Zeiss SFL 8x40, A Field Review (16 Viewers)

[Brummie]

Thank you.

Maybe now would be a good time for a “sorry” for some of your ad hominem remarks. I’ll say nothing further on the matter.

 

[Loud Green Man]

Maybe now would be a good time for a “sorry” for some of your ad hominem remarks. I’ll say nothing further on the matter.

And maybe not.

What part of “Staff Member, Moderator and (Bird Forum) Supporter” did you fail to pick up on?

Feel free to say more please but via PM so we do not further derail this Zeiss focused thread.

LGM

 

[adhoc]

Could someone please direct me to, or just do(!) a review/s of the 10x40? Thanks. I have found only this one (linked). The reviewer is color blind (he/she says).

 

[PW42]

Could someone please direct me to, or just do(!) a review/s of the 10x40? Thanks. I have found only this one (linked). The reviewer is color blind (he/she says).

My 2c for what it's worth.

I spent some time at the Birdfair comparing in particular the SFL 10x40, SF 10x32 and NL 10x32.

The SFL felt comfortable in the hands and well balanced albeit the barrels with the larger objectives are more chunky than the x32s. The colours, as others have said about the 8x40s, were notable. They appeared to be well made.

Contrast is high to the extent that I actually found it detracted from the view on occasions. To be fair, it was a challenging day with very bright sun but, on more than one instance, I found it difficult to pick up detail when it was alongside a bright background - for instance, some narrow black stripes on a white surface. This detail was more visible when using the SF. However I suspect this would rarely be a problem in general use.

I did notice some CA, which is something I am sensitive to, and significantly more than on the NL or SF. Again they were challenging conditions and I may be being a bit harsh in my judgement. I thought the fall off in sharpness off centre was quite marked and started somewhat earlier than perhaps I would have expected; however I do tend to use binos pointing at the subject so I did not explore this in detail and it did not bother me.

As you will have spotted, I did not compare them with the SF or NL x42s largely because I was being driven by weight considerations. And the SFLs do have a big weight advantage in that respect.

Overall I thought they were very good but not as good as the SF or NL but then they have the advantage of bigger objectives and are cheaper (well, less expensive might be a better term). They are not for me (in fact I am having a complete rethink about what I do want) but I cannot imagine anybody being disappointed with them.

 

[adhoc]

PW42, thank you, that's very useful, the details, and the summary in the last line. I, too, am not as particular as some about the image well away from the center, as astronomy is not a priority, and much prefer lighter weight (also smaller size).

Actually, I did not expect responses to my request to be in this same thread! Your post will be lost to someone looking for Z. SFL 10x40 reviews or comments going by thread titles. Also, it's better to confine this thread to the 8x40. If you wish to move the post (probably as the start of a new thread) a moderator I am sure will do that.

 

[Paultricounty]

My 2c for what it's worth.

I spent some time at the Birdfair comparing in particular the SFL 10x40, SF 10x32 and NL 10x32.

The SFL felt comfortable in the hands and well balanced albeit the barrels with the larger objectives are more chunky than the x32s. The colours, as others have said about the 8x40s, were notable. They appeared to be well made.

Contrast is high to the extent that I actually found it detracted from the view on occasions. To be fair, it was a challenging day with very bright sun but, on more than one instance, I found it difficult to pick up detail when it was alongside a bright background - for instance, some narrow black stripes on a white surface. This detail was more visible when using the SF. However I suspect this would rarely be a problem in general use.

I did notice some CA, which is something I am sensitive to, and significantly more than on the NL or SF. Again they were challenging conditions and I may be being a bit harsh in my judgement. I thought the fall off in sharpness off centre was quite marked and started somewhat earlier than perhaps I would have expected; however I do tend to use binos pointing at the subject so I did not explore this in detail and it did not bother me.

As you will have spotted, I did not compare them with the SF or NL x42s largely because I was being driven by weight considerations. And the SFLs do have a big weight advantage in that respect.

Overall I thought they were very good but not as good as the SF or NL but then they have the advantage of bigger objectives and are cheaper (well, less expensive might be a better term). They are not for me (in fact I am having a complete rethink about what I do want) but I cannot imagine anybody being disappointed with them.

Interesting , I wonder if the detail was more visible in the SF32 because of its color bias.

 

[Vespobuteo]

From what I understand the picture on the Zeiss website is not comparing the SF color rendition to the SFL , it’s a generic example of some other binoculars on the market in comparison to the SFL’s. And god forbid, I don’t see anything like that in my SF32 compared to some of the most Neutral Binoculars available. I only can see the difference in direct comparison side-by-side. Other than that SF has an extraordinary realistic image quality.

