• 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 (1 Viewer)

Congratulations on the NL pure. I also just bought the 8x42 and it is hands down my favorite out of all my alpha binocularsee. It has stunning colors and clarity and also less veiling glare than any of my other binoculars. The image is just so clean it’s hard to explain unless you compare them side by side. I know everyone has a different experience with binoculars but for me the NL is just as perfect as I have seen in a binocular.
 
I bought the Swarovski NL Pure 8x42 yesterday. It replaces a Bushnell Legend M 8x42. My, the Swaros are in another universe! The ergonomics are perfect for my hands. The field of view is huge, and the clarity is stunning. I have been out twice with it so far and I love it!

I look forward to reading other people's impressions.

View attachment 1377772View attachment 1377771
I really like your very short summing up and those clear photos. They make a purchase more tempting than anything I've seen so far does, and believe me there has been a lot! Thank you.

Tom
 
Here is a picture from today.
Wonderful! Through the NL (with...?), or...?

Regarding NYC I could think of other reasons beside the virus for the flight of businesses out of town.
And off to Ruffled Feathers we would go... but as crazy (and I do mean that literally) as the past year has been, I also find myself thinking that change has been occurring for a long time. Early 20th-C photos show Manhattan streets absolutely dense with shop signs, on various floors of the same building. As a boy in the 1960s I saw some oddly lifeless streets but still had the feeling that one could find anything in the world at a family-owned shop somewhere, and hear their story while at it. When I visited in the 1990s I saw all that in the final stages of being replaced by the same dull chain stores found at any midwestern shopping mall, and if even those shut down now it hardly seems a great loss anymore. I find myself wondering what a city will be in the future and why people will want to live there.
 
Last edited:
For what it's worth, here my measurements with the Trioptics Dynameter of the usable eye relief, i.e measured from the rim of the fully retracted eyecups (not form the surface of the eyelens):

  • NV 8x42: 17 mm
  • EL SV 8.5x42: 17 mm
  • NL 8x42: 16.5 mm
  • SF 8x42: 16 mm
  • SF 8x32: 16 mm

Canip

Interesting. I always thought Swaro EL had too much ER. Had to swap the stock eyecups for ones from 8x50 SLC with more ER-build in.
SF seems to be just right.
 
It is odd. A lot of Swarovski have glare besides the NL. Leicas seems to control glare a lot better in general, but they don't have the huge FOV of the NL. I think Swarovski is pushing the envelope of FOV, and consequently you are seeing the side effects in the form of glare. I think the NL has gone too far in trying to please the big FOV crowd and as a result a lot of people are selling their NL because of glare. I know I sold mine because of the omnipresent glare at the bottom of the FOV and finicky eye placement. You should not have to tolerate stuff like that on a $3K binocular.

I am one of those people who doesn't care about FOV. I care about razor-sharpness in the middle, great ER, high diopter value at infinity. I don't care for close focus distance. Don't care about glare either.

Never test drove a NL and no plans to. 12x42 makes no sense at all. It badly needs a 50mm+ objective. I think 10x rhymes well with 50mm and 12x deserves an even bigger objective, as least 56mm.

I am perfectly happy with EL and Zeiss 8x42 SF and 10x54 HT, not sure what NL gets me that I don't already have.
 
The NL is very special and definitely worth seeing. That said, it cost me considerable anguish re-evaluating my own fine bins that I was "perfectly happy with", and trying to work out which NL I'd be better off with (instead?) and why. If I were starting today NL 42 would definitely be my first choice... but I'm not, I get attached to what's worked for me. So do try an NL sometime, it's an interesting test.
 
In the U.S., on-line shopping will continue to displace brick and mortar retailers. In the U.S., one in four retail transactions are internet based, yet almost 2 in three Americans live in metro areas of plus 1 million residents representing over 200 million of our 330 million people meaning they're not necessarily in Kodiak, Alaska with no other shopping choices. Americans are moving away from brick and mortar shops and towards internet based one-day-delivery retail shopping. This rapidly shifting retail model can and should calibrate how manufacturers deal with issues like the Swarovski Stop Sign.
...
The advantage of living in metro areas like NYC was way bigger when there was no internet. In the future, big metro areas will become living museums where tourists flock to watch the old buildings and... each other.
 
