Zeiss SFL comparisons with older models (1 Viewer)

[Swissboy]

My wife (Swissboy's Doris ) and I had a chance today to evaluate all four versions of the new Zeiss SFL, and comparing them with our older models we want to replace. That is my wife's Victory I 10x40 dating from 2001, as well as my own FL 8x32 (with Lotutec) that I bought just a short time before Zeiss stopped producing it. Today was a somewhat dreary overcast day. So maybe the observed differences were particularly pronounced. When I tried a 8x30 SFL, I simply did not believe what I saw at first. The picture was so bright! Same with the 10x30 model. The x40 versions were about the same, not particulary brighter. Over all, if anything, the SFLs make colors seem too bright, the views were as if someone had turned on the light. I wonder how they fare in full sun. But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked. This 8x32 FL is very well kept and not all that much used, certainly no signs of dirt or dust.

Also, the new SFLs feel extremely comfortable in the hands, and the relatively low or forward position of the focuser was never an issue. I had been a bit concerned at first. The focus was also butter-smooth, unlike on a small Swaro model the dealer had on display as well. (I don't recall the model as I was not interested anyway.) The wide FOV was also very nice, definitely less tunnel impression than in the 8x32 FL. And that model is not known for a particularly narrow FOV. It may be the extra brightness that hightens the impression.

In a way, I expexted my wife to go for the x40 models, with just a question whether she would stick to the 10x version as on her old Victory I she had been happy with for close to 22 years. But while the 10x magnification still suited her better, she quickly decided to order the x30 model as the weight difference is quite noticeable. There is no need for me to already make a decision, so it is still open whether I'll take a 10x30 or a 8x30 one. At the moment, it looks like the x30 models will become available in spring, hopefully March or April according to the dealer. If nothing else, I can already foresee a highly increased use of this x30 glass for me. The convenient close focus does the rest for this.

 

[A2GG]

I’m concerned about the focus position of the SFL 30 since the bino is so short.
Did you focus with your index fingers or did you have to use middle fingers?

 

[Swissboy]

I’m concerned about the focus position of the SFL 30 since the bino is so short.
Did you focus with your index fingers or did you have to use middle fingers?

I think it was the middle finger, but it seemed more like a combination. At any rate, it felt very comfortable and came very naturally without a conscious effort because the focus wheel is so large. We both have rather small hands. Might be more of a problem if somebody has very large hands, maybe.

 

[mfunnell]

My wife (Swissboy's Doris ) and I had a chance today to evaluate all four versions of the new Zeiss SFL, and comparing them with our older models we want to replace. That is my wife's Victory I 10x40 dating from 2001, as well as my own FL 8x32 (with Lotutec) that I bought just a short time before Zeiss stopped producing it. Today was a somewhat dreary overcast day. So maybe the observed differences were particularly pronounced. When I tried a 8x30 SFL, I simply did not believe what I saw at first. The picture was so bright! Same with the 10x30 model. The x40 versions were about the same, not particulary brighter. Over all, if anything, the SFLs make colors seem too bright, the views were as if someone had turned on the light. I wonder how they fare in full sun. But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked. This 8x32 FL is very well kept and not all that much used, certainly no signs of dirt or dust.

Also, the new SFLs feel extremely comfortable in the hands, and the relatively low or forward position of the focuser was never an issue. I had been a bit concerned at first. The focus was also butter-smooth, unlike on a small Swaro model the dealer had on display as well. (I don't recall the model as I was not interested anyway.) The wide FOV was also very nice, definitely less tunnel impression than in the 8x32 FL. And that model is not known for a particularly narrow FOV. It may be the extra brightness that hightens the impression.

In a way, I expexted my wife to go for the x40 models, with just a question whether she would stick to the 10x version as on her old Victory I she had been happy with for close to 22 years. But while the 10x magnification still suited her better, she quickly decided to order the x30 model as the weight difference is quite noticeable. There is no need for me to already make a decision, so it is still open whether I'll take a 10x30 or a 8x30 one. At the moment, it looks like the x30 models will become available in spring, hopefully March or April according to the dealer. If nothing else, I can already foresee a highly increased use of this x30 glass for me. The convenient close focus does the rest for this.

I've been comparing my new 10x40 SFLs to my 10x56 FLs (having the same magnification, it seemed an appropriate comparison) but not so much against my 8x32 FLs (like yours, bought at or near the end of their production) or (pre-Lotutec) 7x42 FLs (though I did compare with those for the purpose of checking levels of CA).

