Help me with an Alpha :) (1 Viewer)

[Sirpotato]

Hello all,

I'm looking for a "alpha" quality binocular, ideally one that will last me a lifetime (and something I can pass on to my son eventually). I was hoping the Habicht could have fit this bill, but unfortunately it appears as I wear eyeglasses to correct astigmatism its a no-go.

I also require something that isn't too heavy as I have a spinal cord injury which causes issues with my arms and hands. I have a Fuji HC 8x42 as my current main binocular and it does fatigue my arms rather quickly, so I'm thinking a 8x32 would fit the bill best.

After reading (and more indecisive reading) I've dwindled my list down to these:

NL Pure - 8x32
EL - 8x32
SLC HD - 8x42
Victory SF - 8x32
Victory FL - 8x32
SFL - 8x40

FOV doesn't matter too much to be as long as its on par with my current main binoculars. Build quality is high on my list but being alpha I suppose they all will be with the exception of the SFL? I don't mind them being second-hand too as it appears most have transferrable warranty, hence including the FL, EL and SLC HD.

The NL pure I've read is likely the best of all, but at the same time the armor issues worry me a little...But the forehead rest is a very attractive feature too.

I would love it if they're a lot more sharp than my current pair of Fuji too, I'd imagine all of these will be though.

 

[A2GG]

from your list I would go with the SFL 8x40. You’ll get a light weight binocular that’s not much heavier than 8x32 with a bigger exit pupil which will be comfortable with your eyeglasses. I imagine the build quality of SFL would be comparable to SF.

 

[Sirpotato]

from your list I would go with the SFL 8x40. You’ll get a light weight binocular that’s not much heavier than 8x32 with a bigger exit pupil which will be comfortable with your eyeglasses. I imagine the build quality of SFL would be comparable to SF.

Thank you, I was pretty intrigued when I saw the SFL especially as its nearly at the 42 objective size but weight wise very good!

 

[Sirpotato]

I would go with the SF 8x32. The difference between the NL 8x32 and the SF 8x32 is the NL has slightly sharper edges, but the SF has less glare. The SFL's IMO are a step-down from those two alphas, having a smaller FOV with more fall off at the edges.

Also, I had all the SFL's and I saw a blue ring around the outside of the FOV which is a type of CA which you may or may not see because not all people see CA. The only way to be sure is try them yourself in bright sunlight.

The EL, FL and SLC are all nice binoculars, but the SLC 8x42 is heavier, and they are infamous for having wonky focusers and none of them have the big FOV with the sharp edges of the NL or SF. You can pick up an SF 8x32 for a pretty good price now, and they are an excellent all around smaller, lighter binocular.

If you don't want to spend alpha money, try a Nikon MHG 8x42. It is almost as light as the SF 8x32 or NL 8x32, and it gives you the advantages of a 42mm aperture which improves low light viewing and ease of eye placement and the FOV at 8.3 degree is almost as large, plus you save at least a $1000.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/used/1556252/?smpm=bu_uar&cnxclid=17221776192880106801911651115008005

Thank you for the response Denco, regarding the SFL and SF - image wise would there be much difference in the resolution of the image through them?

I definitely like the design of the Zeiss SF more than the NL due to the bridge design being similar to the EL.

How frustrating with the CA. Was that in all lighting situations or just occasionally?

 

[dries1]

Sirpotato since you wear glasses, I would try them out before purchasing, you do not want to be disappointed in having to send them back to try another using mail order.

 

[Conndomat]

Leica 7x42 UV. HD+

Very handy, hardly bigger than an 8x32, easy to use with glasses, very good workmanship and very nice optical performance!

Andreas

 

[Canip]

from your list I would go with the SFL 8x40

+1

 

[tenex]

SLC 8x42 and UV 7/8x42 are ruled out along with other 42s, being the same weight as your Fuji. You will want a 32mm, except possibly for SFL 8x40. Any of those on your list would be excellent, depending on what you find available in EL/FL, and price, so I hardly even need to say good luck. The NL armor issue is said to be solved, in the sense that even if you should have trouble with an older model, the replacement armor now should not.

I do wonder about your sharpness complaint though, as Philipp here thinks highly of his Fuji HC. Does it seem soft to you in the center, or only near the edges?

 

[Swissboy]

from your list I would go with the SFL 8x40. You’ll get a light weight binocular that’s not much heavier than 8x32 with a bigger exit pupil which will be comfortable with your eyeglasses. I imagine the build quality of SFL would be comparable to SF.

