Sweet! was just thinking about the 52's vs this small scope. Fun to read the threads though.
-
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.
Swarovski NL 14x52 and SLC 15x56 - a brief comparison (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Canip
- Start date
Its lovely, if you can get a look through one I think you will be pleasantly suprised. Fantastic FOV and as sharp as a razor...from edge to edge.
The Pure's are lovely too but I just couldn't keep the 14x steady without a mono/tripod so they were a no-no.
I appreciate that scopes come with disadvantages but if longer reach is a prerequisite (and it was), or a desire, then this seemed to be an ideal compromise. And thus far, it is.
Hi Allan
The scope is the Swarovski ATC 17-40 x 56 and the little Gitzo tripod is the diminutive but oh so clever GKTBC Mini Traveler.
Gitzo GKTBC Mini Traveler Tripod Kit - Noir Decor | Wex Photo Video
www.wexphotovideo.com
Many thanks, Pat…..very nice set-up 👍Hi Allan
The scope is the Swarovski ATC 17-40 x 56 and the little Gitzo tripod is the diminutive but oh so clever GKTBC Mini Traveler.
Gitzo GKTBC Mini Traveler Tripod Kit - Noir Decor | Wex Photo Video
www.wexphotovideo.com
Last edited:
iseegeorgesstar
Well-known member
Hello,
Thank you for your review (as I've been away from the binocular world the last few months). Great reading as always.
One question, with the caveat that I've only read the first post thus far, how's the edge correction on these? You said you found the afov of 62 vs 70 degrees to really stand out to you. But is the extra fov in the new NLs "ruined" with sloppy edge correction? I, of course, doubt this is the case with such a high end up optic but wanted to ask anyway.
Also since this is an NL does this mean the so called "rolling ball effect" that the internet has declared NLs have is present. (I apologize if my questions have been answered later in the thread.)
iseegeorgesstar
Well-known member
Your comment is very interesting. I feel like it speaks more about the Canon's IS capabilities and how they might be in need of an upgrade. Given the fact, changing batteries and degraded electronics are real world concerns too the comparison gets more interesting.
I'm curious which you would prefer on the night sky. But I guess there are other forums for that question.
iseegeorgesstar
Well-known member
Surely glassing while riding a bicycle is an extremely turbulent affair. 😱I guess ET with its (his/her??) long fingers would get more shakes, not less
Well said. The earlier comment from Bentley on finding the SV calm was really interesting too.
I stopped by the dealership today to have a look at the 14x52 NL.
It is quite compact, I expected it to be larger. Did not try the forehead rest.
Did not think much about the weight, it did not feel heavy in hand or in use.
Optically they felt very much like the rest of the series - eye relief is among the best on the market and considering the magnification it is very well corrected and it was very impressive.
Though it is impressive, 14X handheld is a bit much for me. Compared to the 12x42NL I found the 14x52NL much harder to hold steady without support.
For my personal use I would have it mounted on a monopod, so it is not much of an issue. However, the price...
...yikes. I would need the forehead rest to park it well with my glasses. I would need a new adapter for tripod use (my current Swaro adapter will not fit as they have changed the mount...). Tried out the bino harness - which is very well made and a beautiful fit for the 12x42 as well as the 14x52 NL. I considered getting the bino harness for my Meopta 12x50. But, the price is a bit over the top for me...
If I total up a kit consisting of the 14x52NL forehead rest, tripod adapter and the bino harness, the total is... ...way out of my league.
I wonder what the target buyer is for this bino? I would like to think I am, but I can't think of spending that much, given that it would have to be married to the monopod for effective use.
With the 12x binos I can track birds in flight with ease hand held but the 14x? I don't know.
It is quite compact, I expected it to be larger. Did not try the forehead rest.
Did not think much about the weight, it did not feel heavy in hand or in use.
Optically they felt very much like the rest of the series - eye relief is among the best on the market and considering the magnification it is very well corrected and it was very impressive.
Though it is impressive, 14X handheld is a bit much for me. Compared to the 12x42NL I found the 14x52NL much harder to hold steady without support.
For my personal use I would have it mounted on a monopod, so it is not much of an issue. However, the price...
...yikes. I would need the forehead rest to park it well with my glasses. I would need a new adapter for tripod use (my current Swaro adapter will not fit as they have changed the mount...). Tried out the bino harness - which is very well made and a beautiful fit for the 12x42 as well as the 14x52 NL. I considered getting the bino harness for my Meopta 12x50. But, the price is a bit over the top for me...
