Is that a promise? If I ever make to Paris with this Covid stuff I will take you up on that.No, but I’ll buy you a drink
Edmund
Is that a promise? If I ever make to Paris with this Covid stuff I will take you up on that.No, but I’ll buy you a drink
Edmund
Sounds good to me! Are you sure though at $18 a bottle!Sounds like a great idea. May I join you?
I would like to buy you both a Chimay Blue.
Lee
Holger Merlitz in https://www.juelich-bonn.com/jForum/read.php?9,448229,448410#msg-448410 says this about SF32: "The Zeiss is very bright, with high edge definition and - you can hear! - without a noticeable green cast."
Holger is a pretty astute judge of binoculars and clearly deliberately looked for a colour cast and didn't find it.
Lee
Green. The unforgivable sin. As the high intensity magenta coatings suggest. Thanks for pointing that out, Kimmo. Saves me time and money.
Tobias, post 97,
The brand new Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 I have here in front of me certainly does not have a green color cast, it is slightly more brown-red pointing at a slightly higher light transmission in the red part of the spectrum in comparison with green and blue.
Gijs van Ginkel
Lee, post 105,
So I am in good company.
Gijs van Ginkel
I read quite often that "at 152 mm, the overall length of this model exceeds the average length normally associated with a 32 mm binocular" (https://www.birdguides.com/reviews/zeiss-victory-sf-8x32-binocular/#).
What if Zeiss had tried to redefine binoculars for the everyday use of birdwatchers? To set a new standard and replace our 42 binoculars with 32? Because that is how the SF 32 feels to me: not a small-sized binocular that fits into a jacket pocket but a regular birding binocular, slimmer and lighter than our traditional models, but with a top level of optical performance.
IMHO it is very clear what has defined the length of SF32 and that is to make available sufficient room for the average hand to achieve a normal open-hinge grip, with 1st finger on the focus wheel and the other fingers wrapped around the optical tube as shown in the pic.
I returned the 10x32's as I just did not have the comfortable viewing experience that I hoped for. I think I may give the 8's a try though. I placed a backorder for them, as they seem to have sold out of stock in most places in the U.S. already.
The larger exit pupil and decreased magnification may prove to be more relaxed.
Has anyone tried both the 8's and 10's outside in real conditions that may be able to comment on this?
Also, would a larger exit pupil make any difference in blackouts or decreased field of vision at the respective eye cup positions?
post 104.............
What if Zeiss had tried to redefine binoculars for the everyday use of birdwatchers? To set a new standard and replace our 42 binoculars with 32? Because that is how the SF 32 feels to me: not a small-sized binocular that fits into a jacket pocket but a regular birding binocular, slimmer and lighter than our traditional models, but with a top level of optical performance.
The problem is that with this there is still the smaller exit pupil. I have yet to experience an equally easy view with a x32 that the corresponding x42 delivers. Thus I doubt that Zeiss had in mind what you suggest.
Sounds like a great idea. May I join you?
I would like to buy you both a Chimay Blue.
Lee
Is that a promise? If I ever make to Paris with this Covid stuff I will take you up on that.
Lee,
I would be honored.
There is the question though of when things will return to normal.
There’s a big birding meet in Abbeville every spring which I guess some members usually would attend.
Edmund
Hi from Italy...
Therefore, still talking about binoculars.... if I have to struggle to use 8X binoculars with 9 degrees of field, I prefer to use 8X binoculars with 8 degrees or even less.
I understand that it is nice to have a very large field of view, but, at first, i have to see my raptor friends well and i want less glares between me and them
By the way i don't think that the problem is a big field of view, I don't think it's a cause.. My SF 8x42 works well also with 8.5°. Speaking of other things, i am very very sorry but I don't agree that SF32 has the same glare issues as NL PURE as i read , here on BF. I have been using the SF 32 with my SF42 for days. I took part in global birding today and had no problem with glare in 10 hours as I did in the three to four hours a day testing the NL PURE.
I believe that as far as glare is concerned the SF32 is more correct. I love NL PURE, I like it a lot, but I hope Swarovski tries to improve the situation.
Having the good fortune of being able to use dozens of binoculars every year for binomania,
I don't take part with a particular brand. I have favorite binoculars from various brands. (Canon 10x42, APM 100 SD, Docter Aspectem 40x80, Kowa Higlander, Docter Nobilem 8x56, Leica Trinovid 8x32, Zeiss SF 8x42, Nikon EDG 10x42, Nikon 8x30 E II, Victory Fl 7x42, Vixen 6.5x32, Sard 6x32 and many others). I'm not creating a war between Zeiss and Swarovski, mine are just very personal impressions on the field..
In any case, I don't think I'll sell my SF42 for the SF32, I use binoculars in many situations and still prefer the 8x42 exit pupil. But I'd like to see the latest mechanical-optical innovations used on the SF32 in the SF 42.
Once again I hope not to sound like an idiot with my bad English .. happy Sunday everyone from Italy.
Piergiovanni