Initial user impressions of the NL x52’s (13 Viewers)

[John A Roberts]

A direct and considered comparison of the Meopta and SLC 15x56's from 2019,
(It was in response to the query from jgraider, 'Have you had any of the Swaro's side by side with the Meopta Meostar HD?
I can't see much difference personally.'):

Actually, yes! One of the people in our party had the Meostar HD. It's the only time I've actually spent real, viewing time with one, and that was over a year ago. This acquaintance asked if I wouldn't mind switching glass for a bit and I was quick to say yes! We were watching Desert Bighorn sheep from about 1500M away and the sun was about 90 degrees to my left because I remember putting a t-shirt over my head/tripod to keep the sun out of my eye. In any case, we swapped for about 30-40 minutes and it was also a very nice optic.

At one point, there were two groups of sheep within the FOV and I remember that I wanted to point his binocular around a little bit more because I detected the slightest bit of soft focus as I got too far off center. The only reason that I noticed and remembered this is because for that type of spotting, the optic remains trained on the same FOV for long periods of time, while seated with the tripod, in order to detect movement. With the SLC, it's my regular practice to just set/establish the FOV and then leave it alone until that particular FOV is exhausted. After that I'll adjust elevation or windage (depending on distance and terrain) by 1/3rd of a FOV overlap and then exhaust that FOV before moving another 1/3. When I used the Meopta, I felt like I wanted to move the optic between the two subjects within the FOV when they were significantly separated. The other reason that I remember this is because he had a Manfrotto pistol grip head and when I wanted to move it precisely, it was difficult and I would sort of sweep left/right, up/down more than I wanted to and then would have to go back the other way. I use a large pan head with a spotting scope and 15X's on a double camera mount, and we had just switched chairs, leaving the tripods where they were.

After a while, we switched back and thanked one another. I told him that I liked his binocular just fine but preferred my pan tilt head. He said that my tripod head spoiled him. He added that the SLC was "easy to focus." I said, gosh, I thought your focuser was just as nice. He said, that he meant that he could land on the perfect focus easier, then said in so many words that he liked the SLC more but stretched to purchase what he had. He had purchased his Meopta from another person in the group and so I rightly assured him that he made an outstanding purchase and got one of the best.

The only other thing that I noticed was that the color through the Meopta reminded me of my 2nd generation 15x56SLC, which was the tiniest bit warmer than that of my 3rd gen 15x56. I had noted that difference between the two SLC's back when I owned them simultaneously for about a year.

Anyhow, perhaps more detailed than what you were looking for but there's no doubt the Meopta HD is a fine optic! I could have done the job with either binocular.

John

 

[Dennis Mau]

Here is a good thread on the Meopta Meostar HD B1 Plus 15x56 versus the Swarovski SLC 15x56 HD, with a nice comparison review by HenRun. Also, a nice review by Canip on the Meopta Meostar HD 15x56 from Cloudy Nights.

MEOPTA MEOSTAR 15x56 HD B1 Plus vs SWAROVSKI SLC 15x56 HD

Hello all! Starting a new thread instead of cluttering up the previous "Gear Anxiety Thread". I have the Meopta Meostar 15x56 HD B1 Plus, which is the latest iteration of the Meostar 15x56. It features a new rubber armor and enhanced optical tolerances promising better optical performance than...

www.birdforum.net

Meopta MeoStar 15x56 HD: Short Review - Binoculars - Cloudy Nights

Page 1 of 2 - Meopta MeoStar 15x56 HD: Short Review - posted in Binoculars: MeoStar 15x56 HD MeoStar 15x56 HD This is a brief review of the Meopta MeoStar 15x56 HD, on the market in Europe and USA since 2015. I have compared it to my other similarly sized binoculars – Docter Nobilem...

www.cloudynights.com

 

[adhoc]

Jerry: Where I live it is extremely difficult, virtually impossible, to try out any binocular, let aside specific types, e.g. 15x. I have said this here in BF ad nauseam and took a break! Apart from the three shown in my photo I have ever viewed through only three other higher-mag 50-56 mm binoculars, and each of the six was accessible only after a lengthy, tedious quest, all this across many years.