That was mostly done in bright sunshine. But this morning, when I read your comment, it is dull and overcast - so you've prompted me to compare again (with all three formats of FL). I can see what you mean when you say "But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked." Without, though, really agreeing with the "mindblowing" or "shocked" parts. I didn't find the differences that large.

Perhaps its the photographer in me, but what I see is that the overall contrast of the view through my SFLs is higher-contrast than the images in any of my FLs (which are much of a muchness in this regard). That means the highlights are brighter, the shadows are darker, and there's a greater separation of tones in the mid-range (the trade-off being less separation of tones - less perceptible detail - in the highlights and shadows). I suspect there's also a difference in colour transmission/balance which might contribute to the "pop-factor" as well, though I'm less sure of that. That leads to a very pleasant image, to be sure, from the SFLs (not that I find the FLs unpleasant in any way). But there's also a trade-off (there always is!) where the overall "zing" or "pop" (or whatever) of the higher-contrast view means it's harder to discern detail in bright highlights or dark shadows.

Which you prefer is likely a matter of personal taste. I like both! I'm in the fortunate position that I can afford to have both in my binocular stable And, really, the differences aren't so huge that I'd let that determine which binocular I use on any particular day (I'd be happy enough to use FLs on dull days or SFLs on bright ones, though the differences might suggest doing the opposite). As is often true, format is a more likely guide to my choice - I'm not taking those 10x56 FLs on a hike where weight is a premium, nor trying to stuff them in a small camera bag! Mind you, if I didn't already have my 8x32 FLs (which I'm very happy with, still) I'd be taking a very close look at the 8x30 SFLs whenever they become available.

...Mike

 

[Swissboy]

I've been comparing my new 10x40 SFLs to my 10x56 FLs (having the same magnification, it seemed an appropriate comparison) but not so much against my 8x32 FLs (like yours, bought at or near the end of their production) or (pre-Lotutec) 7x42 FLs (though I did compare with those for the purpose of checking levels of CA).

That was mostly done in bright sunshine. But this morning, when I read your comment, it is dull and overcast - so you've prompted me to compare again (with all three formats of FL). I can see what you mean when you say "But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked." Without, though, really agreeing with the "mindblowing" or "shocked" parts. I didn't find the differences that large.

Perhaps its the photographer in me, but what I see is that the overall contrast of the view through my SFLs is higher-contrast than the images in any of my FLs (which are much of a muchness in this regard). That means the highlights are brighter, the shadows are darker, and there's a greater separation of tones in the mid-range (the trade-off being less separation of tones - less perceptible detail - in the highlights and shadows). I suspect there's also a difference in colour transmission/balance which might contribute to the "pop-factor" as well, though I'm less sure of that. That leads to a very pleasant image, to be sure, from the SFLs (not that I find the FLs unpleasant in any way). But there's also a trade-off (there always is!) where the overall "zing" or "pop" (or whatever) of the higher-contrast view means it's harder to discern detail in bright highlights or dark shadows.

Which you prefer is likely a matter of personal taste. I like both! I'm in the fortunate position that I can afford to have both in my binocular stable And, really, the differences aren't so huge that I'd let that determine which binocular I use on any particular day (I'd be happy enough to use FLs on dull days or SFLs on bright ones, though the differences might suggest doing the opposite). As is often true, format is a more likely guide to my choice - I'm not taking those 10x56 FLs on a hike where weight is a premium, nor trying to stuff them in a small camera bag! Mind you, if I didn't already have my 8x32 FLs (which I'm very happy with, still) I'd be taking a very close look at the 8x30 SFLs whenever they become available.

...Mike

Looks like we are actually similarly equipped with FLs though I don't have a 10x56. But I'm also the happy owner of four FLs, 7x42. 8x42, 10x42 and the 8x32. The 8x42 which I have owned the longest is still my standard glass. I have never really fully warmed up to my 8x32 which I bought last. The main reason (as I have mentioned elsewhere on BF) is that Zeiss had changed the coating from the comfortable (to me) purplish to an aggressive (to me) reddish-orange in the period when I tried the earlier FL version and when I actually bought it. It took a bit of time to realize that my discomfort was not only temporary. Otherwise I would not have accepted the ordered glass. And it is the neutral color of the SFL coating that made me an instant "friend" of the SFL series. At this point, I think the personal discomfort with the red coating on my FL 8x32 is the main reason for me to justify a change to the SFL x30 series.

