• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

NL Pure 8x32 vs 10x32 (1 Viewer)

Hello, my current kit consists of EL FP 8.5x42 and Kowa 883 spotting scope, and my wife and kids share a CL Companion 8x30.

I'm looking to purchase a lighter pair of bino's for myself, and considering the NL Pure 8x32 or 10x32 with a head rest. My dealer is recommending I get 8 power, but I was wondering if the head rest would help reduce any hand shakes at the higher 10x higher magnification? I don't have the ability to test out both pairs before placing an order, so looking for any and all advice.

What's the general consensus in the community and how do these two bino's compare in the field? Also would you anticipate Swaro will release an updated revision in the coming year, or are the first gen NL Pure's considered to be best in class? Thanks!
 

b_reynolds_ak

Well-known member
I have the 10x32 NL with the headrest. I generally prefer 8x, but for the particular use case for this bino, 10x is what I need.
The field of view is impressive, I think it is similar to what you already see with the 8.5’s. The headrest absolutely makes a noticeable difference in stability with the 10x32’s. When viewing distant objects, it’s like you have turned on image stability. The rest also helps you to fine tune the eyecups so that you can get the maximum amount of fov without pressing the eyecups into your sockets. The rest lives permanently on them, along with the winged eyecups.
I don’t generally need these binos in very low light, but they work fine for me during twilight, outperforming what their exit pupil size would lead you to believe.

Swaro does not come out with yearly updates to their top of the range bino’s.

AFC8B43F-39B0-4F1E-8157-A8CB8433AFE1.jpeg
 

Brummie

Well-known member
Difficult for anyone to answer that question for you because it’s very individual. Lots of people don’t feel they see any more detail with a 10x than a 8x handheld, because the extra magnification is canceled out by increased shakes. Some hunters frequently use binoculars single-handed, in which case 8x would be better.

Personally, I definitely can make out slightly more with a 10x - whether that’s because I’m good at holding them steady or because my eyes are too bad to see what others are seeing at 8x, I don’t know. In that case, it becomes a question of whether the increased resolution is worth the loss in FOV.

What’s your normal usage? Are you doing a lot of birding at close range in dense vegetation, or mostly viewing at distance? The 10x32 NL has the same FOV as the 8.5 EL. So do you think that will always be sufficient, or might there be times when you think an even wider FOV would be useful?

I find the NLs with the forehead rest very stable, allowing me to use a higher magnification than I otherwise would. I love my 12x42. Every other pair of 12x binoculars I’ve tried handheld would be 2nd choice for me compared to a similar 10x.

I’ve never tried the 32mm NLs, but I’m keen to give the 10x32 a spin. Assuming no issues with eye placement, those would be my first choice for anything other than closed forest.
 

Aquaplas

Well-known member
Austria
So, at first i bought the NL 8x42. And this is a extreme good Bino i think. When I like a bright Bino with big EP for maximum Viewing Comfort this was the best for me.
After a half year or so i come in a Shop and see the New 32mm NL Binos. Both, the 8x and the 10x. I compared them Side by Side with my 8x42NL. My impression was at the first look i will go with the 10x32 NL Pure. Why?
The 8x32mm NL has only 65° Subjektive FoV. The 10x32mm has 69°, this is the Same with my 8x42mm NL. The impression with 10 time mag and 69° on 132m is phenomenal! The Eyebox i mean the Eas of View is for a 3,2mm Pupil very stable, and with the Foreheadrest i can hold the 10x32NL very good.
The 8x32mm NL is a good glass too, but when it comes to Brightness and easy Viewing my NL 8x42 is better. Yes, also on Cloudy Days i see a Difference betweet the 8x42 and the 8x32mm NL.
So i bought the 10x32mm NL too, and now have 8x42 and 10x32NL.
Now i have my 10x32NL for about 2 Months or so, and I can tell you this is my new Favorit Bino. The Handhold with the Foreheadrest is perfekt! The Field is very Impressive. The Handling, the Focusser all thgether Alpha Style.
I think the 8x42NL and the 10x32NL are the both Binos who gets much better than the older EL Series.
Also in Low Light for a 3,2mm EP the NL works good.
My Conclusion is, I would go with the 10x32 NL.
 

Bentley03

Well-known member
United Kingdom
I have literally just posted my thoughts regarding the forehead rest on a different thread...

I'm a 10x32 NL Pure owner, wear glasses, and purchased the forehead rest when I bought the binoculars. I attached the forehead rest straight away and for a few weeks used the binoculars like that. I then started alternating between the NL Pure's and an 8x32 instrument (El's) and instantly found the EL's more comfortable to use and the NL's, with the forehead rest, unnatural and irritating to use. I started to hate using my NL's, so the forehead rest came off, I loved my NL's again, and I now question how much difference, in reality, the forehead rest really made. I don't perceive the view to be any shakier without it, positioning is, if anything, easier, and overall I find they handle better.

I have a preference for 10x in the environments I generally use binoculars, and the NL Pure 10x32's are, for me, the best fit and have the best view of any 10x30/32 I've ever tested or owned. BUT, that forehead rest definitely detracted from my enjoyment of them.

