• 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.

Prevent glare in the Swarovski NL Pure ?? (1 Viewer)

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
Not to bore you guys with a long story so I will cut it short: after being unlucky with my Leica 7x42 UVHD+ purchase (poor Leica service, did not fix the problem) I ended up going home with a Swaro NL 8x32 Pure in burnt Orange instead.

I was considering the Zeiss SF 8x32 but I got me some kidney beans when viewing with glasses and when adjusting the oculars I found them a bit less engaging than the Leica 7x42 and the Swarovskis just felt so much better than the SF for me and my glasses. Especially for close up viewing the Swaros are superb for me.

Binos are fantastic for my eyes, I do wear glasses and I am picky with binos in this regard. Not 100% sold on the oval grip, but I am getting used to it and the overall ergonomics are pretty sweet. Focuser, sharpness across the range and image is all I need and wish for.

That glare though. It is very much an issue, for me. When people claim "there is none" I can't help but shake my head. It does not help the discussion. I am very happy to see some well experienced members share their view on cause, effect and possible remedies. The Swaro glare issue is not a binary yes/no question. In my case the glare is present and as real as can be.

Compared to quite a few other top tier 8x32's, in the same spot, same type of light the Swaro NL 8x32 are the worst and unfortunately for me: it is a place from where I do most of my everyday viewing: my deck.

I don't blame Swarovski for this, entirely. My personal conclusion is that my combination of glasses, eye placement and general poor neck posture all help contribute to excessive glare with the NL.

I can do a little better by raising the back of my head a few degrees and looking at a, perhaps, straighter line through the binos. Since I live on a hill side/slope there is only so much I can do about the "everyday" situation and straightening up my posture is not always working and is more fatiguing than using other binoculars which do better enough to allow me to keep my five-decades-in-development-posture.

If I press my glasses closer to my face it does a little better still, but at the cost of being more uncomfortable in use. Raising/lowering the binos sometimes help out with the glare but at the cost of general viewing comfort: going from "fantastic" to "slightly strained".

Without glasses, things are much improved and the Swaros are much more resilient to washing out and by shielding the binos with a free hand I can often eliminate glare entirely though it does require more effort with the NL's compared to several other binos I have and have used, in the same spot. Without glasses I would place my NL in the middle of the pack, and it is a great pack. Certainly good enough!
With glasses three or four of the contenders easily beat the Swarovski for stray light handling and glare. None of them beat the Swarovski in overall viewing comfort, except for perhaps the Leica 7x42 which is different, not better, but equally comfortable for my eyes.

Eye relief is almost "excessive" in the Swaros for me and my best setting is two and a fraction stops out on the back oculars - and I am usually bottomed out with all my other binoculars.

Since my glasses work great for me but are progressive I am very reluctant to taking them off since I need a little adjustment period going on/off at times, especially with binoculars. However with the Swarovski NL I can take my glasses off and immediately feel "at home" with viewing comfort, which was a surprise for me. There are not that many other pairs I have tried that does so well with and without glasses for me.

Previous NL's I have tried at home have been glare monsters in my book and considering how much better other binos have worked for me in a side by side comparison I am surprised that I ended up with a pair of NL 8x32's and that they work so "well", after all.

They are not really a "compact pair" but it is like an amalgamation of all that was great with my previous pairs, optically, ergonomically, mechanically and with one of the best focusers I have ever felt; works great with gloves, with and without glasses - but - at the expense of being glare prone, sometimes to the point of rendering a useless image. At that point I do have to say that there are perhaps only one or two binoculars I have ever had that will perform much better: the Leica Trinovid/Retrovid 7x35 and the Meopta Meostar 8x32. My old all-time favourites the Zeiss FL 8x32 perform just as bad as the Swarovski NL - which is a shocker considering the FL has always been my benchmark binocular for overall performance in all conditions... ...goes to prove that the "best" will vary over time and with different eye glass.

To end on a positive note: I like the burnt orange color: I never liked the Swarovski green hue. With the exception of the Leica 7x42 which is still fresh in memory I don't pine for any of my previous binos when I have the Swaro. It works great as my only low magnification binocular, to the point I almost never use the 10x anymore.

