• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

A very comprehensive review of NL1242 VS EL1250 (1 Viewer)

John A Roberts

Well-known member
Australia
I’ve had a chance to look through the thread. It comprises 7 pages, with the first page being 117 MB in size!
This is due to the there being many multi-MB images. In contrast, the other pages are each 1.2 MB or less

The first page contains many images, though little comment:
- the first half is mainly images of the NL (including stock images from Swarovski), and
- more interestingly, the second half includes many comparative views through the NL 12x42 and EL 12x50 eyepieces

The eyepiece images show:
- firstly the differing fields of view, and
- then the differing resolution

See two images comparing from left to right, the fields of view of the 12x50 to the 12x42

In relation to the resolution, as there’s not any explanation, it’s difficult to know how well the recorded detail of the camera images
corresponds to the detail that would be seen by an observer’s eye, see an example

- - - -

In terms of it being ‘a very comprehensive review’ . . .

The main problem is the lack of any comment about the qualitative differences between the images of the two 12x models
The photos show perhaps a minor difference in resolution in favour of the larger objective EL
However, the thread doesn't address other critical factors, including those encountered in difficult viewing conditions e.g. chromatic aberration, ghosting or veiling glare
As a big fan of the EL 12x50, I was particularly looking forward to some detailed analysis in relation to this

So while for many it will be worth a look, one needs to temper expectations


John


p.s. For ease of comparison, I've also added the first 2 images in a single side-by-side view (Douh!)
 

Attachments

  • FOV 12x50.jpg
    FOV 12x50.jpg
    239.9 KB · Views: 156
  • FOV 12x42.jpg
    FOV 12x42.jpg
    251.8 KB · Views: 145
  • Resolution.jpg
    Resolution.jpg
    129.2 KB · Views: 135
  • Side by Side.jpg
    Side by Side.jpg
    125.1 KB · Views: 107
Last edited:

John A Roberts

Well-known member
Australia
I’ve also attached some images that I thought would be of general interest:
- reflections within the eyepieces of the NL 12x42 and the EL FP 12x50

- reflections from the objectives

- reflections from the eyepieces

- a diagram of the shape of the tapered ‘waist’ of the NL, and

- detail of the FRP forehead rest


John
 

Attachments

  • Eyepiece Reflections.jpg
    Eyepiece Reflections.jpg
    82.1 KB · Views: 121
  • Objective reflections.jpg
    Objective reflections.jpg
    188.8 KB · Views: 104
  • Eyepieces.jpg
    Eyepieces.jpg
    175.4 KB · Views: 124
  • Waist cross-section.jpg
    Waist cross-section.jpg
    136.9 KB · Views: 109
  • FRP detail.jpg
    FRP detail.jpg
    109.8 KB · Views: 73
Last edited:

range

Well-known member
I’ve had a chance to look through the thread. It comprises 7 pages, with the first page being 117 MB in size!
This is due to the there being many multi-MB images. In contrast, the other pages are each 1.2 MB or less

The first page contains many images, though little comment:
- the first half is mainly images of the NL (including stock images from Swarovski), and
- more interestingly, the second half includes many comparative views through the NL 12x42 and EL 12x50 eyepieces

The eyepiece images show:
- firstly the differing fields of view, and
- then the differing resolution

See two images comparing from left to right, the fields of view of the 12x50 to the 12x42

In relation to the resolution, as there’s not any explanation, it’s difficult to know how well the recorded detail of the camera images
corresponds to the detail that would be seen by an observer’s eye, see an example

- - - -

In terms of it being ‘a very comprehensive review’ . . .

The main problem is the lack of any comment about the qualitative differences between the images of the two 12x models
The photos show perhaps a minor difference in resolution in favour of the larger objective EL
However, the thread doesn't address other critical factors, including those encountered in difficult viewing conditions e.g. chromatic aberration, ghosting or veiling glare
As a big fan of the EL 12x50, I was particularly looking forward to some detailed analysis in relation to this

So while for many it will be worth a look, one needs to temper expectations


John
The article is sitll updating.
The review part is yet to come.
 

