I am really jazzed about the addition of the 12x42s in the NLs. I hope that if and when Zeiss responds they also include a pair of 12s. As far as I know they don't offer one in their current line. If Zeiss answers with ergonomics improving on their HTs and FOV improving on their SFs (which as far as I can tell is what the NLs are) and AK prisms and 12x magnification, then I'll definitely buy a pair.
-
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.
New Product Introduction Today From Swarovski ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter John A Roberts
- Start date
I am really jazzed about the addition of the 12x42s in the NLs. I hope that if and when Zeiss responds they also include a pair of 12s. As far as I know they don't offer one in their current line. If Zeiss answers with ergonomics improving on their HTs and FOV improving on their SFs (which as far as I can tell is what the NLs are) and AK prisms and 12x magnification, then I'll definitely buy a pair.
I think Chosun is probably right. Going to be a while.
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Historically, we could have seen an 8 and a 10 x 56 SF with an RF option for the hunting stalking and surveying brigade. What market/end user would a x 12 appeal to? I personally think this is where the x 12 NL Pure is aimed ( pardon any unintentional pun ).
yep. probably right. I'm one that lives in both camps.
Having said that, I think the 12s will be great birding glass. I'm largely a coastal birder (Southeast Alaska). Gulls and pipers and Terns. That sorta thing. The 12s are going to be great...
Agreed. And the SFs were a response to the ELs. Pretty incestuous at this point.
Sagittarius
Well-known member
Thanks, Jan.
All I knew at the time is what I read on some of the forums and saw on YouTube videos stating Zeiss owned and controlled Schott glass.
I assumed they were right but I know, "never assume anything"!
Sagittarius
Well-known member
dwever
Well-known member
Well, not just because. But in Alaska, beyond birds, I also enjoy viewing wildlife in general. You can’t always be accurate with size until you are first accurate with distance. I used to prefer bins with a reticle to get distance or size with some limitations, but Swarovski and Zeiss RF’s have such great images it is the best of both worlds (Leica’s RF’s for me have suffered with being too dark). At measured distance, not only did that confirm to me the cute guy in the snow was a relatively safe distance, but also that he was just a little black bear (Hatcher Pass Spring 2019). To the naked eye I initially thought it was either a small bear or maybe a large wolf. Photo’s not through bins, and grainy from being blown up excessively. Orca last month, one of 18.
Attachments
Last edited:
Sagittarius
Well-known member
Chosun,
I agree with Lee and think the SF 42 has been around long enough.
Wider FOV means a lot to most hunters, some birders, and Dennis. |;|
Zeiss needs to address the NL, jmo.
I agree with Lee and think the SF 42 has been around long enough.
Wider FOV means a lot to most hunters, some birders, and Dennis. |;|
Zeiss needs to address the NL, jmo.
NZbinodude
Well-known member
How could Zeiss improve on the NL? What more can be done?
dries1
Member
Only a few have viewed the NLs, lets wait until someone has spent more than a day in the field with them, then one can compare to the SF and others. There seems to be frustration of a new glass coming out, and folks are thinking I just got (a premium glass) and now Swarovski comes out with the NL, Xv#$%%%$#.
Andy W.
Andy W.
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Sagi, no doubt the extra Fov will be a wonderful thing, and noticed by a few more than just Dennis |
| The thing is the SF ..... IS already ......Zeiss's, Swarovski NL answer :brains:
Look at the gymnastics Swarovski has gone to in terms of market positioning, feature crippling, even discontinuing the SLC 42mm line, just to fit the NL in.
Also, look how slow Zeiss has been in coming out with the 32mm SF - and blind Freddy could have picked that market position .....
You are talking about ~7.5% extra Fov over the SF for the 8x, and ~11% extra Fov over the SF for the 10x. Now of course these are worthwhile and represent an improved view if done well. However ..... What on earth could Zeiss come out with ? the SF+ a little bit more ?
Then what happens to the SF? knobbled ? discontinued ?
The NL is a generational change.
Just as the SF was. I don't think it's time to put the SF out to pasture yet - it's just a boy .....
