Absolutely, there's no doubt whatsoever that for many people (yourself included, clearly) the FRP is a wonderful accessory which takes viewing through a higher powered binocular to a different level. For some, it's probably the difference between buying a 10x binocular, and not.
-
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.
Leica, Zeiss & Swarovski binoculars compared: A personal report (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter gimpel
- Start date
You've got some nice 32's and 42's now, if you ever want to upgrade your 42's you could check out an EDG, the 10x42 EDG is nice too. I ordered mine from Kyoie Osaka - and use the "Wise" bank transfer service to minimize fees.
The SFL's are so nice, once you have the SF though....you don't want to compromise any of the goodness of the SF! It would be nice to get them smaller but I won't give up any of things that make the 8x42 SF so good
Stet
Well-known member
Interesting observation Mike!! I wonder if this holds true for the Swaro EL SV's also. That was the main reason I sold mine many years ago.
MikeRottier
Active member
Keep in mind that I'm talking specifically about the white milky haze that covers the underside of the view. I have no experience with other Swarovski's, nor do I own one. My observations are based on the pair of 8x32 Pure's that my woman owns and that I snatch away as often as I can. Too bad she guards them closely
Last edited:
Stet
Well-known member
Excellent write up Gimpel!! Your obsevations match my experiences almost to a tee. I have been on the hunt for a good 10x32 that is pocketable and have been trying many binoculars. Couldn't agree more about the Zeiss SF. The most comfortable 10x32 binocular I have used yet!! If they were smaller I would have bought them! I had a similiar experience with my Zeiss Victory HT's, they immediately felt like home. They are still one of my favorite bins to use along with my Nikon EDG's. I really liked the Nikon M7's but was even more impressed with the Nikon monarch HG 10x30's. I'm a sucker for the NIkon color science for some reason. I'm still debating on these because the eye placement was a little finicky and I was seeing flashes of blackouts. Still usabe but I'm not sure if I want to deal with it or if I can find a way to add 1 more millimeter to the eye cup. Same experience with the Zeiss SFL 10x30's. Excellent view, loved the colors but eye placement was even worse than the Nikons. If I unscrewed the eyecups of the SFL some I could get them to work with no blackouts though. I also had a pair of Swaro EL Sv 8x32's that exibited the same veiling glare you described in the NL pures and was the main reason I didn't keep them. My search continues, I have a pair of Maven B3 demo's on the way. Hopefully they fit the bill. Enjoy your SF's!!
Stet
Well-known member
It's been like 10 years since I sold them but it was a milky haze. I just don't remember exactly where it was in the view. I took a quick look through the Pures but deliberately didn't look for too long lest it activated my GAS syndrome. One of the main reasons I stopped participating on this site many years ago. My wallet was becoming too light!! I can feel it kicking in again now as I'm reading and researching bins in search of a new 10x32!!Keep in mind that I'm talking specifically about the white milky haze that covers the underside of the view. I have no experience with other Swarovski's, nor do I own one. My observations are based on the pair of 8x32 Pure's that my woman owns and that I snatch away as often as I can. Too bad she guards them closely
Elkhornsun
Well-known member
What I learned was that what seemed to provide the best viewing for me was in no way related to the reviews or ratings by others. I prefer Nikon and Swarovski and Vortex binoculars to the Leica and Zeiss that I have bought and then returned. Part of it is how much weight one puts on CA and field of view and fast focusing and contrast, when evaluating different binoculars. What is most important to me may be of no consequence to someone else.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I find that interesting because Nikon and Swarovski are on two different spectrums of image feel , similar to the divide between Leica and Zeiss, probably more so.
how true that is ... and yet we all keep reading other folks' reviews and impressions!
I agree a grey cloudy day is useful for testing certain aspects of binocular performance, but at the same time it can tend to favour things like (for instance) perceived, as well as actual brightness, and colour saturation (which helps make up for colour leached away by the condition), while downplaying areas that can in fact be quite important (glare etc). I guess just as not every birding day is bright and sunny, not every trip is dull and grey either.
tenex
reality-based
Welcome to Birdforum. This is a nice observation. The visual experience is very important, and bins are more than just a tool.