For my general viewing of the bird feeders the Swarovski NL 8x32 are truly amazing and not beaten by any other pair I have tried.
 
Last edited:

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
Ah, makes perfect sense now. :)
At times the glare is terrible. Still, the sum of all parts makes for a fantastic binocular which makes it easy to forgive the few instances it washes out for me.

To be perfectly honest the Leica Ultravid 7x42 was a near perfect match for my wants and wishes. But the one let down, the focuser, could not be remedied by Leica and source of irritation every time I used it. Much as I miss the Leica I am really impressed every day I pick up the NL 8x32.

Lots of birds around the feeders and a beautiful woodpecker as a regular. The Swaro makes for excellent viewing near and far and in dull weather it is among the best, if not the best I have seen.
 

dries1

Member
Part of me is curious about the burnt orange color, the other part is - I think I will be stuck with this binocular, the color of a traffic cone.
 

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
I can upload a photo with my Swarovski and place it on a silicone mat I have which is more traffic cone orange. Makes the Swaro look discrete 😁
 

gerdwichers8

Well-known member
I like my Nl 12 very much and móre than my wish since 2006 has come true..
However, birding at the Arabian peninsula, I am glad I brought my Noctivid. Not only for sheltering my eyes in the superbly darkened interior but the coating of the Noctivid has only used my make-up brush since arriving 27th last month. No wipes (scratching is sooo easy here) and still spotless!!
My Nl needs wipes every other day
 

Aquaplas

Well-known member
Austria
I like my Nl 12 very much and móre than my wish since 2006 has come true..
However, birding at the Arabian peninsula, I am glad I brought my Noctivid. Not only for sheltering my eyes in the superbly darkened interior but the coating of the Noctivid has only used my make-up brush since arriving 27th last month. No wipes (scratching is sooo easy here) and still spotless!!
My Nl needs wipes every other day

Have the same problem with my NL 8x42. The Lenses (Coatings) Draw up Dust Magical. When i clean them, after an hour of normal use the Dust from the Air Sticks on the Lenses. I also have this Problem on other Swaros. Only my Habicht has this not. When i clean The Habicht, it feels much Smoother when i wish than on the NL. Why? is that a Problem With Coatings on NL? Is there No Swaroclean on them? I cant read nothing about Swaroclean on the NL on the Swaro Homepage?
Anyone knows about this Problem?
 

AlphaFan

Well-known member
United States
Have the same problem with my NL 8x42. The Lenses (Coatings) Draw up Dust Magical. When i clean them, after an hour of normal use the Dust from the Air Sticks on the Lenses. I also have this Problem on other Swaros. Only my Habicht has this not. When i clean The Habicht, it feels much Smoother when i wish than on the NL. Why? is that a Problem With Coatings on NL? Is there No Swaroclean on them? I cant read nothing about Swaroclean on the NL on the Swaro Homepage?
Anyone knows about this Problem?
Just read Swarovski’s own company reports, press releases, etc to be better informed on where the company is headed. Initially, I was very interested in buying the NL Pure. But reports (including a number here on Birdforum) of higher than anticipated susceptibility to external fogging, dust-dirt-smudge-water, focus mechanism issues, and glare - have kept me away - especially at this price-point. Since sport optics are intended for outdoor use they need to be ruggedized and protected from dirt, water, and rapid environmental changes. Even if these issues only impact a small sample NLs, it is more than a 1-off experienced with brand new binoculars. Swarovski appears to be intentionally coy about SwaroClean across their product line - why? Folks in this thread and elsewhere have noted the lack of it impacting field performance / ruggedness / protection.

BTW - Although I do not own the NL Pure I’ve sampled them a number of times and direct-compared to SLCs and SFs. Overall, I‘m very impressed with the deeply immersive image, but the above issues combined with the stellar performance of my SLCs and SFs have kept me from buying a set.
 
Last edited:

dries1

Member
I will stick with the NLs based on the optics and ergonomics, additionally they have the better eyecups compared to the glass from the blue shield.
 

dorubird

Well-known member
Romania
Removing the swaroclean layer from the NLs lenses leads to dusting the lenses too fast. After they removed the swaroclean, they put in place that soap in the box, maybe as a cleaning option :LOL:. Anyway strange choice to remove the swaroclean layer
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top