It's interesting to hear some dismiss the SFL's but here you are 'virtually' equating them to NL's which I take to mean they are in your estimation, alpha glass.
I think of the SFLs as being "alpha minus." Smaller FOV & non locking diopter being the biggest deficits, otherwise they can definitely hang with the alphas.
Agree completely, the 12x really is something special. I use it mainly for astronomy, never seen anything quite like it.
8x40SFL 420'@1000yd
I keep seeing stellar (pun intended) 12x reviews. Would the 12x be awful for birding? I have to admit, having always been an 8x kinda-guy, I've really been rethinking the 10x's lately.
On the contrary. 12x is not awful for birding.
Hello Robert,
If I could only have one binocular, it would be an 8x32 or 8x42. The NL 12x42 will be better on some objects in the night sky like planetary and lunar, but the 10x42 will be better for wider star fields like the Pleiades. A 12x binocular really shows a nice view of the moon. The Canon 12x36 IS III I had was excellent on lunar observations. But I have a 6 inch Dobsonian for Astro use and a Vaonis Vespera robot telescope for imaging the fainter constellations and Messier objects. You leave it out on the patio, and it takes hundreds of exposures of an object over a long period of time, say two hours, and it stacks the images and then sends them to your phone, and you can process them further on your computer.
vaonis.com
No, I don't think the SFL is in the same league as the NL. The NL is alpha glass and the SFL is at about at the level of the SLC. When I compared my NL 8x32 to my SFL 8x40, I sold my SFL the next day. The NL just killed it with a much bigger FOV that is sharp to the edge and better contrast. There is no comparison.
No I don't think so, you may need to adjust a little but that extra mag and its afov gave me more wow than the 8x. Maybe the 10x would be the sweet spot for you?
Yes, the NL 12x42 would be great for astronomy, especially on a tripod. I didn't try the 12x with the headrest, but I am sure it would really help. You might use the NL 12x42 for birding more with the head rest. It is a game changer. I use it on my NL 8x32 and NL 10x42. The Noctivid 8x42 is fantastic with superb on-axis resolution and beautiful color saturation, easily the best Leica I have ever looked through, almost being kind of magical, but I preferred the NL for its huge FOV that is sharp to the edge. I LIKE a big FOV! I understand about the huge AFOV on the NL 12x42. The AFOV on the NL 10x42 is only a couple degrees less, but that big AFOV just immerses you in the view. It feels like you are in the FOV looking at the bird. Probably the biggest advantage for me with the NL 10x42 versus the NL 12x42 is the better DOF. You not only have a WIDER FOV with the NL 10x42, but because of the better DOF you can see further into the FOV beyond your focus point. I find I can sometimes spot a bird BEHIND or in FRONT of the bird I am looking at because of the DOF. That is a real plus with an 8x also.
I think the 12x50 SV would no doubt be better on the Night Sky than the NL 12x42 because of the big aperture advantage. The 12x50 SV is going to go a lot deeper into the night sky, probably almost a magnitude more, and show you a lot more stars and better nebulousity on faint fuzzies. I bet the NL 12x42 is superb for planetary and lunar though where aperture isn't as important. I know my NL 10x42 is. I can't believe how good it star tests. It is almost like an APO telescope. I don't know how Swarovski gets almost all the CA out in such a short focal length optic.
The Noctivid is magical. It is easily the best Leica. The FOV just sparkles and glistens with all that saturated color. It is a beautiful binocular to look at and through!
