• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

I too purchased the 8x32 NL and 8x32 SF (1 Viewer)

birdcat

Well-known member
Supporter
United States
I am not anybody you should listen to, but here are my experiences on the two binoculars after a week+ of daily use and testing:

8x32 NL

Superior image: crisper and improved contrast over SF.
Definitely more prone to condensation.
Seemingly more prone to glare related issues.
Eye placement slightly more forgiving than SF.
Heavier in hand.

8x32 SF

Excellent image: slightly hazy with blue/green tint and less contrast compared to NL.
Definitely less prone to condensation.
Seemingly less prone to glare issues.
Eye placement slightly less forgiving than NL.
Lighter in hand.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2741.jpg
    IMG_2741.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 130

Lezeiss

Member
United States
I am not anybody you should listen to, but here are my experiences on the two binoculars after a week+ of daily use and testing:

8x32 NL

Superior image: crisper and improved contrast over SF.
Definitely more prone to condensation.
Seemingly more prone to glare related issues.
Eye placement slightly more forgiving than SF.
Heavier in hand.

8x32 SF

Excellent image: slightly hazy with blue/green tint and less contrast compared to NL.
Definitely less prone to condensation.
Seemingly less prone to glare issues.
Eye placement slightly less forgiving than NL.
Lighter in hand.
Which one do you prefer if you could only keep one?
 

NDhunter

Experienced observer
United States
Your review is weak with details, so I can tell you are just offering a quick opinion. The glare thing with the NL does keep showing
in many of these reviews.

Jerry
 

Gijs van Ginkel

Well-known member
Lezeiss, post 1,
After intense use and thourough testing (the report will be available probably somewhere next week on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor) I definitely go for the NL Pure 8x32 over the SF 8x32. I have to add that I never observed any glare with the NL . The excellent handling comfort combined with the optical quality: better light transmission, better color reproduction of the NL Pure were very convincing to me.
Gijs van Ginkel
 

Hermann

Well-known member
After intense use and thourough testing (the report will be available probably somewhere next week on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor) I definitely go for the NL Pure 8x32 over the SF 8x32. I have to add that I never observed any glare with the NL .[my emphasis]
But then you say that about virtually EVERY Swarovski binocular. And you dismiss any reports that there is glare.
The excellent handling comfort combined with the optical quality: better light transmission, better color reproduction of the NL Pure were very convincing to me.
That may well be so.

Hermann
 

Gijs van Ginkel

Well-known member
Herman, post 5,
I only write down what we observe and measure, but that does not mean that everybody has the same observations because of differences in our eyes, eye sensitivity, etc. And there is also a difference in the size of the hands, personal preferences etc.
So we tried to do the best we could so after you have read the paper you can comment of course, that is after all the goal of this forum.
Gijs van Ginkel
 

Maljunulo

Well-known member
Unfortunately,the argument can be made that anything which cannot be repeated is not objective.

I think the criteria of objectivity must include reproducibility, otherwise all is madness.

"I see this ....... " followed by "Well, I don't see that at all." is a frequent exchange here, so to use the word "objective" seems a bit off to me.

Once again, just my opinion.
 

_Prism_

Well-known member
England
I am not anybody you should listen to, but here are my experiences on the two binoculars after a week+ of daily use and testing:

8x32 NL

Superior image: crisper and improved contrast over SF.
Definitely more prone to condensation.
Seemingly more prone to glare related issues.
Eye placement slightly more forgiving than SF.
Heavier in hand.

8x32 SF

Excellent image: slightly hazy with blue/green tint and less contrast compared to NL.
Definitely less prone to condensation.
Seemingly less prone to glare issues.
Eye placement slightly less forgiving than NL.
Lighter in hand.
I've read quite a few comments about glare and condensation on the NL but have not experienced any of these issues myself (the only glare I ever experienced on the NL was in a store of all places!). As far as the image goes, there was no clear winner for me when comparing the NL 32 and SF 32 models - they seemed near identical in terms of brightness, sharpness and contrast (I did notice a very subtle accentuation of green and yellow tones in the Zeiss as you mention). However, I found the ergonomics of the SF 32s to be superior (lighter, better balanced, more secure grip, better focuser).