I would suggest the same, or if you'd like even less weight, the SFL 8x30. Over time, the saving in weight may be what you really want/need. My wife and I are both over 80, so weight of optics has become of importance too. So we both selected the x30 model for weight reasons. We have had them in regular use (including the tropics) for over a year, without any complaints whatsoever. And SFL optics are great unless you absolutely want a sharp image up to the very edge. And they are very glare resistant! I replaced my FL 8x32 with the current SFL 8x30, with lots of visual improvements as a result, including a brighter picture. I also need to wear my corrective glasses when using optics, and I think one tends to concentrate to the center of the field anyway. So SFL models fit the so called alpha bill perfectly, as far as I am concerned.

 

[has530]

I have the SLC W B 8x42 and barely use it because the weight aggravates my bad shoulder. I think the recommendation of the SFL is a good one to get you the advantages of a bigger bino with less of the weight.

 

[nickw_]

For me, the first thing you should decide is what sort of presentation you like. What sort of colours do you like? Do you have a preference for 3D views vs. field flattened? Ergonomics matter as well (size, weight, feel, focus speed and knob position). The answers to these questions will steer your decisions. At this price point, everything is really good; it's about preferences.

I have owned Swaro NL, Zeiss Victory, and Leica Ultravid and Noctivid. I tend to prefer Leica's for their color and 3D views. My 7x42 Ultravid are a favourite, and I want to try some 7x35's for their even smaller size. This is where I ended up. It wasn't about price; it was about what looked and felt great to me.

So personally, I would add the 7x35 Leica Retrovid to your list (it's nice and light compared to the 7x42), and views and colours are very nice. The 8x32 Ultravid is another bin you should try.

Ultimately, ergonomics and presentation are very personal. You need to try and see what you like.

 

[Maljunulo]

Why not just go to BinoCentral and look through some?

That should sort it out rather quickly.

(just be certain you have both IPD and diopter set correctly, before rejecting any glass)

 

[Sirpotato]

SLC 8x42 and UV 7/8x42 are ruled out along with other 42s, being the same weight as your Fuji. You will want a 32mm, except possibly for SFL 8x40. Any of those on your list would be excellent, depending on what you find available in EL/FL, and price, so I hardly even need to say good luck. The NL armor issue is said to be solved, in the sense that even if you should have trouble with an older model, the replacement armor now should not.

I do wonder about your sharpness complaint though, as Philipp here thinks highly of his Fuji HC. Does it seem soft to you in the center, or only near the edges?

I was looking on ebay just now and the prices between the FL/EL 8x32 seem very similar, only thing driving cost up is shipping to Australia. But not much less than the price of a new SFL.

The Fuji is 'pretty' sharp across the image, but the sweet spot has a slight noticeable soft spot to it I've noticed, but when I tried the Nikon EII 8x30 it was significantly sharper. Its still a great binocular, but for me its the weight thats the main issue, so even loosing 100g or so will make a difference.

I did compare them to an 10x32 ultravid awhile back and found the weight difference to be nice.

I would suggest the same, or if you'd like even less weight, the SFL 8x30. Over time, the saving in weight may be what you really want/need. My wife and I are both over 80, so weight of optics has become of importance too. So we both selected the x30 model for weight reasons. We have had them in regular use (including the tropics) for over a year, without any complaints whatsoever. And SFL optics are great unless you absolutely want a sharp image up to the very edge. And they are very glare resistant! I replaced my FL 8x32 with the current SFL 8x30, with lots of visual improvements as a result, including a brighter picture. I also need to wear my corrective glasses when using optics, and I think one tends to concentrate to the center of the field anyway. So SFL models fit the so called alpha bill perfectly, as far as I am concerned.

I think so too, it makes it an uncomfortable experience when the fatigue in my arms and back kicks in as its burning neurological pain. I push through it but if I can use something lighter, it would make a big difference. I'm 45+ years your junior so I have no idea what I'll be like in 10+ years from now unfortunately. It does sound like the SFL is a really nice binocular and it is good to know that it improves on the FL I was also looking at.

I have the SLC W B 8x42 and barely use it because the weight aggravates my bad shoulder. I think the recommendation of the SFL is a good one to get you the advantages of a bigger bino with less of the weight.

I think the SLC may be off my list then 😂

For me, the first thing you should decide is what sort of presentation you like. What sort of colours do you like? Do you have a preference for 3D views vs. field flattened? Ergonomics matter as well (size, weight, feel, focus speed and knob position). The answers to these questions will steer your decisions. At this price point, everything is really good; it's about preferences.