The advantage of living in metro areas like NYC was way bigger when there was no internet. In the future, big metro areas will become living museums where tourists flock to watch the old buildings and... each other.
Except that buildings in the US aren't even very old...
I agree with you that the advantages of big city life are diminishing now, and disadvantages increasing, rapidly. (I grew up in NYC myself. But of course developing countries are another story...)
 
I take the liberty to open a new thread here, as I plan to subject the NL to a detailed test and comparison with the EL SV, the SF and possibly other premium glasses soon after its launch on the market and hope that other forum members will share their impressions as well.

Initially, however, this is only a micro review, because I could only look at the NL 8x42 at the Swarovski representative for about fifteen minutes and compare it with my EL SV.

GENERAL

One can certainly argue about the design, also about the return to the "normal" central hinge (I personally never saw any particular advantage in the open hinge concept). The glass appears even more valuable than the EL SV, the finish of the inspected specimen was impressive; haptics and grip appear perfect, the balance and ergonomics excellent, the NL therefore seems lighter than the EL SV at first (which is not the case).
The NL appears compact, almost delicate, fits well into my hand with its unusual “dent” in the tubes, the EL SV in contrast appears almost like a “block” next to it.

MECHANICS

Everything is flawless, the hinge adjustment is pleasantly medium-stiff, the eyecups correspond in shape, size and function to those of the EL SV, but have 6 positions (with 4 intermediate clickstops). The diopter adjustment is now activated neither by pulling out the focusing wheel, nor by pushing it in as on the new CL, nor on the right tube, but by means of a separate slide underneath the focusing button. You can find that great or not so great, but it works well and precisely. No locking mechanism, but an unintentional adjustment seems unlikely due to the chosen placement of the slide.

The pleasant surprise for me was the focus mechnaism – no more different adjustment force between left and right rotation as with my EL SV, and no jerk or noise, but a rather smooth and very precise action on the large, new focusing wheel which has been placed forward between the tubes..

I have not tried the newly available forehead support; it can be easily and quickly mounted and removed, but I have my own method of stabilizing.

OPTICS

I'd better not say anything about the close focus limit here when I look at the discussions that are already going on in various forums.

According to Swarovski, the eye relief is only 18mm instead of 20mm in the EL SV, but I was able to see the edge of the field of view easily and effortlessly wearing my usual varifocal glasses (which I usually take off when observing), and I was able to see the entire field of view with them.

The image characteristics of the NL made a good impression to me in the short time available, very similar to the EL SV - bright, clear, sharp and high-contrast, relatively "cool" image, hardly any CA, little distortion for my eyes and still practically no noteworthy globe effect (Holger Merlitz did predict this correctly). The edge sharpness is good, it seemed to me to be quite comparable to the EL SV despite the larger FOV, but this will have to be verified further. I could not test for stray light.

The field of view (9.1 degrees = 159m) is noticeably larger than that of the EL SV (7.6 degrees = 133m), but somehow I had imagined it would appear even larger than when I looked through it, but the observation conditions in the city were anything but ideal. The comparison between the 159m of the NL and the 148m of the SF will certainly be interesting. The larger width gives the impression of a slightly higher magnification, so I almost thought that the 8x NL and my 8.5x EL SV had the same magnification.

CONCLUSION AFTER 15 MINUTES

Great glass! At first glance, the NL impressed me very positively; the improvements and enhancement over the EL SV are unmistakable, and Swarovski has shown that they will not simply leave the field to the competition. But only with more detailed tests and comparisons will I allow myself an assessment whether Swarovski is currently ahead of the pack with the NL in the premium glass sector; it seems possible. But the almost 900 Francs mark-up (Swiss prices) over the EL SV is no small matter.