I had no issues with eye placement or blackouts in either make (same goes for the 10x versions of each as well). I wonder if this has something to do with eye relief for glasses wearers. Do you wear glasses?
 
Last edited:

Kiwimac

Active member
I have the 'automatic' rain guard that Swarovski make.

I tried it on my NL 12x42 and promptly got condensation on the eyepieces because the fabric of the rainguard was directing my exhaled breath onto them!

Took it off and since, no issue.
 

birdcat

Well-known member
Supporter
United States
I've read quite a few comments about glare and condensation on the NL but have not experienced any of these issues myself (the only glare I ever experienced on the NL was in a store of all places!). As far as the image goes, there was no clear winner for me when comparing the NL 32 and SF 32 models - they seemed near identical in terms of brightness, sharpness and contrast (I did notice a very subtle accentuation of green and yellow tones in the Zeiss as you mention). However, I found the ergonomics of the SF 32s to be superior (lighter, better balanced, more secure grip, better focuser).

I had no issues with eye placement or blackouts in either make (same goes for the 10x versions of each as well). I wonder if this has something to do with eye relief for glasses wearers. Do you wear glasses?
I don’t wear glasses. And I don’t really have trouble with eye placement as much as it was easier to get a good view with the NLs. I still miss the view from the NL a little but the SF are more practical with superior resistance to fogging and glare for how I use them. The ergonomics are personal preference but the SFs are really comfortable to me. My partner wears glasses and still loves their SFs. I am very happy with mine as well.
 

jafritten

Well-known member
Swarovski have stopped applying their SWAROCLEAN coatings to their eyepieces, haven't they? That may be the reason for the condensation issue. If that was the case, I wouldn't buy an NL now but wait for Swarovski to fix the issue. They certainly will.
 

_Prism_

Well-known member
England
Swarovski have stopped applying their SWAROCLEAN coatings to their eyepieces, haven't they? That may be the reason for the condensation issue. If that was the case, I wouldn't buy an NL now but wait for Swarovski to fix the issue. They certainly will.
Hmmm interesting point, I wonder if this is the cause of the condensation. If it is, I reckon we will probably see a lot more posts about it on BF in the near future.
 

birdcat

Well-known member
Supporter
United States
Swarovski have stopped applying their SWAROCLEAN coatings to their eyepieces, haven't they? That may be the reason for the condensation issue. If that was the case, I wouldn't buy an NL now but wait for Swarovski to fix the issue. They certainly will.
I definitely considered this as a possibility, but didn't want to speculate in my original post. I will comment that immediately before the 8x32 SFs I had a pair of 8.5x42 EL Swarovski binoculars manufactured in 2018. These would have still had the SWAROCLEAN coating. I did NOT have a problem with condensation with these EL binoculars. Of course the EL is a different binocular, but it still makes you wonder.
 

jafritten

Well-known member
I definitely considered this as a possibility, but didn't want to speculate in my original post. I will comment that immediately before the 8x32 SFs I had a pair of 8.5x42 EL Swarovski binoculars manufactured in 2018. These would have still had the SWAROCLEAN coating. I did NOT have a problem with condensation with these EL binoculars. Of course the EL is a different binocular, but it still makes you wonder.
Obviously, it is mere conjecture on my part. I don't think it quite impossible, though, that the NLs hit the market prematurely. My 2019 SLCs don't have any condensation problems.
 

Kiwimac

Active member
Swarovski have stopped applying their SWAROCLEAN coatings to their eyepieces, haven't they? That may be the reason for the condensation issue. If that was the case, I wouldn't buy an NL now but wait for Swarovski to fix the issue. They certainly will.
That's an odd thing to do. Why?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top