I wonder what this could be? CA usually looks purple or green, not red, and I've never noticed such an effect on-axis. I do agree with the general consensus that Leicas show more CA than many/most other brands, certainly other alphas.
The two great "difficulties" with 10x (which is really not that much greater, try 12 or 15!) should both improve with practice: getting on birds and coping with shaking. The latter IMO involves not only good holding technique, keeping elbows in/down etc, but also giving the brain a chance to learn to deal with slightly(!) more image shake. I believe people who say they can't do this, but also suspect they may not have given themselves enough time.
Even 10x32 can be a great format. The two I've liked best, ergonomics included, are Trinovid BN and Zeiss FL. UVHD+ is also very nice but I find holding the smaller size a disadvantage at 10x.
I have recently bought 10x42 binoculars (Leica UV HD+); previously I had only 8x. There is a bit more shake, but my hands have learned to be quite steady, and the weight of the 10x42 helps. I have grown to love them! Yes, 8x is better in woodland, and one can find the bird easier, and... But in practice, in California, my biggest problem is not finding the birds; it is identifying the bird sitting on the branch of the tree over there, a bit far, and the 10x helps. I can identify more birds, and/or be more confident in my IDs.
I also have stabilized 16x42, but they are much dimmer, and the field of view is really quite narrow; they work very well for distant birds, but they are not general purpose binoculars. The 10x work very well as general purpose binoculars.
And so now my favorite formats are 8x32, when I need to be light, and 10x42, when I want to have full power. In fact, I think 42mm binoculars make much more sense in 10x, where they are really justified; I do not find an enormous benefit for 8x42 compared to 8x32. In other words: I am happy with a 4mm exit pupil, so 8x32, and 10x42, are wonderful format choices for me. I take the 8x32 when I need to be light or when I travel for non-birding purposes, and I now take the 10x42 for dedicated birding outings.
I also have stabilized 16x42, but they are much dimmer, and the field of view is really quite narrow; they work very well for distant birds, but they are not general purpose binoculars. The 10x work very well as general purpose binoculars.
And so now my favorite formats are 8x32, when I need to be light, and 10x42, when I want to have full power. In fact, I think 42mm binoculars make much more sense in 10x, where they are really justified; I do not find an enormous benefit for 8x42 compared to 8x32. In other words: I am happy with a 4mm exit pupil, so 8x32, and 10x42, are wonderful format choices for me. I take the 8x32 when I need to be light or when I travel for non-birding purposes, and I now take the 10x42 for dedicated birding outings.
“Clear and transparent” The very crux of superior optics.
For me (Zeiss SF 8X2) it is a fleeting thing, not always seen with every view, but enchanting when it is seen.
I distinctly recall watching a rather grumpy-looking Bald Eagle, perched high in a dead tree, overlooking a large millpond, in a nasty drizzle. It was if, in some magical way, the optics disappeared, and I was watching it through 8X eyes. There have been other occasions, but that one sticks in my memory, for some reason.
I think you only get this effect in the “best” optics, but I suppose everyone defines “best” his own way.
When you see it, it is breathtaking, and worth any price.
For me (Zeiss SF 8X2) it is a fleeting thing, not always seen with every view, but enchanting when it is seen.
I distinctly recall watching a rather grumpy-looking Bald Eagle, perched high in a dead tree, overlooking a large millpond, in a nasty drizzle. It was if, in some magical way, the optics disappeared, and I was watching it through 8X eyes. There have been other occasions, but that one sticks in my memory, for some reason.
I think you only get this effect in the “best” optics, but I suppose everyone defines “best” his own way.
When you see it, it is breathtaking, and worth any price.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I fully understand this , and very well said. The outstanding view in these high quality optics are always there , but there are times that they disappear and it seems like the eyes have super powers. It’s very hard to describe, but you
brought out what I occasionally experience. It could have to do with multiple factors, lighting, time of day, sun position even humidity may factor in.
It’s also like a night at the scope eyepiece on that exceptional steady air night , where the rings of Saturn or the bands on Jupiter just jump out in clarity, like you can reach out and touch them.
