Interesting John. Looking at your pic, the hinge, focus mech comes to mind. What're the chances Swaro would've spent the money to redesign this rather expensive component just for the smaller 2mm barrels? If the same as the 42, that suggests a little about rearward dimensions and maybe even space between forward. Think maybe?
Hi Tom,
At this point, as we have minimal information about the NL x32’s, I’ve necessarily been limited and qualified in my comments
Traditionally with comprehensive binocular lines (with x32, x42 and x50/56 offerings) from the 'Big 3', there’s been a concentration on keeping the x32’s as compact as possible e.g. especially with the Leica Ultravids and the Zeiss FL’s
So the x32’s typically have smaller prisms and eyepieces than their larger counterparts, while the x42 and x50/56 models may share components
When Swarovski commenced planning the NL line, among many other things, they presumedly would have worked out the mechanical and optical spec's for a full lineup e.g. x32, x42 and x50 (or perhaps x56). And as part of production efficiencies they would have decided on what the shared components would be
It seems that Swarovski
may have taken a different approach with the NL line in relation to the x32 and x42 commonalities - but we need more information before we can be certain e.g. units in hand
John
p.s. FWIW, the FRP forehead rest fits both the NL x32 and x42, indicating that the rear of the axle housing is the same size on both
See an interesting three part image of the FRP from a Chinese review of the NL x42, courtesy of range,
at:
https://www.birdforum.net/threads/a-very-comprehensive-review-of-nl1242-vs-el1250.396657/
p.p.s. My assumption that Swarovski would reasonably have planned for a full NL lineup, does not mean that it will necessarily eventuate
Who knows what considerations may come into play between initial planning and actual execution?