 

[mfunnell]

I have never really fully warmed up to my 8x32 which I bought last. The main reason (as I have mentioned elsewhere on BF) is that Zeiss had changed the coating from the comfortable (to me) purplish to an aggressive (to me) reddish-orange in the period when I tried the earlier FL version and when I actually bought it. It took a bit of time to realize that my discomfort was not only temporary. Otherwise I would not have accepted the ordered glass.

Maybe my 8x32 FLs aren’t as late-production as I thought (they were certainly late-purchased). SN.4525***. Mine have purplish coatings, for sure, not red-orange. I’ve never really thought on that, nor thought it might make a difference.

Perhaps, here in Oz, far from manufacture, mine sat in a warehouse for a while ‘til I bought them. If what you say is so (I’m not doubting) then maybe I got lucky. (Doesn’t happen often!)

…Mike

 

[Troubador]

Maybe my 8x32 FLs aren’t as late-production as I thought (they were certainly late-purchased). SN.4525***. Mine have purplish coatings, for sure, not red-orange. I’ve never really thought on that, nor thought it might make a difference.

Perhaps, here in Oz, far from manufacture, mine sat in a warehouse for a while ‘til I bought them. If what you say is so (I’m not doubting) then maybe I got lucky. (Doesn’t happen often!)

…Mike

Mike, for what its worth my FL8x32 bought in 2012 had serial 3674864.

 

[mfunnell]

Mine were bought in 2016.

I bought when I (correctly) feared they’d go out of production if the much-rumoured 8x32 SFs came out (and, obviously, because I thought them very good). No shade on the SFs, which I’m sure are great - but the FLs have a much smaller pack-size, which was and is very important for my use.

…Mike

 

[Vespobuteo]

My wife (Swissboy's Doris ) and I had a chance today to evaluate all four versions of the new Zeiss SFL, and comparing them with our older models we want to replace. That is my wife's Victory I 10x40 dating from 2001, as well as my own FL 8x32 (with Lotutec) that I bought just a short time before Zeiss stopped producing it. Today was a somewhat dreary overcast day. So maybe the observed differences were particularly pronounced. When I tried a 8x30 SFL, I simply did not believe what I saw at first. The picture was so bright! Same with the 10x30 model. The x40 versions were about the same, not particulary brighter. Over all, if anything, the SFLs make colors seem too bright, the views were as if someone had turned on the light. I wonder how they fare in full sun. But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked. This 8x32 FL is very well kept and not all that much used, certainly no signs of dirt or dust.

Also, the new SFLs feel extremely comfortable in the hands, and the relatively low or forward position of the focuser was never an issue. I had been a bit concerned at first. The focus was also butter-smooth, unlike on a small Swaro model the dealer had on display as well. (I don't recall the model as I was not interested anyway.) The wide FOV was also very nice, definitely less tunnel impression than in the 8x32 FL. And that model is not known for a particularly narrow FOV. It may be the extra brightness that hightens the impression.

In a way, I expexted my wife to go for the x40 models, with just a question whether she would stick to the 10x version as on her old Victory I she had been happy with for close to 22 years. But while the 10x magnification still suited her better, she quickly decided to order the x30 model as the weight difference is quite noticeable. There is no need for me to already make a decision, so it is still open whether I'll take a 10x30 or a 8x30 one. At the moment, it looks like the x30 models will become available in spring, hopefully March or April according to the dealer. If nothing else, I can already foresee a highly increased use of this x30 glass for me. The convenient close focus does the rest for this.

Sounds promising! I was a bit surprised to see that the SFL30:s is rated to 18mm ER which is very good for such a small bin while still having good FOV and AFOV. UVHD32 and FL32 I rejected due to the short eye relief (NL32 and SFL40 due to size/weight) so Zeiss might have a winner here if they live up to the specs...

 

[Swissboy]

Mike, for what its worth my FL8x32 bought in 2012 had serial 3674864.

Mine has 4634.....

 

[mfunnell]

Mine has 4634.....

Which does suggest later production than mine.

…Mike

 

[AlphaFan]

Have a 2010 FL 8x32 and a new SFL 8x40. Took them both out for a short comparative spin the other day (a mix of clouds and sun) - and, while I slightly prefer the view from the SFL (@mfunnell‘s description was very similar to what I see - mostly a difference in color-contrast [for lack of a more precise term]). However, the difference is not so great that I’ll quit using my FLs as they are still quite satisfying.

