of opinions be? I wonder.

My opinion would remain unchanged. I WANT to pick the SFs over the SFLs, but can't based on optical performance.

 

[pm42]

My opinion would remain unchanged. I WANT to pick the SFs over the SFLs, but can't based on optical performance.

Same here. I have several alphas so the one I pick is not based on price.
And the SFL 8x40 is one of my favorites.

 

[Canip]

Now, if the SF and the SFL were priced the same, what would the outcome of opinions be? I wonder.

I would stay with the SF due to its larger FOV, even better CA and better edge sharpness (and all the consequences of these three). I also very much like the SFL, though.

 

[pm42]

Don’t read about them ….. try them, if at all possible.

If you ask ten people here, you will get at least twelve opinions, and all will likely be different.

Yes and if you read, you will learn things that you may not see during your own test and it is always interesting to know what people think after several months of use.
Doing both, try for yourself and ask others, is probably the best solution when possible.

 

[Troubador]

I have both. It is a matter of preference. I do not use the SF 8x32 as I prefer the SFL 8x40 or the NL Pure 8x32. I do not know why but I never "clicked" with the SF.
But they are very, very good and Troubador's favorite if memory serves.

Handling and ergonomics are different and a matter of personal preference: the SFL is bigger and the focuser is stiffer.
Optically, the SF has a wider field and less CA but the SFL is no slouch.
I also prefer the SFL's rainguard and caps.

So do you want the top optical quality and wider field or a bigger diameter and exit pupil and consider they are worth x% less in optics, x being small, less than 10% I would say?

That is a nice summary of SF32 vs SFL40. As with all these comparisons the final choice is a very personal decision.
SF8x32 is my own favourite having not only less chromatic aberration but having this absence spread over a monster field of view. And it fits my hands as though it was tailor-made just for me.
On the other hand SFL has its own colour palette which is very pleasant indeed. Hard to imagine anyone being disappointed with either of these models.

Lee

 

[MiddleRiver]

I don't have access to SF8x32 so I can only say I have found the SFL8x40 to be quite nice in all regards. My only possible complaint is that I do get a tiny bit of rolling-ball when panning. I've grown used to it and of course when first noticed/purchased I was coming from the world-of-Leica
Also, with regards to the focuser: I'm wondering if early models were adjusted differently or if I got lucky (tho it's hard to believe there would be that much variation in manufacturing)? Mine, purchased beginning of Nov from big camera store, is silky smooth and light to the touch - pretty much flawless and has remained that way even in the single-digit F temps it saw recently.