John A Roberts

Well-known member
Australia
Hi range (post #5),

Well that's certainly good to hear. As I indicated, I'll be most interested in your observations
Thanks for your work so far, and in anticipation of what follows


John
 

range

Well-known member
The review part has been updated, the following is translated by Google:

I wanted to wait for the weather to get better and take a few back-lens photos as a supplementary explanation of my experience, but the smog in Beijing has not cleared in recent days, so I had to post the text first.
Special note: There is a big gap between the reflection of the mirror image and the actual effect of human eyes. The mirror image can only be used as a very limited reference, so everyone cannot rely solely on the mirror image to make the final judgment.
Silvateam's new NL PURE 12X42 and EL 12X50 WB use experience and difference comparison (because the calibers of these two mirrors are not the same level, so some irrelevant ones that cannot be compared will not be compared)
I won’t categorize them below. If you have the intention to buy, look at it one by one. If you don’t have the desire to buy, just take a glance.

1) Silvateam's new NL series feel that the overall sharpness is very high, especially in the central area. The contrast (contrast) of NL is also improved compared to EL. In terms of imaging characteristics, NL12X42 is fine and sharp, and EL12X50 is solid and steady. Both mirrors are transparent, and there is no difference in transparency.
2) There is nothing to say about the brightness of NL, the 91% transmittance index is placed there. However, after comparative testing in the dark environment, the identification of the details of distant objects, at this time the advantages of EL12X50's large aperture are fully reflected, NL12X42 is undoubtedly defeated, after all, EL12X50 is 41.7% larger than the NL12X42 objective lens, and the NL42 has a larger aperture. The cattle cannot be compared with the larger EL50.
3) In terms of color reproduction, NL is relatively neutral, so the color reproduction effect is better than EL. From another perspective, Silvateam uses coating processes and other measures to appropriately increase the color temperature to give people a sense of clarity. The features are slightly adjusted and lowered.
4) In terms of field of view, the NL12X42 has a nominal apparent angle of view of 71°, and the EL12X50 has a nominal angle of 63 degrees. The actual test result by the eyepiece projection method is also the same. It seems that Silvateam has no false standard. Through watching, I originally thought that the field of view of EL12X50 and Leica 10X50 was very large, but after comparing with NL12X42, there is no doubt that the huge field of view of NL can make the observer feel more excited and comfortable. As for whether the shock is strong or not, it depends on whether the observer has seen the Nikon WX or a large pair with ultra-wide-angle eyepieces. The shock of the viewers who have seen it will not feel particularly strong, and those who have not seen it will definitely Will be so excited. But in any case, NL is still the boss with the widest appearance among the small handheld binoculars that can be carried and used normally. Due to the characteristics of the human eye, in order for the observer to have a strong sense of integration, the apparent viewing angle of the telescope must be above 80°. If you turn the eye mask down and rely on the forehead support (forehead pillow, forehead rest) to get your eyes out of the eye mask, the feeling of viewing in suspension is also very wonderful.
5) The good image range of NL12X42 is compared with EL12X50. Although relatively speaking, it still can't fully achieve the full-field clearing effect, especially the image quality of the edges. I feel the same as Mr. Liu, the edge image quality of NL is not as good as EL when viewed with the naked eye. This may be a partial sacrifice and compromise made by Shihua to expand his apparent perspective. Generally speaking, the range of good images is quite large, but compared with those top mirrors with a small apparent angle of view, the effect of full field clarity is still a little worse.
6) Another feature of the NL series is that the definition of the edges of myopic users with the naked eye is not as clear as wearing glasses, while mirrors like Nikon EDG can achieve full field clarity even when viewed with the naked eye. Understand the compromise and concession made by Shihua to expand his apparent perspective.
7) The image at the edge of the NL12X42 field of view has a certain degree of compression, slight blur and a little deformation, which will also cause a slight rolling ball effect. NL's dispersion control and coma aberration should be considered very good, about 60% from the center began to produce a very slight chromatic aberration (dispersion, color fringing), and then carefully observe the star point target can detect a slight coma. Distortion (that is, the very small round target deforms and loses round and starts to have a tail), so the effect of using NL to stargaze is definitely not as good as Nikon's WX. Of course, those true stargazers are going to Nikon's WX.
8) Through observation and shooting, it is found that NL controls the distortion very well. It is almost horizontal and vertical, including the edge, at a certain distance, with very slight pincushion distortion, although the distortion will be different at different distances. Slight changes, but overall the distortion control of Silvateam's new NL can be said to be very perfect and awesome.
9) Silvateam's matting effect has not been very strong, and this time is no exception. I can only say that it is not bad. Look at the picture above, NL and EL are similar, but they are still great compared to those non-top mirrors.
10) The NL12X42's nominal closest focusing distance is 2.6 meters, which is basically consistent with the actual viewing test. If you watch with the naked eye at 400 degrees myopia, the closest focusing distance is about 2.4 meters. Naturally, most telescopes with this magnification will not be used to look at targets that are too close.
11) NL12X42 has a relatively shallow depth of field. The advantage of this performance is that it is easy to separate the target from the cluttered background when watching birds and hunting. The disadvantage is that it takes time to adjust the focus wheel when viewing the scenery due to the difference between the distance and the target. Make it focus. Fortunately, NL's focusing feel has been greatly improved, and it is easy to adjust at any time.
