Where are all the 8x32 SF reviews? After all the speculation... (1 Viewer)

[eronald]

I am currently enjoying my SF 8x32 but to report now would only be to repeat aspects of my earlier review so I will wait until December after we return from a month on the Isle of Islay to report further.

Lee

Lee,

Your opinion is much valued, especially since as an expert you can quickly discern the essentials. However, to stay on topic, your review is not the one which is missing, you already gave this instrument your seal of approval.

It's bewildering that an instrument with no major faults gets so little applause. The upshot may be that the SF 42 was a major update, and now the novelty has worn off, the 32 is "just" a very nice alpha with a very large field of view.


Edmund

 

[Troubador]

Lee,

Your opinion is much valued, especially since as an expert you can quickly discern the essentials. However, to stay on topic, your review is not the one which is missing, you already gave this instrument your seal of approval.

It's bewildering that an instrument with no major faults gets so little applause. The upshot may be that the SF 42 was a major update, and now the novelty has worn off, the 32 is "just" a very nice alpha with a very large field of view.


Edmund

My explanation for Swaro's NL making bigger waves on Birdforum is similar to yours: it is not so much of a mystery as to why a totally new model from Swarovski, with a totally new model name, taking the place as top of Swarovski's binocular line-up and displacing the most successful premium bino model in modern times, the Swaro EL, should arouse more interest and speculation than 'another SF' from Zeiss.

In the meantime dealers report SF32 is selling well and they are placing repeat orders for further quantities.

Lee

 

[pbjosh]

As soon as I am again in Europe I will certainly get ahold of an SF 8x32, it's the bin that I've most looked forward to for a long time. I will very likely look at a 10x42NL. I expect nothing less than excellence than both, and don't anticipate being disappointed by either. Honestly, though, I'm more excited about the SF32.

I'm also looking forward to seeing what Meopta has in store with a new B2, and though I might be a bit pessimistic about the possibility of it becoming a reality, I would love to see a new alpha from Nikon as well.

 

[james holdsworth]

I find it a bit bewildering that Zeiss would skew the SF colour balance towards yellow or green or whatever people are seeing. I thought Zeiss hit perfection with the colour balance of the HT, which to my eyes was perfectly neutral with immaculate white colour presentation. So obviously they can do it, question is why didn’t they?

 

[dries1]

How many more than two people I am aware of, who have observed the yellow cast.

Andy W.

 

[Troubador]

I find it a bit bewildering that Zeiss would skew the SF colour balance towards yellow or green or whatever people are seeing. I thought Zeiss hit perfection with the colour balance of the HT, which to my eyes was perfectly neutral with immaculate white colour presentation. So obviously they can do it, question is why didn’t they?

Holger Merlitz in https://www.juelich-bonn.com/jForum/read.php?9,448229,448410#msg-448410 says this about SF32: "The Zeiss is very bright, with high edge definition and - you can hear! - without a noticeable green cast."

Holger is a pretty astute judge of binoculars and clearly deliberately looked for a colour cast and didn't find it.
Lee

 

[Hermann]

I find it a bit bewildering that Zeiss would skew the SF colour balance towards yellow or green or whatever people are seeing.

You just answered your own question ... "or whatever people are seeing".

Hermann

 

[kabsetz]

I just spent a few days with both the 8x and 10x32 SF, and saw a slight greenish cast in the colours they present. Not much, but it is there.

Also weighed the 8x32 SF as well as the EL SV 8x32. The SF was about 10 g lighter, but the EL had its objective covers on (they would come off, but I did not feel inclined to remove them on a loaner pair, lest I break them in the process).

To Binastro, on the 20x60 Zeiss stabilised. I have a friend who has one, and he says he holds them upside down so that the button rests against his thumb and the weight of the binocular helps press it in to engage. Diopter of course has to be re-set if you do that since eyes swap eyepieces.

- Kimmo

 

[Binastro]

Kiitos, Kimmo.

Regards,
B.

 

[b_reynolds_ak]

I was swapping back and forth between the 8.5x42 EL and the 10x32SF looking out over a wetland with lots of greens and browns. The SF most definitely had a greenish/yellow color cast to it compared to the Swaro’s. So much so that the vegetation looked a bit unnatural. The Swaro’s, to my eyes, seemed very neutral and more pleasing. I then compared the SF’s to some 32 EL’s at a local shop. For me the Swaro’s gave a more relaxed view with less distortion or rolling ball. So, I shipped the SF’s back and ordered a brand new pair of 8x32 EL’s from Camera Land NY. I’m going to deal with whatever glare issues I may have in certain conditions on the back of the fact that I’ll have the very best binos for my needs that I can buy.

