• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions (2 Viewers)

In my translation it says that he had the bins for less than a day...

"Remarks on the Swarovski 8x42 NL Pure model with less than a day of trial viewing July 13-14, 2020"

Or did I miss something?

Now, I see the translation I had, said 24 days, but I assume it should have said 24 hours, that makes more sense.

And it seems the optics have some interesting features, I suppose in time we will get more and more thorough reviews.

I suspect nothing much more until after release.

Jerry
 
Now, I see the translation I had, said 24 days, but I assume it should have said 24 hours, that makes more sense.

And it seems the optics have some interesting features, I suppose in time we will get more and more thorough reviews.

I suspect nothing much more until after release.

Jerry

Yep, time will tell, but I agree that the review is one of the more interesting yet. A few hours in the field is still a fair amount of time.

Seems to be the first that mentions something about glare/flare performance. I probably wouldn't get the NT if not a step up from the EL in that aspect. Maybe the increased contrast that most testers have mentioned could be an indication of that as well?

Other than that, it seems that Swaro have adressed the minor points that I have an issue with in my current EL. So that looks promising.

If that's enough to motivate the pretty steep price will have to be investigated.

Without even tried the bin, I'm a bit impressed by the innovations in the NL. The shape of the barrels, forehead-rest and moving back to a single bridge for example. I guess it was Swaro who started the double bridge race, at least in modern time. Nikon tried to follow (EDG I), and then came the SF and the Noctivid. Then Swaro turns and implements a Zeiss HT-like bridge instead...it's a bit funny actually. o:)
 
Last edited:
The Lintuvaruste observation report was done by my good friend Pekka Nikander, who has tons of experience and very sharp eyes. He is sometimes quicker than myself in identifying optical problems, and is not easily impressed. So if he says a binocular is almost unnaturally sharp, at least that specimen must have had really low aberrations.

I missed the opportunity to see those myself, as I was in a week-long sailing regatta during that critical day - sometimes balancing hobbies can be a challenge.

- Kimmo
 
Without even tried the bin, I'm a bit impressed by the innovations in the NL. The shape of the barrels, forehead-rest and moving back to a single bridge for example. I guess it was Swaro who started the double bridge race, at least in modern time. Nikon tried to follow (EDG I), and then came the SF and the Noctivid. Then Swaro turns and implements a Zeiss HT-like bridge instead...it's a bit funny actually. o:)

Lol :-O I was just thinking that exact same thing ! 3:)








Chosun :gh:
 
The Lintuvaruste observation report was done by my good friend Pekka Nikander, who has tons of experience and very sharp eyes. He is sometimes quicker than myself in identifying optical problems, and is not easily impressed. So if he says a binocular is almost unnaturally sharp, at least that specimen must have had really low aberrations.

I missed the opportunity to see those myself, as I was in a week-long sailing regatta during that critical day - sometimes balancing hobbies can be a challenge.

- Kimmo

Kimmo:

Thanks for the update, I always enjoyed every word of your reviews.
Those reviews helped confirm some of my purchases.
Well done.

Jerry
 
The Lintuvaruste observation report was done by my good friend Pekka Nikander, who has tons of experience and very sharp eyes. He is sometimes quicker than myself in identifying optical problems, and is not easily impressed. So if he says a binocular is almost unnaturally sharp, at least that specimen must have had really low aberrations.

I missed the opportunity to see those myself, as I was in a week-long sailing regatta during that critical day - sometimes balancing hobbies can be a challenge.

- Kimmo

Looking forward for your testing soon when you have the chances!
 
The Lintuvaruste observation report was done by my good friend Pekka Nikander, who has tons of experience and very sharp eyes. He is sometimes quicker than myself in identifying optical problems, and is not easily impressed. So if he says a binocular is almost unnaturally sharp, at least that specimen must have had really low aberrations.

I missed the opportunity to see those myself, as I was in a week-long sailing regatta during that critical day - sometimes balancing hobbies can be a challenge.

- Kimmo

Hi Kimmo.

Hope you'll have an opportunity to thoroughly evaluate these soon. After all the reports of unusually fine center field image quality a proper star test would be most appreciated.

Henry
 
With Pekka's permission, I did a translation of his "first impressions" story on Lintuvaruste, and will post it here. I hope this is better than what Google translate can do. I consulted him on the bit about the rolling ball (carousel effect in Finnish), and based on that, simplified the wording a bit. What he reported to me was consistent with some AMD, but how much and what kind of a distortion profile remains to be seen.

Here:

Some observations on the Swarovski 8x42 NL Pure after a less-than-24 hour trial on 13.-14.7.2020

The image is exceedingly sharp, vivid and with high resolving power.