12) Grip and control. It is worth noting the application and improvement of the new NL binoculars ergonomics. For example, the design of Silvateam’s original hollow structure was changed to a thin waist structure. The application and improvement of this ergonomics is to facilitate the user to hold and improve the effect of one-handed operation. The index finger will be natural after holding. Land on the focusing wheel. This improvement is achieved by rotating the Schmidt-Biehan inverted image prism and modifying the structure of the fixed frame of the prism group to achieve the smallest waist (the smallest part size is 35.4mm), which is easy to hold even with small female hands. At the same time, the center of gravity of the telescope is also at the waist, which is extremely beneficial to improve the stability of the grip.
13) Another major improvement of Silvateam’s new NL is that the focus wheel no longer has problems such as lag and uneven left and right rotation damping as before. Now it is easy and smooth to rotate the focus wheel to focus. , But I feel that the fly in the ointment is that the focus damping is too weak, which leads to too sensitive rotation. The focusing wheel of the new NL is positioned down, and the surface of the focusing wheel with enlarged diameter is covered with black rubber and it feels good to use.
14) The full swing height of the new NL eye mask is 13mm, and the huge eye mask with an outer diameter of 43mm gives a high-end and mighty feeling. The eye mask has six levels of lifting belt positioning gears. The only shortcoming is the damping feeling of the eye mask during rotation. And the sense of clarity of positioning is slightly worse, this is not as good as Nikon's EDG, a joke, rotating and lifting Nikon's EDG eye mask will make people feel addictive. The height of Silvateam's eye mask fully meets the requirements of the shallow eye sockets of the Asians, and there will be no black beans and shadows when you look at the brow bone.
15) Another innovative application of Silvateam this time is the forehead support (forehead pillow, forehead rest). Its functions are: it will certainly help to improve the holding stability (but don't expect to get The effect of stabilizing the image of a telescope); it can appropriately reduce the fatigue and the squeeze of the eye socket caused by long-term handheld observation; you can use the forehead support to realize the low eye mask or the eyes to detach the eye mask for suspended viewing to obtain a special wonderful look ; Conducive to the rapid positioning of the eye point (exit pupil spot); it can be matched with the characters on the top of the central axis to get a rough pupil distance recognition.
16) Another improvement is the mirror bag of the telescope: the original Silvateam mirror bag is a vertical mirror bag with a vertical opening, now it is changed to a waist bag with a horizontal opening. Compared with the old vertical type, the new horizontal waist bag is easier to telescope The accessibility of the belt bag has also been improved in terms of safety and carrying convenience. The binoculars will not accidentally fall out even when the belt bag is open. The shoulder strap of the new belt bag is also very good. It can be said that the design of this belt bag is very user-friendly.
17) The change of the mirror strap, the lower adjustment rope of the EL mirror strap is a round strap, and the new NL is changed to a flat strap. Personally, the sling is more suitable. The sling will give people a stronger sense of security. Both are elastic straps. The elastic straps have a decompression effect and are not easy to be fatigued for a long time.
18) Defects and deficiencies: Silvateam’s common problem is that the hardness and firmness of the coating on the non-encapsulated part of the lens barrel surface is not strong. Carelessness can easily cause damage to the surface coating due to scratches and collisions, especially when pulled out. Pay more attention when inserting the forehead support (forehead support, forehead pillow), because the movable support of some forehead support (forehead support, forehead pillow) is not very flexible. It is best to adjust the interpupillary distance of the telescope before inserting it to make the distance anastomose before inserting it carefully. .
19) Recommendations for purchase: If you have poor grip and stability, mainly used for sightseeing to appreciate the scenery along the way or to view the city and urban areas, it is recommended to buy NL8X42, which can be included in the huge field of vision. Targets such as scenery and people, this feeling will definitely make you excited; if you have a particularly good grip and have a strong desire to observe the target closer, or focus on bird watching and hunting, or have very shortsightedness If you want to experience the comfort of viewing with the naked eye, it is recommended that you buy the NL12X42. After all, this model is still the most distinctive single seedling; if you already have a very good 8x lens that is difficult to give up, or you want to Eat up and down, or if you are in a dilemma and hesitate, then the NL10X42 wild mirror between the two is your dish. Needless to say, the best choice for both.
20) NL8X42 diopter correction range is about 500+, NL10X42 diopter correction range is about 700+, NL12X42 diopter correction range is about 900+. Because there are individual differences in the range of diopter correction, it is recommended that highly myopic mirror friends try it in person, so as to choose a mirror that can meet their own wide range of diopter correction.
21) There is not much difference in the picture quality between the three specifications. Generally speaking, it is easier to do better with the same type of low power lens. Mr. Liu believes that the picture quality of NL8X42 and NL10X42 is slightly better than that of NL12X42. Although I chose NL12X42 myself, for most mirror friends, I do not recommend 12X42 because of the stability of the grip.
Summary: Although there are still some minor flaws in the Silvateam NL series, there is nothing in the world, and the flaws are not covered up. It is not an exaggeration to use the analogy of "this mirror is in your hands". I personally think that NL is a top-notch lens worth buying and long-term possession. Those who are financially permitted, let's start, you won't regret it. It's better to keep a bunch of mirrors and keep one or two of the top ones for appreciation and enjoyment.
 

