• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Swarovski NL 8x42 - First Impressions (2 Viewers)

Last edited:
henry link said:
The first sentence is not a description of pincushion distortion, but rather a description of angular magnification distortion, which as you say increases as pincushion distortion decreases. Mustache distortion employs enough pincushion in the inner 2/3 or so of the the field to correct AMD and then rapidly decreases the pincushion in the outer part of the field, causing AMD to rapidly increase near the field edge.

Below are some photographs of strong AMD distorting a circle at the field edge of a Swarovski 8x32 SV. I use circles for this purpose, but the distortion of a square follows the same pattern of radial compression near the field edge.

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3251084&postcount=1

I won't be completely certain about the NL's distortion until I or someone else examines and photographs a similar row of circles (or squares) through it and also examines and photographes a grid pattern placed behind the eyepiece and viewed through the objective end of the binocular to establish how straight lines change between the center and edge of the FOV.

Henry
Click to expand...
Sorrry for coming back to an rather old question, after reading several different reviews and comments it is still not clear to me whether the 8x42 is suffering from a globe effect. If yes how does if compare to the Zeiss SF, either 8x42 or 8x32?

Thomas
 
Thomas_M said:
Sorrry for coming back to an rather old question, after reading several different reviews and comments it is still not clear to me whether the 8x42 is suffering from a globe effect. If yes how does if compare to the Zeiss SF, either 8x42 or 8x32?
Click to expand...
I see it when panning with the NL 8x42 but not with the SF 8x32. To be fair, I'm not very sensitive to it and I had to check after reading about it and I noticed it only when viewing straight lines such as buildings.
 
Hi Thomas,

It's easy enough to demonstrate that the 8x42NL has the type of distortion that causes the the globe effect, but whether it will be noticed by a particular person is much more difficult to predict as you can see from the last two posts.

To continue with my post that you quoted, I've now photographed the same series of circles through the 8x42 NL, which will be included in my review (if it ever gets done). I made a screen shot below that shows the shape distortion imposed by the NL (top) compared to the distortion of the 8x32 ELSV. Both have enough pincushion distortion at the midpoint between the center and edge (far left circle) to correct the angular magnification distortion that causes the globe effect, but as you near the field edge on the right both show the compression of shapes that cause the globe effect. The closest circle to the edge in both is similarly distorted, but because the NL has a wider AFOV that circle is farther from the center and so may cause less disturbance when panning. Subjective experiences are sure to differ between these two binoculars (as well as the Zeiss SFs, which I haven't photographed), so while the same angular magnification distortion is there in all of them it doesn't map quite the same way in different models, so I wouldn't try to predict anything.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2020-11-29 at 8.04.28 PM.jpeg
    Screen Shot 2020-11-29 at 8.04.28 PM.jpeg
    177.8 KB · Views: 112
henry link said:
Hi Thomas,

It's easy enough to demonstrate that the 8x42NL has the type of distortion that causes the the globe effect, but whether it will be noticed by a particular person is much more difficult to predict as you can see from the last two posts.

To continue with my post that you quoted, I've now photographed the same series of circles through the 8x42 NL, which will be included in my review (if it ever gets done). I made a screen shot below that shows the shape distortion imposed by the NL (top) compared to the distortion of the 8x32 ELSV. Both have enough pincushion distortion at the midpoint between the center and edge (far left circle) to correct the angular magnification distortion that causes the globe effect, but as you near the field edge on the right both show the compression of shapes that cause the globe effect. The closest circle to the edge in both is similarly distorted, but because the NL has a wider AFOV that circle is farther from the center and so may cause less disturbance when panning. Subjective experiences are sure to differ between these two binoculars (as well as the Zeiss SFs, which I haven't photographed), so while the same angular magnification distortion is there in all of them it doesn't map quite the same way in different models, so I wouldn't try to predict anything.
Click to expand...
Henry,
Your screenshots seem to suggest that the NLs have a lot of CA, whereas in my experience they correct CA as well as the SVs, or even better. Regarding RB I have also noticed it in the NLs, but it's rather mild.
Peter
 
Hi Peter,

These images shouldn't be used to evaluate CA. In order to photograph the field edge the camera must be pointed through the eyepiece from an off-axis angle.

I was quite impressed with the CA in my normal CA tests. Longitudinal was unusually well corrected for a binocular and lateral was probably the best I've seen in a modern binocular with a complex eyepiece and objective design.

Henry
 
Gijs,
thank you for your comment, can you please give a link to the review, I couldn't find it on the house of outdoor webpage

Many thanks

Thomas
 
henry link said:
Hi Thomas,

It's easy enough to demonstrate that the 8x42NL has the type of distortion that causes the the globe effect, but whether it will be noticed by a particular person is much more difficult to predict as you can see from the last two posts.

