Typically, most Swaro dealers reduce the list price by about 10 percent. So you might be looking at $2499 for the 8 x 32 NL.. So the difference between the NL and SF is roughly $250.Roughly $525 US more than the 8X32 SF.
I paid $2249.
Typically, most Swaro dealers reduce the list price by about 10 percent. So you might be looking at $2499 for the 8 x 32 NL.. So the difference between the NL and SF is roughly $250.Roughly $525 US more than the 8X32 SF.
I paid $2249.
I wish I had known that when I bought my EL SV 10X42.Typically, most Swaro dealers reduce the list price by about 10 percent. So you might be looking at $2499 for the 8 x 32 NL.. So the difference between the NL and SF is roughly $250.
With due respect all around, I doubt there is a human being alive who can see the difference between 91% and 92% assuming similar spectral distribution.(I wonder why Jan also says "less bright" despite 92 vs 91% transmission... must be that Dutch weather)
There may still be someone here who doesn't know this, but it's not me. Jan said NL32 seemed "less bright", and I wondered why because not only is the claimed transmission not significantly less, it's 1% more. (I did not suggest that difference should be visible either, merely not "less bright".)With due respect all around, I doubt there is a human being alive who can see the difference between 91% and 92% assuming similar spectral distribution.
Jan said that it was a dull day. Would a smaller EP with the 32 Nl make it seem less bright under those conditions than with the 42Nl?Yes, I'm not sure how much a <7oz difference really matters, and without much reduction in size. Back to daydreaming about NL 42, and trying to imagine which...
There may still be someone here who doesn't know this, but it's not me. Jan said NL32 seemed "less bright", and I wondered why because not only is the claimed transmission not significantly less, it's 1% more. (I did not suggest that difference should be visible either, merely not "less bright".)
A 32 just gathers less light than 42 so there's less to transmit...it will usually be less bright than higher diametersJan said that it was a dull day. Would a smaller EP with the 32 Nl make it seem less bright under those conditions than with the 42Nl?
I'm sure the view will be as wonderful as the x42. Disappointing that it's larger than the 7x42 UV though. Fingers crossed a new Noctovid will be more pocket sizeWell, this is exciting, and yet NL 32... is even bigger than EL 32, barely smaller than NL 42 and with less FOV? It's all about the weight then. I've been a 32mm (Leica!) guy for a long time, but with NL I'd take the 42 in a heartbeat (though I'm managing to resist so far).
(I wonder why Jan also says "less bright" despite 92 vs 91% transmission... must be that Dutch weather)
Leica UV 7x42 | Leica UV 8x32 | Swaro NL 8x32 | | Swaro NL 8x42 |
141 | 116 | 144 | length | 158 |
120 | 116 | 130 | width | 131 |
68 | 56 | 65 | height | 71 |
| | | | |
770 | 535 | 640 | weight | 840 |
Comparing the 42 with the 32, the image in the NLPure 32 is just like as it is in the NL42. Black is deep black, full of contrast and differences in shape popping up, but the 32 has just that little less brightness which the 42 gives. Something logic when ones compares the 42 with a 32.Well, this is exciting, and yet NL 32... is even bigger than EL 32, barely smaller than NL 42 and with less FOV? It's all about the weight then. I've been a 32mm (Leica!) guy for a long time, but with NL I'd take the 42 in a heartbeat (though I'm managing to resist so far).
(I wonder why Jan also says "less bright" despite 92 vs 91% transmission... must be that Dutch weather)
The Zeiss Victory SF 42 and also the NL pure 8x42 suffer somewhat from a sort of globe effect, the angular magnification drops from the center to the outermost part of the image (a change from pincushion to straight lines or even barrel distorsion). I would be interested how the NL 32 mm behave in this respectI'll have them in my hands this afternoon.
Any questions/remarks?
Jan
Indeed. I have the SF 8x32 and I hardly use it because it is so big. I prefer carry more weight and enjoy a 8x42 that is not really bigger.shame about the weight creep -- for me 8x32 is attractive as something light to take hiking etc and the EL 8x32 already was on the higher end of weights compared with competitors at that format
Hi Thomas,The Zeiss Victory SF 42 and also the NL pure 8x42 suffer somewhat from a sort of globe effect, the angular magnification drops from the center to the outermost part of the image (a change from pincushion to straight lines or even barrel distorsion). I would be interested how the NL 32 mm behave in this respect
Thomas
2nd videoYouTube video of NL 32 (see grip)