If I total up a kit consisting of the 14x52NL forehead rest, tripod adapter and the bino harness, the total is... ...way out of my league.
I wonder what the target buyer is for this bino? I would like to think I am, but I can't think of spending that much, given that it would have to be married to the monopod for effective use.
With the 12x binos I can track birds in flight with ease hand held but the 14x? I don't know.
Last edited:
Owlbarred
Well-known member
Having recently spent about 4 hours with a friend's 15x56 SLC (and he with my 8x42 NL) in a largely open setting, the following Rokslide 2020 post (#12) Are 15x56 usable freehand? reflects my perspectives nearly perfectly and more clearly than any I have read. Each to his own, but for me, the SLC (optically very nice) were heavy, bulky, and quite shaky -- I was truly relieved to get back my 8x42s.
BTW: I did notice, as stated in the Rokslide post, a distressing and vexing problem with heat waves with the 15x in the 94 degree weather. Lastly, the narrow FOV of the 15x was unendurable for the type of birding I do.
"Magnification can be both your friend and your enemy. It seems to be universally held that more of anything is better than less. I agree sometimes more is better. Magnification does the obvious, it increases the size of the image we see. It also magnifies everything else you can think of too. Next to the image, the next most obvious thing is the magnification of movement. Most obvious are muscle tremors, either from being tired or from not having the steadiest hold desirable. As the shake starts, so does our effort to counter it. That just makes things worse. Breathing and pulse rate factor in here too. The stars typically align for best handheld use in the 7-10x range. You are better off, in my opinion with lesser magnification that can be held steady. Some can use more than 10x. I can handle 12x for a while, but without a tripod, I'm just fooling myself at 15x. After muscle shake, the next most obvious is magnification of heat waves. On a recent hotter than hell Beatty's Butte Antelope hunt with my nephew, the mirage was so bad that I was glad I had thrown in a couple of 7x binoculars. They were usable. The 10x were just a blur. Increasing magnification also reduces the depth of the field that is in focus.
I would venture the opinion that you probably will not enjoy the 15x freehand. Somebody said they doubted you would see a lot of difference with trhe 15x vs the 12x. I tend to agree with that view. Personally if I can't get the view I need at 8 or 10x, then 20x is about where I need to be. I dislike spotters, so I'm considering 18x and a tripod. It is also my opinion that focus quality is at least as important as optical quality at 15x and up. You can jump through a narrower depth of focus pretty quick with a tight, or too fast, or sloppy focus. At any rate I agree that with 15x, a tripod is a must have. A good tripod. Don't skimp on the tripod."
BTW: I did notice, as stated in the Rokslide post, a distressing and vexing problem with heat waves with the 15x in the 94 degree weather. Lastly, the narrow FOV of the 15x was unendurable for the type of birding I do.
"Magnification can be both your friend and your enemy. It seems to be universally held that more of anything is better than less. I agree sometimes more is better. Magnification does the obvious, it increases the size of the image we see. It also magnifies everything else you can think of too. Next to the image, the next most obvious thing is the magnification of movement. Most obvious are muscle tremors, either from being tired or from not having the steadiest hold desirable. As the shake starts, so does our effort to counter it. That just makes things worse. Breathing and pulse rate factor in here too. The stars typically align for best handheld use in the 7-10x range. You are better off, in my opinion with lesser magnification that can be held steady. Some can use more than 10x. I can handle 12x for a while, but without a tripod, I'm just fooling myself at 15x. After muscle shake, the next most obvious is magnification of heat waves. On a recent hotter than hell Beatty's Butte Antelope hunt with my nephew, the mirage was so bad that I was glad I had thrown in a couple of 7x binoculars. They were usable. The 10x were just a blur. Increasing magnification also reduces the depth of the field that is in focus.
I would venture the opinion that you probably will not enjoy the 15x freehand. Somebody said they doubted you would see a lot of difference with trhe 15x vs the 12x. I tend to agree with that view. Personally if I can't get the view I need at 8 or 10x, then 20x is about where I need to be. I dislike spotters, so I'm considering 18x and a tripod. It is also my opinion that focus quality is at least as important as optical quality at 15x and up. You can jump through a narrower depth of focus pretty quick with a tight, or too fast, or sloppy focus. At any rate I agree that with 15x, a tripod is a must have. A good tripod. Don't skimp on the tripod."
