Thanks Henry, I have read your earlier posts on the subject to include that one. Can you imagine, how those of us, who dont experience glare react to these? As I have very limited experience with the NL, that being limited to 2 test drives at a dealer on a day with no apparent glare, (none showed up in the SFs I looked through at the same time), but have thought about buying one, these discussions are puzzling, off-putting. The easy way out is to just choose an alternative, maybe Lee's SF recommendation, but seemingly again based on these above reviewers those to have warts.
-
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.
Swarovski NL vs Zeiss SF: a personal comparison of two 8x32s. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Troubador
- Start date
- Status
Lee is certainly a very seasoned observer and extremely well versed in optical instruments, and so I would not doubt for one second that what he describes in post # 40 is exactly what he experienced with the NL.
As my own experience is very different from his, this reminds me once again that the interface human - optical device can produce extremely different results when it comes to the usage of binoculars and telescopes.
As everyone here knows, people have been debating on this and in other forums whether or not, and if yes, to what degree, the NLs are prone to suffer stray-light effects such as glare. If I am not mistaken, taking into account what I have read so far on a number of forums and in several birding and optics publications, there seem to be roughly 50% of posters who say they experience severe glare issues with the NL, such as described in this thread, and 50% who say they have no or only minor issues that don’t diminish their viewing experience (Gijs has been a major voice for the „no glare group“).
Henry Link has demonstrated that the construction of the inner side of the tubes provides a basis for reflections in or around the light path, so an objective explanation for the possible experience of glare has been given (I guess even Gijs does not dispute this). But whether or not an individual observer really experiences glare is apparently a different story.
Many factors seem to be playing into this, including handling and holding the instrument, face anatomy, viewing habits, physiological issues in the eye, etc. etc. This has to be taken into account when we discuss performance characteristics of a binocular - a reminder that forum members seeking advice or opinions form others can not necessarily just rely on the experience of another forum member - something we all know but easily tend to forget.
Canip
Lee, there may be more to this part of the story. Wonder if you could take a look? Several months back a couple folks got asking about putting NL eye cups onto an EL, to see if the 6 stops and a more positive click helped those. Swaro NA, do to the Virus and working from home, had not experimented with this and did not know. They sent a set and asked for a report. They threaded on just fine and indeed had the 6 positions with improved feel/clicks. However, in the down position, that inner AL ring did not touch the edge of the lens mount and seemed to create something less than a decent seal from debris between cup and lens, when installed on the EL. With the EL eyecups, installed on the EL, that ring sits down right against, or at least close to the edge of the lens/mount. Since I don't own an NL, I assumed that ring would sit against the edge of the lens when installed on an NL. The NL pic above, with eyecups obviously screwed all the way down appears to have that same gap, note the shadow between the AL ring and lens. If so, then the idea the fit has something to do with sealing out larger debris seems less so. Or, there's another issue with the eyecups? Looking at your sample, with eyecups all the way down does that ring sit above the lens edge or right against it? Tanks
Tom
Taking a close look at the NL8x32 there appears to be absolutely no gap between the aluminium ring and the ocular lens and it is not flush with the top surface of the lens but is a tiny bit higer than it, and of course this inner metal component of the eyecup doesn't move when you adjust the height of the eyecup by screwing the outer element up and down.
On the general question of whether light entering the eyepiece from the side/back and contributing to the glare take a look once more at the location and conditions during my test for glare. You can see where the sun is. It is just peeping past the edge of next door's bay window. Looming above me, to my right and behind me is our house. There was absolutely no light source from these directions and of course Henry's post 38 explains how the problem lies down at the objective end of the binos.
Lee
henry link
Well-known member
Everyone can see the glare in the 42 and 32 NLs, even you Dennis, provided the lighting situation is right, your eye's pupils are centered on the exit pupil or are rotated in the direction of the glare. And everyone can fail to see it if the lighting situation doesn't stimulate the reflection from the objective lens cell that causes it or the eye's pupil is positioned off-axis of the exit pupil in a direction away from the reflection.
A large exit pupil only helps when there actually is glare at the edge of the exit pupil, but even a 7mm exit pupil won't save you from seeing it if you rotate your pupils far enough toward the spot at edge of the exit pupil where the glare originates (as Lee did in post #40). On the other hand, if there is no reflection at the edge of the exit pupil because the binocular is properly baffled, then nobody will see glare under any circumstances, no matter what the light is like or how the eye's pupil is positioned or how small the exit pupil is.
I remember you were pretty slow to notice any glare in the 8x30 Habicht or the 8x32 EL SV or the 8x42NL, as long as they were favorites. I imagine that will be true for the 10x32 NL as long as it remains your current favorite, but the mountain goat day is coming. Once you've dumped the 10x32 on eBay we'll hear all about it.
A large exit pupil only helps when there actually is glare at the edge of the exit pupil, but even a 7mm exit pupil won't save you from seeing it if you rotate your pupils far enough toward the spot at edge of the exit pupil where the glare originates (as Lee did in post #40). On the other hand, if there is no reflection at the edge of the exit pupil because the binocular is properly baffled, then nobody will see glare under any circumstances, no matter what the light is like or how the eye's pupil is positioned or how small the exit pupil is.
