Roger Vine's review of the Swarovski NL 14x52 (1 Viewer)

[John A Roberts]

Roger's newest review can be found at: Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure Review


From left to right, Fujinon TS-X 14x40, NL 14x52 and EL 12x50:

John

 

[claves_10]

Hi John A Roberts, can I ask you about the laser test you did?
You just point a laser directly to the objective and depending how it reflects or how many points it shows, you can tell how many glasses has at the front end? It that how to interpret it?

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi claves,

Roger Vine isn't a pseudonym of mine - or vice versa - so I can't help you with that 🤷‍♂️
I'm just an admirer of his great body of work.

All I can add, is that Roger has previously referred to using a laser pointer as an aid to determining optical construction,
though I think this is the first time he's posted a comparative image (?)


John

 

[tenex]

You just point a laser directly to the objective and depending how it reflects or how many points it shows, you can tell how many glasses has at the front end?

Judging by the photo, he's aiming the laser at an angle, and the brighter blobs are scatter as it passes through glass, so two elements and then a third thicker one? Slightly different spacing between EL/NL, if the angle is the same(?). The front element on EL also looks either yellower or brighter, suggesting different glass? (the bits far to the left would be reflections)

"maybe just a slight softening midway" -- is Roger seeing an Absam ring in the 14x52?

 

[claves_10]

THOUGHT YOU WERE ....

 

[Bentley03]

An excellent read, as always, but I do find it mildly irritating that Roger focuses so much of his review bemoaning his inability to handhold the binocular steady, whilst dismissing the FRP out of hand because he might catch it on a branch, despite acknowledging that users report that it works. Why not test it, and THEN exclaim that the benefits are outweighed by the risk of catching it on the branch of a tree?

Roger, suck it and see!

Did I just say that? Hmmmm...I think I might have got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.......😉😇

 

[PatR]

An excellent read, as always, but I do find it mildly irritating that Roger focuses so much of his review bemoaning his inability to handhold the binocular steady, whilst dismissing the FRP out of hand because he might catch it on a branch, despite acknowledging that users report that it works. Why not test it, and THEN exclaim that the benefits are outweighed by the risk of catching it on the branch of a tree?

Roger, suck it and see!

Did I just say that? Hmmmm...I think I might have got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.......😉😇

I was going to start my reply with ‘Roger to that’ but…….

Spot on James, a great review indeed and I am the last one to criticise Roger as I too did initially dismiss the 14x52 after testing it sans forehead rest and, importantly for me, the winged eyecups. Shake was very apparent for me.

The addition of those three points of contact transformed the 14x52 for me such that I can hand hold it without any problems and enjoy what can only be described as a stunning view. They are just superb.

As for catching the forehead rest on branches/bushes, I have carried the bino’s, mit forehead rest, through Gully Ravine on the Gallipoli battlefield without any problem. Those that have been there will appreciate the difficulty of the terrain and its vegetation.

Every cloud though, as a result of dismissing the 14x52 my beloved released the funds to purchase the superb ATC 17-40x56 and, as the 60 day return period had passed (by a whole day) I was forced to keep it.

 

[crinklystarfish]

Some useful information, but perhaps more accurately described as an uncritical overview of characteristics based on a relatively brief and fairly shallow encounter?

General question for owners: are NL x52s supplied as standard with straps that posses a winding adjustment mechanism?

 

[PatR]

Some useful information, but perhaps more accurately described as an uncritical overview of characteristics based on a relatively brief and fairly shallow encounter?

General question for owners: are NL x52s supplied as standard with straps that posses a winding adjustment mechanism?

Mine have the standard Swaro Universal Comfort Strap with its rapid adjuster. Marmite to some, I find them superb.

 

[Scott98]

An excellent read, as always, but I do find it mildly irritating that Roger focuses so much of his review bemoaning his inability to handhold the binocular steady, whilst dismissing the FRP out of hand because he might catch it on a branch, despite acknowledging that users report that it works. Why not test it, and THEN exclaim that the benefits are outweighed by the risk of catching it on the branch of a tree?

He's got the power of the pen so he tells his own story. It's not going to be the same story you would tell.

 

[GrampaTom]

The older 1242 review still talks to the voices in my head, Swarovski 12x42 NL Pure Review. (et tu Richard?), Especially the closing line found there,

"My favourite ever binoculars. If you want to own just one pair that gives wonderful views of everything, but is light and easy to carry these are what I’d recommend. They’re a stunning achievement and for my use profile they’re even more compelling than the 8x model."

Would very much like to read Roger's views on NL 1242 vs these...

 

[crinklystarfish]

Mine have the standard Swaro Universal Comfort Strap...

That was what I thought shipped with NLx52s, so was slightly perplexed as the reviewer seems to have had a different strap supplied; or perhaps never took it from its cardboard wrapper and instead just made an assumption?

Again, I'm afraid the presentation read more like it was based on an embellished version of Swarovski's own marketing material than a genuine warts-and-all review of the product based on empirical time in the field. Just my personal inference, of course.

The older 1242 review still talks to the voices in my head, Swarovski 12x42 NL Pure Review. (et tu Richard?), Especially the closing line found there,

"My favourite ever binoculars. If you want to own just one pair that gives wonderful views of everything, but is light and easy to carry these are what I’d recommend. They’re a stunning achievement ...

