Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions (1 Viewer)

[BabyDov]

BabyDov, post 878,
I have the NL 8x42 now for some time and in my hands it never showed any glare, handling is very comfortable and the optical quality is excellent. It is of course heavier than the 8x32 EL, but it has a larger FOV. The test report in which I compared this NL with other top quality 8x42 and 8x32"s is published (in English) on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor. Go on that WEB-site to "Verrekijkers"and from there to "Verrekijkers testen en vergelijken"and you will find the test there as well as a number of other ones, some in English some in Dutch.
Gijs van Ginkel

Thank you for reporting your favorable experience with the Nl. It's seems strange to me that I seldom see people, except on this forum, who complain about glare, whether it is the 42 Nls or the 32 Els. Why is that?

Perhaps, looking at birds in trees or in the sky above the horizon, makes glare situations more frequent to bird watchers. Most owner reviews on Amazon or other websites, some may be hunters, rarely mention glare issues. (Personally, I haven't seen glare with either my 8x32 el or my 8x42 Vortex HD under any circumstances.) So I am cautiously optimistic that my my experience with the nl will be fantastic.
I can't wait to see the WOW images for myself that most people report. I'm am hoping the naysayers are in the minority.

 

[henry link]

I spent some more time with the 8 and 12 x42 NL last Saturday.
It was a miserable overcast day with no Sunshine, yet I still saw glare in both models ! I just don't get it ....

This was my second test of the NL's, my last being in September last year.
I'm seriously considering getting a pair of 10x42 NL's but I really need to address the issue of glare head on and find out where the hell it's coming from. Additionally I'm still not comfortable with the placement of the Diopter and the fact it doesn't lock....Plus your not getting the forehead rest included with the binoculars which is one of it's main selling points. I think this is a real liberty when your shelling out £2410.

Cheers
Tim

Hi Tim,

Cloudy days have their own particular set of glare producing conditions. Here's an earlier post from this thread with glare photos taken on a rainy day.

Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions

From a design perspective, however, glare is definitely a issue, of course, and I hope Henry is right and Swarovski finds a quick fix. Canip Unfortunately I doubt that will happen, at least based on my brief discussions with Swaro engineers. After all the glare issue of the EL/SV/FP models has...

www.birdforum.net

Where the glare is coming from is not hard to see. It's the metal cell containing the objective lenses. I've found that very careful adjustment of the eyecup length and the IPD can minimize it to an acceptable level for me and I don't like glare.

BTW, the objective cover attachment tab mentioned in the post has been modified to keep it from intruding into the exit pupil. I tested a brand new pair last week, made in January, and found no change at all in the internal baffling compared to my pair made in July. Glare performance was identical.

Henry

 

[james holdsworth]

Test, test, my kingdom for a test....

 

[[email protected]]

I spent some more time with the 8 and 12 x42 NL last Saturday.
It was a miserable overcast day with no Sunshine, yet I still saw glare in both models ! I just don't get it ....

This was my second test of the NL's, my last being in September last year.
I'm seriously considering getting a pair of 10x42 NL's but I really need to address the issue of glare head on and find out where the hell it's coming from. Additionally I'm still not comfortable with the placement of the Diopter and the fact it doesn't lock....Plus your not getting the forehead rest included with the binoculars which is one of it's main selling points. I think this is a real liberty when your shelling out £2410.

Cheers
Tim

Let me assure you the forehead rest is no big deal. But regardless of what some say there is glare in the bottom of the FOV even on a cloudy day and you know what I found out. Honestly the bigger FOV in the NL is no big deal either. You don't need it.

Denco, thank you for your remarks. I should receive the 8 x 42 NL within a day or two to try. If what you are seeing regarding glare is true for me, I will then certainly return them, because the 8 x32 El has never given me a problem with glare.

What especially concerns me is that the same person wearing or not wearing glasses, can report differences with ease of eye placement and glare, generally favoring wearing glasses.

Currently I wear glasses, but expect with cataract surgery in a year or two, I will probably not need glasses.
So what worries me a bit about the Nl is that what might work well for me now with glasses, won't, after cataract surgery without glasses.

Given these concerns, unless I am absolutely WOW'd by the Nl and see no glare, I won't be keeping them. Furthermore, I see no reason to own both the 8x32 El and the 8 x42 Nl. One will have to be returned.

If the EL 8x32 gives you no problem with glare. Keep it! The NL will give you problems with glare.

