NL Pure vs EL - 10x42 (2 Viewers)

[BigJoeXD]

In the market for a new pair of 10x42’s and have been dreaming about a pair of Swaro’s for years. I can get a pretty good deal on the NL’s below MSRP, but it’s still a huge difference.

Does anyone think the cost difference between the two is justified? Trying to be budget minded and will have to sell my current hardly used bino’s.

Ergonomically speaking I actually like the way the EL’s handle better (large hands).

 

[SuperDuty]

In the market for a new pair of 10x42’s and have been dreaming about a pair of Swaro’s for years. I can get a pretty good deal on the NL’s below MSRP, but it’s still a huge difference.

Does anyone think the cost difference between the two is justified? Trying to be budget minded and will have to sell my current hardly used bino’s.

Ergonomically speaking I actually like the way the EL’s handle better (large hands).

I’ve seen both the 8X42 and 12X42 NL, but not the 10X42, I directly compared the 12X42 NL to the 10X42 EL SV, not really an apples to apples comparison, but somewhat informative. Both are superb in different ways, the focus action is definitely far smoother on the NL.

 

[BigJoeXD]

Did you find any other differences worthy of the extra investment?

 

[Paultricounty]

Did you find any other differences worthy of the extra investment?

I’ve used both extensively and feel the optics on both are as good as it’s gets. I also think the 10x42 NL’s are the best of the best. Optics are close but the 10x NL’s have a much wider FOV, and is as large as most 8x bins. The head rest even helps with stability , if you want that little extra. Both are incredible sharp and bright, with the NL being a little bit warmer or less neutral, they also have better panning qualities. I have the 8.5x42 EL, 8x42 Noctivids, 8x42 EDG and we’ll as few others, I’m not so much a 10x guy , but for a 10x the NL checks every box. Is an NL worth $800-$1000 more , probably not but to me they are, because they check all those boxes.

If I had to pick only two Binoculars, it would be the 8 x 42 Noctivids and the 10 x 42 NL’s.

Paul

 

[SuperDuty]

I’ve used both extensively and feel the optics on both are as good as it’s gets. I also think the 10x42 NL’s are the best of the best. Optics are close but the 10x NL’s have a much wider FOV, and is as large as most 8x bins. The head rest even helps with stability , if you want that little extra. Both are incredible sharp and bright, with the NL being a little bit warmer or less neutral, they also have better panning qualities. I have the 8.5x42 EL, 8x42 Noctivids, 8x42 EDG and we’ll as few others, I’m not so much a 10x guy , but for a 10x the NL checks every box. Is an NL worth $800-$1000 more , probably not but to me they are, because they check all those boxes.

If I had to pick only two Binoculars, it would be the 8 x 42 Noctivids and the 10 x 42 NL’s.

Paul

I don’t think much else could be added to what you have to say other than maybe the SV having a totally, or the appearance of a totally flat field all the way to the edge, your analogy seems correct to me, did you test the 10X42 NL against the 10X42 SV on worst case CA targets ?

 

[Paultricounty]

I don’t think much else could be added to what you have to say other than maybe the SV having a totally, or the appearance of a totally flat field all the way to the edge, your analogy seems correct to me, did you test the 10X42 NL against the 10X42 SV on worst case CA targets ?

The CA in both are about the same on axis, almost non existent. If you try to find it , you can. The slightly less flat field in the NL it’s barely noticeable because the FOV is so large and it is extremely good on the edges.

 

[dwever]

The NL’s do have smoother focus action, but that action can change over time as mine did. I hope Swarovski has addressed this. My primary glass are now EL’s. Although not quite the optical equal of a new pair of NL’s, the EL’s build quality seems worth considering against the NL’s.

 

[PatR]

I did compare both as well as their direct competitors from Leica and Zeiss. All are quite superb, all have pro's and con's but at the end of the day I bought the pair that suited me from an ergonomics, optics and feel good perspective.

I am delighted with my NL Pure 10x42's.

 

[SuperDuty]

The NL’s do have smoother focus action, but that action can change over time as mine did. I hope Swarovski has addressed this. My primary glass are now EL’s. Although not quite the optical equal of a new pair of NL’s, the EL’s build quality seems worth considering against the NL’s.

When you say the EL isn’t quite the optical equal of the NL, in what specific areas did you find them inferior ?

 

[BigJoeXD]

I’ve seen both the 8X42 and 12X42 NL, but not the 10X42, I directly compared the 12X42 NL to the 10X42 EL SV, not really an apples to apples comparison, but somewhat informative. Both are superb in different ways, the focus action is definitely far smoother on the NL.