Thus I have to rely on reviews and comments of others, in BF and elsewhere.

I have not made a record of which of them find the Meopta and Swaro. in 15x56 equal or Meopta better. In saying they "favor the Meopta" I meant not only as value for money but also absolutely. Fortunately some of them can be visited through the thread linked above by Denco@. In it HenRun points up some advantages of the Meopta that matter to me. In the video later in that thread we have, "They're equal in my eyes" (2:18); "We've been looking through them both quite a bit today in different lighting situations and they're both about the exact same to me...other than the Swarovskis have a slightly wider field of view." (2:31) HenRun then comments, "The Meopta version in the video is not the latest version B1 Plus though, so probably a small step behind optically."

I sometimes wish I had chosen the Swaro., though, because it is a bit smaller! Anyway, now the subject of this present thread shows there are what are to me still better options, in the Swaro. "14.5?x", and its emulators expected to show up soon.

 

[Maljunulo]

Since we don't have a clue where you live, this may be an understandable mistake.

 

[adhoc]

I apologize for not adding that yet again this time. Please also excuse my including my location in my anonymity, as seen in the "signature" info in the left margin.

 

[NDhunter]

Adhoc:
I have nothing against the Meopta, it is a very good binocular, just my thoughts on owning both side
by side. I currently have the 12x50 Meostar and I find it a great value for anyone looking for this size,
I recommend it.
I understand not being able to try these in person, it is very hard to find a place that would carry them all.
Meopta has a very good reputation, with many satisfied users.
Jerry

 

[PatR]

Jerry: Where I live it is extremely difficult, virtually impossible, to try out any binocular, let aside specific types, e.g. 15x. I have said this here in BF ad nauseam and took a break! Apart from the three shown in my photo I have ever viewed through only three other higher-mag 50-56 mm binoculars, and each of the six was accessible only after a lengthy, tedious quest, all this across many years.

Thus I have to rely on reviews and comments of others, in BF and elsewhere.

I have not made a record of which of them find the Meopta and Swaro. in 15x56 equal or Meopta better. In saying they "favor the Meopta" I meant not only as value for money but also absolutely. Fortunately some of them can be visited through the thread linked above by Denco@. In it HenRun points up some advantages of the Meopta that matter to me. In the video later in that thread we have, "They're equal in my eyes" (2:18); "We've been looking through them both quite a bit today in different lighting situations and they're both about the exact same to me...other than the Swarovskis have a slightly wider field of view." (2:31) HenRun then comments, "The Meopta version in the video is not the latest version B1 Plus though, so probably a small step behind optically."

I sometimes wish I had chosen the Swaro., though, because it is a bit smaller! Anyway, now the subject of this present thread shows there are what are to me still better options, in the Swaro. "14.5?x", and its emulators expected to show up soon.

Ditto, and that is why I study reviews on particular binoculars but do try, if at all possible, to physically test them prior to purchase. But often it is impossible and it doesn't take too long to sift out those reviewers who really do know what they are talking about. I have bought several pairs based on wheat, rather than chaff, reviews/opinions. The Meopta 15x56 being the perfect example.

Never bought or even held a Meopta bino but had used their optics in various armoured vehicles in places which I now shudder at. And they were stunningly good and on occasions, life preservers. So as I wanted a 15x bino I whittled down the likely suspects, looked at many reviews, saw some excellent comparisons with the Swaro and the Meopta on this site and CN amongst others. Based on reviews by @HenRun and @Canip to name but two, bought a pair from a firm who not only had them on offer at a run-out price but had an excellent returns policy. Plus I had bought from them before.

Revelation, all that the reviewers I trusted had said was on the ball. They are, at half the price of the Swaro equivalent, a smidgen behind in some areas but to my suprise as a Swaro, and I hesitate to use the phrase 'Fan Boy', ahead on others. However this is me talking, buying with my own money and using my own Mk1 eyeballs. Others may differ, I couldn't give a toss.