To continue with my post that you quoted, I've now photographed the same series of circles through the 8x42 NL, which will be included in my review (if it ever gets done). I made a screen shot below that shows the shape distortion imposed by the NL (top) compared to the distortion of the 8x32 ELSV. Both have enough pincushion distortion at the midpoint between the center and edge (far left circle) to correct the angular magnification distortion that causes the globe effect, but as you near the field edge on the right both show the compression of shapes that cause the globe effect. The closest circle to the edge in both is similarly distorted, but because the NL has a wider AFOV that circle is farther from the center and so may cause less disturbance when panning. Subjective experiences are sure to differ between these two binoculars (as well as the Zeiss SFs, which I haven't photographed), so while the same angular magnification distortion is there in all of them it doesn't map quite the same way in different models, so I wouldn't try to predict anything.
Click to expand...
Hi Heny,

thanks a lot for the detailed reply and the photographs. I think I am not super sensitive to globe effect but judging from the images I fear that it could disturb me. A year ago I purchaised the little Kowa 6,5x 32 with 10 degreee field of view, nice binoculars but the globe effect is somewhat unpleasant. I am asking myself if it is intended to avoid strongly curved lines at the edges due to pincushing distorsion or just a design flaw. Almost all astronomical eyepieces, even the 100 degree Ethos are free from globe effect. Why are especially the low magnification binoculars suffering from it, NL 8x42, Zeiss SF 8x42 but not 10x or 12x.

Thomas
 
I got my pair of NL Pure 8x42 yesterday. I have had quite many Swarovski binos before during my 25 years of birding, SLC 7x42, SLC 10x42 (still have), EL SV 10x50 and now NL Pure 8x42. I have to say that these are so far the best binos I have ever watched through. I'm very happy about that. One minor drawback there is and that is the fact the lens cover is too tight. I solved this issue by sanding (using Dremel) two (2/6) of the inner knobs from lens covers. Now the lens covers are not too tight but just perfect.
 
hyperboreus, post 850,
I had exactly the same problem with the eyepiece cover, so I decided to take a cover of another (historical) brand that fits very well, comes off quickly when necessary and protects perfectly against rain and dust. Eyepiece covers of many brands are in my experience often not very comfortable or easy to use, so I have made a collection of covers over the years and use the one that is suited for that particular job.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
That is what the seller also suggested to me, but it seemed kind of silly to have almost 3K€ binos and then some flimsy Opticron eyepiece cover on it. I would suggest the sanding method, works very well and you still have the original eyepiece cover on the binos...
 
Last edited:
hyperboreus, post 856,
I do not think that it is silly. The bag Zeiss supplies for the Victory SF 8x32 does not satisfy me at all, although it is well made etc. So I have other bags that fulfill my wishes much butter and the ZEiss bag is used for a smaller binocular and that works allright to.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
I felt like I was buying a Porsche 911 and the seller says to me that "no, the driving wheel is not good, lets change it to the one from Toyota Avensis with the Toyota logo on it". I think I got with a minor tweak still the Porsche driving wheel, if you know what I mean.
 
One minor thing I'm missing from the new NL Pure is related to the field bag: there is no easy handle as there was in the EL field bag I previously owned. This stitched handle can be seen here: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/712747-REG/Swarovski_60507_Field_Bag_for_EL_SLC.html. It was very easy to move the bag around, now you always have to get a grip from the strap to securely move the bag/binos around. I wonder why the did not include that feature to the NL Pure bag?
 
The new Swarovski bag has in my view the advantage that it is easy to get the binocular in the bag and not with the lenses directed to the botom or the top cover of the bag. And I do not miss the handle in the previous bag at all. Swarovski has experimented quite a bit with different bag designs. The one that fitted like an envelope I liked very much, since it protects the binoculars very well and is very compact. But this rather expensive bag was not liked by customers, so Swarovski designed another one shown in post 856. I was not very fond of that bag, but tastes differ as is clear from the different posts. The new bag supplies the option of using a shoulder strap, but one can also insert a very short strap at the backside of the bag, so you can make a convenient handle. Everybody happy I assume since it combines the advantages that other bags did not have.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Gijs van Ginkel said:
The new Swarovski bag has in my view the advantage that it is easy to get the binocular in the bag and not with the lenses directed to the botom or the top cover of the bag. And I do not miss the handle in the previous bag at all. Swarovski has experimented quite a bit with different bag designs. The one that fitted like an envelope I liked very much, since it protects the binoculars very well and is very compact. But this rather expensive bag was not liked by customers, so Swarovski designed another one shown in post 856. I was not very fond of that bag, but tastes differ as is clear from the different posts. The new bag supplies the option of using a shoulder strap, but one can also insert a very short strap at the backside of the bag, so you can make a convenient handle. Everybody happy I assume since it combines the advantages that other bags did not have.
Gijs van Ginkel
Click to expand...
Once I got used to putting the NL's in sideways I like the new NL bag also. It is just something you have to get used to because you are accustomed to putting the binoculars in the case with the oculars up. The new NL bag is well-made and well padded and it has plenty of room for the strap. It works for me.
 
I like also that the binos are inserted sideways, they are easier to put and get from there. But still I’m missing the very convenient handle from the EL bag, it would have made the bag still a bit better.
 

Similar threads

C
NL 32's vs 42's eyepiece lens & eyecup size
Replies
8
Views
555
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver
J
Brief comparison between Swarovski AX Visio 10x32 vs EL 10x32 Swarovision
2 3
Replies
41
Views
3K
tehri
tehri
Owlbarred
A day afield with 8x42 NLs after 20 years using 8x32 EL and EL SVs.
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
Gray C
Gray C
A
NL Pure 8x32 field of view
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Jason Bugay Reyes
Jason Bugay Reyes
SuperDuty
An interesting comparison.
Replies
19
Views
3K
Swedpat
S

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Back
Top