Change to Zeiss SFL 10x40 or stick with my Leicas (1 Viewer)

Hi all, first time here. I've got some Leica BN 10x42 which were my dad's and I've been using them for about 5 years. I'm guessing they are about 20 years old. I really like them for birding but they are sooo heavy. I'm looking to change for the Zeiss SFLs as I want similar quality and spec without breaking the bank, but in a lighter format, and these seem to get good reviews. Has anyone got any bits of advice when comparing the two, or experience of the SFLs in this size? Obviously, I'll also take a trip to my local shop to try them out and see how they feel.

Thanks for any help, Jim

Hi Jim.
Very different views through these two.

I'm a BN fan, great colours, amazing build quality. Classic bino for good reason. You're spoilt from the off!!!
You can get them serviced free by Leica, but of course they can't shave any weight off.

The SFL's are fantastic binos, but a much cooler colour cast in my opinion.
It really is best to go and test, and trust me, you will get a million and one different opinions coming your way.
You could consider 32mm binos if weight is such an issue, poss 8x, superb format, and the light gathering difference is not so very much.
Generally good field of view, good depth of focus, and a steadier image.
I've tried most formats, and i'm generally happier with 8x, and recently looked at 7x, and loved those too!
Let us know how you go.

Have not owned the BN's but I'm def a Leica fan (NV's, Retros, etc...): The SFL's are superb and imho well worth the price-point ask. MIJ may bother some, but the ergos, IQ and form-factor/weight are hard to beat. Yes a more neutral view than any Leica I've used (8 and counting...). Or you could pick up a used Ultravid...

I just tried the SFL's at the bird store sale and loved them. They seem like an excellent combination of smooth focuser (the same as SF and the best along w/ Nikon EDG IMO), light weight, comfortable hold and great optics. The only difference between them and the SF's or other top binos is a slight bit more false color around the outside of the FOV. Otherwise they seem the same as the SF"s to me except smaller and lighter.

Welcome to Birdforum! There are so many ways you could go. SFL would definitely be worth trying but pre-owned alphas could cost the same or less; stepping down to 32mm would be a similar weight reduction, unless you know that won't do for your conditions. The ultimate in nostalgia would be to get a 10x32 BN! (We still have mine and love it.) Or consider UV 10x32, or even 10x42 (still 4.4oz lighter, or 6.9 in leather). Or 10x32 FL which we also have and like, or even EL which would be quite different. Do bear in mind that the 42/50mm BNs were notorious "bricks"; just wanting a more reasonable weight doesn't necessarily make minimizing it the overriding priority, so be sure you like the view and handling too.

I ordered an 8x40 SFL to have a lighter weight complement to my 27 ounce 7x42 UVHD+. It’s a nice binocular that’s definitely lighter than my UVHD+, but not enough lighter nor compact enough to be justify keeping both, so I exchanged the 8x40 SFL for a 16 ounce 8x30 SFL.

The 8x30 is more comfortable to carry on long walks in the mountains surrounding my home. Its 3.75mm exit pupil makes it less comfortable to look through than the 8x40 SFL though. After using it for about 7 months, I think it was the right trade off for me.

If I was limited to one of these three binoculars, I would have probably kept the more versatile 8x4O SFL and let the other two go.

Your comment about them being heavy is telling. The SFLs will definately help with that. I really like lighter binos myself. I’d buy a pair from a dealer that has a good return policy and compare them. I bought a pair from CampSaver at 25% off. They weren’t exactly what I wanted so returned no problem. They have 20% off often.

I was just at a optics dealer on Wednesday looking at what they had and did some comparisons between the Zeiss SFL 8x42,Zeiss Victory 8x42 SF, Swarovski NL pure 8x42, Leica Noctivid 8x42 and Leica Ultra HD+ 7x42 and for me the SFL was nice, but definitely not alpha in my opinion, personally I liked the 7x42HD+ the most.
If I were you,look for a nice used pair of Alpha glass, there is some Els 8.5x42 in the best year production in the classified listing now that would be a great option also.

mungot said:

I really like them for birding but they are sooo heavy.

Click to expand...

Since most here advise you to switch to a new bino, just one dissenting opinion, for what it‘s worth:
The BN is one if those great binos from the era when Zeiss, Swarovski and Leica used to make binos that were optically very good, were not fraught with mechanical issues (focuser, diopter) and lasted more than a lifetime. You got one of those gems.
Why don‘t you consider working out a bit more and accept the BN‘s weight as proof of its sturdiness?

A change in binoculars is always fun, but as others have said, you already own something built to last a lifetime and that works for you. In my opinion, here is a much better option than the expenditure of going through a change/addition, and with the money saved, you can enjoy a birding trip or two somewhere!

LIL’Wren57 said:

I was just at a optics dealer on Wednesday looking at what they had and did some comparisons between the Zeiss SFL 8x42,Zeiss Victory 8x42 SF, Swarovski NL pure 8x42, Leica Noctivid 8x42 and Leica Ultra HD+ 7x42 and for me the SFL was nice, but definitely not alpha in my opinion, personally I liked the 7x42HD+ the most.
If I were you,look for a nice used pair of Alpha glass, there is some Els 8.5x42 in the best year production in the classified listing now that would be a great option also.

