NL 12x vs 14x (1 Viewer)

[Malsam]

not sure has this topic been discussed in the new NL 52 threads but I'm seeking NL 12x users on their opinion, decision to add/replace/keep vs the new 14x. What would be your thoughts, usage on that decision? Eg. Someone shared that 14x and 12x are very different binos as the former will see more power over longer distance while 12x is better for short distance as well. Also some thinks that 14x is more suitable for stargazing and 12x is more for raptor etc. Please share!

 

[Robert Moore]

I don’t have the 12x anymore so can’t compare side by side. I do have the 10x42 and 14x52 NL and really like them. I have a feeder about 40 feet and am surprised how still I can hold the 14. The detail at that distance is just awesome in the 14 compared to the 10. Details in the feather’s like holding the bird in your hand. I love my 10x42 but now I keep wanting to look through the 14 for the extra detail. My 10 not getting used as much. I bought the 14 mainly for Astronomy but now find I am using it for birding more than I thought I would.

 

[Robert Moore]

The 14 can’t and won’t replace the 10x. I get a totally relaxed view in the 10x42 that I could look through all day long. The 14 is awesome for detail but doesn’t have the ease of view that the 10x has for hand held use which is to be expected. When you need the extra detail though it’s nice to have the 14. For Astronomy on a tripod the 14 just kills the 10x42 and that’s why I bought it.

 

[Maljunulo]

The 14 can’t and won’t replace the 10x. I get a totally relaxed view in the 10x42 that I could look through all day long. The 14 is awesome for detail but doesn’t have the ease of view that the 10x has for hand held use which is to be expected. When you need the extra detail though it’s nice to have the 14. For Astronomy on a tripod the 14 just kills the 10x42 and that’s why I bought it.

Does it resolve Mizar? (~14”)

 

[Montereyman]

not sure has this topic been discussed in the new NL 52 threads but I'm seeking NL 12x users on their opinion, decision to add/replace/keep vs the new 14x. What would be your thoughts, usage on that decision? Eg. Someone shared that 14x and 12x are very different binos as the former will see more power over longer distance while 12x is better for short distance as well. Also some thinks that 14x is more suitable for stargazing and 12x is more for raptor etc. Please share!

I have 20x60 binos that are used only for stargazing and always with them mounted to a tripod. For handheld use a 12x was as much power as I could manage, having tried 15x and returning them. I now have the Sig Sauer image stabilized 16x42 binoculars and with the image stabization turned on they area as steady as a 8x42 binocular while providing double the image magnification.

Going past 12x it is better to have binoculars that provide image stabilization or plan on using them with a tripod, or at least a monopod. The Sig Sauer are great on land with their image stabilization and would be good even on a small boat.

 

[Robert Moore]

Does it resolve Mizar? (~14”)

Yes it does. Nice clean split.

 

[Robert Moore]

I can also split Graffias at 13.7”

 

[Malsam]

i just tried the 14x at a local dealer with a 12x, i must have been used to handling 12x which surprisingly the 14x seems even more handholdable to me due to the extra weight and size. I didn't use it with the headrest for both of them when I compare it and was holding one at each hand and keep changing to see what does that 2x mean to me. Brightness and sharpness its about the same but for object size, at close distance there isn't much difference between the size. The 14x really shines when i start glancing far...exactly how far I'm not sure but the further i view, comparing 12x and 14x, the easier you can tell the difference.

 

[Maljunulo]

Yes it does. Nice clean split.

Nice.

One of my favorites

(I had to look up Graffias)

 

[Dennis Mau]

I have 20x60 binos that are used only for stargazing and always with them mounted to a tripod. For handheld use a 12x was as much power as I could manage, having tried 15x and returning them. I now have the Sig Sauer image stabilized 16x42 binoculars and with the image stabization turned on they area as steady as a 8x42 binocular while providing double the image magnification.

Going past 12x it is better to have binoculars that provide image stabilization or plan on using them with a tripod, or at least a monopod. The Sig Sauer are great on land with their image stabilization and would be good even on a small boat.

Do you get any glare with the Sig Sauer IS 16x42's? I got rid of my mine because of the veiling glare at the bottom of the FOV.

