• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Swarovski NL 14x52 and SLC 15x56 - a brief comparison (2 Viewers)

I owned a Fujinon FMT-SX 16X70 for a while.

I could handhold it only for the briefest moments, and mostly used it rested over a partially lowered car window.

It certainly sounds to me as if the 14X NL would be about as different as you could get.

The Fujinon is not for folks whose eyes are close together. The ocular housings are large, and you will have trouble fitting your beak between them. (even if your beak is rather modest in size)
Bought the FMTR-SX 16x70 a couple of months a go and returned it the next day. Hand held was impossible and no problems using it with Mono/Tripod but the CA was shocking.

Beautifully made and built to take the knock's but not for me.
 
I've used my brother's 10x56 SLC quite a bit (handheld). It handles as well as a binocular that size/weight can, and it's manageable when you can brace your elbows on something, but if used freehand, and especially when you have to look up at things as I quite often do, its weight/bulk gets old in a hurry. I've come to prefer my 12x50B Nobilem in those situations purely for its somewhat lighter weight, even though optically the SLC is superior (significantly so, at that - its optics are first class). I try to hold it in in such a way that I place as much of my hand/palm in contact with the barrel as possible, somewhat as tenex has described - I try to do the same or something similar with most binoculars as that gives the steadiest hold.

The 15x56 may have a similar form factor but the higher mag means it's substantially more shaky than the 10x56. Having tried it freehand at one of the Birdfairs, it's definitely too much binocular for me. If you can use it seated, with elbows on knees, it's probably bearable for shorter scanning stints, but realistically that shake factor makes it a tripod (or maybe monopod... do hunters use those much?) binocular. The 14x52 NL is definitely (IMO, but I think most who have tried it would agree) easier to handle than the 15x56 SLC but ... even though the ergonomics and headrest work well for me, I can't be sure I'd be as happy with them at the end of a four hour stint as when I started. If I had the funds, I admit I'd be tempted (what an upgrade it'd be from the 12x50B!), but I'd want to give it a really serious trial before plonking my money down.

The XL porros would require not only the hands but also the arms of a yeti.
 
I owned a Fujinon FMT-SX 16X70 for a while.

I could handhold it only for the briefest moments, and mostly used it rested over a partially lowered car window.

It certainly sounds to me as if the 14X NL would be about as different as you could get.

The Fujinon is not for folks whose eyes are close together. The ocular housings are large, and you will have trouble fitting your beak between them. (even if your beak is rather modest in size)
The magnification will get your attention to the shakes, not so much the weight, so IMHO the 14X52 NL (or what it actually is 14.3X) will not be any better than the 15X56 SLC. If one cannot handle the 15X56 handheld they are not going to get any breaks with the NL.
 
The magnification will get your attention to the shakes, not so much the weight, so IMHO the 14X52 NL (or what it actually is 14.3X) will not be any better than the 15X56 SLC. If one cannot handle the 15X56 handheld they are not going to get any breaks with the NL.
Im curious about something. In my small stable of birding binos, the VP825 is my worst shaker. It's a lovely bino for several reasons, but it is not the best at controlling shake. My EL 1042 is better. Is it possible the often repeated 8 vs 10 thing, that the inherent shake do to the higher magnification being the culprit, may in fact not be the whole story? I can imagine the issue with the NL1452 and especially the SLC 1556 going in the other direction of being too heavy to hand hold for many without shake for any length of time, regardless of X. Maybe "regardless" is the wrong word there. Can it be said its the combination of X and weight that creates the problem? And this is dependent on the individual? Is there a "personal" sweet spot of X/weight, (not to discount technique), that is different for each of us that we need to discover?

My VP is too light to control shake as well as Id like. The EL1042 is better. NL832 best, (tho prolly not just do to weight). I wonder how well I'd get along with a 1032 or an 856?
 
I have less shakes with the Leica Duovid at 12x magnification vs Habicht 10x40 GA and also less shakes when using the Leica 10x25 UV vs the Zeiss 8x30 “Safari”. It’s really a mystery to me why, length of the tubes, weight, exit pupil, pyramids, secret societies, ET?
 
I have less shakes with the Leica Duovid at 12x magnification vs Habicht 10x40 GA and also less shakes when using the Leica 10x25 UV vs the Zeiss 8x30 “Safari”. It’s really a mystery to me why, length of the tubes, weight, exit pupil, pyramids, secret societies, ET?
But this is so true, I certainly can't hold all 10x equally shake free, and every time I use my 12x50 EL I'm aware that the image is exceptionally calm, given the high magnification, calmer than several 10x I use, for sure.

