NL Pure 8x32 or 10x32 or ... (9 Viewers)

[Limpias]

Hello everybody,

I am kind of in a thought process, so I thought as a regular reader but no poster I will give the swarm a try with a maybe already quite often asked question - pardon me!

I am a quite satisfied owner of a current Zeiss SF Victory 8 x 42 and a Victory Pocket 8 x 25.

Usually during my spare time I walk my dog in nature with my camera around my neck (M11 for those who are interested - so I am keen on keeping things small and high quality), taking nice pictures with my dog in some scenic spot - all in a while watching wildlife (which is spare around my area, but never mind) with my binos.

What I found out in the 4 years I am using these two bins is the following:

Normally, for walking the dog, the 8x42 is too big of a bino for carrying around (which usually I take it on vacation to the beach for birdwatching and the such, and also for some astronomy stuff - watching planets and so on), so the 8x25 is my daily carry together with my camera usually. But compared to the 8x42 the 8x25 is a little harder to use. The way to look through - however still high quality and in daylight super enough for everything - is harder and needs some work.

So I thought, I need something in between these two glasses - and bought NL Pure 10 x 32. Normally, I think its reasonably to stay with 8x due to shake and exit pupil - however what tempted me for the 10x was that I get 132 Meters view, which is the same as some of the best 8x bins, with 69° subjective field of view. And, due to the outstanding technology of the NL Pures with an ultra sharp and bright view. Furthermore since I did not have a 10x I thought it is worthwhile to give it a shot.

So, received the Swaro today and tried it in the evening. My first experience with the 10x is wonderful as expected - sharp, bright and cool look. However, compared to the SF 8x42 - no real big difference. In fact, apart from the very edges I usually never look, the SF gives the apparent same field of view, brightness and immerse looking experience - however with a different form factor and weight feeling.

So I am really questioning at the moment, if the 10x32 was a good idea to purchase. I will give it some more days to try it out more - but was wondering if some of you had similar experiences with the 10x32 - which is a wonderful instrument bye the way.

Any thoughts and insights from you?

Thanks a lot for every hint - will keep you updated on the progress...

Best

Andreas

 

[Maljunulo]

Had you asked before you bought, I would have told you that you may not see as big a difference as you think you will.

 

[Gzoladz74]

Hello everybody,

I am kind of in a thought process, so I thought as a regular reader but no poster I will give the swarm a try with a maybe already quite often asked question - pardon me!

I am a quite satisfied owner of a current Zeiss SF Victory 8 x 42 and a Victory Pocket 8 x 25.

Usually during my spare time I walk my dog in nature with my camera around my neck (M11 for those who are interested - so I am keen on keeping things small and high quality), taking nice pictures with my dog in some scenic spot - all in a while watching wildlife (which is spare around my area, but never mind) with my binos.

What I found out in the 4 years I am using these two bins is the following:

Normally, for walking the dog, the 8x42 is too big of a bino for carrying around (which usually I take it on vacation to the beach for birdwatching and the such, and also for some astronomy stuff - watching planets and so on), so the 8x25 is my daily carry together with my camera usually. But compared to the 8x42 the 8x25 is a little harder to use. The way to look through - however still high quality and in daylight super enough for everything - is harder and needs some work.

So I thought, I need something in between these two glasses - and bought NL Pure 10 x 32. Normally, I think its reasonably to stay with 8x due to shake and exit pupil - however what tempted me for the 10x was that I get 132 Meters view, which is the same as some of the best 8x bins, with 69° subjective field of view. And, due to the outstanding technology of the NL Pures with an ultra sharp and bright view. Furthermore since I did not have a 10x I thought it is worthwhile to give it a shot.

So, received the Swaro today and tried it in the evening. My first experience with the 10x is wonderful as expected - sharp, bright and cool look. However, compared to the SF 8x42 - no real big difference. In fact, apart from the very edges I usually never look, the SF gives the apparent same field of view, brightness and immerse looking experience - however with a different form factor and weight feeling.

So I am really questioning at the moment, if the 10x32 was a good idea to purchase. I will give it some more days to try it out more - but was wondering if some of you had similar experiences with the 10x32 - which is a wonderful instrument bye the way.