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
I've only seen atmospheric disturbance in a scope, not binoculars, even 15x. But the conditions may not have been nearly as hot as hell, and not observing at quite the distance involved in an antelope hunt. For birding in open country, the only real drawback I find in SLC 15x56 (as presumably in NL 14x52) is the slow focus, combined with reduced depth of field. Recently I've been getting some experience with a 12x50, and of course that's much easier to manage, really a very nice compromise all around.
We regularly get athmospheric disturbances here that are visible with 14/15X. Add optical abberations, mushy edges and CA to that and the viewing pleasure diminishes. With quality optics you get the best out of any given situation and I find that having the most impact at high magnification.
My Meopta 8x32 is a little gem, it does not rank at the top in most optical snobs book but the sum of all parts is a compact and very well performing companion. A perfect example of does the job well, nothing more, and nothing less.
For the higher mags I throttled down from 15X to 12X, mostly because the binos available narrowed it down to just a few and I found that both the Swaro Pure NL 12x42 and the Meopta 12x50 suited me the best in terms of optical performance and my ability to handhold them.
In the end I went with the Meopta.
I did like the Meopta 15x56 on a monopod but ended up with the more "compact" 12x50. I have a swiveling base monopod and with the 15X I could occasionally get vertigo but I don't get that with the 12X50. For stationary viewing I would love me an 18 to 20X.
Much as I like the 14X52 NL I think that if I had done it all over again I might have chosen a 12X again. But, the 14x52 is very nice, the wide field of view and huge eye relief is impressive.
My Meopta 8x32 is a little gem, it does not rank at the top in most optical snobs book but the sum of all parts is a compact and very well performing companion. A perfect example of does the job well, nothing more, and nothing less.
For the higher mags I throttled down from 15X to 12X, mostly because the binos available narrowed it down to just a few and I found that both the Swaro Pure NL 12x42 and the Meopta 12x50 suited me the best in terms of optical performance and my ability to handhold them.
In the end I went with the Meopta.
I did like the Meopta 15x56 on a monopod but ended up with the more "compact" 12x50. I have a swiveling base monopod and with the 15X I could occasionally get vertigo but I don't get that with the 12X50. For stationary viewing I would love me an 18 to 20X.
Much as I like the 14X52 NL I think that if I had done it all over again I might have chosen a 12X again. But, the 14x52 is very nice, the wide field of view and huge eye relief is impressive.
The NL 14x52 is a very imressive bit of kit and like you, I found the FOV astonishing but I couldn't hold it steady and much to my suprise, the Meopta 15x56 in short bursts and using a wide brimmed hat for support, seemed to me to be 'steadier'. It is much heavier than the NL, which is suprisingly light and compact, and that may account for what I think is a form of 'shake absorber'.
No question, the NL is optically superior but.......the Meopta 15x on a mono/tripod is a truly impressive bit of kit.
When I decided to buy my first Alpha I chose the NL 10x42 over the NL 12x and their Leica/Zeiss equivalents. It ticked all the boxes even without the headrest which was not available at the time. I dismissed the 12x as it induced shake, but did try one again last month when I tested the 15x, both fitted with the headrest, and the 12x performed superbly. Had the headrest been available last year when I tested them, I may well have ended up with the 12x.
But all was not lost, the 15x reminded me that for anything above 12x, I needed a support of some kind so, despite not being a total convert to scopes with all the disadvanteges they bring, the diminutive (and I mean very light and compact) Swaro ATC 17-40mm was tested, purchased and has been something of a revelation. I know this is the bino forum but.......
50g lighter than the NL 15x and, as I would need a mono/tripod anyway, mounted on a Gitzo carbon monopod it provides a sublime view and a greater reach than any bino I personally know of unless you delve into the superdooper cost and weight models which almost certainly need a static mount. I may be wrong and it is likely that some are available but I am sure they will be out of my price range.
I carry the ATC mounted on the monopod when walking and really do not notice the weight at all. Whip it off, carry it around my neck using its strap and the monopod becomes a very competent walking pole. Two for the price of one.
The ATC is the dogs wotsits and using bino's to sweep and spot, the scope then hones in with amazing clarity and FOV. It provides a quite superb view and it tickles me to see rustling feathers on a Grey Heron at 600m when on 40x.