Light and dark hues seem accentuated, reading texts, for example, is extremely easy, notably easier than with the Zeiss 8x42 Victory SF, Leica Noctivid 8x42 and Swarovski 8x42 SLC I compared it with. Detail resolution was top class, and looking at foliage I could see it consisting of individual leaves with varying hues rather than different kinds of green-hued areas with individual leaves difficult to discern. Or as another example, looking at a rye-field, each individual awn is clearly separated unlike with my Swarovski SLC 8x42 which shows them partially merged together and seeing individual awns is more difficult.

Looking at a widgeon at close range (ca. 20 meters), every feather is easily discerned and feather patterns and color hues are visible in vivid clarity. Due to the binocular’s excellent ability to differentiate color hues, feathers of different ages are easily discerned in the bird’s plumage.

The image gives an impression of looking at a picture taken with superb optics, with extremely wide color spectrum (HDR), and slight over-sharpening.
The wide field of view makes finding targets easier, and the image opens up nice and wide. In a forest, the wide view is beneficial since it is easier to find the birds and easier to follow their movements when the bird more easily remains in the field despite their rapid movement. Likewise when watching migration, it is easy to locate targets and there is less need to move the binoculars than with binoulars with narrower fields. There is an almost total absence of any tube-like effects to the image, and dark edges to the field are very narrow and almost imperceptible.

Suppression of stray light is top-notch. Only just before you get the sun in the view do you detect a small reflection in the view which warns you not to move the binocular further so that you would end up staring straight at the sun.

Close focus is 2.0 meters, which in my view is sufficient for viewing insects, especially considering the level of the optics.

The forehead rest gives unexpectedly good support and stabilizes the image surprisingly much. In cool morning weather, it felt cold against my forehead at first, but warmed up quickly. However, I could imagine that in the winter it could feel unpleasantly cold, though fortunately it can be quickly removed.

Focus movement was pleasantly smooth in both directions. In the EL’s, the focus moves more stiffly in one direction than in the other due to a different kind of focus mechanism. The movement range of the NL focus wheel was a little under two rotations.

The eyecups have four intermediate click-stop positions between the minimum and maximum extension. This facilitates finding the right position for your eyes.

The new carrying strap is easy to adjust for good fit and has proper locks for length adjustment.

The body design is unusual. The body narrows at the middle and the tube is partially flattened at a 45 degree angle. This new form provides the binoculars with a good grip. The focus wheel has been moved forwards, and my fingers found it easily. Diopter control is separate from the focus wheel, having its own control wheel. It does not lock in place, but the construction is probably more durable than the previous one, since there is no longer a need to pull up the focus wheel. Experience will show how easily the diopter control wheel will move unintentionally from its setting.

Towards the edges of the field of view, the image compresses so that a square-shaped object narrows when approaching the field edge and widens when it moves towards the center. In normal use, I don’t pay attention to this, but some viewers might find it distracting. This phenomenon creates a so-called globe effect, but usually one’s eyes/brain rather quickly gets used to it and you soon cease to pay attention to it. The image is sharp from edge to edge, which means that it is considerably easier to detect movement at the image perimeter than with binoculars that have soft edges. This means that the entire field of view is better utilizable than in most other binoculars (although in the top models by Leica, Zeiss, Canon and Nikon the image is also sharp from edge to edge).

At the very edge of the field, in certain situations a narrow yellow-green fringe appears, but to see it you need to specifically look for it, and in normal use it is not noticeable at all.

My thaks to Swarovski for the opportunity to preview these binoculars.

Pekka Nikander, July 14, 2020
 
Regarding globe effect: in my very brief test of the NL, I discovered very little of it which, given that the FOV is substantially wider than the one of the EL SV, is quite an achievement.
So it would have been interesting to know if Pekka found the globe effect more prominent than in the EL SV, or not.

Canip
 
Regarding globe effect: in my very brief test of the NL, I discovered very little of it which, given that the FOV is substantially wider than the one of the EL SV, is quite an achievement.
So it would have been interesting to know if Pekka found the globe effect more prominent than in the EL SV, or not.

Canip

The analysis of the k distortion factor by Holger predicts very little RB in the NL 8x42---if the distortion profile assumption made in the calculations holds then the conclusion of that analysis should hold as well. I am more concerned about possible RB in the NL 10x42 and 12x42, for which Holger's prediction is not so good.
 
With Pekka's permission, I did a translation of his "first impressions" story on Lintuvaruste, and will post it here.

Some observations on the Swarovski 8x42 NL Pure after a less-than-24 hour trial on 13.-14.7.2020

The image is exceedingly sharp, vivid and with high resolving power.

