You might notice a difference ( I do). But stop listening to me and other forum members and try for yourself
-
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.
Help me with an Alpha :) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sirpotato
- Start date
Sirpotato
Well-known member
I think thats it, I'll just have to try them out in person. There is 2 seperate shops here that stock Zeiss/Leica and the other Swaro...Think I'll try the Zeiss/Leicas first and then Swaro and decide from there.
I do like the look of the Kowa Genesis 8x33 but probably not at the same level as these others!
Sirpotato
Well-known member
Haha I'm going to go and try them this weekend I think, its a shame everywhere in Australia is so far! I'd probably have better luck if I lived in the East, not the West...Maybe I just need to open an optics shop here that stocks everything in one place... I've never seen a Zeiss, Swaro or anything quality in the spotting scope ranges either on display anywhere in this state. People are missing out 😂You might notice a difference ( I do). But stop listening to me and other forum members and try for yourself
I think you’ll find that you get a much better result if you select a binocular by looking through it rather than at it.
Just my opinion.
Last edited:
I doubt that.
Looking AT the binocular is much better for you: no distortion, no globe effect, no glare, no spikes, no vignetting, no CA, the list is endless …
Last edited:
has530
Well-known member
If it helps...earlier in the thread I mentioned my SLC don't get much use due to strain on my bad shoulder. Well as it turns out what I now use instead is the Kowa Genesis 8x33 and absolutely love them!
I doubt that.
Looking AT the binocular is much better for you: no distortion, no globe effect, no glare, no spikes, no vignetting, no CA, the list is endless …
Sirpotato
Well-known member
Oh nice! How is the eye relief? One thing I realised is I've not looked at any of the eye relief on any of the ones I've suggested!!!
It seems EL, NL and SFL are the winners in ER!!!
As one who needs the corrective glasses to fully benefit from your binoculars, eyerelief is among the most critical points to look at. And Leica, unfortunately has a bad reputation in that respect (I can't judge the Noctivids). That's why I don'd think the compact UVs would be for you. As for being sensitive to roller ball, my experience with Swaros kept me from buying them. (I do have a Swaro scope though, but one rarely does fast panning there.)
So I still think the SFLs are the way to go for you. If you go testing over the weekend, don't make a decision for any model before you have had a chance to test the SFLs.
I mentioned the Monarch HG 8x30 - try that if you can. It may not have the ultimate image quality of something like the NL but it ticks a lot of your boxes - light, handy, wide field of view (not too far off the EII), long-ish eye relief - and it's relatively easily available. It may not feel as bright as some others, but under that blinding Western Australian sun that's not necessarily a bad thing. At the very least it should be a very good reference point, in capability and in cost, to compare your alphas against.
NB. re your post below - it's worth noting that stated eye relief can differ from manufacturer to manufacturer in how they are measured. Probably the best source of info, in that all the measurements are taken via the same means, is Pinac's site (Binoculars Today). You can also alter the eye relief you need by using different glasses frames (bit of a PITA, but can be worth doing) that sit closer or further away to your eyes. The eye relief of my Nikon 10x42 SE was actually just a little too long for one of my glasses, it's noticeably easier to use with the pair I now use, that sits a little further "out".
NB. re your post below - it's worth noting that stated eye relief can differ from manufacturer to manufacturer in how they are measured. Probably the best source of info, in that all the measurements are taken via the same means, is Pinac's site (Binoculars Today). You can also alter the eye relief you need by using different glasses frames (bit of a PITA, but can be worth doing) that sit closer or further away to your eyes. The eye relief of my Nikon 10x42 SE was actually just a little too long for one of my glasses, it's noticeably easier to use with the pair I now use, that sits a little further "out".
Last edited:
Sirpotato
Well-known member
I realised it last night when I was reading through and saw the specs about FOV with glasses and I was like - oh I wear glasses whilst glassing, better check ER 😂...So I went through and knocked all the ones off the list with less ER than my current Fuji.
Even the Genesis lacks it in the 8x33 unfortunately or I'd have tried them too.
It appears that the SF lists 19mm but is actually 15 or 16mm I saw on some websites.
Definitely keen to give the SFL and NL... Wouldn't know about the EL as I don't know anyone with a pair unfortunately.
Sirpotato
Well-known member
I'll definitely see if I can try that model too - I noticed that there is a Nikon EDG model too. Is this older than the HG? It seems to have good ER. It seems like the 8x42 version of the HG is 100g lighter than my Fuji too and the 8x30 even more so.
Ahh ok - so if the glasses sit closer to my eyes does that mean I need less or more eye relief? The glasses I wear are plastic ones without those nose things on that the metal ones have, so they sit relatively close to my eyes, which was probably why I didn't mind the EII when I tested them.
Sky2goflying
Well-known member
If you can, you should try the Swarovski Curio 7x21 CL, they are small, but they behave like much bigger binoculars. 16 mm eye relief, a field of view of 405 ft, and they weight 8.9 oz. Read the reviews they are amazing for their size.
Sirpotato
Well-known member
Very interesting looking binoculars! Are the CL Companion any good too?
