• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Swarovski NL 8x42 vs Carl Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 (1 Viewer)

master5

Well-known member
Hello! Please tell me, I have Carl Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 (black 2019) it makes sense to change it to Swarovski NL 8x42, field of view 148m vs 159m and how it will be by permission?

thanks
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Hello! Please tell me, I have Carl Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 (black 2019) it makes sense to change it to Swarovski NL 8x42, field of view 148m vs 159m and how it will be by permission?

thanks
The best thing to do is try the Swarovski NL 8x42 and compare it to your Zeiss SF 8x42 because only you can decide if it is worth the difference in money to change binoculars. I have had them both and I prefer the NL because of the bigger FOV, the sharper edges, better contrast and better ergonomics with the new molded tubes. If your sensitive to glare the SF may have a slight advantage in that area but I don't notice a lot of glare in the NL either. They are both excellent top alpha binoculars so it comes down to personal preference in the end.
 

jremmons

Wildlife Biologist
Logically? No. The Zeiss Victory SF is one of the top binoculars around. The NL may be slightly superior in FoV, but all the other improvements, if they exist at all, will be too little to be of practical value. You'd basically have to sell your binoculars at probably 80% original value, then purchase another pair of binoculars for likely $750+ more than what you get from selling them. And depending upon how your eyes work with the NL and SF, you may find the SF a better performer. The improvement in FoV is likely negligible in actual use, and probably not even something you'd notice except in direct side by side comparison.

Justin
 

etudiant

Registered User
Supporter
Seems a substantial outlay for marginal gain, but if you enjoy spending money, don't hesitate.
I'd spend the money differently, Nikon just launched a 10x25 stabilized glass which looks really good. While the 10x25 specification does not shine during the darker parts of the day, IS makes a huge difference and this is the first IS glass that I've seen that looks comfortably manageable.
 

Steve C

Well-known member
While I'm sure the NL is a top binocular, please be aware that it is just out and there are far too many pronouncements about its excellence far too early in any evaluation process. I'd say ignore the hype until you can find one at a dealer someplace. I'd not advise you to do it, unless there is something compelling about some dislike for the Zeiss you can't live with. The differences will be less than you might expect from reading about the NL.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Seems a substantial outlay for marginal gain, but if you enjoy spending money, don't hesitate.
I'd spend the money differently, Nikon just launched a 10x25 stabilized glass which looks really good. While the 10x25 specification does not shine during the darker parts of the day, IS makes a huge difference and this is the first IS glass that I've seen that looks comfortably manageable.
If you see or hear anything about the Nikon 10x25 IS binocular let us know. I am interested in those also. They look interesting!
 

wdc

Well-known member
Its an apples to apples comparison, unless the different ergonomics, or the FOV, seem to leap out at you, WHEN you actually try one.

I would try one. There's nothing wrong with tempting yourself... ;-)

The Zeiss SF is already an excellent binocular, so don't expect miracles when you handle and look through the NL. You can buy much less expensive binoculars with a wider field of view than even the NL (though not as well corrected). At the alpha level, it comes down to personal preference and pocketbook. There has been some very succinct user reports on the NL which are quite helpful. Relentless exhortations of superlatives from some newly minted owners should be taken with a grain of salt, especially if what they primarily do is compare specifications to other products that they no longer own, and cast everything else in a negative light. There's no critical thinking there, just bias. Read everything you can and decide for yourself.

-Bill
 

pbjosh

missing the neotropics
Switzerland
No one can answer the question for you, but better to try the NL before making the change. The difference might or might not seem huge, and you might or might not like the NL better. The 8x42 SF is, in my opinion, the single best birding bin ever made up until the release of the NL. How much better is the NL really? I don't know - I've not seen one yet. But the SF continues to impress me. I too am curious to see the NL, but wouldn't make a change unless I'm blown away. Perhaps I'll be tempted by the 10x NL though?
 

master5

Well-known member
Thank you all very much! Sincerely from Russia from a bird lover
 

Attachments

  • P1110330.jpg
    P1110330.jpg
    90.3 KB · Views: 269
Last edited:

jcnguyen09

Active member
Hello! Please tell me, I have Carl Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 (black 2019) it makes sense to change it to Swarovski NL 8x42, field of view 148m vs 159m and how it will be by permission?

thanks
Just my 2 cents I guess! My thinking is that if you have been using SF 8x42 and very happy about it then please ignore and don't need to try out the NL 8x42. That would save you a lot of money and continue being happy using the sf 8x42.
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
"If you’re a keen birder you’ll be wanting to know if these are now the finest birding binoculars in the world. Yes. Yes, they are. They are an evolution of the ELs, but better in almost every way, equal to or better than the previous best (Zeiss SFs) by a noticeable margin in every area except weight. And unlike the SFs, build is properly premium and flawless."

 

bkdc

Well-known member
Don’t underestimate the comfort of the Zeiss Ergobalance concept in shifting the weight to the eyepiece. I think it’s generally agreed that the NL is superior optically. That doesn’t mean it’s best for you. If you are a birder glassing for hours, I find the Zeiss is less tiring. I now own both. I haven’t tried the FRP forehead rest yet as they seem sold out...... Maybe that may improve long term comfort? Mrs bkdc prefers the Zeiss because it feels lighter. But really.. she prefers 8x32’s.

The SF’s are amazing, and if you’re happy with their performance, don’t worry that there might be something better. The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence. Someone else’s rice cake always looks more delicious than your own.
 
Last edited:

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Don’t underestimate the comfort of the Zeiss Ergobalance concept in shifting the weight to the eyepiece. I think it’s generally agreed that the NL is superior optically. That doesn’t mean it’s best for you. If you are a birder glassing for hours, I find the Zeiss is less tiring. I now own both. I haven’t tried the FRP forehead rest yet as they seem sold out...... Maybe that may improve long term comfort? Mrs bkdc prefers the Zeiss because it feels lighter. But really.. she prefers 8x32’s.

The SF’s are amazing, and if you’re happy with their performance, don’t worry that there might be something better. The grass always looks greener on the other side of the fence. Someone else’s rice cake always looks more delicious than your own.
 

Conndomat

United States of Europe
Europe
If your sensitive to glare the SF may have a slight advantage in that area...

Didn't you have any major problems with stray light with the Zeiss? Crescent torches?
I think the SF 8x42 is not very good in this regard, if the NL is even worse here it should hardly be useful for side or front light.

Andreas
 

jcnguyen09

Active member
Didn't you have any major problems with stray light with the Zeiss? Crescent torches?
I think the SF 8x42 is not very good in this regard, if the NL is even worse here it should hardly be useful for side or front light.

Andreas
Although the SF 8x42 is a tad better in controlling glare/haze, it's value is gravely tarnished by the stray lights intrusion and the weird orange crescent torches appeared internally at ~4 and 8 o'clock that Zeiss never cares to admit and fix them!
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Although the SF 8x42 is a tad better in controlling glare/haze, it's value is gravely tarnished by the stray lights intrusion and the weird orange crescent torches appeared internally at ~4 and 8 o'clock that Zeiss never cares to admit and fix them!
I returned 2 brand new Zeiss SF 8x42 binoculars because of the weird orange crescent torches. Outside of that they were great binoculars.
 

tenex

reality-based
These weird-sounding orange crescents don't occur only on Zeiss SF; a thread in the scopes section has also reported them on wide-angle telescope eyepieces, curiously also Zeiss designs (or copies thereof by APM). Apparently they can be avoided by more careful eye placement if one cares to take the trouble.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top