 

[BabyDov]

If the EL 8x32 gives you no problem with glare. Keep it! The NL will give you problems with glare.

Do you really think glare is a certainty with the NL for everyone?

I doubt that, particulary because many owners don't complain about it, even when asked if they see it with the NL. Being insensitive to glare with the EL 8x32, perhaps I won't see it with the NL,either. We'll see.

 

[[email protected]]

Do you really think glare is a certainty with the NL for everyone?

I doubt that, particulary because many owners don't complain about it, even when asked if they see it with the NL. Being insensitive to glare with the EL 8x32, perhaps I won't see it with the NL,either. We'll see.

I think the percentage of people that notice glare in the bottom of the FOV without glasses is going to be pretty high unless you get the eye cups just perfect. A mm or two can make a difference in the eye cups. Even with all the click stops on the eye cups sometimes your perfect adjustment will fall between click stops. The glare as some have said is not really directly associated with bright light or being too near the sun either. It is there almost all the time. It seems to be more viewing angle dependent.

 

[Canip]

BabyDov, post 878,
I have the NL 8x42 now for some time and in my hands it never showed any glare, handling is very comfortable and the optical quality is excellent. It is of course heavier than the 8x32 EL, but it has a larger FOV. The test report in which I compared this NL with other top quality 8x42 and 8x32"s is published (in English) on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor. Go on that WEB-site to "Verrekijkers"and from there to "Verrekijkers testen en vergelijken"and you will find the test there as well as a number of other ones, some in English some in Dutch.
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs (post #879),

I think we will have to live with the fact that some people seem to have a glare issue with the NL, while others - including you and me - don‘t. Whether it has to do with face or eye anatomy, physiology, the way of holding and handling the instrument, usage, psychology, or all of the above - this is what I do like about binoculars compared to photography, the interaction man - machine sometimes seems to produce unforeseen effects and results. We can then debate about them (similar to: is the EL SV sharper or the SF?) but may never reach agreement.

Canip

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Canip, post 887,
You are right but if non-glare observers do not mention it we get this whole forum infected with a sort of glare absolutism .
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[ticl2184]

I think the percentage of people that notice glare in the bottom of the FOV without glasses is going to be pretty high unless you get the eye cups just perfect. A mm or two can make a difference in the eye cups. Even with all the click stops on the eye cups sometimes your perfect adjustment will fall between click stops. The glare as some have said is not really directly associated with bright light or being too near the sun either. It is there almost all the time. It seems to be more viewing angle dependent.

When your spending a small fortune on a pair of binoculars I would EXPECT glare to be kept to the absolute minimal and "NOT" distract you from your viewing experience...That's one of the reasons your paying so much !
The glare in my 10x42 SV's is 100% better than the NL at any eye cup position. And by the way you shouldn't have to be adjusting the eyecup position so you stop seeing glare.. The eye up position is there to allow you to find the most comfortable position for viewing the image and NOT to avoid seeing glare.

Cheers

Tim

 

[ticl2184]

Hi Tim,

Cloudy days have their own particular set of glare producing conditions. Here's an earlier post from this thread with glare photos taken on a rainy day.

Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions

From a design perspective, however, glare is definitely a issue, of course, and I hope Henry is right and Swarovski finds a quick fix. Canip Unfortunately I doubt that will happen, at least based on my brief discussions with Swaro engineers. After all the glare issue of the EL/SV/FP models has...

www.birdforum.net

Where the glare is coming from is not hard to see. It's the metal cell containing the objective lenses. I've found that very careful adjustment of the eyecup length and the IPD can minimize it to an acceptable level for me and I don't like glare.

BTW, the objective cover attachment tab mentioned in the post has been modified to keep it from intruding into the exit pupil. I tested a brand new pair last week, made in January, and found no change at all in the internal baffling compared to my pair made in July. Glare performance was identical.

Henry

Thank Henry.

The optical formula of the SV and NL are almost identical so I don't see why the glare is there in the NL, unless it's the wider FOV.
And if it's because of the metal cell containing the objective lense why don't they damn well do something about it when your shelling out almost 3 Grand....
And by the way, why the hell should you have to adjust the eyecup position to avoid seeing the glare. The eyecup position is there to help you find the best eye position for observing the image, NOT to avoid glare.

PS.
See the photo attached. You can actually see the glare of the 12x42's projected in a ring outside of the exit pupil of the NL on the right.

Cheers
Tim

 

[ticl2184]

PS.