To be cont'd.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Eye relief is often a critical point for me when I wear eyeglasses. I can see at videos of NL 8X42 that the eyepiece lens is big and with the eyecups in the bottom position eyeglasses comes very close to the eyepiece lens so very much of the eye relief is useful.
EL 8,5x42 is not as good in this respect because the eyecup edge
I take the liberty to open a new thread here, as I plan to subject the NL to a detailed test and comparison with the EL SV, the SF and possibly other premium glasses soon after its launch on the market and hope that other forum members will share their impressions as well.

Initially, however, this is only a micro review, because I could only look at the NL 8x42 at the Swarovski representative for about fifteen minutes and compare it with my EL SV.

GENERAL

One can certainly argue about the design, also about the return to the "normal" central hinge (I personally never saw any particular advantage in the open hinge concept). The glass appears even more valuable than the EL SV, the finish of the inspected specimen was impressive; haptics and grip appear perfect, the balance and ergonomics excellent, the NL therefore seems lighter than the EL SV at first (which is not the case).
The NL appears compact, almost delicate, fits well into my hand with its unusual “dent” in the tubes, the EL SV in contrast appears almost like a “block” next to it.

MECHANICS

Everything is flawless, the hinge adjustment is pleasantly medium-stiff, the eyecups correspond in shape, size and function to those of the EL SV, but have 6 positions (with 4 intermediate clickstops). The diopter adjustment is now activated neither by pulling out the focusing wheel, nor by pushing it in as on the new CL, nor on the right tube, but by means of a separate slide underneath the focusing button. You can find that great or not so great, but it works well and precisely. No locking mechanism, but an unintentional adjustment seems unlikely due to the chosen placement of the slide.

The pleasant surprise for me was the focus mechnaism – no more different adjustment force between left and right rotation as with my EL SV, and no jerk or noise, but a rather smooth and very precise action on the large, new focusing wheel which has been placed forward between the tubes..

I have not tried the newly available forehead support; it can be easily and quickly mounted and removed, but I have my own method of stabilizing.

OPTICS

I'd better not say anything about the close focus limit here when I look at the discussions that are already going on in various forums.

According to Swarovski, the eye relief is only 18mm instead of 20mm in the EL SV, but I was able to see the edge of the field of view easily and effortlessly wearing my usual varifocal glasses (which I usually take off when observing), and I was able to see the entire field of view with them.

The image characteristics of the NL made a good impression to me in the short time available, very similar to the EL SV - bright, clear, sharp and high-contrast, relatively "cool" image, hardly any CA, little distortion for my eyes and still practically no noteworthy globe effect (Holger Merlitz did predict this correctly). The edge sharpness is good, it seemed to me to be quite comparable to the EL SV despite the larger FOV, but this will have to be verified further. I could not test for stray light.

The field of view (9.1 degrees = 159m) is noticeably larger than that of the EL SV (7.6 degrees = 133m), but somehow I had imagined it would appear even larger than when I looked through it, but the observation conditions in the city were anything but ideal. The comparison between the 159m of the NL and the 148m of the SF will certainly be interesting. The larger width gives the impression of a slightly higher magnification, so I almost thought that the 8x NL and my 8.5x EL SV had the same magnification.

CONCLUSION AFTER 15 MINUTES

Great glass! At first glance, the NL impressed me very positively; the improvements and enhancement over the EL SV are unmistakable, and Swarovski has shown that they will not simply leave the field to the competition. But only with more detailed tests and comparisons will I allow myself an assessment whether Swarovski is currently ahead of the pack with the NL in the premium glass sector; it seems possible. But the almost 900 Francs mark-up (Swiss prices) over the EL SV is no small matter.

To be cont'd.
Canip

Thanks for sharing your experience. Eye relief is often a critical point for me when I wear eyeglasses. I can see at videos of NL 8X42 that the eyepiece lens is big and with the eyecups in the bottom position eyeglasses come very close to the eyepiece lens so very much of the eye relief is useful.
EL 8,5x42 is not as good in this respect because the eyecup edge is unnecessary high. When I tried them a few years ago I could see the field edges but I wished I had been able to come 1-2mm closer for the perfect open view.

