No, I think you are normal. The steadiness improvement from 7x to 10x is huge. 10x is the absolute highest magnification I can even begin to hold steady. To use 12x, I need IS or a tripod. I keep trying 12x because I like the details also, but I am just shaking too much.
-
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.
How do you feel about your NL 8x42 a year or two down the line? (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter SeldomPerched
- Start date
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Everyone is different. After a year without, and then a year with, I've taken the forehead rest off my 12x42NL.
It's not just a matter of magnification that determines whether I can hold a binocular steady or not. The actual size, weight, balance and ergonomics, for me, is also important. I could never hold the tiny 7x Curio steady enough to enjoy them, but have had no problem with my 8x VP, which weighs just an ounce more. The VP is a bit bigger but still compact, but because of its ergonomics, is easier to steady, in spite of having slightly greater magnification.
I own both the 8x42NL and the 12x42 NL which are both much bigger and heavier than the VP, but because they are so well balanced and easy to hold, not to mention the head rests, I can keep them equally steady. Therefore, in most situations, I will reach for the 12xNl more often than the 8X. There is something about the AFOV and the 12X magnification that continues to WOW me.
I own both the 8x42NL and the 12x42 NL which are both much bigger and heavier than the VP, but because they are so well balanced and easy to hold, not to mention the head rests, I can keep them equally steady. Therefore, in most situations, I will reach for the 12xNl more often than the 8X. There is something about the AFOV and the 12X magnification that continues to WOW me.
Last edited:
Not sure its just that.... The people who shoot pistols well, especially those one hand slow fire 50 yard targets, are... "special." They possess some combination of eye hand coordination I have never experienced. Ditto for other games though. How do some folks hit a very small object like a baseball whizzing by at 100 MPH? Has always eluded me. Confess a golf ball sitting very still on a T is not always in danger of being driven anywhere. I have written often about my preference for 10s. My hands shake. Yup. Hell my body shakes, from the ankles up, depending! There are times while birding when the shake is not welcome, but somehow, when the target is something I really want to see, I find a way.. I know thats vague, sorry. There are all kinds of tricks. Hopefully one is not standing in a rigid pose holding themselves upright with arms holding binos in a static inflexible symmetrical way. Rather, find a way. Move arms. bend elbows, get em under or to the side or whatever it takes. Find a tree, a bridge, a large boulder. But the thing I most notice is focus/concentration. When I really want to see details, there's something I do involving the whole physical position and concentration. I think it is the latter thats most important but hard to explain. When I see something I really want to focus in on, my mind bears down, things slow, the object comes into focus. Cant be alone here. I wonder if others who struggle, just haven't experimented with the whole package?
dries1
Member
I think it comes with use and repetition - (the solution for learning). I find that if I use 10X for a sustained length of time it becomes instinctual, same as 12X. Additionally some ergos are involved, but to me it is the magnification not the weight that causes the stability/instability of view factor.
tenex
reality-based
All binoculars shake, so both physical support (I can't hold any bin steady while climbing a steep mountain trail!) and mental accommodation (learning to extract detail from a shaking image) matter. 10x is my daily bin, and I've learned to use 15x effectively so 12x would be no problem. I suspect that many who say they can't use 10x (much less 12) simply haven't given themselves enough practice. Especially with its wider FOV, I'd find NL 12x42 ideal for birding in most situations I encounter.But don't you agree that weight is an additional factor in steadying a binocular, especially weight that is distributed more towards the front end of the binocular? I find, then, the binocular wanting to move away from my eyes and more difficult to steady. I would rather have the weight favoring the occular end so that binocular will naturally rest more firmly against my. eyes or glasses. Perhaps that's why I find the Curio so difficult to steady in spite of their 7X.. There isn't enough weight by the occulars to help keep them in place, no matter how that little weight is distributed.
I find the Curio easier to hold steady than 8x42. So I guess it has to do with how we are built, our age, muscles, etc.
Especially AGE! 😁
I agree weight is. So to balance. Just not sure there's a standard recipe, one size fits all for those. My 825 Victory pockets are my worst "shakers." Well, they don't shake, but are most susceptible to my own body/hands shake. Still, they work quite nicely given technique not well described above (64). I experience weight... the right amount... as a plus. 832s seem better than the 825s. Always thought the weight of my 1042s helped steady those. Will be going back to test that impression in awhile. Mitigated carry weight issue of those, (something else again, with RYO. Age? Way too many variables to say that.