Any thoughts and insights from you?

Thanks a lot for every hint - will keep you updated on the progress...

Best

Andreas

Almost the same as my case...I also own an SF 8x42 for proper birding outings and a Pocket 8x25 to take to walks in the park and when I need to trave light.

It is all about compromises...the 8x25 is (as expected!) not the same as the 8x42's but still very, very good and perfectly usable. So when I need to take something small or for a walk around they are perfect (even when my SF was being services, I took my Zeiss 8x25 to serious birdwatching outings rather than my Opticron 8x42 as they perform better).

For fun, I considered an 8x32 a few times but I keep arriving to the same conclusion...if I don't need a small pair, I may as well take my 8x42 (best for viewing than the 8x32). If I need something small, I take my 8x25 (best for portability 8x32). So I don't know in what situation I will rather take an 8x32 than either the 8x42 or the 8x25.

That is thinking about it logically, but sometimes it is not the thought process we follow with these purchases!

 

[Limpias]

Thanks for your hints so far. So this morning, I took the VP 8x25 and the 10x32 for a walk and did a little comparison.

What I am really surprised about is how well the 8x25 holds up against the 10x32! Yes, magnification is a little more on the NL, but at the end, its basically the same view as the VP.

Afterwards coming home, I also took a look through the 8x42… and I remembered why I bought it. Somehow, this size is sort of the sweet spot for ease of viewing, depth of field (sharpness), brightness and so forth…

So as reqested, I might just stick with what I got and take the 8x25 as a light company and the 8x42 for more purposeful viewing…

 

[NatureLover123]

Thanks for your hints so far. So this morning, I took the VP 8x25 and the 10x32 for a walk and did a little comparison.

What I am really surprised about is how well the 8x25 holds up against the 10x32! Yes, magnification is a little more on the NL, but at the end, its basically the same view as the VP.

Afterwards coming home, I also took a look through the 8x42… and I remembered why I bought it. Somehow, this size is sort of the sweet spot for ease of viewing, depth of field (sharpness), brightness and so forth…

So as reqested, I might just stick with what I got and take the 8x25 as a light company and the 8x42 for more purposeful viewing…

Yes, I have also a VP 8x25, I like it. It can compete with my SF 10x binos at 42 and 32, but my 10s I like so much because of their immersive detailed view.

If I use the 8x I feel often the need for more power and detail, which I cannot compensate. But with my 10s I can compensate the shake, if there is some shake at all. A 32 bino is a good compromise between a pocket and a full size.

 

[Dennis Mau]

You have a nice pocket binocular the VP 8x25 and a nice all around full size binocular the SF 8x42. The NL 10x32 is not going to replace your VP 8x25 because it is not pocketable, and it is much bulkier and heavier. There is nothing wrong with adding a 10x for longer distances and seeing more detail. You like Zeiss binoculars obviously, and you like a big FOV, so I would add either a Zeiss SF 10x32 because of the huge 7.6 degree FOV or a Zeiss SF 10x42. I would probably go with the SF 10x42 for easier eye placement and better low light performance. A 10x32 can get pretty finicky for eye placement because of the small EP, and it is not good in low light. The SF 10x42 will be brighter even in daylight because your eyes dilate to 4mm in daylight.

 

[Gzoladz74]

My non-logical contribution is...there is only one life, high end binocs are for life and they cost (in most cases) zero maintenance.

So if you can afford it, go for it and enjoy it. Treat yourself. Not everything needs a rationale use case to justify a purchase decision (pls, pls, I hope my wife does not read this).

 

[Swedpat]

Hello everybody,

I am kind of in a thought process, so I thought as a regular reader but no poster I will give the swarm a try with a maybe already quite often asked question - pardon me!

I am a quite satisfied owner of a current Zeiss SF Victory 8 x 42 and a Victory Pocket 8 x 25.

Usually during my spare time I walk my dog in nature with my camera around my neck (M11 for those who are interested - so I am keen on keeping things small and high quality), taking nice pictures with my dog in some scenic spot - all in a while watching wildlife (which is spare around my area, but never mind) with my binos.

