• 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.

SF 8x32 v NL Pure 8x42 (1 Viewer)

I'm going to have to express a contrarian view to what I'm reading here on the subject of "field flatteners".

Can we agree that the ideal situation is for light to arrive at the eye through a binocular exactly as it would have done with no binocular in front of the eye, except of course for the change in magnification? Astigmatism and field curvature simply don't exist in the natural light that falls on the eye, so how would adding them to a binocular image make it appear more natural? It's only when those aberrations are eliminated that we see a faithful analogue to the image space as if it were being viewed through a hollow tube.

I can only believe that the completely inoffensive result of correcting field curvature and astigmatism is being falsely conflated with a pattern of low pincushion and high angular magnification distortions that viewers may find unnatural. Unfortunately, some of the best known binoculars with field flatteners, like the Swaro SV and Zeiss SF just happen to coincidently have those kinds of distortions, but the distortions themselves have nothing to do with the field flattening function. That can be accomplished with any combination of distortions the designer chooses to use.

Henry

Hi Henry,

Distortion is an optical aberration, correct? Shouldn't it also be eliminated since it "...doesn't exist in the natural light that falls on the eye..."? But, as we know manufacturer's deliberately include it in their binocular designs. What's the difference?

The human eye uses field curvature to project visual images onto spherical focal planes. A binocular aided eye must do the same. Field curvature is useful and your eyes know all about it. Violating that natural arrangement has perceptual consequences, just like distortion.

I guess it's a matter of perspective. ;)
Ed
 

Attachments

  • Aberrations.jpg
    Aberrations.jpg
    38.6 KB · Views: 32
Last edited:
It should be the Mau Syndrome. It is where one assumes what they want to see and then proceeds to sound off like an expert proving their imaginary point. The more expert they think they can sound, the more likely they are to convince themselves of their self fulfilling prophecy. The more they convince themselves, the more they become convinced they are right, and that they have convinced everyone else as well.

With all due respect of course ;)

That's almost exactly delusional disorder...
 
Hi Henry,

Distortion is an optical aberration, correct? Shouldn't it also be eliminated since it "...doesn't exist in the natural light that falls on the eye..."? But, as we know manufacturer's deliberately include it in their binocular designs. What's the difference?

The human eye uses field curvature to project visual images onto spherical focal planes. A binocular aided eye must do the same. Field curvature is useful and your eyes know all about it. Violating that natural aspect has perceptual consequences, just like eliminating distortion.

I guess it's a matter of perspective. ;)
Ed

Ed:

You are correct, any distortion like too much field curvature leading to fuzzy edges is a negative.

That is how Allbinos does their rankings, they are consistent with their rankings of optics.

The Allbinos rankings do a very good job, the best binoculars rise to the top.

Jerry
 
It should be the Mau Syndrome. It is where one assumes what they want to see and then proceeds to sound off like an expert proving their imaginary point. The more expert they think they can sound, the more likely they are to convince themselves of their self fulfilling prophecy. The more they convince themselves, the more they become convinced they are right, and that they have convinced everyone else as well.

With all due respect of course ;)
My point is I trust myself more than anybody else. I have no reason to lie to myself. There would be no gain. I find it amazing that other people are telling me that I can't see what I am seeing because of some theory or because they don't see it. That is total nonsense. That is why I don't trust other peoples subjective reviews. It is their brains interpretation of what they see through their eyes which can be very different from what my brain interprets through my eyes and then their opinion of a binocular can be very biased for many reasons. As long as we have different brains and different eyes subjective reviews although helpful should never be used in your final decision on what binocular to buy or not buy.
 
Last edited:
That's almost exactly delusional disorder...
No, it is not delusional disorder. I am not imagining what I am seeing. I would wager that if you would ask 10 birders what binocular had a bigger FOV and you gave them a Nikon EDG 8x32 and a Swarovski EL 8x32 8 out of 10 would say the EL. That is not a delusion. It is a fact.

"Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness — called a “psychosis”— in which a person cannot tell what is real from what is imagined. The main feature of this disorder is the presence of delusions, which are unshakable beliefs in something untrue.Jan 22, 2018"
 
My point is I trust myself more than anybody else. I have no reason to lie to myself. There would be no gain. I find it amazing that other people are telling me that I can't see what I am seeing because of some theory or because they don't see it. That is total nonsense.

Skydiving might be great fun, but it is much better with a parachute. It's just that you—based on the observations of several here—rarely use one. Why don't you come out and say you're infallible and know more than all the optical postdocs in the world?

“It’s important to learn when to stop arguing with people and just let them be wrong.” I’m learning because, “The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge.”— Dr. Stephen Hawking :cat:

Bill
 
No, it is not delusional disorder. I am not imagining what I am seeing. I would wager that if you would ask 10 birders what binocular had a bigger FOV and you gave them a Nikon EDG 8x32 and a Swarovski EL 8x32 8 out of 10 would say the EL. That is not a delusion. It is a fact.

""

Not until you really do it and have the test results. Until then it's only a theory and a subjective claim. At that point already presenting it as fact is really a delusion.... That's how the definitions are, sorry dude.
 
Not until you really do it and have the test results. Until then it's only a theory and a subjective claim. At that point already presenting it as fact is really a delusion.... That's how the definitions are, sorry dude.
Then if that is true, all subjective reviews are just a subjective claim and are delusional because they are just a theory and one person's opinion and are not tested. It is a fact the EL has bigger FOV than the EDG but the point is how small of a difference in FOV can be detected by the human eye. Actually that would be an interesting experiment and important to optics because manufacturers keep increasing the FOV to sell binoculars but really how big of an increase is needed to be noticeable. I notice the difference between a EDG 8x32 and a EL 8x32 and I notice the difference in FOV between a EL 8.5x42 and a EL 8x32 so for me a 10 to 15 foot FOV can be noticed. Maybe it is not the same for all people. Let's throw that question out there. What is the smallest difference in FOV that you notice with your various binoculars? If you have an EL 8x32 and a EL 8.5x42 do you notice a difference in FOV?
 
