• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

NL Pure 8x32 and NL Pure 10x32! (2 Viewers)

SeldomPerched

Well-known member
I also prefer the hand feel and ergonomics of the 32mm EL SV to the 42mm versions.

And shaving off~7 ounces is quite a bit when you're talking about a ~29-30oz starting point. To each their own, but I notice a major difference carrying around a 23oz binocular vs a 30oz binocular. That's a >20% weight savings. And by the same token "only" 10mm smaller in diameter means a >20% decrease in circumference. Again, it feels more substantial than it sounds (to me at least).
I resisted posting something similar but reading this I will chime in to say this is my feeling too. My EL SV or rather FP 8x32 feels dinky compared with the 42 models in the EL line and for me at least that is more due to the slimmer barrels than anything to do with the length. I'd say it is a perfect hold for me whereas bigger ELs feel front heavy. In summary the EL 32 feels significantly more compact than the next size up and I wonder if that isn't part of its sales appeal.

Added just afterwards:.. and I also wonder if the lower diameter won't make the NL 32 versions feel similarly more compact than the NL 42s despite the small length difference when just examining a photo or specs on paper.
 

tenex

reality-based
...I would be interested to read your thoughts on the differences between the EL 8x32 Field Pro en NL Pure 8x32, not so much on paper, more in the field....
Greetings and welcome, SSS. Perhaps you could specify what differences would concern or interest you most?

Ok the next question is, what color did you order?
At this price level, I've often wondered why there isn't more choice of color. Such personalization seems an obvious lure. Both Leica and Zeiss used to offer green as well as black, but no longer (except for Noctivid, and some little pocket glasses). In rubber at least, I'm not particularly fond of black.
 

eitanaltman

Well-known member
If you’re a gram counter you’ll definitely notice the difference...
No doubt, but if you’re a gram counter I would argue this isn’t the product segment for you. As I noted above virtually all of the premium 32mm binoculars are in the 600-650g range. And the 42mm NL is 50-100g heavier than the other premium 42s.

The gram counter is looking at the UV 8x32, CL 8x30 or 8x25, MHG 8x30, VP 8x25, etc.
 
Greetings and welcome, SSS. Perhaps you could specify what differences would concern or interest you most?


At this price level, I've often wondered why there isn't more choice of color. Such personalization seems an obvious lure. Both Leica and Zeiss used to offer green as well as black, but no longer (except for Noctivid, and some little pocket glasses). In rubber at least, I'm not particularly fond of black.
Basically it comes down to personal preference I think, but I was wondering if the price difference is justified. Until the Pure was released, the EL was regarded as one of the best. Looking at this conversation over the larger format Pure, 8x42 and 10x42, it would seem that there is a marked difference in quality with the new model. It looks like it is going to be a hands on decision in the shop.
 

GrampaTom

Well-known member
United States
Somethin's happenin here... what it is, aint exactly clear....

Till we have them, all this is kinda fun conjecture. More questions than answers. I sense some opinions are a bit more closely held, defended, but still. All this talk about size, weight, ergos only goes so far. I know my own reaction to the NL42 in hand, defied my expectation and the paper specs. Not only is it not the heaviest alpha 42, (Noctivid). its effectively no heavier than the EL42. But it sure "feels" lighter. I'm not the only one to say this. But I stray.

What about optical quality? That's a biggie, maybe biggest. Only a few know....

No ones talking about price. While it could be argued folks buying $2000 to $3000. binos are not too worried about price, still value (or a sense of it), operates, if in the background for many. Surely some inferred because the NL42 cost almost a thousand bucks more than the EL, that it must be better, (not just different). Is there a "price effect" subconsciously effecting our experiences with these? It cost more, it MUST be better? $3000. has winnowed takers surely. Then there is the backlash over the head rest having to be purchased.

Swaro has had to notice.

But have you noticed? (based on current online US retailer prices)
EL842 $2169.
EL832 $1999.
NL842 $2969.
NL832 $2499. (yep I found one, will it hold?)
The EL32 costs $170./7.8% less than the EL42. The NL32 costs $470./16% less than the NL42. Wonder why.
NL 42s not making sales projections? Price too high? Not recouping development cost?
NL 32s hurried to market at a lower price to try and stimulate total NL project sales revenue?
How many NL32s will want a headrest?
Will we say 6-8 ounces matters, while secretly wanting to save almost $500? I apologize if thats too snarky.
 

paddy7

Well-known member
I wonder what the rationale is for producing binoculars, presumably designed for birding or hunting, in garish colours like orange? Ok, some folks may be operating in deserts or along beaches where these might blend in a little, but when birders take such care over clothing that allows them to operate as close to unnoticeable as possible, but then stand there holding orange binoculars?
I ran into a photographer recently, with a lens i could have slept in, all covered in camo webbing, with a camo backpack - and a red waterproof jacket on....i guess he could only think as far as the last bend in the road....
 