Well, I thoroughly agree with this conclusion, at least. For four years now the NL12x42 has been my go-to and - if you can hold it steady (enough) - then I'd pay heed to those voices... Every other full-size all-rounder I've ever used is just battling for the best of the rest.

 

[Bentley03]

Well, I thoroughly agree with this conclusion, at least. For four years now the NL12x42 has been my go-to and - if you can hold it steady (enough), then I'd pay heed to those voices... Every other full-size all-rounder I've ever used is just battling for the best of the rest.

I regularly bump into an 82 year old life long birder on my walks, who shares your view, and who tells me that several of his associates have also seen the light and made the investment, after testing his copy. I'm in awe of his  birding knowledge, but even more in awe of the speed which he is able to identify birds at distances I'm struggling with, when I'm using a binocular with a power less than 12x. Stability holding this particular 12x steady is clearly no problem at all for him, even at his relatively senior age. It's not my personal favourite NL, or the one I might habitually pick up, but I do sense it's the handheld game changing format, for birders and astronomers, within the NL range.

 

[GrampaTom]

To play on an often used set of words, I’ve never wished for my 8s when out birding where I bird (important point), with 1042. Can’t say the same in reverse. I have on the other hand, wished for more X than 10 often enough.

I get this is a slightly different notion but I totally dig 832 with scope. I see them as integral parts of a set. Bino is quicker on target, wider field, very useful for studying water/cattail junction looking for certain birds in close. Implied still is the need for more X. In this case 18+. In summer with migration over the 1042 returns as tool of choice, scope stays home in these same places. 832s get used as standalone in different habitats that I go to then where waterfowl and shorebirds no longer primary targets.

So the little voice in my head re 1242. The fight is gearhead wanting another pleasure hit from purchase vs real utility as a tool to bird.

Soon to be 81.

 

[rodneyAB]

So the little voice in my head re 1242. The fight is gearhead wanting another pleasure hit from purchase vs real utility as a tool to bird.

On my walks on rolling hill and flat grassland, the 1242 is a high-end tool and always appreciated when used. Works well hand held with FRP for me, and, since adopting the monopod, the working is a much cleaner view and longer duration. I can stand still with TAS mounted 12x observing the Northern Harrier on fence post pulling apart rodent, or pan as the bird takes flight gliding along the fence line then disappearing within curvatures of hillside reappearing on downslope and sailing out across the flats. flexible versatility

 

[crinklystarfish]

Soon to be 81.

Then why not spend the next decade+ with life thoroughly enriched by an NL12x?

+1 with the monopod option, too. I usually just use the 12x freehand; but, if my destination means I'm going to be sitting in hides or standing in one spot for more than a few minutes, then I'll often make use of my monopod.

The setup's purposefully light, uncluttered and self-contained. I carry the 'pod in a generic bag and had a platform 3D printed to screw on to the standard mounting base. I don't bother with any kind of faffy head, but instead just plonk the NL on the custom platform and with a little downward pressure, Hey Presto: a 12x that (in terms of shake) handles like a handheld bin of much lower magnification.

The images this setup returns are a joy and in many (but not all) cases it could arguably very effectively replace an 8x-and-scope combo.

 

[LaKu]

Treated myself to a NL 12x42 a while ago and love the thing to bits for waders/ducks far out/raptors. I tested the 14x52, too (outside my shop of choice that lets you spend a LOT of time with the toys ouside ^^). I found it really impressive, but JUST a bit too much in every aspect for my kinda use. A bit too heavy, a bit too big, a bit too much magnification. The 12x42 hit the sweet spot, so that's what I chose. That being said, I can totally see how it could be the perfect tool for some folks. On a tripod, I guess there's little better options for long, distant observations.

 

[GrampaTom]

... On a tripod, I guess there's little better options for long, distant observations.

Thank for your comments. Re the above, surely a scope on a tripod is better that the 14s for long distance stuff, no?

 

[GrampaTom]

Still hoping Roger might chime in with thoughts re 1242 vs 1452....

 

[PatR]

Thank for your comments. Re the above, surely a scope on a tripod is better that the 14s for long distance stuff, no?

Absolutely Tom. A scope on a mono/tripod, with its greater reach, is a far better option if static or if you can physicaly handle the weight/size differences whilst mobile.

As you know I bought the lovely Swaro ATC after testing the 14x NL because I couldn't hold it steady enough for longer than a couple of minutes. Delighted with the scope, yomp around with it on a monopod which doubles as a walking stick and appreciate not only the reach but the superb optics.

But I did buy the 14x after a chance encounter, added the forehead rest and the winged eyecups and bingo, shake almost reduced and a lovely pair of bino's to take out when I can't be bothered to set up the scope/monopod. Or when the terrain dictates the bino only option.

A recent trip to the Gallipoli Battlefields, and a trek up Gully Ravine with its close vegetation and difficult ground, confirmed the advantages of the 14x over the more cumbersome scope combination.

So best of both worlds really, choice is a wonderful thing, and each has it's pro's and con's. I am very fortunate in that I can afford both and when that extra reach is needed and there are no restrictions to hinder mobility or access and visibility is clear, then the scope is the one I take.

But there is a time and place for the 14x and when I do use it I fully concur with Roger's findings. It is an exceptional optical package.