• 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.

Where are all the 8x32 SF reviews? After all the speculation... (1 Viewer)

wdc said:
First, the FOV difference looks pretty insignificant in those shots, which Dries pointed out a few weeks ago, comparing NL 8x42 to SF 8x42
Click to expand...
Yes. But the SF 8x32 FOV is almost as big as the NL 8x42. I see no difference.

wdc said:
Second, the apparent color saturation difference looks impressive! If this example is truly accurate, that is significant. I am surprised to see there is that much of a gain to be had at these stratospheric price points
Click to expand...
So I am. I really love the view from the NL and I did not expect it: more brightness, more vibrant color and for me at least, more 3D.

wdc said:
PM's photos also demonstrate a similar result, though less extreme.
Click to expand...
The SF is indeed really excellent and I expected it to stay with me for a long time. Now, I'm not so sure because Swarovski really did something special.
 
james holdsworth said:
I see the same, and cleaner more luminous whites. I’d love to see the same comparison with the NLs and the HTs, as I suspect the HT will have better white fidelity and better colour vibrancy than either of the SFs, which both seem a bit warm biased.
Click to expand...

I've directly compared the 8x42 NL to my two Zeiss FLs. My 1987 post Lotutec 8x56 FL shows the now familiar slight green Zeiss tint compared to what looks to me like nearly perfectly neutral color from the NL, but the 8x56 comes across as a little brighter. My 2004 pre Lotutec 8x42 FL has about has the same color accuracy as the NL, but also appears a little brighter. The binocular with the brightest appearing image in my collection is a 2017 Swarovski 8x30 Habicht. It has the same color accuracy as the NL, but is quite obviously brighter, as it should be with the same coatings combined with a higher transmission prism and only 12 glass to air surfaces.
 
When I compared a pair of Swaro NL 10x42's against an SF 10x42, the SF had a noticeable 'green bias' to the image. I was looking across the road at the side of a white building in broad daylight. The image through the Swaro was more vibrant and sparkling.

The images presented in this thread showing color comparisons between the Swaro and Zeiss confirm my initial observations, and I'm now even more inclined to believe what I saw.

Don't know what the x32 Zeiss is like.

I doubt you could go wrong with any of them. They're all top notch.
 
Last edited:
henry link said:
I've directly compared the 8x42 NL to my two Zeiss FLs. My 1987 post Lotutec 8x56 FL shows the now familiar slight green Zeiss tint compared to what looks to me like nearly perfectly neutral color from the NL, but the 8x56 comes across as a little brighter. My 2004 pre Lotutec 8x42 FL has about has the same color accuracy as the NL, but also appears a little brighter. The binocular with the brightest appearing image in my collection is a 2017 Swarovski 8x30 Habicht. It has the same color accuracy as the NL, but is quite obviously brighter, as it should be with the same coatings combined with a higher transmission prism and only 12 glass to air surfaces.
Click to expand...
I would guess that the Zeiss 8x42 FL and 8x56 FL with their AK prisms were also transmitting a little higher than the 91% of the NL. My Zeiss 8x56 FL also had a slight green tint.
 
For me, the reduced contrast and slightly less vibrant image displayed in the photo`s from the SF is what makes it work so well. The first time I looked through one in a very high contrast situation was a game changer and the reason I moved from two SVFP`s to my SF.

I was looking at a Herring Gull perched on top of a utility pole on a very bright day with bright white cloud cover, I was actually trying a Noctivid, the outline of the Gull seemed to merge with the sky like blown out highlights in an incorrectly exposed photo, I was used to this on all my previous "Alphas" to some degree although the NV was the most extreme. But when I picked up the SF the Gull was perfectly defined against the sky, no blowing out, and I could see detail in the plumage the others hid from me because of their higher contrast, I was sold.

I fully understand my experience may be unique to me, but I`m glad the SF is made the way it is, and its great to have so much choice at the top level.
 
In order to get as precise a picture as possible of whether the Zeiss Victory 8x32 SF would "fit" my eyes, I need the following dimensions of the rubber eyecups:

Inner diameter: xx mm
Outside diameter: yy mm

I would be happy to hear from you!
 
Inner: 26 mm
Outside: 41 mm

Canip

P.S. Not sure why this is relevant information to evaluate whether binocular fits your eyes
 
Last edited:
Thanks Canip for measuring ...
This way I can perhaps compare the dimensions with existing binoculars and roughly estimate, whether the geometry fits my eye sockets.

Now it actually looks as if I have to buy the ZEISS VICTORY 8X32 SF only a few weeks after the SWAROVSKI NL PURE 8X42 ...
Phew, October 2020 will be a very expensive month |:S|

If I only knew how to do it so that the Missus doesn't notice?
Maybe I should just give her the Zeiss SF for Christmas ???
Bingo, thats the solution ;)
 
Why?

The NL Pure is a little bit on the heavy side ... and I'm in my late 70s and the weight is not insignificant on hours of hiking.
That's why I'm looking for very good binoculars with a wide field of view and less weight for this application!
 
pepe said:
Why?

The NL Pure is a little bit on the heavy side ... and I'm in my late 70s and the weight is not insignificant on hours of hiking.
That's why I'm looking for very good binoculars with a wide field of view and less weight for this application!
Click to expand...