Henry and all ...

Anyone heard of "Vanta Black"
In 2019 MIT scientists fabricated a substrate that absorbs 99.965% of all light.
It's the blackest black...
If anyone at Swarovski are reading can you PLEASE coat the internal baffles of the NL in this material to reduce glare so I can buy a pair...😉

Cheers
Tim

 

[PeterPS]

PS.

Henry and all ...

Anyone heard of "Vanta Black"
In 2019 MIT scientists fabricated a substrate that absorbs 99.965% of all light.
It's the blackest black...
If anyone at Swarovski are reading can you PLEASE coat the internal baffles of the NL in this material to reduce glare so I can buy a pair...😉

Cheers
Tim

Hi Tim,
I don't think that Swaro will do anything about this issue as they can sell the NLs to all those people who either don't notice the glare in their NLs or notice it but don't care. There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that the NLs that I owned had serious glare issues---the glare/haze is there at the bottom of the EP for everybody with a bit of experience to see, and there were several pics posted on the BF showing the glare in the NLs. The question is why some people notice it when they use their binos while others don't: imo the decisive factor is your facial features (eye sockets, nose bridge etc.)----if you can get close enough to the oculars without experiencing blackouts then you can avoid the glare.
Peter

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

I have tried to generate reflections/glare in the 8x42 NL pure using a high intensity LED LENSER flashlight (concentrated and wide beam) shining from behind in the eyepieces, shining at different angles inside in the objective metal case (perfectly blackened in my NL): no reflections in my binocular image. If it should originate from the objective side from the metal cage on the objective side it should occur there, but it does not turn up. So my conclusion is: glare or different kind of reflections do not occur with this sample in combination with my eyes.
Now I took another binocular: the Kowa 6,5x32 (I like it, but that is another chapter): with light entering the binocular from the objective side like from a low sun over trees and the sky looking partly milky white: no image left, completely blinded. A similar kind of experience with a Minox 8x25.
My conclusion is: with my 8x42 NL sample it is for me simply not possible to generate glare like reflections .
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[ticl2184]

I have tried to generate reflections/glare in the 8x42 NL pure using a high intensity LED LENSER flashlight (concentrated and wide beam) shining from behind in the eyepieces, shining at different angles inside in the objective metal case (perfectly blackened in my NL): no reflections in my binocular image. If it should originate from the objective side from the metal cage on the objective side it should occur there, but it does not turn up. So my conclusion is: glare or different kind of reflections do not occur with this sample in combination with my eyes.
Now I took another binocular: the Kowa 6,5x32 (I like it, but that is another chapter): with light entering the binocular from the objective side like from a low sun over trees and the sky looking partly milky white: no image left, completely blinded. A similar kind of experience with a Minox 8x25.
My conclusion is: with my 8x42 NL sample it is for me simply not possible to generate glare like reflections .
Gijs van Ginkel

Lucky you..
Can I have that pair of yours 😉

Cheers
Tim

 

[jan van daalen]

You can, but you have to come to The Netherlands who sell these "specials".

Jan

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Jan, post 895,
Yes I noticed it: on the box it said: Swarovski NLpure-GF only sold by HOO. Now I understand why I had to pay 6000 US dollars. So I am a lucky guy.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[BabyDov]

Does there seem to be a difference between the the 3 magnification versions of the NL in regard to glare?

(I recall that the 10 x 32 El was more prone to glare than the 8x32 El)

 

[ticl2184]

Does there seem to be a difference between the the 3 magnification versions of the NL in regard to glare?

(I recall that the 10 x 32 El was more prone to glare than the 8x32 El)

It was definitely more noticable in the 12x version I tried last weekend...
See pic above...

Cheers
Tim

 

[PeterPS]

Does there seem to be a difference between the the 3 magnification versions of the NL in regard to glare?

(I recall that the 10 x 32 El was more prone to glare than the 8x32 El)

The usual difference that one would expect as the magnification increases: I had the 8x42 and the 10x42 and the latter was worse---the larger EP of the 8x42 makes eye placement easier.

 

[PeterPS]

Jan, post 895,
Yes I noticed it: on the box it said: Swarovski NLpure-GF only sold by HOO. Now I understand why I had to pay 6000 US dollars. So I am a lucky guy.
Gijs van Ginkel

Sold by WHO? Anyway if Swaro charges 3000$ extra for a GF bino then getting rid of glare seems to be a much harder job than what Henry believed.....