PeterPS

MEMBER
Silvateam=Swarovski
Otherwise I think Google did a decent job...phenominal AI.

And mirrors=binoculars (of course). But the translation is also funny in places:
"The cattle cannot be compared with the larger EL50."
I believe the cattle is the NLs.....
Btw, no AI, just humongous computing power and a fast search algorithm.
 

PeterPS

MEMBER
Are you sure? I think Google Translate uses deep-learning now, like deepl.com, another good translator.

This is off topic so I'll be brief. Deep learning is nothing but an algorithm, definitely not AI. In fact what some people call AI is nothing but RI=Recycled (human) Intelligence.
 

pm42

Well-known member
This is off topic so I'll be brief. Deep learning is nothing but an algorithm, definitely not AI. In fact what some people call AI is nothing but RI=Recycled (human) Intelligence.
No its not but I'll stop talking about it as it is off topic. This is clearly not an algorithm.
 

elkcub

Silicon Valley, California
United States
This is off topic so I'll be brief. Deep learning is nothing but an algorithm, definitely not AI. In fact what some people call AI is nothing but RI=Recycled (human) Intelligence.

Peter,

Quoting from the attached 2017 article,
...Deep learning, a technique with its foundation in artificial
neural networks, is emerging in recent years as a powerful
tool for machine learning, promising to reshape the future of
artificial intelligence.

I would be somewhat surprised if the technology enters into machine translation, however, I've been surprised before. I take it that your reference to "recycled human intelligence" falls under the rubric of 'expert systems,' but that is also fair game for 'deep learning.'

BTW, are you located at Stanford, UK or Stanford U?
Ed
 

Attachments

  • Deep Learning for Health Informatics.pdf
    2.6 MB · Views: 12

tenex

reality-based
No, deep learning (neural network) is not an "algorithm" based approach. You can't even tell exactly how it's reaching conclusions. (Never mind "AI", I agree that what people mean by that can be a mess)

Interesting review, particularly the suggestion to use the arguably redundant forehead rest as a substitute for extended eyecups. I'd like to try that myself. Thanks, range.

Also intriguing how machine translation gets tricky expressions like "fly in the ointment" just right, but stumbles over simple words like "mirror" (technical context?). I'd like to know the literal sense of this Chinese expression "wanting to eat up and down", which has many equivalents in other languages.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top