That was my thinking: to have a very good binocular with reduced weight. Now that I have the 8x32SF, regular full sized ones (8.5x42) feel much heavier than they used to. Also, the image from the SF’s is wonderful in actual use. In side-by-side comparisons with full sized, the full sized seem slightly better, but this distinction vanishes when used alone.
 
Torview said:
For me, the reduced contrast and slightly less vibrant image displayed in the photo`s from the SF is what makes it work so well. The first time I looked through one in a very high contrast situation was a game changer and the reason I moved from two SVFP`s to my SF.

I was looking at a Herring Gull perched on top of a utility pole on a very bright day with bright white cloud cover, I was actually trying a Noctivid, the outline of the Gull seemed to merge with the sky like blown out highlights in an incorrectly exposed photo, I was used to this on all my previous "Alphas" to some degree although the NV was the most extreme. But when I picked up the SF the Gull was perfectly defined against the sky, no blowing out, and I could see detail in the plumage the others hid from me because of their higher contrast, I was sold.

I fully understand my experience may be unique to me, but I`m glad the SF is made the way it is, and its great to have so much choice at the top level.
Click to expand...

It is good to see a very positive post about the Victory SF. I have enjoyed my 10x42 SF for several years now.
For some reason, there is lots of noise about the new NL. That is good and these binoculars have some differences.
As far as the Victory SF showing a green cast, I find nothing there, it should not be a mention that would bother anyone looking for a new binocular.
Color differences are largely personal, and with experience this is not a big thing, ergos and the rest are more important.

Jerry
 
Last edited:
NDhunter said:
It is good to see a very positive post about the Victory SF. I have enjoyed my 10x42 SF for several years now.
For some reason, there is lots of noise about the new NL. That is good and these binoculars have some differences.
As far as the Victory SF showing a green cast, I find nothing there, it should not be a mention that would bother anyone looking for a new binocular.
Color differences are largely personal, and with experience this is not a big thing, ergos and the rest are more important.

Jerry
Click to expand...
My unnamed binocular from a well known maker relevant to this thread has different color in each barrel -checked by holding inverted. Is this a personal color difference? Just asking.

Edmund
 
Last edited:
eronald said:
My unnamed binocular from a well known maker relevant to this thread has different color in each barrel -checked by holding inverted. Is this a personal color difference? Just asking.

Edmund
Click to expand...

Edmund:
You are mentioning a very good question. I see colors different in my own eyes. One has higher color perception than the other.

I have confirmed it by inverting the binoculars. In the fall with these red and orange colors of leaves and foliage, this took me by surprise some years ago.

That is why I don't care much about what others may see in very slight color casts, as it means little for 99% of users.

And that is why it would not matter one bit on their buying decision.

Jerry
 
eronald said:
My unnamed binocular from a well known maker relevant to this thread has different color in each barrel -checked by holding inverted. Is this a personal color difference? Just asking.

Edmund
Click to expand...

I once had a new out of box binocular that had some sort of misalignment / manufacturing error where there was bizarre astigmatism / an almost off centered sweet spot in one barrel but not the other, confirmed by looking through the affected barrel with both eyes at differing angles, and also by inverting the binoculars and watching the problem move perfectly from eye to eye and rotationally.

Odd things can happen and make it through QC.
 
eronald said:
My unnamed binocular from a well known maker relevant to this thread has different color in each barrel -checked by holding inverted. Is this a personal color difference? Just asking.

Edmund
Click to expand...

I have noticed the same thing in Every binocular I’ve owned and think it is a difference in my eyes and not the glasses. Would seem to make sense as one of my eyes is sharper than the other and color recognition could just as easily be different too.
 
Upland said:
I have noticed the same thing in Every binocular I’ve owned and think it is a difference in my eyes and not the glasses. Would seem to make sense as one of my eyes is sharper than the other and color recognition could just as easily be different too.
Click to expand...

This is easy to check: just look through the same glass with both eyes. I know one of my eyes is brighter for instance.
 
range said:
A new SF 10X32 view fyi.
http://www.bggd.com/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=451808&extra=page=1
Click to expand...

Another quite positive review. My takeaways from it were:

-Overall as excellent as would be expected
-Very positive about glare rejection
-Similarly to the NLs, given the huge FOV, eye placement is perhaps a touch less forgiving.
-I'm keener than ever to get my hands on a pair of 8x32

Regarding eye placement, as I understand it these large FOV bins (SF 32mm and the NLs) do start to get trickier as the cone of light coming out of the ocular lens is necessarily of a greater angle due to the larger AFOV. When you combine this with the smaller exit pupil, this makes itself more felt. I should think the 8x would be a bit more forgiving than the 10x due to exit pupil size. Similarly, on the NLs, the 8x should be the most forgiving and the 12x the most fidgety, no?

Overall I'm quite keen to check them out. From what I keep reading I think I'll like them well and I doubt the supposed blue ring or the supposed color cast will be terribly noticeable. I most worried about eye relief / eye placement. And I wish the strap lugs were metal but whatever, I also wish the FP strap attachment system didn't exist :)
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

N
SF 42 & 32 Brief Comparisons
Replies
8
Views
2K
Scott98
S
O
Zeiss Victory HT 8x42 vs. Victory SF 8x42
Replies
4
Views
543
Scott98
S
J
Brief reviews about Zeiss victory SFL 8/10 x40
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Declan Joseph Deasy
D
S
Feedback request from any FL 8x32 owners….
Replies
13
Views
2K
Foss
Foss
Z
Grey 8x42 SF Should I or not
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
etc
etc

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top