I do struggle to use the 15x56 SLC handheld for more than a few moments though.
 
If I may add a triviality, the day after the first long outing with my 8x56 SLC I had gout-like pains in my thumb joints.
I have since adopted the (US Navy?) grip that was recommended here many years ago with fingers in front of the strap lugs and thumbs behind pointing upwards. It's very comfortable and, apart from weight differences, any binocular feels much like another.

John
Interesting...Having had the exact same pain in my thumb joints after trying my then newly acquired 8x56 SLC WB , I was initially worried that I had made a mistake with these monster bins. Luckily, that pain never came back :).

I'm not sure if I naturally found a better hold after that but after reading your comments, I have just been out this afternoon to observe my local ospreys on their platform. I adopted the hold with the thumbs up next to the eyepieces and the bins resting very comfortably in the palms of my hands.

I recommend this position highly, it has made all the difference and I'm delighted to say the binocular weight seems to matter little now! :)
 
IMHO the 14X52 NL (or what it actually is 14.3X) will not be any better than the 15X56 SLC. If one cannot handle the 15X56 handheld they are not going to get any breaks with the NL.

"that is your subjective opinion, others may differ". Not invested in either binocular either.

I'm delighted to say the binocular weight seems to matter little now! :)
That's great, and the model you have has (IMO anyway) stunningly good image quality - but if one of those ospreys flies off and starts hunting at an angle that requires you to angle your binoculars upwards, even by 45 degrees, that weight will soon make itself felt. Or, even worse - Australian hobby comes in and starts going up (and up and up) in a thermal pretty much directly above you. I've had a few of those experiences with the 10x56, and superb though it undeniably is, I pass on using it nowadays.
 
The SLC 56 has been around for a while now, folks are familiar with them. The NLs offer a slightly lower weight, simular to the SV 50s. If one has moved from the SV - SLC because of the wright, the slightly improved optics of the NL 52s will not make a difference.
 
Im curious about something. In my small stable of birding binos, the VP825 is my worst shaker. It's a lovely bino for several reasons, but it is not the best at controlling shake. My EL 1042 is better. Is it possible the often repeated 8 vs 10 thing, that the inherent shake do to the higher magnification being the culprit, may in fact not be the whole story? I can imagine the issue with the NL1452 and especially the SLC 1556 going in the other direction of being too heavy to hand hold for many without shake for any length of time, regardless of X. Maybe "regardless" is the wrong word there. Can it be said its the combination of X and weight that creates the problem? And this is dependent on the individual? Is there a "personal" sweet spot of X/weight, (not to discount technique), that is different for each of us that we need to discover?

My VP is too light to control shake as well as Id like. The EL1042 is better. NL832 best, (tho prolly not just do to weight). I wonder how well I'd get along with a 1032 or an 856?
I can't handle the small 25-20mm glass, they are a pia, so i can understand. Too small and light. I just never adapted to them.
 
the VP825 is my worst shaker. It's a lovely bino for several reasons, but it is not the best at controlling shake. My EL 1042
It's often said that the light weight makes some binoculars more shaky, and there may be something to it. But there are probably other factors afoot - small size means less to get a secure grip on, and it seems a lot of pocket binoculars suit glasses wearers better because the small eyecups make for difficult eye placement straight to the eyes. Smaller exit pupil unquestionably also makes things harder.

But pocket binos are intended for those for whom convenience trumps everything else.
 
It depends what you mean by usable. I find they're fine for a quick glance/id check, but not for detailed study. Obviously range plays a part too. If I want to properly study a bird I'd use a tripod, but for quickly checking something they're usable for swift look for my fairly steady hands. People's mileage may vary.
 
It's often said that the light weight makes some binoculars more shaky, and there may be something to it. But there are probably other factors afoot - small size means less to get a secure grip on, and it seems a lot of pocket binoculars suit glasses wearers better because the small eyecups make for difficult eye placement straight to the eyes. Smaller exit pupil unquestionably also makes things harder.

But pocket binos are intended for those for whom convenience trumps everything else.

Just a fine point... Perhaps me only. I prefer "compact" to "pocket" bino as a descriptor. I do get your point. I know many here write about this. For me day to day the VPs sit behind the MAC on my desk, ready to grab when birds on feeder on window or out across the concrete canyon I described earlier. They ride beautifully in my back pack for air travel, so I always have pretty darn good optics conveniently available when traveling. I lengthened the strap and added a YKK detachable clip, (to delete strap for desk duty) and carry them Bandolier style when out and about in those places. Pocket? Well maybe OK in cold weather in a coat pocket. Pants, as some have written? Not for me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top