Of course the opportunity is always there to do something really innovative - it's just that I don't think Zeiss will ......
A more mainstream move might be to develop an extrawide field 50mm SF line up that comes in around about the weight of the Swaro NL ...... :cat:
Chosun :gh:
Last edited:
Sagi, no doubt the extra Fov will be a wonderful thing, and noticed by a few more than just Dennis |
The thing is the SF ..... IS already ......Zeiss's, Swarovski NL answer :brains:
Look at the gymnastics Swarovski has gone to in terms of market positioning, feature crippling, even discontinuing the SLC 42mm line, just to fit the NL in.
Also, look how slow Zeiss has been in coming out with the 32mm SF - and blind Freddy could have picked that market position .....
You are talking about ~7.5% extra Fov over the SF for the 8x, and ~11% extra Fov over the SF for the 10x. Now of course these are worthwhile and represent an improved view if done well. However ..... What on earth could Zeiss come out with ? the SF+ a little bit more ?
Then what happens to the SF? knobbled ? discontinued ?
The NL is a generational change.
Just as the SF was. I don't think it's time to put the SF out to pasture yet - it's just a boy .....
Of course the opportunity is always there to do something really innovative - it's just that I don't think Zeiss will ......
A more mainstream move might be to develop an extrawide field 50mm SF line up that comes in around about the weight of the Swaro NL ...... :cat:
Chosun :gh:
I agree, with the caveat that we need to see what that additional fov means in real usage...current SF owners will note it, but not as much as current Swarovski owners, as the SF FOV is already very wide.
Will it be noticeable enough to make SF's owners consider it? Time will tell.
Also I am keen to see if there is any compromise in the NL to achieve this fov i.e. some Zeiss users are bothered by the "rolling effect". Is this also an issue in the NL? If so, is it worse? Or it is not there at all.
It will be interesting to read findings from consumers.
Sagi
Schott is part of Zeiss Group but there is no evidence that they do anything different than act like any other business and sell to anybody who wants to buy their products. This is what Jan was saying. Similarly, Zeiss Sports Optics doesn't do Schott favours such as only buying glass from Schott. There was a video of a visit to Zeiss Sports Optics a few years ago that clearly showed Ohara boxes in the store. And all of this makes sense because undoubtedly both Schott and Sports Optics have financial targets to meet. So if Schott wants a share of Sports Optics' business it has to compete against other glass makers.
Lee
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
For low light viewing the exit pupil will probably be the limiting factor. AK prism might give 2% higher trasmission. Whereas the exit pupil is 44% larger in a 10x42 vs a 12x42. More mag will compensate to some extent for the decrease in eye resolution at low light but not sure how much.
I asked an "optics expert", why no AK-prism any more?
The downsides he mentioned was price (harder to make), weight and size, but also that edge-to-edge sharpness would be more difficult to obtain with AK-prism in a small package.
"Coatings are so good now that the need is less for AK-prisms"
Not sure if he was biased in any way though...
Still enjoy them in my 7x42 FL:s.
Last edited:
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
FOV figures is one thing, but how much is usable? Above 65°ish AFOV it might be restricted with eye glasses. The claimed 70°+? AFOV in the Zeiss Harpia didn't make me any happier for example...
Not sure if 50mm is the right way to go when the trend is downsizing? Zeiss made some 45mm bins in the past. Night owls 7x45, weighed like a brick. Handled like a brick. Actually looked a bit like a brick as well...
Increased weights in first the Noctivid and now NL is a bit surprising. Claim "But it doesn't feel heavy, great balance" etc...but laws of physics still exist...
The competition for the NL might actually be the 32mm SF.
Imagine a 32mm bin with big FOV, great eye-relief, proven ergonomics and state-of-the-art glare handling.
:t:
I have just one issue with SF32, it's more expensive than the 42 mm model...
Last edited:
The BulbMogul
Well-known member
Has anyone yet been able to "PURCHASE A NL PURE" anywhere in the WORLD..? I am not talking about all the ones shipped out for reviews..
