Trying out Swarovski 12x42 NL vs 10x...and the 12x are brighter? (1 Viewer)

[laurencejackson]

I already have the 10x42 NL, but I have been hankering after the 8x and that incredibly wide FOV. So, I went to my local camera shop yesterday to have look through the 8x and I also tried the 12x, which I hadn't looked at before. What an incredible bin! They seemed no more difficult to use than my 10x and what's more, they were definitely brighter than the 10x!
I found this amazing as I would assume the opposite to be true generally, but can anyone shed any light (!) on this? Surely they don't use different coatings? My 2021 10x may have not been as clean as the new 12x but I can't think that was the reason as they are in absolutely mint condition. Mine were just a tad more 'overcast', colors were duller whereas the 12x had real a pop to the image. Any ideas...?

Laurence

 

[Richard D]

Measured transmission is supposedly about the same 91/92%. I can't think of anything other than the increased magnification revealing a little more detail.

 

[Bentley03]

I agree with Richard D, almost certainly the effect of increased magnification.

I'm also a huge fan of the 12x NL, and based on nothing more than my own perception from experience of the various NL formats, think the 12x may just be my favourite (as well as being the only 12x of any range of bins I've been able to pick up and use comfortably handheld). It's an absolutely stunning glass! 😍

(I bumped into an almost 80 year old lifelong birder on one of my walks recently. His binocular of choice when he's out birding? A 12x42 NL which he uses handheld with forehead rest!)

 

[ReinierB]

The afov of the 12x42 is a bit larger than the 10x42. Maybe that plays a role too?

Did you bring your 10x42 with you and compare them side by side? If not, I don't think you can really rely on what you thought you saw.

 

[laurencejackson]

The afov of the 12x42 is a bit larger than the 10x42. Maybe that plays a role too?

Did you bring your 10x42 with you and compare them side by side? If not, I don't think you can really rely on what you thought you saw.

Yes I was comparing them directly to each other. The whole image was brighter with more pop and I don't think it was a magnification issue, I'm quite used to many different formats of bins and I was focusing on certain details like a leaf or chimney etc when comparing.

 

[henry link]

IMO, it doesn't take much dust an/or condensed droplets or a little smearing on the exterior surfaces to noticeably cut the contrast and brightness. Many times I've thought a binocular was clean, but when I shined a bright light on the glass from just the right angle I could see filmy smeary stuff I hadn't noticed. Then I would carefully clean one side and compare it to the other side. The difference was just like what you described above.

 

[laurencejackson]

IMO, it doesn't take much dust an/or condensed droplets or a little smearing on the exterior surfaces to noticeably cut the contrast and brightness. Many times I've thought a binocular was clean, but when I shined a bright light on the glass from just the right angle I could see filmy smeary stuff I hadn't noticed. Then I would carefully clean one side and compare it to the other side. The difference was just like what you described above.

Thank you Henry

I think you have put your finger on it! My 10x were quite grubby after all and when compared with the 12x, very much their equal. Of course, being under the Swaro spell for 20 years now I have now purchased the 12x already, so now have the trilogy, 8x, 10x and 12x! I will sell the 10x though as I feel having 8x and 12x is a better combo. The 12x are very special bins....