Another thing I’ve noticed over time is (to my eyes at least) different binoculars often offer their best performance under different lighting conditions. For example, my FL 10x56 is my favorite binocular for waterfowl and waders on sunny days (very pleasing image and an absolute glare-crusher), but I prefer the view and color pop from my SLC 10x56 on overcast days. What I’ve noticed about the SFL is that it seems to have very consistently good performance and precise colors over a wide range of lighting conditions.

 

[Swissboy]

My wife (Swissboy's Doris ) and I had a chance today to evaluate all four versions of the new Zeiss SFL, and comparing them with our older models we want to replace. That is my wife's Victory I 10x40 dating from 2001, as well as my own FL 8x32 (with Lotutec) that I bought just a short time before Zeiss stopped producing it. Today was a somewhat dreary overcast day. So maybe the observed differences were particularly pronounced. When I tried a 8x30 SFL, I simply did not believe what I saw at first. The picture was so bright! Same with the 10x30 model. The x40 versions were about the same, not particulary brighter. Over all, if anything, the SFLs make colors seem too bright, the views were as if someone had turned on the light. I wonder how they fare in full sun. But here now, it was absolutely mindblowing to me. My FL 8x32 gave an impression as if it were a very old glass, I was truly shocked. This 8x32 FL is very well kept and not all that much used, certainly no signs of dirt or dust.

Also, the new SFLs feel extremely comfortable in the hands, and the relatively low or forward position of the focuser was never an issue. I had been a bit concerned at first. The focus was also butter-smooth, unlike on a small Swaro model the dealer had on display as well. (I don't recall the model as I was not interested anyway.) The wide FOV was also very nice, definitely less tunnel impression than in the 8x32 FL. And that model is not known for a particularly narrow FOV. It may be the extra brightness that hightens the impression.

In a way, I expected my wife to go for the x40 models, with just a question whether she would stick to the 10x version as on her old Victory I she had been happy with for close to 22 years. But while the 10x magnification still suited her better, she quickly decided to order the x30 model as the weight difference is quite noticeable. There is no need for me to already make a decision, so it is still open whether I'll take a 10x30 or a 8x30 one. At the moment, it looks like the x30 models will become available in spring, hopefully March or April according to the dealer. If nothing else, I can already foresee a highly increased use of this x30 glass for me. The convenient close focus does the rest for this.

Updates to post #1:
I had another chance to evaluate the SFLs today under similar overcast conditions. And I also did some more comparing with other brands, including my own Leica UV10x25. Some statements made by me need to be corrected. I had probably been so much overwhelmed that my critical differentiation had suffered a bit. So today, the x40 models did provide a noticeably brighter view, but still not by much. But the difference between the 8x and 10x was quite noticeable, and my enthusiastic original statement ("mindblowing") was clearly meant for the 8x30. But I agree with Mike (post #4) that my wording was probably somewhat too extreme. Nevertheless, the overall joy about these models, particularly the x30 ones remains. So I have now ordered mine as well. Unlike my wife, I chose the 8x magnification as my shaking of the hands is more pronounced.

I was also doing some comparative evaluation with the corresponding Swarovski models. As I tend to notice the rollerball effects many Swaro models show, there was no serious comparison, more just about haptics and brightness. It mainly struck me that the Swaros feel more metallic when handled. That may convey more solidity, but the models feel cold when handled, whereas the Zeiss models (already with the FLs) provide a more comfortable feel to me. A major interest to me was how the NL waist shape felt like, as I had read some critical remarks. I must say that at least the x32 NL felt very comfortable in my relatively small hands. And on the side, the dealer who provided this fine opportunity for comparisons also showed me an obvious reaction by Swarovski to the many anti FP remarks one can find. The models now come with an easily mountable attachment for standard binocular straps!

I had also looked at several IS models that were on display (Canon and Kite). The effect is quite convincing, but the brightness is reduced compared to the non IS models of Zeiss and Swarovski. Plus, the available IS models are still rather cumbersome at least to me, both regarding the weight and the shape.

Regarding Beth's question (A2GG post #2), I now paid better attention which fingers I used to focus the SFL models. It was a variable combination from index finger to ring finger, often middle and ring finger combined. But as stated earlier, it is not critical and always feels very comfortable.

 

[b-lilja]

Swissboy, great to see your experience with the 8x30 SFL, which as I've said elsewhere am very excited about. I'm sure I'll get a pair to go with my 8x40s.