I have owned Swaro NL, Zeiss Victory, and Leica Ultravid and Noctivid. I tend to prefer Leica's for their color and 3D views. My 7x42 Ultravid are a favourite, and I want to try some 7x35's for their even smaller size. This is where I ended up. It wasn't about price; it was about what looked and felt great to me.

So personally, I would add the 7x35 Leica Retrovid to your list (it's nice and light compared to the 7x42), and views and colours are very nice. The 8x32 Ultravid is another bin you should try.

Ultimately, ergonomics and presentation are very personal. You need to try and see what you like.

I guess I'm drawn more to warmer colours, but colour neutral is also good for accurate ID, so happy either way really. 3D would be nice and if I could go porro I'd likely go that route but as I wear glasses the Habicht is out (very) unfortunately. I'm susceptible to rolling ball I think and panning makes me feel nauseous - I think its rolling ball atleast that causes that (?). I think thats why I may hesitate towards the swaros too in case they cause that issue. If I could hand hold them I'd probably do the 42s still and I'll likely keep my Fuji as they do have a nice sparky view to them in good light. So I guess the 40s would be good if I was to use them for astronomical stuff too. I find I'm more inclined to bird in the evenings too, so light does become an issue. Daytime doesn't matter as its usually extremely bright here in my state, year-round.

I have tried the UV 10x32 in the shop and compared to my Fuji and it was the weight difference I liked the most. I wasn't totally blown away by the view as the FOV felt quite similar. But I was inside testing them so not a true test. The build quality was amazing though I'll give them that.

How would you say the UV compared to the Zeiss?

Why not just go to BinoCentral and look through some?

That should sort it out rather quickly.

(just be certain you have both IPD and diopter set correctly, before rejecting any glass)

I did actually go to Binocentral awhile back and tried what they had including the 10x32 UV, GPO and some Vortex. I think I'll have to find time to get to Leederville Cameras and Digidirect. I messaged them to ask which Zeiss they have on display before I do the drive. I know Leederville have NL on display but unsure of what magnification. I'd go 10x but I'm too shaky even with an 8x unfortunately and the glasses make me tremble more initially for some reason.

 

[Sirpotato]

I did see these on Ebay too, apparently they're manufactured in 2003, so unsure if that year was good? As you can see the postage is a killer though and they're about the same price as a SFL new.


Also these we're relatively cheap compared to the others!

 

[twitcherf]

I suspect the reality is that all of those bins are likely to fulfill your requirements and Maljunulo's advice to try them all is probvably the best. A lot of these really high end bins fall to personal preference as to which is best for you.

 

[Binocollector]

Concerning sharpness - I doubt that the SFL will be "much" sharper than the Fuji HC. One reason is that there is a slight chance (even though that is speculation on my part) they are made by the same company -- Kamakura -- at least they make binos for Fujinon as well as Zeiss (Kenko also made binos for Fujinon) but it could be that's just the stabilized models like the TS-X 14x40 (the bino market is rather intransparent in who makes what).
The specs (between SFL and HC) also seem very similar. That's not to say that Kamakura doesn't make binos that differ in quality for different companies depending on what these companies order and the price of the final product.
The Fuji HC seems also brighter and sharper than the FMTR which is an often recommended bino for stargazing and boating. But I do own other 7x50s that are indeed sharper than the FMTR.
That being said -- the Fuji HC is no "alpha". My Meopta Meopro Air might actually be ever so slightly sharper (and the Meopro Air isn't even the top model from Meopta). So I'm guessing an NL Pure or Zeiss SF will also be sharper. I doubt it's "a lot" though. But that's probably depending on personal impression and how much experience someone has with different instruments. I'd be disappointed if I ever looked through an NL Pure or Zeiss SF and it WOULDN'T be sharper than a Meopta Meopro Air or Fuji HC. But for the price I paid (around 500€ for each one), both seem perfectly fine and it would be rather expensive to "upgrade" (and I don't think I ever will).
I also didn't see any complaints about sharpness in the Fuji by Pinac aka Canip (binocular.ch) or Piergiovanni (binomania.it) in their respective reviews.
I think we all agree that increase in price past the 500€/$-mark will get diminishing returns. My guess is to see noticable improvement, one should go from 500 straight to 1,000 and the next big step would be double that. Mid-range optics are all pretty close from what I can tell. I got a couple of instruments in the 500€-range.
But, yes, I'd absolutely expect a 2,000+€ instrument to be better in almost all aspects (hard to beat the build quality of the Meopta Meopro Air though).
Edit: I often have the impression that porro binos are sharper than roof prism models in general. Especially the really good older ones, like a Katsuma 9x35 that I own. Really very sharp. And even some cheap modern day Komz 8x30s are pretty damn sharp but have a rather small sweetspot.

