In praise of the 32mm FL binoculars (1 Viewer)

Hello,

About fourteen years ago, I bought the 10x32mm FL. Less than a year later, I bought the 8x32mm FL. Both purchases were demos from cameralandny.com, when the shop was located on Lexington Avenue in New York City.

Both models have good field of view: Zeiss list the 8x as having a 64º apparent field of view, and the 10x as having a 69º apparent field of view. The former is very good, the latter is even better.

Their fiberglass reinforced polycarbonate bodies, generated a lot of criticism from bird watchers but at least one user on Cloudy Nights wrote that they were tough and were the best built binoculars on the market.

Designing a binocular with bot a good FOV and good eye relief, 15.5mm for the 8x and 15.3mm for the 10x, was very laudable for this eyeglass wearer.
After obtaining the 8x, I put my Leica 8x32BN binocular in cupboard, which it has rarely left. That Leica was far more friendly than my Nikon 8x32 SE, which it replaced.

The close focus of both models is listed at 2m and I do not need closer than that. The focussing is extraordinarily smooth but it did have a problem: it was too easy to pull the dioptre setting out when removing the binocular from a case. Since I generally do not use a case, it was not a problem. Awareness of that propensity is enough to avoid the trouble.

I generally carry only the 8x, which is obviously my binocular of choice. Even though I could hold the 10c32 FL more steadily than it predecessor the 10x40 ClassiC, I am still not happy with 10x. On occasion, I carry a lower powered glass,like my MeoPro 6.4x32, and the 10x, which works very well. The 10x provides the extra reach, I need across a lake or across a large meadow.

After more than a decade of use, I have very satisfied. As I own a 1917 Zeiss 6x24, which still functions. I have hopes to use my FL's for many years to come before it becomes truly obsolete. As it is still in production, and since Zeiss does not seem interested in a new 8x32 SF, I think that service, if needed, should be no problem for many years.

I know that individuals may have a different take on these binoculars but in the past fifteen years I have owned the FL, the Nikon SE 82, the Nikon 8x30 EII, and the Leica 8x32BA, but the 8x32 FL has met my needs. I am not attracted to either flat field binocuars or toe

Hi Arthur,

It's great to hear how satisfied you are with the little FL and that the bino
still performs well and continues to meet your needs. I'll be receiving mine this week
and hope to have it for many years as well. I hope to use my ultravid 42mm and newly
acquired FL 32 as my only binos going forward.

Lee commented recently that the 10x32 FL has field flatteners, but Zeiss never advertises this and only
the 10x32 FL has this. Do you noticed a huge sweet spot in your 10x32...sharp edge to edge? This was surprising
news to me.

Going to bed now and will check back tomorrow.

Hello Gilmore Girl,

First of all, I rely heavily on the 8x32 FL. I use the 10x32 only when I think that I might need the extra reach. My bird watching technique is to first, find a bird with unaided sight, then use a binocular. If I am looking at something rather distant, I reach for the 10x. Should I acquire a target by sound, I search with the eight power or a glass of lower power. In searching, I seek cues like mass, colour or motion, cues which do not require a truly flat field. Then I move the target to the center of the view.

A quick comparison, shows that the 10x has a larger sweet spot, but not by much. Perhaps this is a product of the ten power's greater apparent field of view.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Yes, I also first search for birds with my eyes by looking for movement or any other cues and then
bring the bin up after spotting the bird. Most of the time I do it this way and this is how I was taught early on.
I remember being so frustrated trying to find birds and follow them with the binocular in the beginning. Then I read about searching first for movement and shapes with your eyes.

I've never owned a 10x and tried some when I was thinking about it. I prefer lower magnification since they're easier to use and have a calmer image (less shake). I remember once feeling frustrated just trying to set the diopter on a 10x due to the jumping target while trying to get the best focus.

I always wanted to try 7x42 and 10x42 FL (especially 7x).

With binoculars generally, many discussions involve the 'i love the XXXX of the XXXX model, but....' and these swings and roundabouts are calculated on a like/dislike spreadsheet to arrive at something you could happily use for the rest of your life.
Like any long-term relationship, you may acknowledge certain nuances, but just secretly smile at them and desist from calling the divorce lawyer, as the rest of the deal more than makes up for it.
Thus-wise for me with the FL 8x32. Some complain of off-axis astigmatism (which i rarely see or notice), softened edges, a 'green tinge' and tricky eye positioning.
None of these trouble me one whit. I find a tough, light, small, bright, CA-free, all-purpose, simple, reliable, ergonomically-suitable birding binocular, where whatever foibles it might have a superseded by its good points.

