• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Fogging oculars...just NL's or all new production Swaros? (2 Viewers)

Leica says breathing on lenses damages them:

Only when you drink to much alcohol...
 
In the “early days” lens coatings were magnesium fluoride, but I have no clue what they are today.

Can someone enlighten me before I step off the path into the swamp?
 
Most coatings are a mix of different refractory oxides with different refractive indices that are stacked up depending on the reflective performance you want. Anti reflection coatings are very simple compared to filters that have several very precise and controlled transmission windows and are designed to block all other wavelengths, the control you need to guarantee the specs is impressive. The deposition process is different today and thus very hard and durable coatings can be produced that should last a long time.
 
Most coatings are a mix of different refractory oxides with different refractive indices that are stacked up depending on the reflective performance you want. Anti reflection coatings are very simple compared to filters that have several very precise and controlled transmission windows and are designed to block all other wavelengths, the control you need to guarantee the specs is impressive. The deposition process is different today and thus very hard and durable coatings can be produced that should last a long time.
Okay, I’ll say what I was going to.

Leica claim that enzymes in micro droplets in your exhaled breath will destroy lens coatings.

I was under the impression that enzymes only had an effect on organic substances. That if you put enzymes on, say, a cut of meat, there will be an effect, but if you put enzymes on a big crystal of, say, sodium chloride, nothing would happen.

Therefore, I remain unpersuaded by the Leitz argument.

How far into the swamp did I walk?
 
Mal, I agree, 100%, but believe me, what I (and others who have experience of using NL's without glasses have also acknowledged on this thread and elsewhere on BF) know for sure, is that in certain conditions, for some users, NL's do indeed fog up not just a little bit quicker than the majority of higher end binoculars, but a lot quicker. This is FACT.
this is interesting - I would try dialing down the eyecup if possible & see if that fixes it. I'd be surprised if it's some property of the hard multicoatings on the glass. I think it's just warm moist air from your body hitting the cold lens.
 
Leica says breathing on lenses damages them:

It's not Leica. It's some guy who owns a website called "Leica Review. Independent Leica Lens and Camera Reviews". Big difference.

And I don't believe him. Sounds to me like utter nonsense. Take his stance on microfibre cloths and cleaning fluids. So Zeiss and B+W and all the other companies that sell such products for cleaning their lenses don't know what they're doing? Come on.

Hermann
 
The fogging issue in the NL is disturbing considering Swarovski does not have problems like this in
their other models.
Jerry
And this is at the root of my motivation for starting this thread. My NL's are quite definitely not my favourite binoculars, but I sincerely believe (or believed) that they are my best binoculars, overall. Now that I'm no longer wearing glasses when I use binoculars, that belief has been shattered by this discovery, because glasses wearers are unaffected. This characteristic, or phenomenon, clearly doesn't affect everyone who doesn't wear glasses either (see ReinierB's post after yours), but for me (and others) the extraordinary rapidity of fogging in this model, in certain conditions, is very evident. I have a suspicion the issue actually affects far more people than the weight of reporting might suggest, but they are possibly unaware that the speed of the fogging is as rapid as it is, if they only use their NL on a regular basis, and don't rotate a selection of different binoculars.

I have been in the process of transitioning from using my 10x32 EL to my 10x32 NL as my daily grab and go binocular, as I felt they were just a little better than the EL, overall. This fogging issue has changed that perception, and the balance has swung back in favour of the EL, which I now consider to be the Swaro at the top of their model range which performs best overall. Sadly the x32 EL's are discontinued.

So, the question remains; are the other Swaro models of recent manufacture also afflicted by this 'faster than normal' fogging phenomenon, or do they fog at what might be considered normal speed. I've heard no complaints regarding the speed of fogging in other models in their range, but that doesn't mean there isn't an issue with them too. What it might suggest, is that their eyecup designs may be less prone to fogging in the first place, therefore the effect of the absence of a hydrophobic coating is less (or not) obvious, or not a factor at all.
 
I don't recall eyepiece fogging featuring in advertising for hydrophobic coatings, which was all about shedding macroscopic droplets of precipitation (and easier cleaning). Do we actually know that hydrophobic coatings also impede fogging, and their absence creates the problem some allege with NLs? I have bins with and without them, between which I've never noticed a tendency of one to fog up much more easily than the other. They probably haven't all been out as often in relevant conditions, but a BN was my regular bin for over 15 years and I didn't find it problematic.

As to eyecups, don't NL's have essentially the same construction as SLC/ELs before them? And NLs have plenty of eye relief which should help here. This really seems a bit mysterious.
 
massively increased susceptibility to fogging of NL's
ONLY the oculars of my NL's have fogged up, rendering them unusable.