 

[mwhogue]

I did see these ( SW 8x32 EL) on Ebay too, apparently they're manufactured in 2003, so unsure if that year was good? As you can see the postage is a killer though and they're about the same price as a SFL new.

Right, that original Swaro pre SV 8x32 is way overpriced IMO. I have no idea what you have to pay in Australia for used binos but in the US it would probably sell for @ $600- $800. I have tried a friend's example a number of times and it's a nice bin, one of the best of its day, but definitely not worth that asking price.

The price on the Zeiss T FL is more realistic.

Mike

 

[Sirpotato]

Concerning sharpness - I doubt that the SFL will be "much" sharper than the Fuji HC. One reason is that there is a slight chance (even though that is speculation on my part) they are made by the same company -- Kamakura -- at least they make binos for Fujinon as well as Zeiss (Kenko also made binos for Fujinon) but it could be that's just the stabilized models like the TS-X 14x40 (the bino market is rather intransparent in who makes what).
The specs (between SFL and HC) also seem very similar. That's not to say that Kamakura doesn't make binos that differ in quality for different companies depending on what these companies order and the price of the final product.
The Fuji HC seems also brighter and sharper than the FMTR which is an often recommended bino for stargazing and boating. But I do own other 7x50s that are indeed sharper than the FMTR.
That being said -- the Fuji HC is no "alpha". My Meopta Meopro Air might actually be ever so slightly sharper (and the Meopro Air isn't even the top model from Meopta). So I'm guessing an NL Pure or Zeiss SF will also be sharper. I doubt it's "a lot" though. But that's probably depending on personal impression and how much experience someone has with different instruments. I'd be disappointed if I ever looked through an NL Pure or Zeiss SF and it WOULDN'T be sharper than a Meopta Meopro Air or Fuji HC. But for the price I paid (around 500€ for each one), both seem perfectly fine and it would be rather expensive to "upgrade" (and I don't think I ever will).
I also didn't see any complaints about sharpness in the Fuji by Pinac aka Canip (binocular.ch) or Piergiovanni (binomania.it) in their respective reviews.
I think we all agree that increase in price past the 500€/$-mark will get diminishing returns. My guess is to see noticable improvement, one should go from 500 straight to 1,000 and the next big step would be double that. Mid-range optics are all pretty close from what I can tell. I got a couple of instruments in the 500€-range.
But, yes, I'd absolutely expect a 2,000+€ instrument to be better in almost all aspects (hard to beat the build quality of the Meopta Meopro Air though).
Edit: I often have the impression that porro binos are sharper than roof prism models in general. Especially the really good older ones, like a Katsuma 9x35 that I own. Really very sharp. And even some cheap modern day Komz 8x30s are pretty damn sharp but have a rather small sweetspot.

So realistically I'd be better skipping the SFL and just going straight to the SF and NL from the Fuji to notice any real difference?

I'm going to go and try the Zeiss/Swaros this weekend I think and take my current pair with me to compare...With my glasses with me to make sure!

That does sound true with the porros, I think that might be why I've been a little disappointed with the roofs I've got because the porros I've tried, even the cheap ones have felt sharper.

 

[Sirpotato]

Right, that original Swaro pre SV 8x32 is way overpriced IMO. I have no idea what you have to pay in Australia for used binos but in the US it would probably sell for @ $600- $800. I have tried a friend's example a number of times and it's a nice bin, one of the best of its day, but definitely not worth that asking price.

The price on the Zeiss T FL is more realistic.

Mike

I thought it was tbh, I'd likely get a new pair of bins for that. I think here in Australia its because there is generally less demand for them so you have to wait a fair bit of time for them to pop up on the used market. I'm waiting for something to come up here on the classifieds though now.

 

[ragin-cajun]

NL 8x32, I have no desire for another binocular. Light and great view. View is very similar to the SLC, which is a fantastic bino. No armour issues for me. Really liked the SF but the cheap zeiss eyecups ruined the experience. Everyone likes the 7x42 Leica uvhd.. I’d try those first. let one pick you.