I have recently bought its little brother, the Victory Pocket, and have been astonished by its performance.
I also use a Nikon EII 8x30, which is like the vintage two-seater, open-top roadster that you like to take out in good weather, when you have the inkling to spend a leisurely day admiring the view.

But when it gets to doing the serious business, in all weathers and everywhere - first call is the FL 8x32.

And congratulations Beth on finally biting the bullet and replacing the one you sold!

I really liked the 8x32 T*FL I owned, but as Paddy mentioned I definitely had some issues with eye placement. I didn't mind the edges much so long as I was able to position it properly to my eyes.
The 8x25 Pocket has been, for me, much easier in terms of eye placement and is a true "Victory" model in terms of the rest of the optical qualities (color, brightness, sharpness, control of CA). That said, given its small objectives it certainly does not perform in dim light as well as larger models.

I long regret selling the 7x42 T*FL... ergonomics, image, and build quality were just top of the line even today.

Justin

paddy7 said:

With binoculars generally, many discussions involve the 'i love the XXXX of the XXXX model, but....' and these swings and roundabouts are calculated on a like/dislike spreadsheet to arrive at something you could happily use for the rest of your life.
Like any long-term relationship, you may acknowledge certain nuances, but just secretly smile at them and desist from calling the divorce lawyer, as the rest of the deal more than makes up for it.
Thus-wise for me with the FL 8x32. Some complain of off-axis astigmatism (which i rarely see or notice), softened edges, a 'green tinge' and tricky eye positioning.
None of these trouble me one whit. I find a tough, light, small, bright, CA-free, all-purpose, simple, reliable, ergonomically-suitable birding binocular, where whatever foibles it might have a superseded by its good points.

I have recently bought its little brother, the Victory Pocket, and have been astonished by its performance.
I also use a Nikon EII 8x30, which is like the vintage two-seater, open-top roadster that you like to take out in good weather, when you have the inkling to spend a leisurely day admiring the view.

But when it gets to doing the serious business, in all weathers and everywhere - first call is the FL 8x32.

And congratulations Beth on finally biting the bullet and replacing the one you sold!

Click to expand...

Paddy

I couldn't put it any better myself and agree with every word.

Lee

Thanks Paddy7. I received it yesterday. It's in mint condition considering its age (older than I thought); looks practically new. Hinge has firm tension so IPD stays put and strap lugs are in the perfect place (out of the way of hand positioning). Zeiss cleaned it up nicely. The focus is easy and fluid and not stiff (thankfully). Peeped through it yesterday briefly on my lunch break and all looks good. I'll set the diopter this weekend when I have some actual time with it. Seems smaller than I remember.

Hello Paddy7,

Yes, I could have written that the Zeiss does not have as good glare control as my Leica BN. Then again, I did not mention its excellent control of side lighting, an especial problem for those who wear specs, I had a problem with the SE, with side lighting. I could have mentioned that Zeiss USA is providing first class customer, of late.

Indeed, I notice neither astigmatism at the edges nor colour casts. 8x32 binoculars are notorious for difficulties in eye placement. An exit pupil of 4mm is not ideal for twilight but it is good enough. Even on a overcast day, at my latitude, the 32mm's transmission is very good.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Hi Beth/Arthur -
Mine were bought second hand on ebay, several years back. They date from 2007, and i had them serviced last year (FoC - thanks Zeiss!)
I run them one stop back from fully-extended on the eyecups - no particular science behind this, but just a preference. I find the eye positioning with binoculars is a kind of muscle memory; if i've used something else for any period, i need 15 minutes or so to re-acquaint myself with the FL's EP, but it rarely takes longer, and then it's locked in again.
My two top points with these are the CA-free, wide FoV. Using them for seawatching is an absolute delight. The design issues will either attract or repel users, depending on their own physiology i suppose, but the squat, lightweight but solid dimensions are just the ticket for me, particularly in protracted use.

Anyway, it's been good to write this and force myself to rationalise why i like them so much in the face of so much stiff opposition!:t:

Arthur,

When you say overcast, you mean like today + the wet snow?

Andy W.

paddy7 said:

Hi Beth/Arthur -
...