This is a description of our own built-in image stabilization system! The higher magnifications will never be quite as stable as 7 or 8x but I do think you need them to see more detail on distant targets. It's true, all I need is a flat surface to rest my elbows on and the view becomes totally stable. Bird blind walls, seawalls, roof of the car, they all work well. Even leaning one arm/shoulder against a wall seems to help.
Aquaplas
Well-known member
I love my NL 8x42 now after 2 years so much than the first days. Optically the NL 8x42 and the Zeiss SF 8x42 for me are 2 Binos I can’t decide so I bought both. The Zeiss is more flexible for different light situations. But with the sun in the back the Swaro is unbeatable. Immersive! Clear, very good Colours. I can see hardly CA.
There are only 2 things I don’t like.
First: the focusing knob have a bit match. It comes a bit more with time and high temperatures. But it works fine.
And the 2nd I don’t like is the rubber coating. Now after 2 years of use, I use it often but not heavy, the coating on the left barrel gets a tear from about 5mm in the near of the weld seam. I know about the good Swarovski warranty service, but with all my Swaros I had rubber coating problems. And the constant sending goes on my nerves. Such a expensive Bino must have a more reliable rubber coating. Here is Zeiss and Leica much better. I always use my 25 year old Zeiss Dialyt. The rubber coating here is as good as new.
There are only 2 things I don’t like.
First: the focusing knob have a bit match. It comes a bit more with time and high temperatures. But it works fine.
And the 2nd I don’t like is the rubber coating. Now after 2 years of use, I use it often but not heavy, the coating on the left barrel gets a tear from about 5mm in the near of the weld seam. I know about the good Swarovski warranty service, but with all my Swaros I had rubber coating problems. And the constant sending goes on my nerves. Such a expensive Bino must have a more reliable rubber coating. Here is Zeiss and Leica much better. I always use my 25 year old Zeiss Dialyt. The rubber coating here is as good as new.
Last edited:
grackle314
Member
The NL Pure 10x42 with forehead rest has been used by me carried with a SW bino suspender pro about 20 hours a week for birding slightly under two years now. The NL Pure 10x42 has a field of view in the range of many excellent 8x42 binoculars so getting your eyes on the birds is about the same as what 8x used to be praised for but is now available in a 10x. The headrest is a gamechanger for going to 10x from 8x and even lets 12x be considered, but I have liked keeping the FOV with view angle around 7.5 degrees. The light arriving at my eyes gives the best connection to the beauty of Nature that I have experienced in a handheld binocular.
Got to agree with you. I have had mine for three weeks and am truly impressed. I was in two minds whether to get the forehead rest as it is vastly overpriced (and should have been included in the cost of the bino's) but it transforms the handling, use and overall performance. It is a fantastic bit of kit and the bino's are just superb.
Must admit that it took a bit of a leap to buy the Pure's but no regrets...well perhaps one. I bought the Habicht 7x42's last month and my beloved has taken a shine to them.
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
I did try the 1242 but strangely didn't like them at all. The view did nothing for me though I was impressed that they were easier to hold still than even any 10x i have tried (the NL was the only glass with higher than 10x mag. that I've ever tried). If I was doing a lot of coastal work no doubt my findings would be much closer to yours, Holzphoto.
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Can you give more detail about what was lacking to you in the NL 12X42 ?
Last edited:
SeldomPerched
Well-known member
In a way, no. It just left me uninspired. It didn't feel like a revelation. I don't know what else to say. Either I had a bad day or the magnification wasn't needed. That could be it because I only had time to use it for quite close views; where I was when taking it round to test it didn't call for that magnification, come to think of it. Maybe it would have grown on me after more varied use over a day or two.
I'd definitely say try for yourself. When I tried the NL 8x42 a year earlier I liked it a lot but the view provided a more exciting test. Even so, I tried the EL 8.5 on the same view a minute or two later and really was just as impressed with that; OK, the EL was a bit less ergonomic to hold but no problem and not exactly uncomfortable.
This doesn't read as a very uplifting post; I'd be inclined to suggest you should discount most or all of what I've written!
Tom
SuperDuty
Well-known member
I understand completely, I can look at a binocular one day, or listen to a particular song on my HIFI one day, and think I’m seeing or hearing something really amazing, then, the next time I’m underwhelmed by the same thing, subjectivity and moods definitely play into how we perceive things, thanks for the honest answer.