Just my 2p, I know the forehead rest has many fans out there, but it's not for me. 🙂
 

tenex

reality-based
I don't have the ability to test out both pairs before placing an order, so looking for any and all advice.
You don't say why you would be considering 10x instead of 8/8.5, so all I can say is that for birding, it's largely a matter of typical distance, including need for focus adjustment (also FOV, but with NL that's no longer an issue). In any case I've used 10x32s for 20+ years and highly recommend the format if your hands aren't noticeably unsteady. As the FHR isn't cheap or universally liked, I'd give the NL a serious try first without it.
 

kimmik

Well-known member
United States
After trying EL 8x32 (discontinued) and NL 8x32 side by side, I am of the conclusion that for 8x32 specifically, EL is better and NL is expensive, eyeside heavy, overall heavier, less robust, and only achieves marginally better FOV and a new curvy aesthetic.
 

GrampaTom

Well-known member
United States
After trying EL 8x32 (discontinued) and NL 8x32 side by side, I am of the conclusion that for 8x32 specifically, EL is better and NL is expensive, eyeside heavy, overall heavier, less robust, and only achieves marginally better FOV and a new curvy aesthetic.
Kimmiik, could you explain "less robust," please? That is, how did you come to that conclusion?
 
Last edited:

kimmik

Well-known member
United States
Hello, happy to explain as I’ve mulled about NL ever since its release. for background I am newish to swaro but not to optics (10 years with binos and telescopes). currently have EL NL and CL 7x21.

Short answer is, my gut says the probability of surviving a drop goes SLC > EL > NL.

in terms of little specific things you will notice the thinner armour on NL vs EL. I got into Swaro too late to be able to buy smaller SLCs.

Suppose swaro has done some magic to NL to counter this loss of armouring. Well they would have to achieve this while also reducing the metal content, since the % metal in NL is significantly reduced while fragile glass is increased. I dont feel the EL is so poorly constructed that there is room for shaving its metal content without losing toughness. Others may disagree.

Another observation is that SLC and EL started with 30 year warranty, whereas NL never had 30 year warranty, so the chassis design presumably did not have this as driving force.

Gijs, everything i said is verifiable fact other than the one opinion about toughness, which I’ve done my best to explain my reasoning here.

Kimmik
 

kimmik

Well-known member
United States
Gijs, while I respect your long experience in the matters, you have ignored my clearly laid out reasoning. This exposes your non objective biases.
 

PeterPS

MEMBER
Gijs, while I respect your long experience in the matters, you have ignored my clearly laid out reasoning. This exposes your non objective biases.
Biases are always subjective (sometimes implicit too) and we all suffer from them. So here is my biased opinion (similar to yours): if you own the SV/FP 8x32 replacing them with the NL 8x32 makes little sense.
 

pm42

Well-known member
Gijs, while I respect your long experience in the matters, you have ignored my clearly laid out reasoning. This exposes your non objective biases.
I think that when people talk about their "gut feeling" and try to demonstrate something such as the robustness of NL vs EL with 2 lines of "reasoning"' without any real world experience to backing them , they should not talk about bias.
Neither should they when they disagree with experts without being capable of doubting themselves.
 

PeterPS

MEMBER
I can see this is a closed forum where newest is bestest. Nothing worth my time now, bye all.
Don't give up yet. On any forum some people will agree with you and others won't. "There are as many opinions as there are men", and most of the time what we post on this forum is nothing but our opinion, so keep posting yours.
 

GrampaTom

Well-known member
United States
Don't give up yet. On any forum some people will agree with you and others won't. "There are as many opinions as there are men", and most of the time what we post on this forum is nothing but our opinion, so keep posting yours.
I agree, but to though, opinions are not substitutes for facts. Kimmik did expressly state his response to the "robust" question was opinion - "Short answer is, my gut says the probability of surviving a drop goes SLC > EL > NL....." If we have the ability to discuss an opinion and try to transition it towards fact isnt that a better outcome?
 

elkcub

Silicon Valley, California
United States
I can see this is a closed forum where newest is bestest. Nothing worth my time now, bye all.
Of course you're free to do as you wish. However, I fully agree with PeterPS (post #17) and encourage you to stay. You are quite correct, IMHO, that there is a predictable positive bias towards the newest products, particularly from Swarovski, Zeiss, and Leica. With the exception of Holger Merlitz, I've yet to see posts on these binocular forums that would pass muster for a journal publication. The most you can expect is an interesting discussion.

Ed
 
Last edited:

Thotmosis

Well-known member
Netherlands
Short answer is, my gut says the probability of surviving a drop goes SLC > EL > NL.
My gut feeling says that the Habicht GA will survive a drop better than the SLC, EL and NL.
so:
Habicht GA > SLC > EL > NL

This is just a non scientific opinion, based on the fact that i dropped my Habicht GA on a wooden floor once without damage;) But i could be completely wrong.

It would be an interesting fact finding experiment to drop the above mentioned binoculars from let’s say 2m on a wooden floor 10 times to see how they respond to that. Maybe somebody did this test already?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top