I am really in agreement with the comments here about the SFLs. It's just such a good glass, all round, in many conditions. I keep picking mine up and loving them - never a question or doubt about their quality.

My experience with the FL with the earlier (purple/green subtle) vs later (reddish not so subtle) is that they are almost two different glasses - really a case study in the importance of coatings. The earlier are more true to color but less immediately sharp and less contrasty - more washed out. The later suffer from the same problem as other recent Zeiss, pre-SFL - not true to color, shifting yellow-green. I prefer the earlier coatings. BTW, I don't believe the Lotutec change occurred at the same time as the color coating change, although I'm not positive.

Serious side by side comparison of my 8x42 FLs (early coating) and 8x40 SFLs were a no brainer - SFLs all the way. I really resonated with your comment Swissboy, they do seem like a last generation optic in that setting. (That said I do love those FLs - I kept them in the family and gave them to my young brother in law).

 

[Swissboy]

Swissboy, great to see your experience with the 8x30 SFL, which as I've said elsewhere am very excited about. I'm sure I'll get a pair to go with my 8x40s.

I am really in agreement with the comments here about the SFLs. It's just such a good glass, all round, in many conditions. I keep picking mine up and loving them - never a question or doubt about their quality.

My experience with the FL with the earlier (purple/green subtle) vs later (reddish not so subtle) is that they are almost two different glasses - really a case study in the importance of coatings. The earlier are more true to color but less immediately sharp and less contrasty - more washed out. The later suffer from the same problem as other recent Zeiss, pre-SFL - not true to color, shifting yellow-green. I prefer the earlier coatings. BTW, I don't believe the Lotutec change occurred at the same time as the color coating change, although I'm not positive.

Serious side by side comparison of my 8x42 FLs (early coating) and 8x40 SFLs were a no brainer - SFLs all the way. I really resonated with your comment Swissboy, they do seem like a last generation optic in that setting. (That said I do love those FLs - I kept them in the family and gave them to my young brother in law).

Need to check about the sharpness statement. But it's clear that Lotutec came independently and much earlier than the change of the coating color. Of my three x42 FLs with purplish coating only the first one I got does not have Lotutec.

 

[GrampaTom]

the dealer who provided this fine opportunity for comparisons also showed me an obvious reaction by Swarovski to the many anti FP remarks one can find. The models now come with an easily mountable attachment for standard binocular straps!

Not new, just overlooked by the anti field pro folks here...

 

[Maljunulo]

Irrelevant to the SFL, but a comment on differences of glass and coatings, my Zeiss 8X32 SF made the image in my Swarovski SV-EL 10X42 (pre field pro) look “dingy” when directly comparing the two at the same time, and with the same subject.

 

[pbjosh]

Not new, just overlooked by the anti field pro folks here...

I use this attachment system but it still contains the „great advantage“ of twisting whatever your chosen strap system is every time you stow or set down your bins… Count me as an anti field pro folk here

If you could put NL optical quality in the SF you‘d have the best of both worlds. Until then, I seem to prefer the SF for field utility. I would say the SF is optically 95% of what the NL is, but ergonomically / as a tool, the NL is only about 60-70% of what the SF is. However you come down on this, they‘re both stellar optically and both excellent bins, the NL just (in my view at least) hampered by some overengineering and (for several of my friends) hampered by fogging issues.

Getting back to the SFL, I am wondering if I‘ll be happy to trade some field of view for weight savings, the SFL‘s really do seem to be impressing a large number of people and the views I‘ve had so far have impressed. At some point I will take a more serious look at them. I already quite love the MHG and have long wished for a „more alpha version“ of it, which the SFLs increasingly seem to be, based upon opinions here at least.

 

[A2GG]

At some point I will take a more serious look at them. I already quite love the MHG and have long wished for a „more alpha version“ of it, which the SFLs increasingly seem to be, based upon opinions here at least.

yea that's why I'm looking forward to trying the SFL 8x30 as well. I trust the SFL image will be impressive, but I have to see if its ergonomics are good. That's what it will come down to for me.

 

[tenex]

Mine [with red coatings] has 4634.....

Interesting, our 10x32 #46346xx still has purple coatings. We must be very close to establishing where the change occurred, and surely Gary could associate a date with that. I'm glad to have this version, as the colors are lovely and here in the generally sunny West I have no need of heightened contrast. (SFLs seemed excessive.)