Last edited:
Reminds me of when I was a boy and my Dad was repairing a pair of overalls (he was a Dartmoor farmer) watched over by his Mother in law, on an old hand turned Singer sewing machine, many here over a certain age will remember these.

Anyway Dad had forgotten to check there was enough thread on the spool before starting, nearing the end of the repair it was looking like the thread would run out before completion, my Granny, his Mother in law, insisted that if he just turned the handle faster he could get the job finished before the thread ran out !

She could not be convinced otherwise.

Kind of reminds me of someone.
 
Yes I see a FOV difference between 8x32 SV and 8.5 SV. That's 26' though (I think).

I also notice the slight magnification difference, but I've been using both for many years. I prefer 8.5, so if I eventually try the NL it will probably be the 10x. 8x, for me, does feel a little underpowered sometimes.

Dennis am I correct you'll be without a bino for a month or more!?! As a birder, I could not do that! The problem with your brand of subjectivity is that it is on steroids. Who even knows how many times you've changed your subjective impressions???

After many years I know I don't like fuzzy edges and off-axis astigmatism. A stable subjectivity I think. And yes I am aware of those things all the time. I don't go looking for them either.

Nice story, Torview! Unlike your Granny, however, Dennis can change his mind every three weeks. He seems to have fun doing it, so, well, I let it go.
 
Dennis,

There's no way you don't have any binoculars right now.
I'm guessing you meant no current premium bins (?)
You must have at least a pocket on hand or an old Trinovid or something.
 
No, it is not delusional disorder. I am not imagining what I am seeing. I would wager that if you would ask 10 birders what binocular had a bigger FOV and you gave them a Nikon EDG 8x32 and a Swarovski EL 8x32 8 out of 10 would say the EL. That is not a delusion. It is a fact.

"Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness — called a “psychosis”— in which a person cannot tell what is real from what is imagined. The main feature of this disorder is the presence of delusions, which are unshakable beliefs in something untrue.Jan 22, 2018"

It all depends on if you are 'aware' of FOV and have it in the back of your mind as you compare and contrast two bins side by side. So if you 'ask people' to look for FOV, they will look for it and most likely be able to tell. But on any normal day, very few (perhaps you) pick up a pair of bins and look for FOV...for me, I am looking at the birds since I go birding to look at birds and not get carried away looking at FOV or even glare. And even if I have a pair of bins ....and am not comparing side-by-side, I won't notice FOV, unless it is something like my 10x42 HT with 330' FOV compared to my Nikon which is 430+'.
 
To do a proper experiment you would have to have 10 disguised binoculars sitting on a table and see if 20 people could rank them from first to last based on the FOV. It is important because if you don't notice a 10 foot difference in FOV you might be just as well off with the Zeiss SF 8x32 as the Swarovski NL 8x42 and save the weight and the money. The NL will still probably have sharper edges though but that remains to be verified. I personally notice the difference in FOV size when I switch from binocular to binocular. When I go from an EDG 8x32 to a EL 8x32 I notice the bigger FOV of the EL even if I use each binocular on a different day. But we must remember I am the 6 million dollar man!
 
Dennis,

There's no way you don't have any binoculars right now.
I'm guessing you meant no current premium bins (?)
You must have at least a pocket on hand or an old Trinovid or something.
No, none. I don't have any beaters anymore. I am just carrying what I consider the best for me. I am waiting for the NL 8x42. And then I am going to see if I can get by with only one pair of binoculars. If I hate the NL I will try the Zeiss SF 8x32.
 
Last edited:
Dennis, can you notice the glare factor between the EDG and the SV?

Andy W.
Yes. The EDG 8x32 controls glare better than the EL 8x32 but the EL is brighter, has a bigger FOV, more neutral color and sharper edges with its flatter field design. I have always wondered if Allbinos tested the EL 8x32 if they would rank it 1st over the EDG 8x32. It would be close but I think they might because they like flat field designs, and they have the EL 8.5x42 ranked over the EDG 8x42 in the 8x42 category but the EDG 10x42 is 1st in the 10x42 category. In the EDG line I think the 10x42 is the best followed by the 8x32 and then the 7x42. The EDG 7x42 never wowed me that much because of the small AFOV for a 7x. If the NL controls glare better than the EL it should be a nice binocular.
 
Last edited:
Dennis only having one binocular?
Chuck deciding he might not buy either?
What's happening here? Was there some blinding flash of light i missed somewhere?
It's BF Jim - but not as we know it....
 
Some details which may impact the choice for some potential buyers from the spec sheets.

IPD on the SF is 54-76mm vs 56-74mm on the NL, could be a deciding factor for some, at least the SF can accommodate more users.

Not a problem for me in the UK but the operating temperature on the SF is -30C to + 64C vs -25C to +55C on the NL. That extra -5C may be important for users in colder climates come Winter.

I have to say my Genesis 8x33 has convinced me I could manage with just one good 30mm class binocular, so however good the NL is, the SF is the one I`m most keen to try first.
 
"Not a problem for me in the UK but the operating temperature on the SF is -30C to + 64C vs -25C to +55C on the NL. That extra -5C may be important for users in colder climates come Winter."

Really? that would change ones mind about which glass to purchase?
 
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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top