A subsequent side by side test with a friends Swaro 15x56 during a days yomping over Woodbury Common (a place firmly etched in the minds of those who have served in, or with, the the Royal's) confirmed that I had made the correct call and with the money saved I purchased a pair of Meopta 8x56's, again influenced by articulate and unbiased reviewers, most notably @Bentley03 and @hopster. They are superb.

Now I know that many who have tested them side by side favour the Swaro's over the Meopta's. Fair enough.

Others, who have never seen let alone held/used them, will chip in with their thoughts and opinions and I break wind in their general direction as they are about as useful as an ashtray on a Harley D.

And now, as I ponder fiendish schemes to smuggle a pair of 14x52 Pure's past the ever watchful eyes of my beloved, I shall savour a snifter of the superb Penderyn Single Malt, distilled here in beautiful Wales.

Lechyd Da or Sláinte!

 

[Swedpat]

It did reduce the glare by adjusting the eye cups precisely, but I still had some glare in certain situations. I was unsuccessful at totally eliminating it. I eventually gave up on the NL 8x32's and I went to a Nikon MHG 8x42 and I now don't have any glare problems.

Not only that, but I like the fact that they are about the same size and weight, but they have a much bigger 42mm aperture, so they are brighter and have easier eye placement.

I was hoping Swarovski would eliminate the glare I found in all the NL's with the newer 52mm NL's. Because a bigger aperture sometimes controls glare better.

I thought maybe the bigger aperture of the 52mm would help control the veiling glare in the bottom of the FOV because a lot of times the glare will bypass the field stop of the binocular and never reach your eye, so I was considering purchasing the NL 10x52.

I was disappointed when I saw the same type of glare in both the NL 14x52 and NL 10x52, perhaps to a lesser degree, but it was still there. Glare is very user dependent on how the eye cups fit your eye sockets and eye cup adjustment, so you may or may not see it.

I guess that is the price you pay for the newer SWA flat field binoculars like the NL, although Zeiss seems to have controlled the glare much better in the SF. If you want SWA and less glare choose the SF among the alpha binoculars.

Maybe Zeiss will come out with an SF 10x52 and 14x52 to compete with the NL 10x52 and 14x52. They have followed Swarovski with their SF line up till now. I would bet Zeiss could do a bigger FOV SF than the NL with less glare, less weight and a weight rearward design, just like they did in the smaller apertures.

Review: Swarovski 8x32 NL Pure vs. 8x32 EL WB

"The stray light issue which has occasionally been reported to plague the EL WB has not been resolved with its successor, and this is going to remain a matter of dispute whenever the NL Pure's merits are discussed. Nonetheless, there exists only one binocular which could currently challenge its pole position, the Zeiss Victory SF. In comparison, the SF has the advantage of an even wider field, a lower weight and - yes - a superior stray light protection.

Holger Merlitz"

Binoculars rankings - 8x32 - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

The top two pictures are exit pupils in the Zeiss SF 8x32, compared to the bottom two pictures of the exit pupils of NL 8x32.

View attachment 1593072View attachment 1593073View attachment 1593074View attachment 1593075

That is a significant difference in favor to SF!

 

[Swedpat]

To sum up the NL versus SF difference, the NL has slightly sharper edges and the SF has less glare. It depends on what is more important to you.

I consider sharper edges not so important at free hand use, because you then automatically aim the binocular so the object(or part of it you fixate on) is in the center of the field. But when it's mounted you let your view move around the field more than at free hand, and then sharp edges is more important.

 

[Patudo]

The only Meopta x56 I've compared to the Swarovski counterpart is the 8x56. Fine binocular though that is, the Swaro is ahead - exactly as it ought to be, given its price - in terms of pure image quality, which is truly outstanding, one of the best (to my eye anyway) I've seen in any handheld binocular. The Meopta is however smaller, less bulky, it's probably close to being as well packaged as a x56 can, which can translate to an advantage in being able to hold it steady, and gives the impression of being just as solid, although less refined in fine details such as how the eyecups turn out. And it's very good in its own right image-wise, with the great qualities of a 7mm exit pupil. I'd imagine there is very little between the two in terms of practical utility. The theoretical advantage of the SLC's Abbe-Koening prisms would likely give you only a few minutes more in near darkness, and it isn't necessary to have things look as good as they do in the Swaro under good viewing conditions.