Sky2goflying
Well-known member
The Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 are awesome, but they weight 17.2 oz. The Curio being a 7x21 has a very stable and relaxing view and its incredibly sharp up to the edges. Don't let their size fool you.
Sirpotato
Well-known member
Thanks mate, I'll definitely see if the shop has these when I go up to check them out and see if they have one I can test
Conndomat
United States of Europe
I think this statement is too general.
Some Leica UV models work with eyeglasses, others less so and yes, the Noctis should hardly cause any problems with eyeglasses.
Andreas
Sirpotato
Well-known member
I'd have definitely looked at Noctivids if they did an 8x32 version. The 8x42 is just a bit too heavy for me based on the stats.
I think they have them at a shop thats relatively local though, so I'll probably try them.
Too bad there's not more eye relief on the Ultravids or older BN models because they're both pretty great binoculars in their own right. I've got both in 8x32 and also the 10x32 HD+, but don't wear glasses.
Sirpotato
Well-known member
Update
Went to a couple of shops today to have a look and compared them all with eyeglasses on and against my current Fuji. Great day to test - bright, sunny and warm, a typical Western Australian day.
First shop had Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 - it was nice, very well built and well balanced in my hands. The sharpness of the image was above my Fuji HC. They didn't make feel wow I like I thought these though. Very light though! But didn't see to the field stop with eyecups fully closed down. I'd say I was missing around 2-5% of the field, not much, but enough to put me off as the glasses I wear are plastic and as close to my eyes as glasses can go so I'd likely see less if I ever got different styles of glasses. Cool/neutral image I felt. Fuji has more of a rich colouration compared. One thing I also noted was these had sat on the shelf awhile it looks and the armor had become white and powdery.
Also tried 8x42 and 10x42 Noctivid - built like tanks and heavier than my Fuji. Will last a lifetime no doubt. Didn't like the eyecups that much. Nice very sharp image though for the brief time I was able to hold them still, but the burning in my thoracic region in my back set in fast unfortunately when testing them, so I wasn't able to hold them steady. Rich colours and bright. Better than the SF in that regard. I didn't like the diopter adjuster as I could click it accurately.
Whilst I was here I also tested the techno-stabi Fuji - 12x28...These surprised me, they were actually really nice and not too heavy compared to my old canon 10x30 II that I used to own. 4.2 degree field of view was fully visible with eyeglasses on and cups fully down. I loved how you flick the IS on and it stays on unlike the Canon I had. Very sharp image and less CA than the Canon I had I reckon. Very close to the HC view but in 12x. Also had a chance to look at the 14x40...Impossible to use with glasses on really and very weird to hold. Not much to say about those as I didn't check them out after seeing the FOV.
There was some Olympus, other Fuji porros and Nikons etc here but none of the top range models and they didn't have the SFL either frustratingly.
So I decided to set off to the shop that has Swarovski, honestly a little deflated as I expected to be wowed by the Victory SF. Started thinking I'd just stick with the Fuji and use the money for a camera lens.
Anyhow, I arrived at the other shop and they had a cabinet full of Swarovski NL Pure and Curio and CL Pocket, also some Zeiss (only Terras), suprisingly Kowa - but no Genesis, some Nikon Monarchs (no HG) and Steiners - possibly some others but nothing noteworthy.
The salesperson was very passionate and knowledgeable here and let me take any pair of the Swarovski outside and have a walk around with them on my own and assured me that he trusted me...I could have had a free pair of 14x52 haha!
Anyhow, I tried the one I was most keen on first the 8x32...First thought was this feels very different to how it looks and is very comfortable in my hands. It just works. Its extremely high quality and feels better built than even the noctivid despite being lighter. I don't know why but the images don't do it justice as the green armor in photos looks a little cheap/plasticky for some reason but totally the opposite in person. I took it outside and looked at nearby trees and small twigs in them, noticed some New Holland Homeyeaters nearby and looked into the distance...Wow. Wow. Wowww. Love them already - just absolutely razor sharp, beautiful colours and with the eyecups down fully I can see all the way to the field stop and more despite being ultra wide FOV. I could hold these steady and I'd imagine even more with the headrest - not needed for other people but for me I'd likely need it due to my health condition. One thing I noticed too was the depth of field was really good - not too much focus adjusting needed compared to my Fuji which you have to be very precise with.
Then I tried the 10x32 and again wow! More or less the same FOV as my 8x42 in a 10x. Definitely sharper than my Fuji and a lot less CA. I just wish I could hold them more still. All the same qualities as the 8x though.
Then I tried the 10x42...More heavy, but beautiful too. Suprisingly the 32s felt better in my hand. I couldn't hold these steady as they were heavier than my Fuji but despite that still extremely well balanced. So bright as well.
Then I tried the 14x52...These were amazing! Actually suprisingly light for their size and great in the hand due to the taper to the objective. I went outside and focused on a tree in the far distance and with my bare eyes and glasses I could see the tree but no birds... With the binoculars I could see a tree martin flying around near the tree. Obviously hard to hold still, but on a tripod or something these would be unreal!
