Initial user impressions of the NL x52’s (2 Viewers)

[John A Roberts]

The thread 'First image of the NL x52’s!' has been locked (following some acrimonious comments).

It includes information and images from Swarovski upon the official release of the NL 10x52 and 14x52 on the 13th of June,
along with the initial reactions and assessments of many here on the forum.

As it had grown to nine pages, it was probably near time to start a new thread, if only to make things easier in terms of future viewing
e.g. the original NL x42 thread ended up growing into a 50 page monster; and it's successor into a 54 page one!
( see: New Product Introduction Today From Swarovski ? and Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions )


- - - -
While the NL x52’s will not be available for purchase in stores until the 11th of July (see post #15: First image of NL x52's! )
there are already some units in circulation *

Some comments from those with hands on experience, include:

• Arek with the 10x52: Swarovski NL Pure 10x52 – first impressions - Swarovski NL Pure 10x52 - first impressions

• The Porters with the 14x52: Swarovski NL Pure 52mm Binocular Review — Birdwatching Dot Com

• And Canip with both in post #24 and 33: First image of NL x52's!


An image from each:



John


* There are now also units in shops available for purchase, at least in the US, see posts #2 and 3 at: NL Pure x52 in hand
In the first post, grackle314 describes his impressions of the 14x52.

 

[Bentley03]

Most UK stockists received 1x 10x52 and 1x 14x52 last Monday or Tuesday. The 14x52's appear to have been snapped up pretty quickly, but I'm aware of at least one still available.

First thing that struck me is just how small their form factor appears to be, they are really very compact. In the hand, I find them to be probably the most comfortable of all the NL's to hold, the wasp waist being a little larger in circumference. In general, I prefer the way EL's handle, but these NL's (for me) handle as well as x50 EL's, aided by balance in the hand which is simply sublime. The optics? Handheld, I don't think I've ever experienced better than the 10x52, with the added luxury of the 5.2mm exit pupil giving an extraordinarily relaxed and easy view for a 10x binocular. Yes, these are really rather good (understatement).

 

[CharleyBird]

These latest NL are quite hefty according to reliable measurements:
10x52... 1159g
14x52... 1164g
(Canip)

If I were a keen astronomer they'd be top of my upgrade-wants list, but as a bird enthusiast I'm not comfortable carrying extra large & heavy binoculars for hours.

I'm truly looking forward to trying these new models but know from their weights that the full-size 8/10/12 x42NL models are more suitable to my birding needs.

 

[Paultricounty]

Does anybody think these would come out in 12x?

To me the 52 begs for a 12x, the 42 fell short for me and preferred the 12x50EL.

 

[tenex]

Having chosen "14" (14.5?) rather than 15, I wouldn't expect them to also do a 12, but feel free to start a request campaign. I do think 12x52 would be a fine option, especially with EL discontinued.

 

[Maljunulo]

I wonder what level of projected sales they have to predict before someone signs off on production of a new design.

No one is going to produce a binocular that they might only sell fifty of.

 

[Scott98]

Does anybody think these would come out in 12x?

To me the 52 begs for a 12x, the 42 fell short for me and preferred the 12x50EL.

How about an 8.5x52....to replace the 8.5x42 EL?? They probably figured 10x would take care of the lower end......or 9x52, 12x52, 15x52 would have been nice

 

[Scott98]

These latest NL are quite hefty according to reliable measurements:
10x52... 1159g
14x52... 1164g
(Canip)

That's a good 4-5 ounces over the published specs - does this include the caps, rainguard & straps or something??

The thread 'First image of the NL x52’s!' has been locked (following some acrimonious comments).

Oh dear....another discussion crashed into the rocks of denial over basic physics and larger aperture gathering more light than smaller....so sorry I missed it.....and what a WARM welcome to Tot from the larger group here.....

 

[MJ73]

I have the 14 on order. Going straight on a tripod to observe bighorn sheep.