Nethero

Well-known member
I wonder what the rationale is for producing binoculars, presumably designed for birding or hunting, in garish colours like orange? Ok, some folks may be operating in deserts or along beaches where these might blend in a little, but when birders take such care over clothing that allows them to operate as close to unnoticeable as possible, but then stand there holding orange binoculars?
I ran into a photographer recently, with a lens i could have slept in, all covered in camo webbing, with a camo backpack - and a red waterproof jacket on....i guess he could only think as far as the last bend in the road....
Originally the EL O-Range version of the EL-Range was aimed at and for hunting. They put a rangefinding binocular designed for hunting in the universal hunting color- hunter orange.

When not in camouflage to blend in, one wants to stand out for safety. If nothing else, the orange will make it so you won’t lose your $3,000 binoculars!

That’s what I have been truly baffled by the reaction from so many here. People love the orange! When the word hunting alone so often is regarded as a curse word on this forum and people spell it as h****** or say “the H word” as if it were a curse.

Let alone it’s original targeted audience, I would have thought something so eye catching would have presented a problem when trying to view potentially rare and flighty species. But again, if nothing else, regardless of its targeted audience, it might help one not lose such an expensive optic because it stands out so well from the environment.
 

Gijs van Ginkel

Well-known member
Well, I hope that you can keep a secret, but the orange color was among other chosen for the following reasons:
-1- The Dutch national color is orange and Swarovski wanted to honor the many binocular sales in that country and especially in House of Outdoor in the middle of the country.
-2- Birders and hunters increasingly forgot where they had left their green binoculars in the green environment where they were situated for observations and orange can be detected more easily in the green ocean of grass and trees.
-3- After a long and difficult discussion the Swarovski design team decided to honor the Dutch national soccer team as an encouragement for winning the world cup and as sign of gratitude for its performances.
-4- To honor the Dutch Royal family for its endurance to cope with the highly demanding population
There were also some other arguments, but I am not allowed to tell them.
Gijs van Ginkel
 

paddy7

Well-known member
Well, I hope that you can keep a secret, but the orange color was among other chosen for the following reasons:
-1- The Dutch national color is orange and Swarovski wanted to honor the many binocular sales in that country and especially in House of Outdoor in the middle of the country.
-2- Birders and hunters increasingly forgot where they had left their green binoculars in the green environment where they were situated for observations and orange can be detected more easily in the green ocean of grass and trees.
-3- After a long and difficult discussion the Swarovski design team decided to honor the Dutch national soccer team as an encouragement for winning the world cup and as sign of gratitude for its performances.
-4- To honor the Dutch Royal family for its endurance to cope with the highly demanding population
There were also some other arguments, but I am not allowed to tell them.
Gijs van Ginkel
Thanks Gijs! That all sounds more than credible, and a great honour on your Royal Family, football team and retail emporium from Austria's finest manufacturer of binoculars.
Of course, anyone who forgets where they've left a £2,500 set of binoculars probably shouldn't have bought them in the first place.:)
 

jremmons

Wildlife Biologist
I wonder what the rationale is for producing binoculars, presumably designed for birding or hunting, in garish colours like orange? Ok, some folks may be operating in deserts or along beaches where these might blend in a little, but when birders take such care over clothing that allows them to operate as close to unnoticeable as possible, but then stand there holding orange binoculars?
I ran into a photographer recently, with a lens i could have slept in, all covered in camo webbing, with a camo backpack - and a red waterproof jacket on....i guess he could only think as far as the last bend in the road.
Personally, if I bought the NL 32, it'd be in the burnt orange color. As I do a lot of backcountry work and tend to lay my stuff down as I'm maneuvering about, I occasionally have to remember where I sat my gear. My knives, tools, gloves, phone case, hats, etc. are often the blaze orange color as a result.
 

Maljunulo

Well-known member
It is alleged that there are, among the birding community, some for whom their binoculars are a fashion accessory, a bit of personal jewelry, or a demonstration of affluence.

I, personally, have never met such a shallow individual, but I bird alone.

The orange would seem to be especially suited for those folks, as it seems to be destined to be noticed at all times and in all places.
 

ticl2184

Well-known member
Well, I hope that you can keep a secret, but the orange color was among other chosen for the following reasons:
-1- The Dutch national color is orange and Swarovski wanted to honor the many binocular sales in that country and especially in House of Outdoor in the middle of the country.
-2- Birders and hunters increasingly forgot where they had left their green binoculars in the green environment where they were situated for observations and orange can be detected more easily in the green ocean of grass and trees.
-3- After a long and difficult discussion the Swarovski design team decided to honor the Dutch national soccer team as an encouragement for winning the world cup and as sign of gratitude for its performances.
-4- To honor the Dutch Royal family for its endurance to cope with the highly demanding population
There were also some other arguments, but I am not allowed to tell them.
Gijs van Ginkel
Tell All....
 

PYRTLE

Old Berkshire Boy
I wonder what the rationale is for producing binoculars, presumably designed for birding or hunting, in garish colours like orange?
Though the 42mm NL Pure doesn't offer the burnt orange option, yet this larger size and x 12 is likely to be interesting to the stalking community.

I dont think it's due to excess stocks of brighter rubber armouring!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top