Click to expand...

Could you briefly summarise the differences amongst the binos you compared? The best and worst of each?

The Leica BN's were an excellent binocular for their time, but they are getting the behind the newer alphas optically in brightness, FOV, contrast and transparency. I wouldn't upgrade to the Zeiss SFL 10x40 though because I have tried several of them and I got the blue ring of death around the outside of the FOV and I don't think they are a huge upgrade from your BN's so personally I would avoid them.

If you want a smaller, lighter binocular, and you want a noticeable improvement, you can't beat the Swarovski NL 10x32 or Zeiss SF 10x32. For birding in the daytime, you will not notice any difference in brightness between the 10x32 and a 10x42, and they are much lighter and smaller. A Zeiss SFL is around $1500 but if you look you can find a like new SF or NL 10x32 for around $1800 to $2000, and they are light years ahead of the SFL optically and in build quality.

“Light years…”
Thats hilarious. And ridiculous. And terrible advice.

These are all stunning binos. EACH one excels in different areas, presents different biases, and appeals to individual’s different ‘optical train’, ergos, and pocket book. There is no best, no light years of difference, no perfect design.

MiddleRiver said:

“Light years…”
Thats hilarious. And ridiculous. And terrible advice.

These are all stunning binos. EACH one excels in different areas, presents different biases, and appeals to individual’s different ‘optical train’, ergos, and pocket book. There is no best, no light years of difference, no perfect design.

Click to expand...

Totally agree with this. For a while I had both the SF 10x32 and the SFL 10x40. I ended up keeping the SFL 10x40 as I felt it simply suited me better. It was equally as good optically as the 10x32 (maybe I have a very good example) and much easier to use with no black out problems and better color representation. To say there is ''light years'' between the two is, (without wishing to offend a certain persons delicate disposition), rubbish.

gweller said:

Totally agree with this. For a while I had both the SF 10x32 and the SFL 10x40. I ended up keeping the SFL 10x40 as I felt it simply suited me better. It was equally as good optically as the 10x32 (maybe I have a very good example) and much easier to use with no black out problems and better color representation. To say there is ''light years'' between the two is, (without wishing to offend a certain persons delicate disposition), rubbish.

Click to expand...

I had all the SFL's and I got the blue ring of death around the outside of the FOV on all of them, so I would never recommend them. Blackout problems are largely caused by the interplay of the eye cup length, eye socket depth and eye relief. It depends on how that particular binocular fits your facial structure. For me personally, the SF's have fewer blackouts than the SFL's. That is not to say you will have the same experience I had, and for you personally, the SFL could be a better fit than the SF.

I felt the SFL's had much softer edges than the SF, less contrast, more CA, especially on the edge, were not as transparent and were not as sharp on-axis. The SFL's have more CA because they don't use as high quality ED glass in their optical train as the SF's. Zeiss charges almost $1000 more for the SF than the SFL, so there must be a reason for that, and it usually means they have better glass and coatings which makes a big difference in performance and I personally can see the difference easily between the two binoculars. What I really miss when I use a sub-alpha like the SFL is the "sparkle" that the SF and NL have. The "sparkle" has to be one of the biggest perks of owning a true alpha.

If Zeiss made the SFL as good optically as the SF, while at the same time charging $1000 more, they would have to be idiots because the SFL would cannibalize the sales of the SF. The SF at almost twice the price of the SFL is intended to be better optically and have better build quality than the SFL, and it does. For different reasons, some birders like the Nikon MHG more than the SF, and that is great because you just saved yourself a lot of money. It just comes down to personal preference. The SF and NL were designed to be the best binoculars made, and they are, but that doesn't mean they are the best for you. From Scopeviews Binocular Reviews.


"Zeiss claim premium T* Coatings for SFLs, but these are more like generic coatings, with reflections in tobacco and green, not the distinctive dark pink/purple found on the SFs and old Victory FLs. The coatings are very transmissive, though a bright light finds a single internal surface that appears uncoated. The coatings have LotuTecTM water-repellent technology."

"Any negatives then? The SFL's don’t <quite> have the super-wide and sparkling-bright view of the SFs (or indeed SW’s NL Pures), or its ultra-fluid focuser."

"There’s no question that the 10x32 SFs are the best 32mm binoculars I’ve ever tested. Smaller bino’s once had a narrower field, less eye relief and a dimmer view in return for a lower price. No longer."

SF should indeed be a better binoculars compared to the SFL given the price difference. I have no experience with SF however I never felt the SFL 10x40 I have is less bright or sharp. I never got any blackout problems with SFL 10x40 which I often get with my NL 8x42. Even the FOV of SFL 10x40 didn’t feel far worse compared to the NL. I have never seen or heard (except from Dennis) the ‘blue ring of death’ with SFL 10x40 (or the SFL 10x30 I tested before).