(600m away measured with a Hawke Laser rangefinder).
Very interested in this conversation...
I birded for several years before, becoming convinced I was missing stuff beyond the range of my favored 10X. Finally bought a scope 2 years ago. In the fall winter spring when the migration is on here in the San Francisco Bay area, we bird mostly out over largish open bodies of water. Its waterfowl, shore birds and the raptors that follow. Looking at an array of scopes and tripods on the sidewalk outside a very nice optics store in Mendocino, it dawned on me the issue I feared most by adding a scope is the package. The scope/tripod weighs only about 8.5lbs - not much. The issues are twofold. Carrying with tripod resting on shoulder puts the scope out front (or back, depending) where the leverage it exerts exceeds the 8.5 pound weight, think of a pendulum. Beyond weight is the need to think about the thing, when you plop it down to use it. You have to make an effort to make sure the legs are spread, the feet are on some sort of solid base, to view. That takes time, is a distraction. If you merely want to set it down in order to grab binos, you have this same concern over time and focus from the preferred activity of getting on a bird. The optical benefit is undeniable. So I have made the tradeoff. Birding 5-6 days a week last winter, the scope and 8x32s were an undeniably superb combination, integral parts of a system. I remember the day I bought the scope. After having made the scope choice, I asked if I could take a look through the then new NL 1242. My reaction was quite clear, I remember thinking, "You just bought an 18-54 scope. You own 10s (and 8s) binos, these 12s as gorgeous as they are, bring nothing to that party."
But,
In the spring, summer, early fall "off season" I still bird at least a couple days a week. The scope stays home. The 1042s return as the weapon of choice. Ive used 10s long enough, that shake, fast moving birds at least where I bird, are not an issue. Lately rethinking, there is stuff I cant see well enough in the summer with the 10s still. Would a 12 or that new 14, or... be enough better here, then? The NL 1242 has the same FOV as my current 10. I know the ergo benefit of the NL body well enough suspect maybe. A 14 or 15?
Heres the questions.
1. Would something like the new Kowa 55A make enough difference to the weight/bulk/inconvenience of my current 77scope/tripod setup to be worth it? Make it nicer in winter and more useable in summer? (suspect I know...)
2. Would mounting a 1242 on a tripod and dragging that around makes much sense? I get the benefit of two-eye vision, wider FOV, stability. As I use 18X on the scope by far the most, though do like up to say 30X a lot, maybe in summer? Maybe certain places?
3. Thinking mostly about summer viewing how about this monopod thing? I have zero experience. The idea expressed above in PatRs that one can quickly detach bino from it suggests the benefit of a free hand bino is not lost, and the thing become useful as walking stick between viewing places?
Hi Tom
A few thoughts to your questions:
1. I have the Opticron MM4 77 scope and have carried it on my back attached to a Gitzo Systematic tripod in the past. Great scope but a big and relatively heavy combination to cart around so it stays at home or is used close to our RV when we park up. Then, during my quest for greater mag and reach I tested the NL 15x and found it difficult to keep steady despite the headrest and a wide brimmed hat. But the new Kowa TSN 55A and the Swarovski ATC scopes were ready mounted to test and I was taken aback at the optical quality, compact size and weight or lack thereof. Stunning bits of kit and frankly not much to choose twixt the two…..I bought the ATC because I prefer the rubber armoured body more as it is going to be used in places where I know I will knock it. But the Kowa is brilliant and I would have been perfectly happy with it.
I will use it in all seasons and where I live we have one day of sunshine a year and even then it rains! The ATC is totally waterproof and has spent the obligatory 10 minutes at a depth of 1.5m in the river. The rubber body will be better in the cold too and as it will be slung over my shoulder or mounted on a monopod, I much prefer the ATC barrel focus rather the Kowa’s (excellent) focus wheels which protrude on the top and could get ‘caught’.
2. I have ‘dragged’ my Meopta 15x56’s around on a tripod and mounted them on a ballhead using a great US made mount, the Aziak which is Arca compatible. But frankly it was a PIA and I quickly returned to the monopod set up. The Aziak is perfect on the monopod.
Agree two eyes are better than one and were 17-40x bino's available and were light and compact, I would buy a pair. But I haven’t seen any. The FOV on the ATC scope is fantastic even though it is a one eyed wonder!
