Pure NL the right one for me? (2 Viewers)

[NatureLover123]

Maybe you add this to your "NL's are simply the best!" Thread from half a year ago.

I'm out now as I don't face much problems and honestly sick of nerdy discussions without outcome, I rather go out and watch birds 🥸

Yes, I am also tired of discussing without outcome. I like also to compare binoculars but at the end of the day, everyone needs to decide what fits them best. No binocular is perfect, but it can be perfect for you and your needs.

Enjoy your binoculars and watch wildlife and nature.

PS: I got a very old 7x50 binoctem to my collection. It’s still in good condition, and yes you see that it has not modern coatings and prisms but it’s amazing how good they were at that time already. Some CA is present and the color fidelity is not 100% true. It cannot compete with my other Victories SFs and Pocket but its still amazing.

 

[MikeRottier]

PS: I got a very old 7x50 binoctem to my collection. It’s still in good condition, and yes you see that it has not modern coatings and prisms but it’s amazing how good they were at that time already. Some CA is present and the color fidelity is not 100% true. It cannot compete with my other Victories SFs and Pocket but its still amazing.

My main binocular now is an Eschenbach 10x40 Derby Compact. Old and battered, with missing eyecups. But it does the job remarkably fine with the added benefit that I can throw them in my backpack without eyecups (lost them) and without worrying until I can afford a Conquest or a Kahless

 

[LeonWang]

Well, after a week’s try I decided to return the NL 10x42. Initially I thought I could tolerate the flare, but in the end I can’t justify the price I paid due to such a critical flaw. I found it could be very annoying at times. Still I feel the Nikon Edg 8x32 is the most comfortable and is the better fit for me.

 

[PW42]

Yes, I am also tired of discussing without outcome. I like also to compare binoculars but at the end of the day, everyone needs to decide what fits them best. No binocular is perfect, but it can be perfect for you and your needs.

You are right, there never will be an outcome. Some experience glare and are bothered by it, some experience it and are not worried by it and others don't experience it. Result: Impasse!

 

[Scott98]

Well, after a week’s try I decided to return the NL 10x42. Initially I thought I could tolerate the flare, but in the end I can’t justify the price I paid due to such a critical flaw. I found it could be very annoying at times. Still I feel the Nikon Edg 8x32 is the most comfortable and is the better fit for me.

The 10x42 EDG is available from Kyoie Osaka

 

[LeonWang]

The 10x42 EDG is available from Kyoie Osaka

I've already ordered a Skyrover Cloud Banner 10x50, and should be able to get it in couple of days. People said it should be like a NL without the flare issue, and that sounds almost too good to be true. Let's see how it turns out.

 

[LeonWang]

Got my SRCB 10x50 today, it has a very similar field to the NL. I think it is slightly sharper at the extreme edge, but has higher CA off center compare to the NL 10x42.

Indeed it does not flare like the NL! It is definitely a keeper, especially for the price I paid. The only problem I found so far is the rubber tip of the eye cup. The rim is too thick, so I get either vignetting at its two outmost extensions, or kidney beans after retracting two stops. I will see if I can find some replacement with thinner rim, or have to modify the rubber rim myself.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Got my SRCB 10x50 today, it has a very similar field to the NL. I think it is slightly sharper at the extreme edge, but has higher CA off center compare to the NL 10x42.

Indeed it does not flare like the NL! It is definitely a keeper, especially for the price I paid. The only problem I found so far is the rubber tip of the eye cup. The rim is too thick, so I get either vignetting at its two outmost extensions, or kidney beans after retracting two stops. I will see if I can find some replacement with thinner rim, or have to modify the rubber rim myself.

So you have to bodge it?

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Got my SRCB 10x50 today, it has a very similar field to the NL. I think it is slightly sharper at the extreme edge, but has higher CA off center compare to the NL 10x42.

Indeed it does not flare like the NL! It is definitely a keeper, especially for the price I paid. The only problem I found so far is the rubber tip of the eye cup. The rim is too thick, so I get either vignetting at its two outmost extensions, or kidney beans after retracting two stops. I will see if I can find some replacement with thinner rim, or have to modify the rubber rim myself.