 

[Swedpat]

How about an 8.5x52....to replace the 8.5x42 EL?? They probably figured 10x would take care of the lower end......or 9x52, 12x52, 15x52 would have been nice

I want a 9,5x52 as a complement to 10x52! 😄

 

[Swedpat]

These latest NL are quite hefty according to reliable measurements:
10x52... 1159g
14x52... 1164g
(Canip)

If I were a keen astronomer they'd be top of my upgrade-wants list, but as a bird enthusiast I'm not comfortable carrying extra large & heavy binoculars for hours.

I'm truly looking forward to trying these new models but know from their weights that the full-size 8/10/12 x42NL models are more suitable to my birding needs.

Interesting that 14x version is heavier than 10x. It should be the opposite because shorter focal length ocular has smaller lenses. Or does the 14x version have more advanced oculars in order to keep the eye relief?

 

[Scott98]

I want a 9,5x52 as a complement to 10x52! 😄

I think 10x and 14x covers things pretty well - but yes, if it was up to me, I'd like to see 7x,8x,9x,10x,11x, all the way up to 20x....why not? something for every possible user

 

[Swedpat]

I think 10x and 14x covers things pretty well - but yes, if it was up to me, I'd like to see 7x,8x,9x,10x,11x, all the way up to 20x....why not? something for every possible user

Joke aside, I think if there was a market for it they would probably make all possible configurations. I think 7, 8 and 10x covers the most desires. 6x is also and I have 3 binoculars with 6x. But I would like a high grade 5x25 for really wide FOV. I am sure Swaro, Zeiss and Leica would produce 5x binos if there was a market for it. But it is a very small niche.

 

[Maljunulo]

Who needs the laws of physics when you have opinions?

 

[tenex]

That's a good 4-5 ounces over the published specs - does this include the caps, rainguard & straps or something??

Yes, Canip weighs with rainguard and strap.

Oh dear....another discussion crashed into the rocks of denial over basic physics and larger aperture gathering more light than smaller... so sorry I missed it...

Denial is not a productive strategy, especially for a newcomer.

Interesting that 14x version is heavier than 10x. It should be the opposite because shorter focal length ocular has smaller lenses. Or does the 14x version have more advanced oculars in order to keep the eye relief?

5g here is an insignificantly tiny difference. But sometimes the highest power model will have an extra field-flattener lens in the eyepiece, adding a bit of weight. (Possibly not true here because the 10x NL already has one too?)

 

[John A Roberts]

With the introduction of the NL x52's, a concern for many Swaro users will be . . .

How's best to carry them along with my current field kit? 🤷‍♂️


Cropped image, from Wotjas_B at: forum.optyczne.pl :: Zobacz temat - Spotkanie lornetkowe Jeziorsko 18-19.05 (a Polish optics forum)


John


p.s. Of course I initially posted this in the wrong thread (the one about Swaro price reductions)!

 

[Bentley03]

I'm surprised this thread hasn't gained more traction, given that there will now be plenty of x52's in the hands of excited(?) and delighted(?) new owners, with the supply chain (certainly in the UK) seemingly delivering units well in advance of the stated 10th July delivery start date.

Personally, I'm itching to read people's first, and more in depth, impressions...

 

[dries1]

"I'm surprised this thread hasn't gained more traction".

I think it is just the reality that most users prefer 8X32/42 and 10X42. While NL 56s look enticing, the SVs and SLCs in large aperture formats 50/56 are still excellent.

 

[Robert Moore]

I pre ordered over 3 weeks ago and still not in stock at Eurooptics. Will report here after I get them.

 

[Bentley03]

"I'm surprised this thread hasn't gained more traction".

I think it is just the reality that most users prefer 8X32/42 and 10X42. While NL 56s look enticing, the SVs and SLCs in large aperture formats 50/56 are still excellent.

Yes, the size is certainly quite niche for birdwatchers, although it would appear that distribution stateside is behind where we are this side of the Pond, which will obviously affect reporting on here.

I don't trust my grotty old eyes too much at the moment, although an upcoming cataract procedure should sort the grottier of the two. But, I sensed some differences in daytime performance between the 10x42's and 10x52's, which I'm intrigued to find out if others pick up on, without me provoking a response by asking a question (a question which is bound to lead to a thousand posts, arguments, eventual boredom and another locked thread ).