To glare or not to glare - that is - maybe - the question.
If the NL 8x42 was called by some the best 8x42 they ever had in hand, I can say that the NL 8x32 may be the best 8x32 I have ever seen.
But what about glare? In the various discussions about the 42 NL series, glare seems to have become the subject of some heated debates, and people have been giving each other a glare. Those who called the issue of glare in the 42 NLs a hype have been glaring defiance at those who insisted that there was glare.
So what about the 32 NL series?
I took a new 8x32 NL Pure for 3 days to the mountains, together with an NL 8x42 and an SF 8x32 for comparison (pics).
Here are my first impressions, and I can make this relatively brief, since there are many similarities between the NL 8x32 and the NL 8x42, and the latter has been widely reviewed and described by now.
Build quality: excellent finish and build; on the tested 8x32 there were none of the quality deficiencies described in some posts about the 8x42. The objective covers don’t stick as firmly in the tubes as in the 8x42, which may be an advantage if you want to take them off rapidly. Eyecaps sit too firmly on the eyecups for my taste (as in many Swaros); and I am not a fan of the FieldPro system (and probably never will be).
Balance and ergonomics: very similar to the 8x42 NL, very well balanced, perfect position of the focus wheel. The 8x32 may rest even better in your hands than the 8x42 if you have small hands.
The weight: with strap and front and eyepiece covers, 200g or 30% more than the same size SF 8x32; the difference is considerable, you might almost be tempted to underestimate the solidity of the SF (which would be a mistake).
Mechanics: impeccable. Central hinge, eyecups, focus mechanism, diopter adjustment lever all work smoothly and precisely, like on the 8x42 NL. Very nice focus action, compared to my ELs and SLCs, and even a bit smoother than on my SF 8x32. There are about 5 dpt extra travel of the focus wheel beyond the infinity position; the SF trumps that with at least 6 dpt. Dpt adj lever: the “0” position is correctly set at 0 dpt. The lever operation needs some getting used to, but then works perfectly.
Optics:
The size of the FOV appears the same as in the SF (according to specs, the SF has 155m, the NL 150m; if you mount both glasses side by side on tripods, you can spot the difference, otherwise probably not). The 8x42 with its 159m shows a bit more field, but even here the difference becomes only visible if you actually look for it.
Image characteristics: very much similar to the NL 8x42. Nice clear image taking you into the scenery.
Central sharpness is comparable, also with the SF, although I did occasionally have the feeling that the SF allowed me to read letters on far away signs a tiny bit more easily than the SF. Perhaps due also to the slightly warmer image of the SF which in some viewing conditions seems to provide a bit more color and perhaps a nuance more contrast (I need to confirm that further).
Off-axis sharpness: for my eyes much better (and I repeat: much better) in the NL 8x32 than in the SF 8x32, which also makes the panning experience in the NL more pleasing. The SF also exhibits some interesting distortion characteristics (as far as can tell, not typical rolling ball) which Holger Merlitz once mentioned somewhere and which I had dismissed at the time, the NL in contrast feels just right when panning.
Color fidelity: both NLs appear quite neutral, the image in the paper test rather white or “cool”, cooler than the SF which exhibits a nuance of warmth (which in some situations may be an advantage).
CA: I could not detect anything worth mentioning in the center of the field, a tiny bit more further off-axis; a lot here depends on your eye placement. Could it be that the SF is even a nuance better in this respect?
Brightness: because of the cooler image characteristics, the NL appears sometimes slightly brighter than the SF. Hard to say how reliable that impression is.
And finally: stray-light (just admit that you have been waiting for it).
According to my experience and to the best of what I have been able to verify, the 8x32 NL Pure exhibits the same stray-light performance as its larger brother, the NL 8x42.
This will be good news for some and bad news for others.
The NL exhibits some reflections on bright light sources just outside the field of view; not too bad, but at least noteworthy. The SF is better here, but on the other hand exhibits brighter spikes.
Glare: I could find glare at the lower part of the image when observing against a low standing sun, with sunlight hitting the objective lenses. It happened when I did not position my eyes correctly behind the eyepieces, and when I chose one of the outer positions of the eyecups. Same as in the 8x42 NL!!
I would therefore repeat what I said with regard to the 8x42: I can provoke glare in the NL 8x32, but I can also avoid it quite easily. I can use the NL totally glare-free if I want.
With proper eye placement and eyecup settings, the image is glare-free.
I know this will not be satisfactory for some. I remember one forum member making a remark like: in a premium product such as the NL, you should not have to make adjustments to your viewing position (to which I remember replying that when you drive a luxury car, you DO adjust the sitting position, don’t you?).
Of course, other things like face anatomy, observing habits, etc. will have an influence on whether or not someone will actually experience glare with the NL or not.
I personally believe a lot depends on whether people will be willing to give it a try. I just hope people will do that before dismissing them without even looking (as seems to have been the case sometimes, judging from some posts, with the 42 NLs).
To sum up:
The 8x32 NL overall combines splendid ergonomics, superb mechanics and a wonderful bright and sharp image with excellent panning experience.
For me, glare can totally and easily be handled. It’s not worse than in some other premium binoculars (and yes, there are some with an even better stray-light suppression).
I so far had a strong preference for 8x42 models over 8x32; with the NL, I am not so sure any more – I like it a lot.
fwiw
Canip