 

[Montereyman]

I got the new HDX version and no issues with glare. The price is the same and the old non-HDX version is selling at a considerable discount.

 

[Maljunulo]

I got the new HDX version and no issues with glare. The price is the same and the old non-HDX version is selling at a considerable discount.

HDX?

 

[Brummie]

I have a feeder about 40 feet and am surprised how still I can hold the 14. The detail at that distance is just awesome in the 14 compared to the 10. Details in the feather’s like holding the bird in your hand. I love my 10x42 but now I keep wanting to look through the 14 for the extra detail. My 10 not getting used as much. I bought the 14 mainly for Astronomy but now find I am using it for birding more than I thought I would.

I had a similar experience with the 12x42. Justified getting it for long-range handheld viewing, but actually enjoy it most often for getting more detailed views of common backyard birds.

Still hope to try the 14x52 at some point to see if it'll work for me handheld.

 

[Dennis Mau]

I got the new HDX version and no issues with glare. The price is the same and the old non-HDX version is selling at a considerable discount.

I had the newer HDX version of the SIG Sauer in 16x42 and 20x42 and had the same glare problems. It wasn't any better than the older version for me. These are from some of the reviews of the Sig Sauer HDX 16x42 on Amazon.com. I experienced the same thing.

Amazon.com

"Regarding the performance of the product, and as some other user such as Ad Astra has already stated, it is stated that the optical quality of the binocular and its low level of chromatic aberrations are tarnished by a notable predisposition to flare and loss of contrast as soon as the unit is oriented slightly against the light and the vision is moved vertically upwards. This defect is increased if the 2 stabilization modes are used. Likewise, in a nighttime use with lights in the field of view, for example in a nighttime use in a cityscape with light sources in the observed area, continuous, annoying ring-shaped flashes occur around each light source at the edges of the viewing area."

"Was really excited about these, but regretfully returning them. Chromatic aberration is well controlled and sharpness is good, but even normal daytime sun is enough to provoke terrible veiling flare and huge contrast loss, even when almost fully perpendicular to the sun. Even the color balance between the sunward and shadeward side changes noticeably. The stabilizer appears to make the flare even worse, it resulted in misty flare ghosts that I could toggle on and off repeatedly."

 

[henry link]

I had the newer HDX version of the SIG Sauer in 16x42 and 20x42 and had the same glare problems. It wasn't any better than the older version for me.

Perhaps some skepticism should be applied to what Dennis has to say about glare in the NLs, as well as other binoculars like the SIG Sauer 16x42s. Could it be that he's not the most reliable narrator of his own history with various models?

Happily he has left a trail. I checked two threads from last year - one devoted to the SIG Sauer 16x42 models, in which he made many posts praising them, and the infamous "Glare Monsters" thread, which I assume was started while he still owned the 16x42 HDX.

16x and steady views. Sig Zulu6 16x42

I never would have thought I could view handheld at 16X with binoculars. But here it is. I stood on my back porch and read signs with fairly small print at well over a block away. Image is pretty darned good as well. Nice and sharp with good color and in focus all the way to the edge. I have no...

www.birdforum.net

Glare Monsters!

What are the two best birding binoculars you have used that controlled glare the best, and what are the two worst you have used for glare? Glare control is very important in a birding binocular because there are so many times when you are looking close to the sun, or you are looking up at odd...

www.birdforum.net

In the first thread I can find no complaint at all about glare during the months he actually owned the 16x42s and neither model was included on his "glare prone" list in the second thread. In fact, neither model is mentioned at all in the "Glare Monsters" thread.

Here is his very first mention of noticing a glare problem, posted on June 7, 2024, over a year after his first Sig 16x42 purchase and nine months after his purchase of the HDX upgrade.

16x and steady views. Sig Zulu6 16x42

The 5 year guarantee is for the stabilizer. Andreas Interesting... W/out the electronics, they are still usable, but not as intended. What's typical for other IS brands?

www.birdforum.net

If he saw the glare during the months while he owned the binoculars, why didn't he mention it? Is his current version of events what he remembers noticing or what he now wishes he had noticed?

 

[Maljunulo]

Sometimes it can be hard to keep stories straight.

