dries1
Member
I have never seen those prices for used SVs or SFs, am I looking in the wrong places?
I would pay that or a bit less for the SFL, but not the asking price.
-
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.
The new ZEISS SFL 30 binoculars (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Birdforum
- Start date
I would pay that or a bit less for the SFL, but not the asking price.
ragin-cajun
Well-known member
was amazed how small the SFL 40s felt in hand. outstanding low-light performer. clean Zeiss view but i couldn't get past the bike inner-tube-rubber coating. and it just didn't wow me like the SLC... or NL, SF but it is half the price of these 2. solid mid-range bino. alpha for me, close but no...my 2 cents.
Last edited:
I paid under £1000 for a fully boxed as new pair of the EL 8x32s from a UK store about a year ago, so it is/was possible.
Swarovski El 8x32 for sale | eBay
Get the best deals for Swarovski El 8x32 at eBay.com. We have a great online selection at the lowest prices with Fast & Free shipping on many items!
www.ebay.com
Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 Premium Binoculars | eBay
<p dir="ltr" style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 Premium Binoculars.</p> <p dir="ltr" style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Well looked after, excellent condition, optics spotless.</p> <p dir="ltr" style="margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;">Genuine interest only please.</p>...
www.ebay.com
Last edited:
I never liked harnesses and prefer regular neck straps, but the RY version I'm able to get along with very well. Seems much easier to get on and off than ones I've used in the past. Makes wearing the 8x42NL for long periods much more bearable. But to each his own.
I find the color cast of the 8x32SFs to be the only negative, but unfortunately a huge negative. It interferes with contrast and in masks field marks to some extent, especially in low light. In comparison the 8x40 SFL view (and that of the various 32&42 NLs) was like a film was lifted.
Last edited:
Swarovski El 8x32 for sale | eBay
Get the best deals for Swarovski El 8x32 at eBay.com. We have a great online selection at the lowest prices with Fast & Free shipping on many items!
www.ebay.com
Think about it? I've experienced it. And I don't get too hung up on what's "Alpha" and what's not. Optically I consider the 8x40 SFL better than the ELs and the 8x32 SFs; and equal to the 8x42NLs except for FOV. I've no experience with the 8x42SFs, but if they have the same color issue as the 32s I'm definitely not interested.
FOV and sharper edges is the big difference between the SFL and the NL. Why do you consider the SFL better than the EL? The EL is pretty color neutral, and it has sharper edges than the SFL and the same FOV. If you don't care about FOV and sharp edges, you can get by with a lot less expensive binocular, and you are frustrating all the R&D guys at Swarovski that developed the NL!
The alpha's like the SF and NL with the huge FOV's are always going to be bigger and more expensive than a 32 mm like the Leica UVHD+ because they have to have a more complex eyepiece with more lens elements to get that WA. Have you ever seen a Nagler WA eyepiece for a telescope ? Some of them look like hand grenades, If you like a small 32 mm you are going to have to be content with a more modest FOV. The smallest 30-32 mm I can think with an above average FOV is the Nikon MHG 8x30 or the Kowa 8x32 BD II XD, but then they have fuzzy edges because they don't have all the lenses in the eyepiece to correct for field flatness like an NL does.
1/3/2023 Kowa 8x32 BD II XD Review
Wide but fuzzy
ByleighCommunity Member
Magnification:8x
I purchased these close range hunting (100-400y) in scattered to dense trees. These were definitely wider than any 8x's I'd ever looked through, and the center of the image is surprisingly sharp. It drops off pretty bad at the edges, so any extra FOV you get is pretty dull. The depth of focus is way too shallow, due partly to the 8x32 configuration, but it was enough to make me annoyed every time I took them out. I got tired of constantly working the focus wheel to see something 50y past what I was just looking at. It is awful. You can see it in some of the video reviews on YouTube. It does have a very wide FOV, but beware of the downsides!
Last edited:
Swarovski El 8x32 for sale | eBay
Get the best deals for Swarovski El 8x32 at eBay.com. We have a great online selection at the lowest prices with Fast & Free shipping on many items!www.ebay.com
Thanks both. I was surprised to see the Original pre SV EL 8x32 that sold for $1299. It looked to be in good shape with all accessories. Still the price fetched seemed a little high.