Paul
I now have both 8x42 and 7x42 EDG, the first time I've ever had 2 binos in the same series. It's very interesting! One thing I've noticed....the 8x42 is the better all-around bino for birding right? So I've been taking it out more. But every time I'm in the forest with the 8x42, I'm constantly saying to myself "damn, I wish I had the 7x42 right now". For the wider FOV, yes, but that's not the #1 reason - it's the depth of field. I really miss that wider depth of field.
Not sure what my point is here how much I like 7x, or maybe just saying that the only way I can truly find out which binoculars I like is to own them.
Not sure what my point is here
how much I like 7x, or maybe just saying that the only way I can truly find out which binoculars I like is to own them.NatureLover123
Active member
Hello together,
I just want to share my experience with premium binoculars.
My first one was an old bulky Zeiss 10x50, multi-coated, I got from my grandpa. He bought it long time ago in former East-Germany (GDR), at that time pricey around 600,-DM. I felt in love with binoculars and nature observing as a child.
When I got older and could afford binoculars on my own, the first one I got was a SF 10x42. Later I got gifted a Victory Pocket 8x25. Later I also bought a SF 10x32, which I have since 2 months now.
What I love about the SFs, in general
I love the crisp, sharp, natural colored images and the very high resolution. Zeiss knows how to build high quality optics. (Sure Leica and Swarowski, too.)
The wide field of view contributes to the immersion, and Zeiss knows how to, let´s say, create a "3D-Effect" that let you feel that you are really there. You forget that you look through a binocular. They are superb balanced, you forget that you use a binocular, when looking through them. The focuser is also smooth.
The 10x magnification with the very wide AFOV, increases the immersion for me.
Differences SF 10x42 and SF 10x32
My former primary the 42, is still lightweight for a 42, but when you carry it on a long hike, you notice that you have "something" on your neck or in the harness. But when you take it to the eyes, you immediately have a perfect image. The 32 needs to be setup precisely (IPD and eye cups) to get a similar experience. Now I use my 42 when I am explicitly looking for wild animals (like deers) during twilight, there is no real other benefit with the 42 for me in comparison to the 32, at day and also until sundown. The SF 10x32 works for me until around 10-20 minutes after sundown (depends on the weather condition). I am not a hunter so that's ok for me. It's designed as a high-end instrument for the day.
Well I compared them side by side, multiple times, during sun goes down. And the SF 10x32 works remarkably well. As long as your eye's pupil did not exceed the 3.2mm, then the 32 is just slightly darker than the 42, I assume this is not because of the exit pupil, it's most likely because of the +2% light transmission. Well these 2% I occasionally notice also during dull dim days. but it does not bother me, you can see all details via the SF 10x32, clearly and crisp. I love it. It's so super lightweight, and fits for my big hands like a natural plug able extension of my eyes.
I read that some users experience "blackouts" with it, well you need to setup it for your eyes and eye socket shape, correctly.
What I love with the small VP 8x25
It's even lighter and used when I normally would not take a binocular with me. It's a "you always have with you" binocular. I use it also in urban areas, where 8x is usually enough. But when I use it in nature, I often think "would have been nice to have 10x now, damn". But the general rule is "the best bino is that that you have with you".
The 8x is more stable, it's like I would use a tripod. But I got comfortable with my 10x bins to hold steady with bare hands. It's just a matter of training. The wide field of view which my 10x offer does not require for my needs a 8x32 or 8x42.
Comparison to NL Pures I tried at the dealer
Sure, they are also awesome but they are heavier, less balanced for me and the view is like a flat screen TV. If I want to watch a movie of nature, I watch it on my flat screen TV. If I want to experience nature as it is, I use my SF 10x32. If I want to search for wild animals at twilight I use my SF 10x42. If I go biking I use my VP 8x32....
If I would ever go to a long expedition, I would take the 32 at standby on my neck or in a harness AND probably would take also the 42 in the backpack with me, just in case for late twilight.
I just want to share my experience with premium binoculars.
My first one was an old bulky Zeiss 10x50, multi-coated, I got from my grandpa. He bought it long time ago in former East-Germany (GDR), at that time pricey around 600,-DM. I felt in love with binoculars and nature observing as a child.
When I got older and could afford binoculars on my own, the first one I got was a SF 10x42. Later I got gifted a Victory Pocket 8x25. Later I also bought a SF 10x32, which I have since 2 months now.