I’d like to have a demo with one of these one day, but their general technical comment/disclaimer puts me off a bit ( translation assumptions aside ):

“Technical Support

The manufacture of telescopes belongs to the industry of pure manual assembly, so it is impossible to be perfect. There may be slight dust, traces of assembly, differences in coating color, differences in hand feel and other deficiencies which are inevitable. Hope you can have a relatively objective standard and expectation.”

 

[LeonWang]

So you have to bodge it?

Not really going to "bodge" it . I find that it works fine half way in between the 2nd and 3rd stop, so maybe a couple of O rings will do the trick.

 

[LeonWang]

I’d like to have a demo with one of these one day, but their general technical comment/disclaimer puts me off a bit ( translation assumptions aside ):

“Technical Support

The manufacture of telescopes belongs to the industry of pure manual assembly, so it is impossible to be perfect. There may be slight dust, traces of assembly, differences in coating color, differences in hand feel and other deficiencies which are inevitable. Hope you can have a relatively objective standard and expectation.”

I would not read too much into those . To me it sounds like some standard word salad written by the lawyer in Chinese and gets lost a little bit in the translation.

 

[shaggyegret]

I have a 10x32 NL and the glare 'problem' is overly exaggerated. Sure when you watch towards the sun you will see something but I am not bothered by it.

Everybody certainly has their preferences. I think the glare is pretty bad. Especially for the steep price that Swarovski demands. Do they get almost everything else correct? Yes. That doesn't mean it isn't a significant problem.

I live in a sunny area and the glare is an issue more frequently than it should for $2k bino. Sometimes I can ignore it, sometimes I just give up and look another direction. But, in my opinion, they absolutely miss the mark, when it comes to glare.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Everybody certainly has their preferences. I think the glare is pretty bad. Especially for the steep price that Swarovski demands. Do they get almost everything else correct? Yes. That doesn't mean it isn't a significant problem.

I live in a sunny area and the glare is an issue more frequently than it should for $2k bino. Sometimes I can ignore it, sometimes I just give up and look another direction. But, in my opinion, they absolutely miss the mark, when it comes to glare.

I gave up on the NL's because of glare. I do agree, Swarovski's probably have the most perfect optics outside of the glare. It is a shame they can't do something about it. The NL doesn't show glare for everybody, but a lot of people see glare in them and the Habicht 8x30 W. Seeing glare depends on your facial structure, how deep and wide your eye sockets are and if you wear glasses or not.

 

[SanderBird82]

I gave up on the NL's because of glare. I do agree, Swarovski's probably have the most perfect optics outside of the glare. It is a shame they can't do something about it.

That glare was a problem for me in the first week. Now i can use the NL Pure 8x42 without glare. Just put it right on your eyes.
For me it works that way. Its personal probably.

 

[PW42]

It's strange how it affects people differently. I have had no real problems with glare on my NL 12x42 nor on my Habicht 8x30 (well known for its susceptibility to glare). Clearly not the experience for others.

It could be that some find it more bothersome than others but that seems unlikely. So maybe it's more to do with facial design, whether glasses are used, where eyecups are set, etc.

Just idle morning ponderings.

 

[PatR]

Must admit that I do not have glare problems with any of my Swaro's from the NL's to all three Habicht's.

It is, as you say, a very personal thing. Some do, some don't and some just like to hang their flag on the mast of the good ship ICGlare.

 

[Owene]

That glare was a problem for me in the first week. Now i can use the NL Pure 8x42 without glare. Just put it right on your eyes.
For me it works that way. Its personal probably.

Yes. Not extending the eye cup at all and using it flat and the glare is ok. When I did extend the eye cups I had to use the plastic glare attachments

 

[hopster]

While you’re there take a quick peek through an 8X32.

You may (or may not) be surprised.

I also would prefer 8x32.

 

[Dennis Mau]

That glare was a problem for me in the first week. Now i can use the NL Pure 8x42 without glare. Just put it right on your eyes.
For me it works that way. Its personal probably.

You don't pull out the eyecups at all? You just put it right on your eyes?

 

[Dennis Mau]

Yes. Not extending the eye cup at all and using it flat and the glare is ok. When I did extend the eye cups I had to use the plastic glare attachments

You mean the winged eyecups?