I remember you were pretty slow to notice any glare in the 8x30 Habicht or the 8x32 EL SV or the 8x42NL, as long as they were favorites. I imagine that will be true for the 10x32 NL as long as it remains your current favorite, but the mountain goat day is coming. Once you've dumped the 10x32 on eBay we'll hear all about it.
henry link
Well-known member
I hope not. I think that day for Dennis is only a few months away. It's the day, after months of not noticing any glare in his 8x30 Habicht, he looked up some cliffs at mountain goats backlit by the sun and saw the light. Off to eBay they went.
I'll continue to enjoy my NLs too, long after the mountain goat day.
wdc
Well-known member
Thanks for the thoughtful review Lee. I concur with several of your opinions, and don't with others. I reviewed both of these, side by side a few months back. The only reason I tried the NL was that the SF32 did not quite give me the entire FOV with my glasses on. It turns out the NL did, otherwise I would have stuck with the SF. The SF is great in the hand and their views are more alike than un-alike in terms of visual quality. Yes, the focuser on the NL is verging on too slow, but I'm used to it when I use it. I don't feel it has cost me any birds yet...
Regarding glare, to me they both have artifacts related to it, but I perceived the NL gave me more actual contrast in the image field, regardless of the glare related artifacts at the bottom periphery of the field. That's my take. Neither of them are glare free for me. Even with glare, they are both really good binoculars. An 8x42 Zeiss Sf, and a 10x42 Leica Noctivid have far less glare in my experience, under the same conditions though, so there seems to be a price for the smaller objectives of these 2 designs.
Cheers,
Bill
Regarding glare, to me they both have artifacts related to it, but I perceived the NL gave me more actual contrast in the image field, regardless of the glare related artifacts at the bottom periphery of the field. That's my take. Neither of them are glare free for me. Even with glare, they are both really good binoculars. An 8x42 Zeiss Sf, and a 10x42 Leica Noctivid have far less glare in my experience, under the same conditions though, so there seems to be a price for the smaller objectives of these 2 designs.
Cheers,
Bill
I don't see any significant glare in the NL 10x32 and I have used them for quite a while now, and I saw a lot of glare in the NL 8x42. I don't think it is totally correct in trying to explain glare as a problem with just the binocular itself because it is also a problem with the binocular human interface and how your eyes and brain interpret the light coming into your retina. This story from Allbinos discusses why one person see's glare in the same binocular and another person doesn't. They tested the same Swarovski SV 10x50 binocular, so it has a quite large exit pupil also. They came to the conclusion that a large part of the glare difficulty had to be the way the binocular interfaced with the person, not just the binocular itself.
"Have we clarified the doubts of our Reader? It’s difficult to answer that question. If I was an owner of this piece of binoculars, I wouldn’t have noticed any concerns with the performance against bright light, and I most certainly wouldn’t have sent it to the service for an extra check. This example emphasizes the fact that the choice of optical equipment is a very personal matter. Of course, you can read our reviews and tests, considering them to be pointers in the right direction, allowing you to choose a group of possible candidates, but before you buy anything you must take the binoculars in your hands and use it. We have different eye sockets, a bit different sensitivity characteristics of our light detectors, different layout of rods and cones in our retinas and also individual sight defects. All these factors can influence our choice of a pair of binoculars; that’s why a piece of equipment which fares great in our tests might be perfect for another person but not for you."
Swarovski EL 10x50 Swarovision - binoculars review - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.
Last edited:
Um, Dennis, your eyes do not interpret anything, only the brain can interpret the signals from the retina, which are delivered to it via the optic nerves.
The eye is a very rough sphere, filled with transparent goo and a lens (and cornea) on one side which focus an image on the retina. The retina sends nerve impulses to the brain, which transforms those impulses into what we call vision.
Only the brain can “see”. An eyeball does not see any more than a camera with film in it sees.
Well ……… what can I say?Interpret means convert, and that is what the eyes do. They convert the light coming through the cornea into the retina, which sends signals to the brain, which then reads the signals and transforms them into vision. Don't challenge me on Biology, I did very well in Biology in school. My brain is not reading any glare in the NL 10x32 and Henry's brain is, therefor my brain, must be bigger.
Overall... much too much tends to be said in these threads. Tedious round and round and round, over and over and over, with the same tiresome cast of characters clearly displaying that they have nothing better to do in life than come here and pick at each other ad nauseum.
Just an observation. Get a life?
Last edited:
Sounds like you got out of the wrong side of the bed today Don. Birdforum is a place where folks get a chance to air their opinions and other folks get a chance to agree or disagree. Unless we change our minds we all tend to repeat ourselves to some extent for example my preference for 32mm binos and Zeiss SF 8x32 in particular, Henry's love of his FL8x56, or your love of everything Leica. If we were all sitting around a table face to face, most of these discussions would take place relatively rapidly but we are remote from each other and can only drip-feed our contributions one post at a time so it means a topic necessarily staggers on for longer than a conversation in real life would.Overall... much too much tends to be said in these threads. Tedious round and round and round, over and over and over, with the same tiresome cast of characters clearly displaying that they have nothing better to do in life than come here and pick at each other ad nauseum.
Lee
Now there’s a post which gets right down to the essentials.
What could possibly be more fundamental?
Did you know that „Bir Ding“ is Chinese and means „observing animals with wings“?
- Status
Similar threads