What I found out in the 4 years I am using these two bins is the following:

Normally, for walking the dog, the 8x42 is too big of a bino for carrying around (which usually I take it on vacation to the beach for birdwatching and the such, and also for some astronomy stuff - watching planets and so on), so the 8x25 is my daily carry together with my camera usually. But compared to the 8x42 the 8x25 is a little harder to use. The way to look through - however still high quality and in daylight super enough for everything - is harder and needs some work.

So I thought, I need something in between these two glasses - and bought NL Pure 10 x 32. Normally, I think its reasonably to stay with 8x due to shake and exit pupil - however what tempted me for the 10x was that I get 132 Meters view, which is the same as some of the best 8x bins, with 69° subjective field of view. And, due to the outstanding technology of the NL Pures with an ultra sharp and bright view. Furthermore since I did not have a 10x I thought it is worthwhile to give it a shot.

So, received the Swaro today and tried it in the evening. My first experience with the 10x is wonderful as expected - sharp, bright and cool look. However, compared to the SF 8x42 - no real big difference. In fact, apart from the very edges I usually never look, the SF gives the apparent same field of view, brightness and immerse looking experience - however with a different form factor and weight feeling.

So I am really questioning at the moment, if the 10x32 was a good idea to purchase. I will give it some more days to try it out more - but was wondering if some of you had similar experiences with the 10x32 - which is a wonderful instrument bye the way.

Any thoughts and insights from you?

Thanks a lot for every hint - will keep you updated on the progress...

Best

Andreas

Hi Andreas,

Some prefer 10x and mean that it makes a worthwhile difference. Theoretically, it gives 25% higher resolution than 8X. In practice, the increased useful resolution is often a little lower. This if the eyes cannot compensate for the increased magnitude of the handshakings.

Have you tried 10x32 with the head rest? This may be the way to really make use of the resolution by 10x.
Not everyone agrees with the advantage of it, but I belong to those who do it.

 

[SanderBird82]

You have a nice pocket binocular the VP 8x25 and a nice all around full size binocular the SF 8x42. The NL 10x32 is not going to replace your VP 8x25 because it is not pocketable, and it is much bulkier and heavier. There is nothing wrong with adding a 10x for longer distances and seeing more detail. You like Zeiss binoculars obviously, and you like a big FOV, so I would add either a Zeiss SF 10x32 because of the huge 7.6 degree FOV or a Zeiss SF 10x42. I would probably go with the SF 10x42 for easier eye placement and better low light performance. A 10x32 can get pretty finicky for eye placement because of the small EP, and it is not good in low light. The SF 10x42 will be brighter even in daylight because your eyes dilate to 4mm in daylight.

But is it worth to have a SF 8x42 and a SF 10x42? For the money? I didnt see that much difference

 

[Dennis Mau]

But is it worth to have a SF 8x42 and a SF 10x42? For the money? I didnt see that much difference

Most birders see a difference in 8x and 10x. 10x has 25% greater resolution than 8x and is helpful in seeing more detail at greater distances. I am surprised you didn't see that much difference because birds are going to appear much bigger, and you should see more detail. Try reading a sign or a license plate with both 8x and 10x. It should be easier to read it with 10x if you can hold your binocular fairly steady.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

So, received the Swaro today and tried it in the evening. My first experience with the 10x is wonderful as expected - sharp, bright and cool look. However, compared to the SF 8x42 - no real big difference. In fact, apart from the very edges I usually never look, the SF gives the apparent same field of view, brightness and immerse looking experience - however with a different form factor and weight feeling.

Did you see better details with the 10x against your 8x?

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

A 10x32 can get pretty finicky for eye placement because of the small EP, and it is not good in low light.

Was it with your eyes on the 10x32?

 

[SanderBird82]

Most birders see a difference in 8x and 10x. 10x has 25% greater resolution than 8x and is helpful in seeing more detail at greater distances. I am surprised you didn't see that much difference because birds are going to appear much bigger, and you should see more detail. Try reading a sign or a license plate with both 8x and 10x. It should be easier to read it with 10x if you can hold your binocular fairly steady.