 

[Montereyman]

Where glare will be most evident is with backlit subjects and I try to have the sun at my back or to one side whenever possilble. When photographing subjects I plan my arrival for when the sun will provide frontal lighting of subjects and if this is not possible I do not take any pictures.

The Sig Sauer HDX do not exhibit the color shifting and edge flare that I encountered with my copy of the Zeiss Victory 8x42 that cost 3x as much.

There is no such thing as the perfect binocular and there are always going to be trade-offs. It is why I have 10x25, 10x32, 10x43, 12x50, 20x60, and now 16x42 binoculars that I use. If I still had a boat I would have kept the 7x50 ones that were great for night use on the ocean.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Perhaps some skepticism should be applied to what Dennis has to say about glare in the NLs, as well as other binoculars like the SIG Sauer 16x42s. Could it be that he's not the most reliable narrator of his own history with various models?

Happily he has left a trail. I checked two threads from last year - one devoted to the SIG Sauer 16x42 models, in which he made many posts praising them, and the infamous "Glare Monsters" thread, which I assume was started while he still owned the 16x42 HDX.

16x and steady views. Sig Zulu6 16x42

I never would have thought I could view handheld at 16X with binoculars. But here it is. I stood on my back porch and read signs with fairly small print at well over a block away. Image is pretty darned good as well. Nice and sharp with good color and in focus all the way to the edge. I have no...

www.birdforum.net

Glare Monsters!

What are the two best birding binoculars you have used that controlled glare the best, and what are the two worst you have used for glare? Glare control is very important in a birding binocular because there are so many times when you are looking close to the sun, or you are looking up at odd...

www.birdforum.net

In the first thread I can find no complaint at all about glare during the months he actually owned the 16x42s and neither model was included on his "glare prone" list in the second thread. In fact, neither model is mentioned at all in the "Glare Monsters" thread.

Here is his very first mention of noticing a glare problem, posted on June 7, 2024, over a year after his first Sig 16x42 purchase and nine months after his purchase of the HDX upgrade.

16x and steady views. Sig Zulu6 16x42

The 5 year guarantee is for the stabilizer. Andreas Interesting... W/out the electronics, they are still usable, but not as intended. What's typical for other IS brands?

www.birdforum.net

If he saw the glare during the months while he owned the binoculars, why didn't he mention it? Is his current version of events what he remembers noticing or what he now wishes he had noticed?

Digging up old posts is a waste of time. A lot of times you don't see the glare at first, and it takes more time with the binocular to realize it has problems because the glare is not there all the time. It is kind of like marriage. You don't see somebodies faults until you live with them for a while.

I guarantee you, the Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42 has veiling glare problems. If you don't believe me, try one. That would be the most logical and foolproof method of disproving me, if that is your intent.

Even Motereyman admits there is glare in the Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42 in post #17 above. How much more evidence do you need before you believe it?

"Where glare will be most evident is with backlit subjects, and I try to have the sun at my back or to one side whenever possible. When photographing subjects I plan my arrival for when the sun will provide frontal lighting of subjects and if this is not possible I do not take any pictures."

 

[CharleyBird]

Digging up old posts is a waste of time. A lot of times you don't see the glare at first, and it takes more time with the binocular to realize it has problems because the glare is not there all the time. It is kind of like marriage. You don't see somebodies faults until you live with them for a while.

I guarantee you, the Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42 has veiling glare problems. If you don't believe me, try one. That would be the most logical and foolproof method of disproving me, if that is your intent.

Even Motereyman admits there is glare in the Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42 in post #17 above. How much more evidence do you need before you believe it?

"Where glare will be most evident is with backlit subjects, and I try to have the sun at my back or to one side whenever possible. When photographing subjects I plan my arrival for when the sun will provide frontal lighting of subjects and if this is not possible I do not take any pictures."

Sep 18, 2023

I tried all the NL's and I had problems with glare in all of them unless I got the eye cups adjusted exactly right,

So Dennis, when you adjusted all the different NL binoculars exactly right you weren't troubled by glare.
Good for everyone to know.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Sep 18, 2023


So Dennis, when you adjusted all the different NL binoculars exactly right you weren't troubled by glare.
Good for everyone to know.

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.