The situation in which Patriot222 compared the two binoculars sounds like a pretty stiff test and fortunately, not one that many of us will encounter on anything like a regular basis. That's one of the situations in which the so-called flat field really shines. It would have been interesting, though, to have tried both binoculars on the same tripod mount. A good tripod head definitely does make a difference.

 

[CharleyBird]

To sum up the NL versus SF difference, the NL has slightly sharper edges and the SF has less glare. It depends on what is more important to you.

I disagree, there is far more to the NL. Having tried all magnifications of NL in x32 and x42, there was no glare, just as you wrote last year that you found no glare in the NL models when correctly adjusted.

The NL wide field of view, so useful for following birds, the beautifully neutral colours and clarity of the view, the wonderfully quick length adjustment of the neck strap and well padded travel case make them second to none considered either as an instrument or as a complete package.

Certainly Nikon's current birding binoculars are not as good as the top Swarovski, Zeiss, or Leica. Nikon are cheaper. Optician are cheaper still.

 

[dries1]

"Others, who have never seen let alone held/used them, will chip in with their thoughts and opinions and I break wind in their general direction as they are about as useful as an ashtray on a Harley D."

This was funny and true, one has to admit.

 

[Maljunulo]

Others, who have never seen let alone held/used them, will chip in with their thoughts and opinions and I break wind in their general direction as they are about as useful as an ashtray on a Harley D.

Congratulations for saying it right out loud.

 

[Thotmosis]

The only Meopta x56 I've compared to the Swarovski counterpart is the 8x56. Fine binocular though that is, the Swaro is ahead - exactly as it ought to be, given its price - in terms of pure image quality, which is truly outstanding, one of the best (to my eye anyway) I've seen in any handheld binocular. The Meopta is however smaller, less bulky, it's probably close to being as well packaged as a x56 can, which can translate to an advantage in being able to hold it steady, and gives the impression of being just as solid, although less refined in fine details such as how the eyecups turn out. And it's very good in its own right image-wise, with the great qualities of a 7mm exit pupil. I'd imagine there is very little between the two in terms of practical utility. The theoretical advantage of the SLC's Abbe-Koening prisms would likely give you only a few minutes more in near darkness, and it isn't necessary to have things look as good as they do in the Swaro under good viewing conditions.

The situation in which Patriot222 compared the two binoculars sounds like a pretty stiff test and fortunately, not one that many of us will encounter on anything like a regular basis. That's one of the situations in which the so-called flat field really shines. It would have been interesting, though, to have tried both binoculars on the same tripod mount. A good tripod head definitely does make a difference.

In the end, they are all good optics and the place where you are at a certain moment and the person you are with adds more to the experience than the binocular IMHO.

 

[Thotmosis]

Congratulations for saying it right out loud.

Congratulations for your comment, i think you are a very wise man.

 

[SuperDuty]

I disagree, there is far more to the NL. Having tried all magnifications of NL in x32 and x42, there was no glare, just as you wrote last year that you found no glare in the NL models when correctly adjusted.

The NL wide field of view, so useful for following birds, the beautifully neutral colours and clarity of the view, the wonderfully quick length adjustment of the neck strap and well padded travel case make them second to none considered either as an instrument or as a complete package.

Certainly Nikon's current birding binoculars are not as good as the top Swarovski, Zeiss, or Leica. Nikon are cheaper. Optician are cheaper still.

I’ve directly compared the EL to the SF, to my eyes the EL is a far more pleasing view, and my NL is a step up from the EL, IMO.

 

[tenex]

This was funny and true, one has to admit.

Of course it was even better with a moustache and faux French accent...

...and there has been no "initial user impression of the NL x52s" per the thread title since post #64. How well are they selling?

 

[dries1]

Of course it was even better with a moustache and faux French accent...

A great line for inspector Clouseau, LOL.

 

[Maljunulo]

A great line for inspector Clouseau, LOL.

Or Hercule Poirot?

 

[tenex]

No...