What I love about the SFs, in general
I love the crisp, sharp, natural colored images and the very high resolution. Zeiss knows how to build high quality optics. (Sure Leica and Swarowski, too.)
The wide field of view contributes to the immersion, and Zeiss knows how to, let´s say, create a "3D-Effect" that let you feel that you are really there. You forget that you look through a binocular. They are superb balanced, you forget that you use a binocular, when looking through them. The focuser is also smooth.
The 10x magnification with the very wide AFOV, increases the immersion for me.
Differences SF 10x42 and SF 10x32
My former primary the 42, is still lightweight for a 42, but when you carry it on a long hike, you notice that you have "something" on your neck or in the harness. But when you take it to the eyes, you immediately have a perfect image. The 32 needs to be setup precisely (IPD and eye cups) to get a similar experience. Now I use my 42 when I am explicitly looking for wild animals (like deers) during twilight, there is no real other benefit with the 42 for me in comparison to the 32, at day and also until sundown. The SF 10x32 works for me until around 10-20 minutes after sundown (depends on the weather condition). I am not a hunter so that's ok for me. It's designed as a high-end instrument for the day.
Well I compared them side by side, multiple times, during sun goes down. And the SF 10x32 works remarkably well. As long as your eye's pupil did not exceed the 3.2mm, then the 32 is just slightly darker than the 42, I assume this is not because of the exit pupil, it's most likely because of the +2% light transmission. Well these 2% I occasionally notice also during dull dim days. but it does not bother me, you can see all details via the SF 10x32, clearly and crisp. I love it. It's so super lightweight, and fits for my big hands like a natural plug able extension of my eyes.
I read that some users experience "blackouts" with it, well you need to setup it for your eyes and eye socket shape, correctly.
What I love with the small VP 8x25
It's even lighter and used when I normally would not take a binocular with me. It's a "you always have with you" binocular. I use it also in urban areas, where 8x is usually enough. But when I use it in nature, I often think "would have been nice to have 10x now, damn". But the general rule is "the best bino is that that you have with you".
The 8x is more stable, it's like I would use a tripod. But I got comfortable with my 10x bins to hold steady with bare hands. It's just a matter of training. The wide field of view which my 10x offer does not require for my needs a 8x32 or 8x42.
Comparison to NL Pures I tried at the dealer
Sure, they are also awesome but they are heavier, less balanced for me and the view is like a flat screen TV. If I want to watch a movie of nature, I watch it on my flat screen TV. If I want to experience nature as it is, I use my SF 10x32. If I want to search for wild animals at twilight I use my SF 10x42. If I go biking I use my VP 8x32....
If I would ever go to a long expedition, I would take the 32 at standby on my neck or in a harness AND probably would take also the 42 in the backpack with me, just in case for late twilight.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Deeper not wider 🤓. But I’m with you on the 7’s.
Not sure what my point is here
NatureLover123
Active member
I just wanted to add, that I think the 2% difference in light transmission is because the SF 10x32 is obviously even better corrected for aberrations like CA. I search for CA but I cannot find anything. In the SF 10x42 I can notice slightly in some conditions at near the edge of the field, but well you get 2% transmission more. I am not a Zeiss engineer but I think that's the reason for it. The SF 32 is designed for the day, and they took the chance to further correct it.
Glad you're enjoying some very good binoculars! Your grandfather's binocular sounds like a "Nobilem" (the top-end product from the former East German Zeiss factory in Jena). If you still have it in your family, it'd be really interesting to hear about some comparisons between it and your 10x42 SF.
How do aberrations reduce transmission?
NatureLover123
Active member
I did not said or meant that. I meant that Zeiss did probably add more optical elements to the SF 10x32 in order to correct the CA better than in the SF 10x42 which has 92%. This makes sense, because more optical elements, even applied with best coatings, would reduce the transmission a bit. This would explain the decision to have 90% at the end of the SF 32.
Its just my personal assumption, I may be completely wrong. Maybe they needed to add more elements to get the balancing to the eye pieces right. I don't know or will ever know for sure. But I can for sure say that they did a great job with my SF 32.
Similar threads