I went back inside and tried the 7x21 Curio...Holy crap this was great too - razor sharp and wide FOV and I could see the full field with my glasses on. Unbelievably small and light... I'd have a pair of these and the Curio haha.
I told myself I'd go away and think about it though and to write up what I discovered here. I'd still love to try the 8x32 EL but I don't have any friends that own them...Nor anyone in the same age bracket that loves this stuff like I do. I'm pretty sold on the 8x32 NL Pure though!
Went to a couple of shops today to have a look and compared them all with eyeglasses on and against my current Fuji. Great day to test - bright, sunny and warm, a typical Western Australian day.
First shop had Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 - it was nice, very well built and well balanced in my hands. The sharpness of the image was above my Fuji HC. They didn't make feel wow I like I thought these though. Very light though! But didn't see to the field stop with eyecups fully closed down. I'd say I was missing around 2-5% of the field, not much, but enough to put me off as the glasses I wear are plastic and as close to my eyes as glasses can go so I'd likely see less if I ever got different styles of glasses. Cool/neutral image I felt. Fuji has more of a rich colouration compared. One thing I also noted was these had sat on the shelf awhile it looks and the armor had become white and powdery.
Also tried 8x42 and 10x42 Noctivid - built like tanks and heavier than my Fuji. Will last a lifetime no doubt. Didn't like the eyecups that much. Nice very sharp image though for the brief time I was able to hold them still, but the burning in my thoracic region in my back set in fast unfortunately when testing them, so I wasn't able to hold them steady. Rich colours and bright. Better than the SF in that regard. I didn't like the diopter adjuster as I could click it accurately.
Whilst I was here I also tested the techno-stabi Fuji - 12x28...These surprised me, they were actually really nice and not too heavy compared to my old canon 10x30 II that I used to own. 4.2 degree field of view was fully visible with eyeglasses on and cups fully down. I loved how you flick the IS on and it stays on unlike the Canon I had. Very sharp image and less CA than the Canon I had I reckon. Very close to the HC view but in 12x. Also had a chance to look at the 14x40...Impossible to use with glasses on really and very weird to hold. Not much to say about those as I didn't check them out after seeing the FOV.
There was some Olympus, other Fuji porros and Nikons etc here but none of the top range models and they didn't have the SFL either frustratingly.
So I decided to set off to the shop that has Swarovski, honestly a little deflated as I expected to be wowed by the Victory SF. Started thinking I'd just stick with the Fuji and use the money for a camera lens.
Anyhow, I arrived at the other shop and they had a cabinet full of Swarovski NL Pure and Curio and CL Pocket, also some Zeiss (only Terras), suprisingly Kowa - but no Genesis, some Nikon Monarchs (no HG) and Steiners - possibly some others but nothing noteworthy.
The salesperson was very passionate and knowledgeable here and let me take any pair of the Swarovski outside and have a walk around with them on my own and assured me that he trusted me...I could have had a free pair of 14x52 haha!
Anyhow, I tried the one I was most keen on first the 8x32...First thought was this feels very different to how it looks and is very comfortable in my hands. It just works. Its extremely high quality and feels better built than even the noctivid despite being lighter. I don't know why but the images don't do it justice as the green armor in photos looks a little cheap/plasticky for some reason but totally the opposite in person. I took it outside and looked at nearby trees and small twigs in them, noticed some New Holland Homeyeaters nearby and looked into the distance...Wow. Wow. Wowww. Love them already - just absolutely razor sharp, beautiful colours and with the eyecups down fully I can see all the way to the field stop and more despite being ultra wide FOV. I could hold these steady and I'd imagine even more with the headrest - not needed for other people but for me I'd likely need it due to my health condition. One thing I noticed too was the depth of field was really good - not too much focus adjusting needed compared to my Fuji which you have to be very precise with.
Then I tried the 10x32 and again wow! More or less the same FOV as my 8x42 in a 10x. Definitely sharper than my Fuji and a lot less CA. I just wish I could hold them more still. All the same qualities as the 8x though.
Then I tried the 10x42...More heavy, but beautiful too. Suprisingly the 32s felt better in my hand. I couldn't hold these steady as they were heavier than my Fuji but despite that still extremely well balanced. So bright as well.
Then I tried the 14x52...These were amazing! Actually suprisingly light for their size and great in the hand due to the taper to the objective. I went outside and focused on a tree in the far distance and with my bare eyes and glasses I could see the tree but no birds... With the binoculars I could see a tree martin flying around near the tree. Obviously hard to hold still, but on a tripod or something these would be unreal!
I went back inside and tried the 7x21 Curio...Holy crap this was great too - razor sharp and wide FOV and I could see the full field with my glasses on. Unbelievably small and light... I'd have a pair of these and the Curio haha.
I told myself I'd go away and think about it though and to write up what I discovered here. I'd still love to try the 8x32 EL but I don't have any friends that own them...Nor anyone in the same age bracket that loves this stuff like I do. I'm pretty sold on the 8x32 NL Pure though!