 

[james holdsworth]

Every sv I’ve tried has been decidedly bluish...some strikingly so in winter conditions.

 

[eitanaltman]

In my experience a lot of these "color casts" on top dog binoculars are VERY slight and only really obvious in direct back-to-back comparison. Just used alone in the field, it would be rare to notice the blue lean of the Swaro SV or the red lean of a Leica UV or the slight yellow/green lean of a Zeiss SF.

But if you go back to back the differences are much more apparent.

And, like anything optics, different people vary in how much they notice slight color differences. I'm quite sensitive to this (not in the sense that it bothers me, but in the sense that I notice).

We know the data on transmission supports these conclusions, you can scroll through Holger's tests to confirm - (and Allbinos broadly agrees) -- of the "big 3", in general, the Swaros have the best transmission in the extreme blue end (both Zeiss + Leica roll off more below 500nm) which gives them that slightly cool "crystalline" view, the Leicas have the best transmission at the extreme red end (both Zeiss + Swaro roll off above 600nm) giving them that richer "saturated" look, and the Zeiss have the best transmission in the middle (rolling off more at both ends) which gives them a bit of a green/yellow cast in certain situations.

All are quite flat with excellent transmission in the middle, so for the most part look nearly neutral, but if you swap back and forth quickly looking at subject matter that exacerbates the difference, it's there.

 

[Richard ferriss]

Thanks.

My pair of these arrived today in 8x32 format. I recently sold the 8x32 EL's to try these out. I am familiar with the 10x42 SF and Zeiss here seems to have made a 32mm version of that binocular. Sharpness is outstanding and the color hue is indeed biased toward yellow. But that makes a nice addition to the collection. Build is terrific. Weight is more than the EL's - you can feel it, but the balance makes up for it. They are slightly bigger too.

I am posting because I am a person affected by the Swaro 32mm glare issue. These come close to providing a glre-free substitute for those otherwise beloved bins.

https://www.cabelas.com/shop/en/swarovski-el-binoculars-with-swarovision-1601081054I wear glasses and with the eyecups all the way down have an easy view to obtain and hold.

I hope this helps some folks. I highly recommend these, but if I was not glare-affected by the Swaro's, I would probably stick with them.

Thanks. I’ve also received the 8x32 sf and am quite enjoying them. Also sold the SV 8x32 because of glare. I’m not expert enough to comment with authority, but really appreciate evaluations of the flare question. Eye placement is taking some practice, but these already feel like friends, and beg to be brought along on excursions. The ergonomics really work for me.

 

[NDhunter]

So I’ve been evaluating the 10x32 SF, after making an o ring adjustment to the eye cups. Comparing to a 8.5x42 EL, the view is not as neutral, showing more of a green color cast. Also the rolling ball effect or whatever you want to describe it as, is a lot more pronounced in the SF.
My questions for you with both 8x in hand is 3 part.
1: Differences in color cast between the two.
2: Rolling ball effect and general ease of use on your eyes.
3: The obvious question.. glare between the two.

Thanks!

I am wondering why you need to use 0-rings ? Have you tried the
adjustments in the eyecups. :smoke:

Jerry

 

[b_reynolds_ak]

I am wondering why you need to use 0-rings ? Have you tried the
adjustments in the eyecups. :smoke:

Jerry

Yes, the size of adjustments were too great between settings, so I could not get the right eye relief to avoid either blackouts or a lessening of the fov. The o ring essentially added a few mil to the 3rd position, creating a more ideal eye relief, so that I could bring them up to my face at the position I like and have optimal eye placement in that position.
However like I mentioned, the view was still not as easy on my eyes as Swaro’s are and I would start to get a headache while looking through them for any length of time. The flat field of the Zeiss came across as a distorted viewing experience, whereas Swarovision looks really natural to me. I often spend many hours a day looking through my binos, picking apart mountainsides. I need a bino that is foremost enjoyable for that sort of use.

 

[DocSarvis]

I’m quite happy with my late model Zeiss Victory 10x32 but I’m fully aware that there has been progress made since I made that purchase. However, I think I will let some time pass before I consider an upgrade to let Zeiss iron out any problems. Thinking of the first run of the SF42 here. How long was the grayish model out for before the second edition (black) models were issued? I have no desire to be a beta tester for Zeiss like some were.

 

[Scarletmacawdad]

I would like to revise the impression I relayed above.

