Zeiss SF 8x30 vs SFL 8x40 (1 Viewer)

[tian1227]

This is my first post here even though I've been reading the forum for quite a bit

I've been searching for a binocular in the past few months. One criterion for me is that the weight is less than 25oz. I've tried many (Zeiss pocket 8x25, Hawke Frontier ED 8x42, Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 & 10x42, SFL 8x40 & 10x40, Maven B3, vortex diamondback 8x32, GPO ED, SF 8x32, ...)

I'm now down to just two.. the SF 8x30 and the SFL 8x40. They are both great and I just want to give my own impressions on them.

Diopter: I really like the one on SF.. the diopter on SFL is non-locking which I dislike. (SF wins)

Build quality: These two both seem to be great. The focusing wheels are smooth on both, though slightly tighter on SFL. But the SF is made in Germany and manufactured by Zeiss.. which is a big plus for me. ALSO, the 10x40 SFL (not the 8x40 I'm comparing here) that I also tested had a terrible eye extender cup issue.. and it was purely a quality issue. So I have to assume that the QA on the SF's are slightly better than the SFLs. (SF wins)

View - Resolution: This wasn't apparent to me first, but when I looked at the water in a pond about 100 yard away, wow, the SF really shined here... I could definitely see more details than the SFL. If I end up keeping the SFL, this will be the one thing that I will really really miss about the SF. (SF wins)

View - Color: The SF gives a yellowish tint to the image, which I slightly dislike. The SFL image is more "clear" and "transparent" in color to me. (SFL wins)

View - CA: I do see slight chromatic aberration on the SFL, especially on the edge. It's almost non-existent on the SF. (SF wins)

View - brightness: when it's dark, the SF shows a brighter image as expected.. and no question it's better in this regard. (SFL wins)

View - ease/comfort: This is my biggest complain about the SF.. when I extend the eyecup all the way out, the edge of the view is a bit blur, as if my eyes are too far away from the eyecup. However, if I screw in the extender just a little bit, I then see a very crisp round view, but now I see black kidney shaped spots, as if my eyes are too close. I don't know if this is a design thing resulted from making the FOV extremely wide, but it just seems that there is a very small range of how far the eyes can be from the eyecup. It could also just be my eyes.. but I have no issue at all with the SFL. The SFL for me is definitely easier and more comfortable to view. (I'm thinking to myself.. dang.. if the SF is like the SFL in this catagory, I'd be keeping SF without a second thought!) (SFL wins)

Price/Value: I paid about $2K for the SF new while it was on sale, and $1600 for the SFL "like new". To me the SF would have the more "value" here as it's about $500 off and new. (SF wins)

Weight/Dimension: They are similar in weight (SF is about 1 oz lighter) and size. (SF wins)

Ergos: They both feel great in hands, but the SF feels a bit more comfortable when I use it with one hand. This is because for me (5'7'') the 32mm tube is a little easier to hold than the 40mm tube. (SF wins)

Due to the view comfort, right now I'm leaning more toward the SFL.. even though I really want to pick the SF!

I'm hoping to have several more viewing sessions next week!

 

[William Lewis]

Hi Tian.

Sounds like your having a good time comparing them. Im assuming your looking for a "one and done"? That's great, I think the 2 your comparing would be on my shortlist too, I'd probably chuck the ultravid and NL 8x32's in the mix too - I've never got on with the sfl '30, the focus wheel seems to be in the wrong place for me.

The sf is an interesting beast in all its guises, the 42 and 32's mainly due to longer focal length than is the current norm. Obviously this helps curb colour fringing as you've noted along with the weight balance as Zeiss advertise.

The 32's though I think are the real outlier of the current crop of top of the line bins with both the longer focal ratio but also moving objective focusing, it's virtually unheard of now unless you own a cannon, no other current zeiss, Nikon, Swarovski or Leica use it as far I know though.

I suppose there are no more optical elements though, yes there is the plane glass window in front of the moving objective to make them waterproof but there is no focusing element behind them. Maybe the mechanics are slightly more complex with the moving elements being a bit further from the focus wheel, and bigger?