When you say the EL isn’t quite the optical equal of the NL, in what specific areas did you find them inferior ?

I’d be interested to know this as well.

Also, separate but related note, does anyone wear regular prescription eyeglasses when using their bino’s, if so is there a pair you’ve found that gives you the same FOV as without eyeglasses on? With some other manufacturers I had to rule them out immediately because the FOV was reduced by a large percentage.

 

[SuperDuty]

I use glasses, eye relief is fine on the NL and EL with the eyecups down, specifically on the 12X42 and 8X42 NL, I’m assuming also on the 10X42 NL.

 

[Risveden]

I use glasses and there is no reduced field of view compare to non-glasses. I can use the binoculars without glasses but the image is very slightly better with glasses and ofcource less fiddly to use without the need to take of the glasses all the time. I have the NL 10x42 and my glasses are made by Zeiss.

 

[Elpha8888]

Id go with 8x Pure or the 12x Pure, had both and the 12x blew me away, hold it as steady as a 10x, sublime glass especially for astro.
Anyway the the Pures have what I'd call better transparency, I've had the 8.5 and 8 pure side by side, the 8.5 is brutally sharp, the 8x Pure glass just has that something extra. For me Pure ergos much better to grip the barrels, focuser better.
However..... You should seriously look at the SF as well, picked up the 8x and I'd take that over a Pure.

 

[Paultricounty]

Well if your going to look at others like SF , then you gotta look at the nicest, the Leica 8x42 Noctivids. Delicious warm and saturated image quality, and built like a Rolls Royce.

 

[Elpha8888]

Well if your going to look at others like SF , then you gotta look at the nicest, the Leica 8x42 Noctivids. Delicious warm and saturated image quality, and built like a Rolls Royce.

Absolutely, that kind of money you better be looking at all three top dogs!
Agreed that the Noctivid is the most well built but Zeiss absolutely nailed the ergonomics/weight balance and focuser and to me that's a big deal.
I would like to spend some time with the Noctivid one day, I've only used it for a short time and I'm sure I'd want one as well!

 

[claves_10]

but Zeiss absolutely nailed the ergonomics/weight balance and focuser

I agree though nothing is 100% perfect. Eye placement on my SF 10x42 just a bit, a tiny bit finicky. But what you said absolutely true, weight balance and focuser are perfect and a crispier image too over EL´s..... just a bit but noticeable.
Well as I said, nothing is 100%

 

[Elpha8888]

I agree though nothing is 100% perfect. Eye placement on my SF 10x42 just a bit, a tiny bit finicky. But what you said absolutely true, weight balance and focuser are perfect and a crispier image too over EL´s..... just a bit but noticeable.
Well as I said, nothing is 100%

I'm undecided between the 10x and 8x in the SF, I've only tried the 8x so far and it was magical, I'm hoping the 10x is as good. Yep no perfect binocular but close🙂

 

[Paultricounty]

Absolutely, that kind of money you better be looking at all three top dogs!
Agreed that the Noctivid is the most well built but Zeiss absolutely nailed the ergonomics/weight balance and focuser and to me that's a big deal.
I would like to spend some time with the Noctivid one day, I've only used it for a short time and I'm sure I'd want one as well!

I’m sure you would , seems like you you like the finer things. Definitely Zeiss did nail it with the SF, weight , balance , focuser and of course that image quality. The Nocs also mail it , but Leica take a different yet equally nice approach. They are not light, but very dense, they have a very well built silky feel to them and balance is also very nice. The focuser is also silky smooth, just like the SF, ergos not as good as SF, a more traditional type feel to them.

Back to the EL, NL OP. Either one will not leave you wanting for better image quality.

Paul

 

[Paultricounty]

I agree though nothing is 100% perfect. Eye placement on my SF 10x42 just a bit, a tiny bit finicky. But what you said absolutely true, weight balance and focuser are perfect and a crispier image too over EL´s..... just a bit but noticeable.
Well as I said, nothing is 100%

That is very individually subjective. I find the EL sharper than the SF, but the Zeiss is warmer, and the color sometimes can bring out some detail on some objects , but then lesser than EL’s on other objects, if that makes sense.

 

[tenex]

EL, NL... unless you must have that flat field, it's still worth considering the classic SLC (HD or WB) 10x42, now available new as "Kahles Helia S", or you can pick up a used SLC which Swaro will refurbish as needed (as I did), either way for around $1300-1400. A gorgeous binocular.