I don’t remember was it somebody here or in a previous advertisement of Zeiss, that the reason for the green leaning spectrum is to help in contrasting the greens from browns, something to that nature. Whether that is true or not I notice this in the SF more than the Leica’s or Swaros.

It's a Photoshop mock-up, push the "green tint" slider to max, and you get that result.

This one's bad but I don't think it's even that bad:

Carl Zeiss Jena Binoctem 7x50 - 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.

www.allbinos.com

 

[PW42]

Interesting , I wonder if the detail was more visible in the SF32 because of its color bias.

I think it was a combination of the white being so white (!) and the sheer brightness of the image that it impacted on the definition of the black stripes. Maybe my eyes could not cope. I don't want to make too much of this; it was a noticeable difference but still a good image.

 

[binomania]

Hi Lee and hi to all the friends of the group. Last week I organized a small meeting with some passionate readers of my site. We went to the mountains and compared various binoculars, including the new ZEISS SFL and the NL PURE and the old FL, etc. etc. You can fFind my first impressions in this article,

Binomania, reportage in Valtellina: amici, pizzoccheri, tanti binocoli e qualche novità - Recensioni di binocoli, telescopi terrestri e astronomici, cannocchiali da tiro, fototrappole e tanto altro ancora.

PREMESSA Come prima cosa, penso sia doveroso ringraziare tutti gli amici che sono venuti a trovarmi: da Piero dal Piemonte, a Marco da Padova sino a Andrea da Bolzano e ovviamente tutti gli altri,compreso "Beppe" che ci ha veramente deliziato con i suoi aneddoti da astrofotografo e manager. Un...

www.binomania.it

IF you want you can use the automatic translation system present. I'll try to prepare a video review before mid-August, but I need to do a lot of testing. What I can tell you is that in the backlit observation it was superior to the NL PURE, so much so that a couple of reader friends went home disconsolate.

 

[Troubador]

Hi Lee and hi to all the friends of the group. Last week I organized a small meeting with some passionate readers of my site. We went to the mountains and compared various binoculars, including the new ZEISS SFL and the NL PURE and the old FL, etc. etc. You can fFind my first impressions in this article,

Binomania, reportage in Valtellina: amici, pizzoccheri, tanti binocoli e qualche novità - Recensioni di binocoli, telescopi terrestri e astronomici, cannocchiali da tiro, fototrappole e tanto altro ancora.

PREMESSA Come prima cosa, penso sia doveroso ringraziare tutti gli amici che sono venuti a trovarmi: da Piero dal Piemonte, a Marco da Padova sino a Andrea da Bolzano e ovviamente tutti gli altri,compreso "Beppe" che ci ha veramente deliziato con i suoi aneddoti da astrofotografo e manager. Un...

www.binomania.it

IF you want you can use the automatic translation system present. I'll try to prepare a video review before mid-August, but I need to do a lot of testing. What I can tell you is that in the backlit observation it was superior to the NL PURE, so much so that a couple of reader friends went home disconsolate.

Very nice amico mio but when selecting English language, nothing happens and only Italian remains!

Anyway it was easy to copy your summary and translate via Google and that was good.

Looking forward to your full review.

Ciao bello
Lee

 

[pm42]

Very nice amico mio but when selecting English language, nothing happens and only Italian remains!

Same here but when I open it in Chrome, I got a Google translation popup and it works.

 

[Troubador]

Same here but when I open it in Chrome, I got a Google translation popup and it works.

Yes but doesn't Chrome leave you with hundreds of trackers?

Lee

 

[pm42]

Yes but doesn't Chrome leave you with hundreds of trackers?

With the right options/extensions and GDRP, not really. But this is not what I use daily and to consult Binomania, I think its ok unless our italian friend secretly works for the NSA

 

[Dennis Mau]

It sounds like they were very impressed with the SFL. They agree with me that the CA on the SFL is about the same as the alpha's. The NL Pure looks like it still has the glare problems I experienced with diffuse light when I had mine.

"The new Zeiss SFL 8 × 40 is a great product, it will cost around 1900 euros, has a weight of 32 mm binoculars, is very sharp, with a chromatic aberration similar to that of a 2500 euros TOP OF THE RANGE and also won hands down against the NL PURE in the morning backlit observation of some jays. For the record, the field of view was completely legible, but the same could not be said of the NL, especially in 8 × 42. The larger format binoculars, owned by one of the “Marco” present, also have fewer problems with diffused light during the backlit observations that we verified with the participants during the event. Pity. I always hope that Swarovski solves this flaw that stains a valid product."