If I were in your boat, well, I'd feel lucky to be able to consider owning a new sf 8x32 but also id probably spend a hot minute really trying to dial in the eye cup position on the sf. You can use o rings or if your a cheapskate like me a merry shit load of girls hair bands, and closing up the ipd often helps too. Good luck.

Will

 

[tian1227]

Hi Tian.

Sounds like your having a good time comparing them. Im assuming your looking for a "one and done"? That's great, I think the 2 your comparing would be on my shortlist too, I'd probably chuck the ultravid and NL 8x32's in the mix too - I've never got on with the sfl '30, the focus wheel seems to be in the wrong place for me.

The sf is an interesting beast in all its guises, the 42 and 32's mainly due to longer focal length than is the current norm. Obviously this helps curb colour fringing as you've noted along with the weight balance as Zeiss advertise.

The 32's though I think are the real outlier of the current crop of top of the line bins with both the longer focal ratio but also moving objective focusing, it's virtually unheard of now unless you own a cannon, no other current zeiss, Nikon, Swarovski or Leica use it as far I know though.

I suppose there are no more optical elements though, yes there is the plane glass window in front of the moving objective to make them waterproof but there is no focusing element behind them. Maybe the mechanics are slightly more complex with the moving elements being a bit further from the focus wheel, and bigger?

If I were in your boat, well, I'd fell lucky to be able to consider owning a new sf 8x32 but also id probably spend a hot minute really trying to dial in the eye cup position on the sf. You can use o rings or if your a cheapskate like me a merry shit load of girls hair bands, and closing up the ipd often helps too. Good luck.

Will

Hi Will,

Yeah I'm taking the "one and done" approach, and also trying to just have one for all purposes instead of having multiple.

The oring approach sounds very interesting! I wonder if anyone else has had similar experience with the SF or it's just me. I do have very bad nearsightedness and I wonder if that plays a role somehow.

 

[chill6x6]

So are you talking about an SF 8X32?

All I can say is I sold the SF 8X32 and kept the SFL 8X40. There is no doubt if the SF 8X32 works for you, go with it. But the odds are in the favor of the SFL 8X40. I'd certainly give the NL 8X32 a look as well.

 

[tian1227]

Yup SF 8x32 is the one I'm looking at.

 

[tian1227]

Ah I realized I said 8x30 in my original post.. as well as a few other typos. I don't see a way to edit it though..

 

[Maljunulo]

I’m happy with mine. (had it since December 2020)

 

[Ribbon]

Also 'one and done' with the SF 8x32's here, apart from my kitchen table Swift...
Great all-rounder.

 

[Ignatius]

@ tian 1227: you have 10 categories, of which seven go to the SF. In my eyes you have a clear winner.

 

[tian1227]

I’m happy with mine. (had it since December 2020)

The SF 8x32 you mean?

 

[tian1227]

@ tian 1227: you have 10 categories, of which seven go to the SF. In my eyes you have a clear winner.

Yeah that's true.. but the view comfort is a big thing though

 

[Maljunulo]

The SF 8x32 you mean?

Yes, sorry if I wasn’t clear.

 

[ragin-cajun]

I was also underwhelmed w sf and sfl eyecups and armor in general.. NL 32 in different league than sfl for me.. try one..

 

[Scott98]

View - ease/comfort: This is my biggest complain about the SF.. when I extend the eyecup all the way out, the edge of the view is a bit blur, as if my eyes are too far away from the eyecup. However, if I screw in the extender just a little bit, I then see a very crisp round view, but now I see black kidney shaped spots, as if my eyes are too close. I don't know if this is a design thing resulted from making the FOV extremely wide, but it just seems that there is a very small range of how far the eyes can be from the eyecup. It could also just be my eyes.. but I have no issue at all with the SFL. The SFL for me is definitely easier and more comfortable to view. (I'm thinking to myself.. dang.. if the SF is like the SFL in this catagory, I'd be keeping SF without a second thought!) (SFL wins)

All the top binos have at least one huge flaw IMO and you've found it with the SF's. For me this problem was barely noticeable during trials but became overwhelming during actual birding in bright sun. I have to unscrew the eyecups 1.5 turns to get them in the right spot and use o-rings and blue masking tape to hold them in position.