3. The monopod is my choice after some pretty intensive hikes with both set ups even after replacing the heavy Systematic with the much lighter Legende tripod. As I alluded in my previous post, it acts as a walking stick (I have a rubber foot and a snow/grass spike to meet most ground conditions) as well as a very effective and stable platform for the scope/bino/camera. Changing between them or taking them off completely is instantaneous. There is a hand strap attached to the monopod which I pull downwards to improve stability.
I believe that I have found the perfect ‘off road’ package for me which combines low weight and a compact size with a very stable and adaptable viewing/photo platform. Like all things it is a bit of a compromise but using a (handheld) NL 10x to scan and find and then zoom in with 17-40x scope meets and exceeds my expectations.
My 73 year old back is extremely grateful that the heavy stuff is either back at home, or in the RV, resting!
tenex
reality-based
This sounds attractive (as I find I seldom carry my 82mm scope very far) but I have trouble imagining the ergonomics. (Not that others don't say that about SLC 15x56!) What sort of head do you use, how stable does it feel, how well does it pan, etc?
Awesome, thank you. I got you by 7... Ha. Birding is always a hike for us, though not a particularly hard one. Its the moving about and taking care in managing gear that, I s'pose feeds some of this. For instance, with the monopod and ATC or 55A on, how do you deal with scope and monopod when you want to use binos (for me always on RYO)?
Last edited:
👍👍
When I need to use the bino’s I either wedge the monopod against me/tree/rock or just lay it down on the ground or simply use the excellent strap on the ATC and let it dangle!
RYO on my bino’s too. Super bit of kit.
PatR, interesting input, thank you.
I "gave up" on spotting scopes for two reasons: carrying around stuff with a tripod is not something I enjoy anymore and one eyed viewing is tiring for me. The very best scopes with the best eye relief are of course less straining on the eyes but none came close to the pleasure of viewing through the Swarovski BTX.
However, two weeks ago I ended up selling off my Swarovski BTX. Well, of course with some regrets, but to someone who hopefully will get more use out of it. But I would rather have fond memories of the BTX (and I do) instead of having it collecting dust at home.
So, no more tripod and no more BTX. For local walks or extended hikes a monopod and a high mag bino is the best compromise.
When the Pure NL 14x52 was announced I was intrigued, a little more magnification in a compact package? Awesome!
But, after trying it out I felt almost relieved going back home to the Meopta 12x50, which still is my best "compromise".
Also, the price of the 14x52 is not worth the little extra reach, coupled with the drawbacks.
At my lookout near home I feel that the 12x often falls short and I did not bring the BTX often enough due to the bulk.
When the compact ATC was announced I was impressed by the small size and seemingly great optics in a small package, however the one eyed viewing put me off, especially since I still had the BTX.
I might be looking into the ATC as a light weight scope option with support/monopod, just like you do now.
It is worth looking into seeing if I can readjust to one eyed viewing as it will be in shorter stints.
Much as I love the BTX the option to zoom in and out is good to have at times.
I "gave up" on spotting scopes for two reasons: carrying around stuff with a tripod is not something I enjoy anymore and one eyed viewing is tiring for me. The very best scopes with the best eye relief are of course less straining on the eyes but none came close to the pleasure of viewing through the Swarovski BTX.
However, two weeks ago I ended up selling off my Swarovski BTX. Well, of course with some regrets, but to someone who hopefully will get more use out of it. But I would rather have fond memories of the BTX (and I do) instead of having it collecting dust at home.
So, no more tripod and no more BTX. For local walks or extended hikes a monopod and a high mag bino is the best compromise.
When the Pure NL 14x52 was announced I was intrigued, a little more magnification in a compact package? Awesome!
But, after trying it out I felt almost relieved going back home to the Meopta 12x50, which still is my best "compromise".
Also, the price of the 14x52 is not worth the little extra reach, coupled with the drawbacks.
At my lookout near home I feel that the 12x often falls short and I did not bring the BTX often enough due to the bulk.
When the compact ATC was announced I was impressed by the small size and seemingly great optics in a small package, however the one eyed viewing put me off, especially since I still had the BTX.
I might be looking into the ATC as a light weight scope option with support/monopod, just like you do now.
It is worth looking into seeing if I can readjust to one eyed viewing as it will be in shorter stints.
Much as I love the BTX the option to zoom in and out is good to have at times.