And regarding eye relief I don't know why the manufacturers state same value for all models in a line, while it's not true. All EL models are claimed to have 20mm, all NL modes 18mm.
It was the same with Zeiss Victory FL: all models were claimed to have 17mm.
We know that 7x42 and 8x42 always have longer ER than 8/10x32 and 10x42.

I seriously consider to get NL Pure 8x42!
 
Last edited:
I received NL Pure last week. First impression: the shape is nice and provides a very comfortable grip. My first test was, as usual, the usable eye relief for eyeglasses. I started with the eyecups on the second step above bottom. That did not work good at all. The first step did not work good either. And then the bottom level: I could see the edges but not really that open as I desire.
Then I thought: the eyeglasses! I picked up my other eyeglasses who are closer to my eyes. At the second step above the lowest level it was clearly better. And at the first step I could see the entire field but not perfect. Then I tried at the bottom level: YES! Perfect and open view. I am very happy about that.

Based on the good reviews of the head rest I ordered it as well. And my impression is that it definitely helps to stablisize the image. It’s a great idea!
The FOV is a pleasure. Very wide, and the sharpness is good at almost the entire FOV. I can see a very slight distorsion close to the edges, though. Nothing worth to complain about in my opinion, but it’s not completely perfect.

When it comes to the eye relief, my experience is that the usable eye relief is not really as long as with Vortex Viper HD 6x32 and Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42. But these models only have 48 and 57 deg AFOV, compared to around 70 deg for NL Pure. I find it impressive that NL Pure actually provides such a long ER for such a wide AFOV! With the right eyeglasses it’s fully satisfying for me.

The only thing which made me dissapointed was that there is a slight play in the focuser wheel. It should not be on a binocular at this pricerange! Or IT WAS: when I now try the binocular I hardly feel a play at all. The focuser wheel of NL Pure has much less resistance than at the Vortex and Zeiss. Maybe it just needed to be used a while?
Regarding the image quality I think a description is a bit superfluous. It’s contrasty and supersharp, as expected.

I am very convinced NL Pure is the last 8x42 I have got in my life!
 
And regarding eye relief I don't know why the manufacturers state same value for all models in a line, while it's not true. All EL models are claimed to have 20mm, all NL modes 18mm.
It was the same with Zeiss Victory FL: all models were claimed to have 17mm.
We know that 7x42 and 8x42 always have longer ER than 8/10x32 and 10x42.
Hi Swedpat,

that is not entirely correct, that EL 12x50 is 19mm. specified and at Zeiss there are also different specifications, 10x32 = 15.3mm, 8x32 = 15.5mm, the others as far as I know all 16mm.

However, it is difficult with the ER. Location anyway, there is no consistent measurement method and even within a series of binoculars one glass can work, but not others!
The FL 7x42 does not work for me as an eyeglass user, but the 10x56 does. According to the manufacturer, both glasses have the same ER 16mm. position.

Ultimately, you should always check yourself whether it fits.

Andreas
 
Hi all

My review of the new top binoculars from Leica, Zeiss & Swarovski in the journal "Ornithologischer Beobachter" [in german language]:


Further, I recently compared my SF 10x32 and an NL 10x42 for one day. I was struck how similar the optical impression was in practice, even late at dusk or early in the morning, when we observed lekking Black grouse in the Alps. The one exception was glare, which I found much more conspicuous and disturbing in the NL than in the SF.
 
I recently compared my SF 10x32 and an NL 10x42 for one day. I was struck how similar the optical impression was in practice, even late at dusk or early in the morning, when we observed lekking Black grouse in the Alps. The one exception was glare, which I found much more conspicuous and disturbing in the NL than in the SF.
The 10x32 SF are great binoculars, indeed. I enjoy mine immensely.
 
I have spent the last two days watching a couple of Coopers hawks at my local parc... Here is a picture from today. (With Sony RX10 IV)

View attachment 1378142
Wonderful. The RX10 IV is a great choice as a birding camera! Not inexpensive, but compared to full frame options with 600mm reach - a bargain.


Another birding camera option with mind boggling reach (but a much smaller sensor):

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top