Re hue: I spent a lot more time with these, and I cannot rule out the yellow / green case is not in fact a correct color representation and my impression is due to having spent so much time with Swaros, that may, it appears, favor the blue end. Frankly I'm suspecting that. Its dead neutral.

Re eyecups: I wear glasses. When the eyecups are totally screwed down I get kidney beaning. But the first stop is too high up and I lose the full field stop. My initial solution is just to partially retract both cups out, and just forget that they are not resting in a stop. They seem to stay put - especially since the eyecups are not that press-fit style Swaro uses. You can just lay them on the eyepieces.

These are growing on me a great deal. Between these and the 8x32 El I can't see resolvable by any criteria other than preference (assuming you don't, like me, have a glare problem with the ELs (interestingly, my wife, no glare, hm...)).

On that preference front, the really cool thing about these is that they are not flat field. The ELs put a heck of a lot of territory in focus at once, and that is really helpful for counting birds. But these SFs have their bigger brother's "immersion" factor (forgive me, if that is the wrong word) - it feels more 3d than most 8's I've tried.

Finally, re size and weight. I think I'm just getting fooled by the outside diameter of the barrels being larger. They don't seem different in weight any longer to me. But they still feel a little bigger in the hands. I still can't balance them as easily as the ELs, but I'm pretty convinced this will come with time.

I hope some of this helps.

 

[binomania]

So I’ve been evaluating the 10x32 SF, after making an o ring adjustment to the eye cups. Comparing to a 8.5x42 EL, the view is not as neutral, showing more of a green color cast. Also the rolling ball effect or whatever you want to describe it as, is a lot more pronounced in the SF.
My questions for you with both 8x in hand is 3 part.
1: Differences in color cast between the two.
2: Rolling ball effect and general ease of use on your eyes.
3: The obvious question.. glare between the two.

Thanks!

Hello. In summary... I have been using the Zeiss SF 8x42 and the Swarovski EL 8.5x42 for three years. I take them both with me when I go to the oasis turret to do surveillance. I am a voluntary ecological guard and I have to do a service of 14 hours a month, always in a protected LIPU oasis. Great for me and for binomania These days I left the EL at home and brought the SF32
So I can give you my opinion:
The Swarovski NL shows more neutral images, however, I prefer the warm hue of the SF which gives me greater contrast when observing in nature, where there are areas of trees and leaves. I think it's very subjective...
Both SF42 and SF32 resist glare better. Looking near the setting sun, the SF42 is "slightly" better at containing diffuse light than the SF32, but the SF 32 seems to me to have more micro-contrast than the SF42 and also contains better chromatic aberration both on axis , both lateral. I really like the SF32.
I am not very sensitive to the rolling ball effect, but I find the SF32 very pleasant to use. It is very light and I confirm that the weight is unbalanced towards the eyepieces, like the SF42..Sorry for my English

 

[b_reynolds_ak]

Hello. In summary... I have been using the Zeiss SF 8x42 and the Swarovski EL 8.5x42 for three years. I take them both with me when I go to the oasis turret to do surveillance. I am a voluntary ecological guard and I have to do a service of 14 hours a month, always in a protected LIPU oasis. Great for me and for binomania These days I left the EL at home and brought the SF32
So I can give you my opinion:
The Swarovski NL shows more neutral images, however, I prefer the warm hue of the SF which gives me greater contrast when observing in nature, where there are areas of trees and leaves. I think it's very subjective...
Both SF42 and SF32 resist glare better. Looking near the setting sun, the SF42 is "slightly" better at containing diffuse light than the SF32, but the SF 32 seems to me to have more micro-contrast than the SF42 and also contains better chromatic aberration both on axis , both lateral. I really like the SF32.
I am not very sensitive to the rolling ball effect, but I find the SF32 very pleasant to use. It is very light and I confirm that the weight is unbalanced towards the eyepieces, like the SF42..Sorry for my English

Thanks for your thoughts on that. A lot comes down to preference I think, such as the color hues of each bino. I wish I had bought the 8x rather than 10x32 SF to try out. However I think they would still share much of the same characteristics, such as the flattening of the image and color. I’ll be sticking with Swarovski 8x32 EL’s for now, as I prefer multiple aspects of Swaro over Zeiss.
It sounds like you have a very enjoyable task with your volunteer work!

 

[binomania]

It sounds like you have a very enjoyable task with your volunteer work!

Yes, I really like my "job" as a volunteer. We are not paid, but during the service, we have the same fskills of "public official" and we are competent in environmental crimes. My luck is to be vigilant in a beautiful oasis.
Ciao