Anyway, it's been good to write this and force myself to rationalise why i like them so much in the face of so much stiff opposition!:t:

Click to expand...

Hello Paddy7,

I heartily believe that one's relationship to a binocular is personal. My needs and preferences differ from those of others. I also have a tendency to want the "Rolls-Royce" of something. In the case of the 32mm FL's, I am nowhere near the top price glass but it is certainly premium, perhaps more of a Bentley.

Having written that, I find that some people who post on this forum take criticism of a binocular quite badly. I certainly try to keep my posts on the binocular forum free of ad hominem comments.

Andy,

I had no problems this morning as snow flurries started.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Pinewood said:

Having written that, I find that some people who post on this forum take criticism of a binocular quite badly. I certainly try to keep my posts on the binocular forum free of ad hominem comments.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Click to expand...

Hi Arthur. I frequent many hobby based forums, e.g. bicycling, photography, archery, hunting, and computers, and they are often the same. One person will mention why they find one model/brand more appealing and then out comes the legion of the supporters for either product/brand. It is absurd, in my opinion.

I've owned probably one iteration of every top tier model from the alpha brands (excluding the SF and EDG) and can say without hesitation that any of them, so long as ergonomics work out well, are top of the line and will not limit your ability to enjoy your birding, nature viewing, shooting competition, or hunting activities.

Justin

Arthur,

I was just commenting on the gray wet weather here, winter blues. Another plus for the FL it is the most comfortable to hold in cold weather, like today.

Andy W.

Have any of y'all x32 FL owners ever compared to a x33 Kowa Genesis? I am curious what your thoughts are on the optical differences between the two and where you think the FL excels over the Kowa. The x32 FL is a binocular that I've really wanted to look through, but there aren't any Zeiss dealers anywhere near me that carry anything from the Victory line.

I haven't compared them side-by-side, but tried both Genesis models a couple of years back, and remember making a mental note that - should something happen to the FLs, and i really couldn't shell out for another one - the Kowas would be a suitable replacement. I thought optically, the bigger (i think 8.5x44, or something) was the closest. This was principally because of the extremely low CA, which is a particular thing with me.
However, there were just more personal things for which i would still prefer the FL - these were about the 'feel' in the hand, the response of the focus wheel, weight and balance etc.
The larger Genesis weighs a lot though.
I think i remember somewhere a comparison (was it you, Lee?) between a Zeiss and a Kowa 32 - it might have been the Conquest though. This was some time ago, but someone might remember it (particularly if they wrote it!)

Andy -
I'm often out at dusk with a friend who is a real gull specialist, and we wait for the 'big boys' to come into roost. He uses an 8x42 Zeiss HT, which is particularly good at the extremes of the day. I estimate i lose around 15mins on him, using the 32mm.
If you assume the same would happen at dawn, that's around 1/48th of the total day where an HT might be advantageous.
I am sufficiently aged now to not be able to use large exit pupils, and for 95% of the time, feel that toting around anything bigger than a 32mm with a 4mm EP is a waste of energy. I guess the use of the FL glass in some way compensates a little for this anyway.
I certainly haven't ever thought 'it's a shame i didn't bring the XXXXX instead....'

paddy7 said:

I haven't compared them side-by-side, but tried both Genesis models a couple of years back, and remember making a mental note that - should something happen to the FLs, and i really couldn't shell out for another one - the Kowas would be a suitable replacement. I thought optically, the bigger (i think 8.5x44, or something) was the closest. This was principally because of the extremely low CA, which is a particular thing with me.
However, there were just more personal things for which i would still prefer the FL - these were about the 'feel' in the hand, the response of the focus wheel, weight and balance etc.
The larger Genesis weighs a lot though.
I think i remember somewhere a comparison (was it you, Lee?) between a Zeiss and a Kowa 32 - it might have been the Conquest though. This was some time ago, but someone might remember it (particularly if they wrote it!)

Click to expand...

I have both Genesis 8x33 and FL 8x32 and they are so close in the quality of the view that choosing between them seems a fruitless exercise that would depend on very personal factors that other folks may or may not share. They are both mini-powerhouses of binos. Either one of these is quite good enough to be someone's only binos.

Lee

Why have both?

Hello Lee,

Sorry because this is a Zeiss forum...But a quick question: If I remember well, you do have, or have tried well, the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32. How do you compare this with the Kowa Genesis 8x32. Both in optical and mechanical features?

Thank you!

PHA