• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

Swarovski NL vs Zeiss SF: a personal comparison of two 8x32s. (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
I think there are several types of binoculars situation in relation to glare:

1 bino in which glare is evident without much effort in many lighting situations, being very intrusive glare.
It is obvious to all user

2 bino in which glare must be looked for very carefully in certain position in order to be seen some intrusive glare.
But it can only be seen by those who deliberately provoke it and know exactly how and where to look for glare test.

3 bino in which glare must be looked for very carefully in certain position in order to be seen very faintly and no intrusive glare.
It can only be seen by those experience users who deliberately provoke it and know exactly how and where to look for glare test.

4 bino in which glare is absent in any situation.

From the multitude of reports and various opinions I have read (not in my own experience with these models) I made an average conclusion: apparently NL 8x32 is part somewhere in the middle between 2 and 3, maybe closer to 2. And Zeiss 8x32 seems to belong to 3 category
No such bird as #4. 🙏🏼
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
I think there are several types of binoculars situation in relation to glare:

1 bino in which glare is evident without much effort in many lighting situations, being very intrusive glare.
It is obvious to all user

2 bino in which glare must be looked for very carefully in certain position in order to be seen some intrusive glare.
But it can only be seen by those who deliberately provoke it and know exactly how and where to look for glare test.

3 bino in which glare must be looked for very carefully in certain position in order to be seen very faintly and no intrusive glare.
It can only be seen by those experience users who deliberately provoke it and know exactly how and where to look for glare test.

4 bino in which glare is absent in any situation.

From the multitude of reports and various opinions I have read (not in my own experience with these models) I made an average conclusion: apparently NL 8x32 is part somewhere in the middle between 2 and 3, maybe closer to 2. And Zeiss 8x32 seems to belong to 3 category
I guess I had some intrusive glare in my NL 8x42. At certain angles when I was tilting the binoculars, the glare would always creep into the bottom of the FOV. That is what I found particularly irritating. Even though I could avoid the glare by not tilting the binoculars at that angle, I knew that every time I did I would get the same glare. I could predict it. Predictable glare is more irritating than say the occasional glare you get in sunny situations.
 

james holdsworth

Consulting Biologist
Some have really short memories…years of discussing FL astigmatism, endless debates about green cast in SF’s, thousands of pages on Swarovski rolling ball and gritty focus and Leica CA.

Its always going to be something, it’s an Internet forum discussing binocular. It’s also the readers choice to decide what to read, comment on or just simply ignore.
 

dorubird

Well-known member
Romania
No such bird as #4. 🙏🏼
Maybe EDG 8x42 it is such a rare bird. But due to the very aggressive baffling diaphragm I think it loses light transmission. No glare at all with surreal contrast but the low transmission is the price paid for that in EDG. In optics there is a law of compensation, we have to sacrifice somehow something to have something else on an impeccable level. NL and SF are one of the best series of binoculars, but does not mean that they do not have small weaknesses somehow.
 

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Is there a point here Lee? You know of my background and history in related businesses. I’ve known the internal blackening story for decades. I believe you are conflating a couple themes in ways that aren’t helpful.

You make my point. We don’t know how many see glare as a thing emanating from the binocular, made worse by it, compared to what Mother Nature is serving up. We should.
My point is that manufacturers blacken the insides of binos and add baffles because they know that glare is a 'thing'.

Lee
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top