Light and dark hues seem accentuated, reading texts, for example, is extremely easy, notably easier than with the Zeiss 8x42 Victory SF, Leica Noctivid 8x42 and Swarovski 8x42 SLC I compared it with. Detail resolution was top class, and looking at foliage I could see it consisting of individual leaves with varying hues rather than different kinds of green-hued areas with individual leaves difficult to discern. Or as another example, looking at a rye-field, each individual awn is clearly separated unlike with my Swarovski SLC 8x42 which shows them partially merged together and seeing individual awns is more difficult.

Looking at a widgeon at close range (ca. 20 meters), every feather is easily discerned and feather patterns and color hues are visible in vivid clarity. Due to the binocular’s excellent ability to differentiate color hues, feathers of different ages are easily discerned in the bird’s plumage.

This really makes me wonder: did Pekka compare them on a tripod, or handheld (or the NL with the forehead rest)? I cannot, even after not drinking beers and having a good night rest and low heart rate, get the maximum out of many high-end binoculars in terms of sharpness, at least not handheld. So I would find it doubtful if anyone can see difference in (center field) sharpnes between e.g. a new NL and any of the top brands. Is Pekka some kind of super-sharp-eyed robot? ;)
 
Depending on ones eyesight, such as David "Typo" who has very good eyesight, would likely see the difference, however minuscule, however others with less visual acuity would likely not see any difference on axis between a prime SV and an NL. The wide FOV is what will sell this glass, nothing else.

Andy W.
 
Depending on ones eyesight, such as David "Typo" who has very good eyesight, would likely see the difference, however minuscule, however others with less visual acuity would likely not see any difference on axis between a prime SV and an NL. The wide FOV is what will sell this glass, nothing else.

Andy W.

Hi Andy,

I'll wait untill you have one in your own hands and we'll talk again;)

Jan
 
Depending on ones eyesight, such as David "Typo" who has very good eyesight, would likely see the difference, however minuscule, however others with less visual acuity would likely not see any difference on axis between a prime SV and an NL. The wide FOV is what will sell this glass, nothing else.

Andy W.

Higher contrast makes for higher apparent sharpness or to put it another way, it makes the resolution easier to see.

Lee
 
Jan,

My eye sight is nowhere near many on here, but the FOV is the one characteristic of the NL that is being pushed by marketing is just my opinion. I am still enjoying the Noctivid 8X42 and my old EDG, old news to some but I am content.

Andy W.
 
Thank you Pekka and Kimmo for the early NL review and translation!

When I purchased the Noctivid 8X42 I did a hand held side by side test with the EL SV 8.5X42 and the SF 8x42. The 3 alphas were very close in my perceived resolution in the central field of view with a slight advantage to the NV in micro contrast of fine details.

When I tested my friends 7X50 Nikon WX against my NV 8X42 I was immediately impressed with the superior micro contrast of the WX. It was distinctly better with critical observing. This was daytime as well as twilight observing and handheld (although I can only hold the big heavy WX for very short periods).

If Swarovski can achieve a noticeable improvement in micro contrast over the NV/SF/EL-SV with the new NL then that is a stunning achievement in my opinion.

Visual acuity does vary a lot with individuals and some folks may not perceive as large of a difference in the fine detail view through different binoculars. For them the increased FOV of the NL might be the only reason to get the NL. As much as I expect I will dearly love the 69 deg AFOV of the 8X42 NL, the prospect of improved fine detail in the central FOV is even more enticing.

Stephanie
 
Towards the edges of the field of view, the image compresses so that a square-shaped object narrows when approaching the field edge and widens when it moves towards the center. In normal use, I don’t pay attention to this, but some viewers might find it distracting. This phenomenon creates a so-called globe effect, but usually one’s eyes/brain rather quickly gets used to it and you soon cease to pay attention to it.
I'm having trouble parsing this. The first sentence sounds like a (somewhat redundant?) description of simple pincushion distortion, but it's the absence of pincushioning that's understood to cause a rolling-ball effect. Or is that sentence actually trying to describe the more complex "moustache" distortion typical of field-flatteners? Can someone else who's tried the NL comment on its distortion characteristics? (Also, Canip saw no rolling ball...?)
 
The first sentence is not a description of pincushion distortion, but rather a description of angular magnification distortion, which as you say increases as pincushion distortion decreases. Mustache distortion employs enough pincushion in the inner 2/3 or so of the the field to correct AMD and then rapidly decreases the pincushion in the outer part of the field, causing AMD to rapidly increase near the field edge.

Below are some photographs of strong AMD distorting a circle at the field edge of a Swarovski 8x32 SV. I use circles for this purpose, but the distortion of a square follows the same pattern of radial compression near the field edge.

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3251084&postcount=1

I won't be completely certain about the NL's distortion until I or someone else examines and photographs a similar row of circles (or squares) through it and also examines and photographes a grid pattern placed behind the eyepiece and viewed through the objective end of the binocular to establish how straight lines change between the center and edge of the FOV.

Henry
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top