 

[GrampaTom]

Well, after a bit of back and forth with Google translate, think I got the gist of it. Essentially this seems a quick report of a fun, partial weekend doing a "shootout" with friends and various optics they each brought to share - with not much rigor. Moving from section to section and looking for some beef, there are comments made that beg questions... that cannot be asked or answered. Seems not the best thing then to highlight these summary comments. Dennis we know your predilection to the glare issue. Its hard not to think of Holger's, Canips, Roger Vine's Tobias Mennle's way more complete summaries of the NLs for instance and wonder what else Piergionanni might say in his promised coming more full reports.

Do I dare say this? Why not? Seems unfortunate that Swaro apparently no longer talks with him, continuing their inexplicable PR policies...

 

[Upland]

Selling it soon Dennis?

Andy

I’m first in line lol! Actually Dennis I hope you have finally found your dream bino. I know from my experience that it’s extremely difficult. However if you do change your mind send me pm!

 

[Vespobuteo]

It sounds like they were very impressed with the SFL. They agree with me that the CA on the SFL is equal to the alpha's. The NL Pure looks like it still has the glare problems I experienced with diffuse light when I had mine.

"The new Zeiss SFL 8 × 40 is a great product, it will cost around 1900 euros, has a weight of 32 mm binoculars, is very sharp, with a chromatic aberration similar to that of a 2500 euros TOP OF THE RANGE and also won hands down against the NL PURE in the morning backlit observation of some jays. For the record, the field of view was completely legible, but the same could not be said of the NL, especially in 8 × 42. The larger format binoculars, owned by one of the “Marco” present, also have fewer problems with diffused light during the backlit observations that we verified with the participants during the event. Pity. I always hope that Swarovski solves this flaw that stains a valid product."

Similar is not the same as equal.

Did you ever get a "similar" rental car or a "similar" hotel room when traveling?

I sure did, and they weren't equal...

Send me a PM when your SFL:s have landed on eBay...

 

[Vespobuteo]

Hi Lee and hi to all the friends of the group. Last week I organized a small meeting with some passionate readers of my site. We went to the mountains and compared various binoculars, including the new ZEISS SFL and the NL PURE and the old FL, etc. etc. You can fFind my first impressions in this article,

Binomania, reportage in Valtellina: amici, pizzoccheri, tanti binocoli e qualche novità - Recensioni di binocoli, telescopi terrestri e astronomici, cannocchiali da tiro, fototrappole e tanto altro ancora.

PREMESSA Come prima cosa, penso sia doveroso ringraziare tutti gli amici che sono venuti a trovarmi: da Piero dal Piemonte, a Marco da Padova sino a Andrea da Bolzano e ovviamente tutti gli altri,compreso "Beppe" che ci ha veramente deliziato con i suoi aneddoti da astrofotografo e manager. Un...

www.binomania.it

IF you want you can use the automatic translation system present. I'll try to prepare a video review before mid-August, but I need to do a lot of testing. What I can tell you is that in the backlit observation it was superior to the NL PURE, so much so that a couple of reader friends went home disconsolate.

The comment to the donkey-photo made my day!

"The only participant who struggled with the inter-pupillary distance of the available instruments"

😂

 

[Dennis Mau]

Similar is not the same as equal.

Did you ever get a "similar" rental car or a "similar" hotel room when traveling?

I sure did, and they weren't equal...

Send me a PM when your SFL:s have landed on eBay...

You're correct, the SFL could have better CA control than the alpha's. In fact, I honestly think they do, but I didn't want to get hung out to dry.

 

[Dennis Mau]

I’m first in line lol! Actually Dennis I hope you have finally found your dream bino. I know from my experience that it’s extremely difficult. However if you do change your mind send me pm!

I really think there are going to be a lot of birders trading in their SF 8x42's and Conquest HD 8x32's once they try the SFL 8x40. The only advantage I see the SF 8x42 has over the SFL 8x40 is a 25 foot larger FOV, and then you have to deal with a much bigger, bulkier, heavier binocular without the true colors of the SFL and for some people even a green tint or possibly the blue ring of death or the orange crescent at the bottom of the FOV. Why would you pay $1000 more for 25 more feet of FOV and then have to deal with all the downsides? With the Conquest HD 8x32 you have a smaller sweet spot, less sharp edges and less accurate colors with a noticeable green tint. The SFL is easily worth the $800 difference in price, IMO. If you had an SF 8x42 and a Conquest HD 8x32, you could replace them both with the SFL 8x40 and save a lot of money. Really, if you have an 8x42 and an 8x32 for their different advantages, you could sell them both and just get the SFL 8x40. It is brilliant!