Unfortunately, I do not have any experience with UV 10x42 BN however I have the UV 10x32 HD. SFL 10x40 is indeed brighter than UV 10x32 and the sweet spot of SFL is much higher. I can hold SFL much more comfortably compared to the other 10x40 I have which is Habicht GA. It is because of lighter weight and the compact form factor of the SFL. It might be the case for your BN as well.

The only problem I got with SFL (other than QC issues) is CA which is higher than my liking. CA of SFL 10x40 not always bothers me but in certain conditions like observing water birds I got annoyed time to time. However it has better CA control than UV 10x32 HD. If the money/ a little bit of weight is not an issue, going to a SF or an NL or EL will be a better option for you. For me it is only because of the bit poor CA handling of SFL 10x40.

There have been other comments about the 'Blue Ring of Death' regarding the Zeiss SFL. I thought the Zeiss SFL 8x40 I had was great until I compared it to the Swarovski SLC 8x42 back to back. The SLC just killed the SFL because it made me realize just how SOFT the edges were on the SFL and how the sharpness quickly degrades away from the center.

Even though the SFL and the SLC were supposed to have similar sized FOV's the SLC FOV seemed way bigger because it was sharper on the edges. Then I started looking at the soft edges of the SFL and I suddenly noticed they were BLUE. I sold the SFL the next day and kept the SLC.

Then I compared the SLC 8x42 to an EL 8x32 and the EL 8x32 just killed the SLC because it had sharper edges yet and better contrast and transparency. I bought an NL 8x32 and compared it to the EL 8x32, and the NL just murdered the EL with it's FOV and superior transparency. That is how I ended up with the NL 8x32. I think the NL 8x32 is overall the best birding binocular you can buy.

I have an NL 8x32 and an SF 10x32, and I compare them all the time under different lighting. The Zeiss SF has excellent handling, but I think the NL edges it out a tad bit in optics. The NL just wows the heck out of me every time I use it. I may have to try an NL 10x32 IF I can find one cheap! It is hard to beat Swarovski's for optics, especially the NL. The NL is so transparent, it is amazing.

[email protected] said:

There have been other comments about the 'Blue Ring of Death' regarding the Zeiss SFL. I thought the Zeiss SFL 8x40 I had was great until I compared it to the Swarovski SLC 8x42 back to back. The SLC just killed the SFL because it made me realize just how SOFT the edges were on the SFL and how the sharpness quickly degrades away from the center.

Even though the SFL and the SLC were supposed to have similar sized FOV's the SLC FOV seemed way bigger because it was sharper on the edges. Then I started looking at the soft edges of the SFL and I suddenly noticed they were BLUE. I sold the SFL the next day and kept the SLC.

Then I compared the SLC 8x42 to an EL 8x32 and the EL 8x32 just killed the SLC because it had sharper edges yet and better contrast and transparency. I bought an NL 8x32 and compared it to the EL 8x32, and the NL just murdered the EL with it's FOV and superior transparency. That is how I ended up with the NL 8x32. I think the NL 8x32 is overall the best birding binocular you can buy.

I have an NL 8x32 and an SF 10x32, and I compare them all the time under different lighting. The Zeiss SF has excellent handling, but I think the NL edges it out a tad bit in optics. The NL just wows the heck out of me every time I use it. I may have to try an NL 10x32 IF I can find one cheap! It is hard to beat Swarovski's for optics, especially the NL. The NL is so transparent, it is amazing.

Click to expand...

Yes; the NL's are amazing. And they kill every other binocular in sight. But not everyone has that kind of money. I have 8×40 SFL and love them. Yes they are softer at the edges but honestly it doesn't bother me much since I just move the bino's in the direction and object I want to see.
I do also own the Swarovski 8.5x42 EL's. And while they certainly are sharper at the edges and brighter; they are also heavier and uncomfortable to handhold. The SFL's crushes them in comfortability. Therefore, when I don't want to haul the tripod around; I prefer the SFL's.

mungot said:

Hi all, first time here. I've got some Leica BN 10x42 which were my dad's and I've been using them for about 5 years. I'm guessing they are about 20 years old. I really like them for birding but they are sooo heavy. I'm looking to change for the Zeiss SFLs as I want similar quality and spec without breaking the bank, but in a lighter format, and these seem to get good reviews. Has anyone got any bits of advice when comparing the two, or experience of the SFLs in this size? Obviously, I'll also take a trip to my local shop to try them out and see how they feel.

Thanks for any help, Jim

Click to expand...

Hi Jim,

I know where you are coming from. I say KEEP the BN and get the SFL. I don't think you will be disappointed with the SFL. I've used the 8X42 version a lot and have compared it to basically everything I have that's similar. It's lightweight, superb focus, and excellent optics that satisfy me. I think it's one if Zeiss's best efforts in years. I say go for it!

Great advice Chuck. The only thing better than an awesome bino is two!