I would expect all of my binos, including those from Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica and Nikon, to externally fog up in certain conditions, and experience has taught me to counter the fogging risk with certain measures (breathing through my nose instead of my mouth, leaning the eyecup rim against my eyebrows instead of pressing them into my eye sockets, watching temperature difference between instrument and air and ventilate eye lenses frequently , etc.).

I haven’t noticed any „massively increased susceptibility to fogging“ in any of my NLs, nor any of my other Swaro binos (I do have a few). And even when one or the other bino did fog up e.g in cold and humid conditions, that didn‘t render them „unusable“.

Just my 2 ct.
 
I would expect all of my binos, including those from Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica and Nikon, to externally fog up in certain conditions, and experience has taught me to counter the fogging risk with certain measures (breathing through my nose instead of my mouth, leaning the eyecup rim against my eyebrows instead of pressing them into my eye sockets, watching temperature difference between instrument and air and ventilate eye lenses frequently , etc.).

I haven’t noticed any „massively increased susceptibility to fogging“ in any of my NLs, nor any of my other Swaro binos (I do have a few). And even when one or the other bino did fog up e.g in cold and humid conditions, that didn‘t render them „unusable“.

Just my 2 ct.
Thank you for this, Christophe. I think NL owners reading this thread, wondering if their NL's are complete lemons in certain conditions, will be very reassured by what you have said, regarding your own experience with your NL's. Your reputation, as a collector and very experienced user, carries much weight on this forum. I myself am a frequent visitor to your website, looking for information about, or your opinion of, a particular binocular.

And I confess, caught up in the moment, I rarely take precautionary measures to avoid fogging these days, such as you recommend, partly because I have only quite recently started using binoculars without glasses again and also because I am not generally walking and using binoculars in conditions which might provoke fogging...or so I thought. But, I have experienced fogging on many occasions over many years of using binoculars, and do know how to mitigate the onset of fogging (I have spent many nights outdoors from dusk until dawn with binoculars in hand). I have, therefore, tried everything I know, as well as experimenting further with suggestions from friends, to find a setting and placement for the NL's, which will allow me to use them fog free, whilst enabling me to still follow a bird on the wing continuously (and comfortably!) for more than 30-45 seconds. I have been unable to find such a setting and placement. So, for me, the NL's do become unusable, and there is nothing in what you suggest which has allowed me to comfortably follow a bird in flight over an extended period, whilst maintaining a good view, without the NL's revealing their 'massively increased susceptibility to fogging", when compared to other binocular brands and models which I own (and like you, I have no shortage of binoculars to choose from).

So there it is, your own experiences of NL fogging differs from mine. You find that your NL's are no more susceptible to fogging than any other, in terms of how rapidly they fog up, and I maintain that in my experience, NL's are far more susceptible to fogging than equivalent binoculars from other manufacturers.

What is clear, is that the weight of reporting suggests that most NL users will say they share your own experience of NL's, whilst a far smaller proportion of NL owners share my own findings. I maintain my position regarding the NL's, for me there is definitely something 'not quite right', regarding their susceptibility to rapidly fogging up in certain conditions, and this based on what is now quite extensive experimentation alongside other binoculars from different brands and of a variety of vintages, as well as several pairs of pre 2020 Swaros.

Christophe, I thank you again for posting your 2 ct. 🥂
 
My observations as a non-glasses-wearing user.

I have a very early NL12x42 and much more recent NL8x32. I also own / have access to quite a number of recent mid- and high-end binoculars.

I initially didn't notice the phenomenon but - following years of use in varying climates and conditions - do now acknowledge that my NLs are indeed more prone to misting than I would consider ideal.

The phenomenon is most common in my experience if the binocular body is particularly cold and humidity is high. It is also exaggerated if I'm wearing a hat or hood (common for me), which undoubtedly interferes with air circulation around my eyes / oculars.

It should maybe be no surprise that in these circumstances - when the cold ocular lens is brought close to comparatively wet and warm eye - that (unless ventilation is adequate) condensation will be prone to form. It's well-understood physics.

I have no clue why NLs are particularly affected, but did buy into the earlier rumours(?) that the NL line's coatings were changed on the grounds of reducing pernicious environmental impact.

For what it's worth, I too have noticed the left hand ocular is more prone, but just put this down to my personal anatomy resulting in slightly less air circulation around my left eye / ocular.

I've found a small lens blower quickly (if only temporarily) resolves the problem.
 
I have no clue why NLs are particularly affected, but did buy into the earlier rumours(?) that the NL line's coatings were changed on the grounds of reducing pernicious environmental impact.
Binoculars are products that are expected to be used for a very long time of service. They are not short-lived products that are produced in large numbers. Manufacturers should build the jars to allow sustainable use under all environmental conditions, rather than complying with some fancy environmental protection KPI, which an over-motivated manager has defined.

With my amateurish opinion, I claim that a particularly environmentally friendly coating has not a big impact during the expected service life of a good binocular.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top