Mike
FOV and sharper edges is the big difference between the SFL and the NL. Why do you consider the SFL better than the EL? The EL is pretty color neutral, and it has sharper edges than the SFL and the same FOV. If you don't care about FOV and sharp edges, you can get by with a lot less expensive binocular, and you are frustrating all the R&D guys at Swarovski that developed the NL!
I have 8x32 NLs, don't need ELs. The 8x40SFLs have better resolution than the 8x32NLs I own, which had better resolution than the ELs. The SFLs also have less glare and smoother focus with less throw. The 8x40SFLs were a pleasant surprise and hopefully the 8x30SFLs are of comparable quality. If they are I will sell the 8x32NLs and pocket some cash.
I don't care about sharpness to the absolute edge. Although it's a pretty minor issue, flat field bins are a tad bit dull and lifeless. Occasionally I'll pick up a detail in the field with the less flat SFLs that I didn't with the 8x42 NLs. Less FOV? Yes it is a drawback of the SFLs in comparison the Alphas, but not a great one. The "less expensive bins" you suggest won't have the resolution the SFLs.
And as far as frustrating the Swaro guys, they've done much worse with the over engineered Field Pro system and it's protruding nipple attachment point as well as the over engineered objective covers. The SFL object cover uses a much better concept. And now the frustrated Swaro dudes want $3,300 for 8x42s.
Interesting that you feel the SFL has better resolution than the NL. Do you mean on-axis resolution? How did you determine it? Just subjectively, or did you use a USAF resolution chart? I would think both the SFL and the NL would be resolving at the limit of the human eye.
Last edited:
Surely the better resolution is simply down to the comparative objective size? I'll be interested to know if you find the 8x30's resolve as well, or better, than your 8x32 NL's.
William Lewis
Wishing birdwatching paid the bills.
There's an old adage from mountain bike components, light, strong, cheap - pick 2.
With optics it's the same type of trade off, these sfl's (I've used the 40's) are solid workaday binoculars as I've said before with no obvious vices but they have prioritised light - slightly - at the expense of strong (optically).
I'm not a huge fan of Schmidt pechan's in general they just don't give me the magic so they're no on my radar and I don't get on especially well with small 8x30's except porro's from an ergonomic and stability perspective so there not for me personally but that doesn't mean they won't fill a niche for many.
They're still not cheap!
Will
With optics it's the same type of trade off, these sfl's (I've used the 40's) are solid workaday binoculars as I've said before with no obvious vices but they have prioritised light - slightly - at the expense of strong (optically).
I'm not a huge fan of Schmidt pechan's in general they just don't give me the magic so they're no on my radar and I don't get on especially well with small 8x30's except porro's from an ergonomic and stability perspective so there not for me personally but that doesn't mean they won't fill a niche for many.
They're still not cheap!
Will
Last edited:
yarrellii
Well-known member
I have! You have written exactly what I think to myself
Every single day I use my 8x32 EL SV I wish they weighted 450 g, just like the SLF 8x30. This is the reason (besides the price tag) I've never had any interest in the NL/SF bunch: why carry a 8x30 the size/weight of a 8x42 MHG or 8x40 SLF? I just don't get it. I'd be more inclined to get a 8x40 SFL than a 8x32 NL even if they had the same price. As a matter of fact, thinking about price/usability, if I had to choose between my two favourite 8x32 the EL SV and the Opticron Traveller and keep just one for every single activity, I'd probably choose the latter. Because it can do things (or I can take it places) the EL can't (due to weight/portability). I've tried many 8x32, and while the UVHD was very nice, my hands around its body felt crumped, and my big expectations towards the MHG 8x30 (which was supposed to be THE binocular) met terrible eye comfort, constant blackouts (that I never got with the Monarch 7 8x30. So, while it remains to be seen whether or not the SFL 8x30 can offer enough eye comfort (something my EL SV excels at), I thin it's a really wise move from Zeiss.
Yes, I've tried the CL 8x30, again, narrow eyecups. The Conquest HD 8x32: too heavy, slight tendency to blackouts; FL 8x32, nice, but not on pair with EL/UV optically to justify the price (to my eyes obviously, but YMMV). In short: if the SFL 8x30 deliver: I might as well sell both my EL and Traveller and have a single everyday binocular once and for all
Fingers crossed. After the big disappointment I got with the MHG 8x30, I prefer to be cautious.
Objective size is very likely the reason.