From what you've written, I would go with the SFL's. I've got the 8x42 SF and the eye placement trouble is so difficult that they've been removed from primary birding use, and are relegated to astronomy or special situations where I'm seated or stationary and can manage the eye placement troubles better.

For me the only downside of the SFL's would be the extra false color around the outer parts of the field. If that's going to drive you crazy, the 8x32 SF's would eliminate it.

 

[tian1227]

I was also underwhelmed w sf and sfl eyecups and armor in general.. NL 32 in different league than sfl for me.. try one..

Yeah I've thought about getting one to try but read about the glare issue.. and since it's quite a bit more than the SF 8x32 (for what I paid for anyways), so I decided to try the Zeiss first.. maybe I'll give NL a try sometimes later.

 

[tian1227]

All the top binos have at least one huge flaw IMO and you've found it with the SF's. For me this problem was barely noticeable during trials but became overwhelming during actual birding in bright sun. I have to unscrew the eyecups 1.5 turns to get them in the right spot and use o-rings and blue masking tape to hold them in position.

From what you've written, I would go with the SFL's. I've got the 8x42 SF and the eye placement trouble is so difficult that they've been removed from primary birding use, and are relegated to astronomy or special situations where I'm seated or stationary and can manage the eye placement troubles better.

For me the only downside of the SFL's would be the extra false color around the outer parts of the field. If that's going to drive you crazy, the 8x32 SF's would eliminate it.

Very interesting.. yeah for me it's like, no matter what position I always seem to have one issue or other. I'll give some more time and see if I can find a good way to deal with it.

For SFL, I think I can live with the issues, it's just now that I've seen the images with the SF, so that will always bug me a little 😂 if I never saw the SF I think I'd be happy with the SFL pretty much 100%. Nothing is perfect I guess 😂

Also wanna mention that the Nikon MHG to me is quite capable too. The CA is only slightly worse than SFL. Otherwise to me other things are on the same level. I just don't like the look of it and the feel of the material. For anyone who does like the classic look, it would pretty good for the price.

 

[Patudo]

when I extend the eyecup all the way out, the edge of the view is a bit blur, as if my eyes are too far away from the eyecup

It might be worth remembering the SF isn't intended to be sharp all the way to the edge: if that's important to you, you might want to look at something like a Swarovski EL or NL. Good luck in your hunt for the perfect binocular!

 

[tenex]

when I extend the eyecup all the way out, the edge of the view is a bit blur

I missed this on first reading. It sounds like spherical aberration of the exit pupil, aka finicky eyebox. Models like SF and NL are known to be especially sensitive to eye alignment, so try fiddling with the IPD (hinge) setting and how you're holding the bin (and possibly your head) and see if you can get this right, and whether it seems likely to get easier with practice.

 

[tian1227]

It might be worth remembering the SF isn't intended to be sharp all the way to the edge: if that's important to you, you might want to look at something like a Swarovski EL or NL. Good luck in your hunt for the perfect binocular!

Yup it's been a lot of fun 😊

 

[tian1227]

I missed this on first reading. It sounds like spherical aberration of the exit pupil, aka finicky eyebox. Models like SF and NL are known to be especially sensitive to eye alignment, so try fiddling with the IPD (hinge) setting and how you're holding the bin (and possibly your head) and see if you can get this right, and whether it seems likely to get easier with practice.

Ah I did notice changing (reducing) the IPD made the SF a little better for me. I didn't know that's due to spherical aberration. I'm guessing it's that plus the 32mm are causing my issue.. maybe due to my eye socket shape and/or nearsightedness? The 40mm probably naturally eases the eye placement issue as the exit pupil is bigger and the eye box is bigger.