Certainly, modern camera lenses can produce lovely bokeh and sharp images.
-
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.
Zeiss SFL 8x40, A Field Review (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Troubador
- Start date
Tenex,
It is very unusual for binoculars not to have a lot of undercorrected spherical aberration, so that could explain why you have not noticed it before. SA also reduces contrast and tends to turn black into dark grey. Busy bokeh is in my view a small price to pay for otherwise improved image.
- Kimmo
It is very unusual for binoculars not to have a lot of undercorrected spherical aberration, so that could explain why you have not noticed it before. SA also reduces contrast and tends to turn black into dark grey. Busy bokeh is in my view a small price to pay for otherwise improved image.
- Kimmo
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
The NL:s have 1 mm more effective eye relief.
So perhaps slightly better with glasses.
On the other hand, the SFL have a larger exit pupil, and smaller AFOV 60 vs 65°... so the full view might be easier to see.
You probably need to try them to know what works best for you.
Henry, thank you. Apologize received and warmly accepted.
I will also sincerely apologize for being so snappy in my replies. If I had worded it as well as you wrote it we could have understood each other better from the start and had a more fruitful conversation. I extend to you a digital handshake and let's move on. I have been off the forum for a while. Look forward to catching up on the friendly banter. My fuse is longer after some time off and I will try to keep it that way and try not to type faster than I can proof read for intelibly... ...intellibiligy... ...intelligibiliness... ...gaarh, you know what I mean!
Hard to say. I have glasses and the viewing comfort is a little more forgiving - for me - on the NL 8x32.
Still the SFL 8x40 works great. Field stops are a little larger/wider and don't disappear out of the image circle just as well as with the Pure NL but the SFL viewing comfort is also great, with some wiggle room.
I feel a need to put my glasses in place "correctly" and park the SFL in the right place to get the full range of wiggle room, if you understand what I mean. The NL 8x32 is a little more forgiving in that regard. I like the eye cups better on the SFL. I feel they park well right up to my glasses.
You definitely need to try both, if possible side by side. Since I no longer have the Pure NL I am very pleased with the SFL. But I can't recommend either one untried.
I have looked through both. I have viewed 832 NL several times now and am a fan, if not yet an owner. Looking through and handling both the SFL840 and NL 832, same day, same place, I have reported here I could go birding with either and have a fine day. In fact if i had one and a bud the other, we could switch off with almost no issues. The differences to me are slight. I do like the NL better, as I think the ergos/haptics are a bit nicer, I am a field pro strap mounting system fan, and maybe just maybe the optics were a bit nicer. Its hard to put this into words, as on paper, length and weight are so similar, but the fatter tubes of the SFL do contribute to the SFL seeming "bigger" though that seems the wrong word for the impression.
Oh, Im 6'3" have largish hands, wear eyeglasses with lens that do curve slightly forward and do need them to see through optics.
Same here except I own both. My wife prefer the 8x40 as she finds the eye placement easier but for me, there is little difference in this regard.
If the list the pro&cons, the 8x32 wins but I somehow like the 8x40 a tad better. So it's a draw.
Aquaplas
Well-known member
Now I have owned the SFL and for me the Viewing Comfort is better than on the NL 8x32. So I sold the NL. Also the Glaring is better for me on the SFL. The Colours of the SFL are more shiny than on the small NL. And the 5mm EP makes the look I find more impressive. Iam very happy with the SFL. In Bad light Situations my 8x42 SF is better. But in Sunlight the SFL is amazing.
Also when I look in the direction of the sun, a tree or something other is better colored on the SFL. The NL Colours are in such situations more blunt.
The improved Coatings with the UHD optics makes the SFL to a special Bino for me.
The made in Japan I can’t feel in hand. It is very well made.
The SFL I a very good concept. Light and big EP.
I also tested a SF 8x32. The SF 8x32 and NL 8x32 are both very nice glasses. But Iam a 40 and 42 guy! I need for longe observations a bigger EP. On bad weather days the Viewing comfort of a bigger EP is much better I find.
Also when I look in the direction of the sun, a tree or something other is better colored on the SFL. The NL Colours are in such situations more blunt.
The improved Coatings with the UHD optics makes the SFL to a special Bino for me.
The made in Japan I can’t feel in hand. It is very well made.
The SFL I a very good concept. Light and big EP.
I also tested a SF 8x32. The SF 8x32 and NL 8x32 are both very nice glasses. But Iam a 40 and 42 guy! I need for longe observations a bigger EP. On bad weather days the Viewing comfort of a bigger EP is much better I find.
Last edited by a moderator:
tenex
reality-based
This is all about unusually high contrast. It seems a curious choice when a large segment of the intended market is Europe/Britain.
Yes. And it means less details in shadows. I like it but cannot say it's better.
Being really nit-picking, the FL has better chromatic aberration control, but SFL doesn't have a CA problem. The colours seen through these are different but not substantially. But they certainly feel different when hanging around your neck and resting against your chest. Weight isn't an issue as SFL is certainly light enough but there is no escaping that its 40mm tubes feel bulkier than 32mm. The rumoured SFL 30mm would not have this characteristic though.
Lee
I prefer 32mm so would choose the FL, but it is a close-contest and I wouldn't be disappointed if I got the SFL instead.
Lee
TroelsPetersen
Well-known member
Thank you Lee for an excellent review.
Is there any chance the improved eyecups of the SFL could be mounted on the SF?
Kind regards, Troels
Is there any chance the improved eyecups of the SFL could be mounted on the SF?
Kind regards, Troels
The 8x40 SFL may not have a CA issue but the sample of the 10x40 I bought showed it pretty clearly, at least to my eyes.
I wanted a lighter weight alternative to my 10x42 EL SV's and the SFL offered it together with an ultra smooth focuser but color fringing on waterfowl, in particular, was above the threshold where I could tolerate it. Side by side with the EL's it was no contest. I had high hopes for the SFL's but returned them.
I wanted a lighter weight alternative to my 10x42 EL SV's and the SFL offered it together with an ultra smooth focuser but color fringing on waterfowl, in particular, was above the threshold where I could tolerate it. Side by side with the EL's it was no contest. I had high hopes for the SFL's but returned them.
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
The results of our investigation of the 8x40 SFL are now on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel
Paultricounty
Well-known member