I saw a bit difference.
But is that worth paying another 2000 plus dollars for that little bit difference? I dont think so.

 

[Dennis Mau]

I saw a bit difference.
But is that worth paying another 2000 plus dollars for that little bit difference? I dont think so.

If you want a pair of 10x binoculars to use from time to time when you want a little more reach than your 8x42 SF's provide, try a pair of Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42's. They are about 95% of the optics of the SF's for 1/4 of the price at about $600. Then you don't have so much invested in a binocular you don't use all the time.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Was it with your eyes on the 10x32?

No, it wasn't my eyes. A 10x32 has a small EP of only 3.2mm, so it is going to have more difficult eye placement than a 10x42 or 8x42 that have a 4mm and 5mm EP, and it won't be as bright in low light or even in the daytime because your eyes dilate to at least 4mm in daylight. It is true that it depends on the ER and eye cup length of the 10x32 binocular and the depth and shape of your eye sockets in how well the binocular will work for you personally. Some 10x32's might work very well for you, while others will be more finicky. In general, though, smaller EP's mean less light and more finicky eye placement.

 

[Swedpat]

No, it wasn't my eyes. A 10x32 has a small EP of only 3.2mm, so it is going to have more difficult eye placement than a 10x42 or 8x42 that have a 4mm and 5mm EP, and it won't be as bright in low light or even in the daytime because your eyes dilate to at least 4mm in daylight. It is true that it depends on the ER and eye cup length of the 10x32 binocular and the depth and shape of your eye sockets in how well the binocular will work for you personally. Some 10x32's might work very well for you, while others will be more finicky. In general, though, smaller EP's mean less light and more finicky eye placement.

In daylight the eyepupils actually can constract to 2,5mm or less so you don't see a brightness difference between 10x32 and 8x42 in full daylight.

 

[claves_10]

In daylight the eyepupils actually can constract to 2,5mm or less so you don't see a brightness difference between 10x32 and 8x42 in full daylight.

Swedpat .... is is quite different to have a 3.2mm exit pupil or a 4.2mm or o 5.25 Bino regardless you own eye-pupils are at 2.5mm in a sunny day. In theory seems absolutely right and sound what you say but reality goes other way. NOT a brightness difference but in a easier view field, YES.

 

[Dennis Mau]

In daylight the eyepupils actually can constract to 2,5mm or less so you don't see a brightness difference between 10x32 and 8x42 in full daylight.

No, 2mm is the minimum they constrict to, but some peoples can constrict to 4mm in daylight. It varies from person to person. I know mine only constrict to 4mm because a 8x42 binocular is definitely brighter than a 10x32 even in daylight.

• Normal Pupil Size Range:
  A normal pupil size ranges from about 2 to 8 millimeters in diameter, depending on the lighting conditions. In bright light, pupils typically constrict to 2-4 mm, while in dim light, they can dilate to 4-8 mm.
• People vary in how much their pupils dilate, and this variation can be influenced by factors like age, gender, emotions, and underlying health conditions.
  
  

 

[Dennis Mau]

Swedpat .... is is quite different to have a 3.2mm exit pupil or a 4.2mm or o 5.25 Bino regardless you own eye-pupils are at 2.5mm in a sunny day. In theory seems absolutely right and sound what you say but reality goes other way. NOT a brightness difference but in a easier view field, YES.

Bigger EPs are not only usually brighter, eye placement is easier, and you can move your eye around more to see the FOV because the bigger EP gives you more room, which most people describe as an easier view. You have to keep your eyes more aligned with the ocular with smaller EPs because of the narrower beam of light exiting from the ocular. Eye placement is more critical with a 10x32 than a 8x42.

 

[claves_10]

Bigger EPs are not only usually brighter, eye placement is easier, and you can move your eye around more to see the FOV because the bigger EP gives you more room, which most people describe as an easier view. You have to keep your eyes more aligned with the ocular with smaller EPs because of the narrower beam of light exiting from the ocular. Eye placement is more critical with a 10x32 than a 8x42.

That is what I meant but you said it more clear and thanks for doing so.