According to my 2011 Zeiss brochure the eye relief of FL 8x32 was 15.5mm and that of FL7x42 was 16.0mm.
I owned an FL8x32 for 7 years and used it while wearing spectacles with no eye relief problems at all.
Lee
Last edited:
-
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.
IN PRAISE OF THE SWAROVSKI 12X42 NL PURE (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter SUPPRESSOR
- Start date
I owned an FL8x32 for 7 years and used it while wearing spectacles with no eye relief problems at all.
Lee
I tried a fellow birder's pair whilst looking for the Oare Marshes Green-Winged Teal yesterday, and I was incredibly surprised at how stable I could hold them - better balanced than the 10s oddly. If I had the cash I'd be seriously tempted. I'd tried the 10's and nice though they were didn't tempt me to replace my 10x40 Habichts, the 12's though...
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
Looking at purchasing NLs, so a test of 10s and 12s side by side is in order, i wouldn't overlook 8s either
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
Thats the magic, all my holidays are now planned around spring migration, and usually a fortnight on Scilly in october, and the necessary purchase of a nice pair of Zeiss for the Dame and she's hooked
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
Purchased the 12x42s, compared them with the 8s and 10s, 12s were just so good, honestly i rave about new Bins, The Leica Nocts and newest incarnation of Els were jaw dropping, but these Pure, well, well, well, just sensational, crystal clear, Tack sharp, colours absolutely spot on, feel fabulous in the hand, but i'm only ever going to give the Views of a Birder, the Spec data really is unimportant to me, "I know what i like, and i like what i know"..........
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
A week on, and i really think, the 12x, can be the new 10, just for the amazing F.O.V, which is better than the Amazing EL 10x42 W B, some form of Swaro witchcraft, apart from maybe the price, as good an 11/10, just glorious.
As well as christening them on Norfolks Bee-eaters, and an obliging Cape Gull, the colours on a closish Red Kite, and Osprey were incredibly vivid
As well as christening them on Norfolks Bee-eaters, and an obliging Cape Gull, the colours on a closish Red Kite, and Osprey were incredibly vivid
rpg51
Well-known member
I have the NL 8x42. Love it. I want to add the NL 12x42 to my quiver. But, I'll have to sell something to make that happen. I've decided to sell my Kowa TN 883. It is listed in classifieds now. Hate to let it go. But, I have acquired camera equipment that will satisfy my needs for real long distance viewing, and so I think I will get more use out of 12x binos than I will out of a big scope.
Robert Moore
Well-known member
I just got the 12x NL so I have had all three of them now. I had the 8x for over a year and sold it recently and acquired the 8x40 SFL and NL pure in 10x42. The 10X42 had more CA and had an issue so I returned them and ended up getting the 12x NL. The 12x is I think the best of the bunch. It has a lot less CA than the 10 and I can’t even really see any. Tack sharp all the way to the edge even though it has the widest apparent field of the bunch. I am really glad I tried it or I would have never known how good it is. Weird thing I can hold it just as steady as the 10. So now I am using the SFL for my 8x and the NL for my go to high power bin. 12x for me really is the new 10. Same field of view as 10 and just incredible. You will love it!
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
Scanning the edges of phragmites reed beds, and its so easy to now resolve 'Birdy' looking clumps, into Birds, easily finding cryptic Snipe, the clarity is amazing, like you can just reach out and touch the view.
I've had the very best down the years, and these are just phenomenal...
I've had the very best down the years, and these are just phenomenal...
Robert Moore
Well-known member
Here is a couple pics of a label on a power transformer behind my house about 50 yards away. One is through the 12x42 NL pure and other is the Zeiss 8x40 SFL. I used my iPhone 13 Pro at 3x in video mode and these were captured from video. I just paused the video and did a screenshot.
Attachments
Robert Moore
Well-known member
If you zoom in on pictures you can see how well the 12x does with CA compared to the Zeiss even though the Zeiss is only 8x. The Zeiss visually I don’t really see any and only shows in photos. The 12x NL is just remarkable especially for 12x.
Robert Moore
Well-known member
I just noticed a bee in the picture can you see it? Lol
Robert Moore
Well-known member
First pic is obviously 12x NL
crinklystarfish
Well-known member
For what it’s worth…
I was an early-uptaker and have essentially used the 12x NL as my (full size) do-it-(almost)-all solution for about 18 months now.
Picking up on some of the themes already posted, here are a few random thoughts.
I’ve used mine in all habitats at all times of day with great success. The quality of image, 12x magnification, extremely impressive field of view (both actual and perceived); plus combination of ergonomics and the nicely-engineered reliable mechanicals mean that subjects in almost all habitats and circumstances can generally be acquired very quickly. And once they are, you’re most definitely in (not at) the show.
The 12x magnification absolutely does facilitate picking out and identifying subjects that an 8x or 10x would be challenged by. Conversely, even in very closed habitats the 12x NL is still utterly viable. Only when it comes to things like following fast-flying dragonflies at close quarters does the 12x become something of a liability.
I can hold it still enough, but, this has taken some work. I’ve found that experimenting with different grips makes a significant difference. On this point - and as is reasonably well accepted - it’s too simplistic to associate magnification alone with steadiness of image, there are numerous other factors such as weight, balance and ergonomics at play. I can hand-hold my Monarch 5 16x56 almost as steadily as the 12x NL, but there are some 10x’s that I struggle to hold as still as the 16x56. I think the matter of the shakes is a very personal thing and it’s folly to generalise. Simplistically, you need to give it a go rather than rely on the personal accounts of others.
The headrest. Hmmm… I tried it, and as far as steadying the image was concerned, for me it made not one jot of difference. It did, though, make the binocular far more cumbersome and very successfully prevented the casual use of hats. I sold it.
Careful eye placement is rewarding. The 12x is unforgiving if IPD and eye relief are anything other than spot-on. I’ve found that my very personal requirements mean that eyecups screwed out between 2 and 3 stops from the fully-in position almost completely eliminates glare without introducing the spectre of kidney-beaning. I use 3 x nitrile ‘O’ rings to achieve this position. Position 2 = kidney beans, position 3 = glare. Once set up correctly, I can now bring the binocular to my eye very quickly and am reliably rewarded with very speedy and utterly absorbing acquisition.
The case is, for me, useless. I like to be able to get to my bins very quickly without having to fight zips and a tangle of bundled-up neckstraps. The case is in the original box: somewhere deep in storage.
Same with the strap. I wear my bins quite short on my chest rather than have them bouncing off my belly. For me, the (neoprene part of the) strap is too long. Specifically, I can barely adjust it to be short enough to achieve the position I prefer, and even when it just about will go short enough, there’s then absolutely no way it will accommodate the eyepiece cover.
Ah, the eyepiece cover. Much has been written already: it’s just clownshoes. I’ve had to heavily modify mine to make it work in the field. As well as carefully removing the stupid internal indents that mean it can barely be removed from the binocular, I’ve also taken off the strap-guide from the side I don’t tether. This now makes for a snag-free, swift and easy removal / replacement. This is not a fight we should have given the price point and Swarovski’s supposed attention to detail.
Regarding the accessories in general, my own conclusion is that they’re more about gimmick and corporate identity than practicality. In this vein, I must thank Nikon for making simple cases and straps that allow the NL to actually work in the field.
So, in my case anyway, following some experimentation and modification, I’m very happily able to use the 12x NL as an extremely competent and rewarding do-almost-everything binocular. For sure, it’s the closest I’ve come yet to an instrument that I can take to any place at any time and be confident that there are few other binoculars that would make my life better at that precise moment.
Perfect? Absolutely not. Is there much better out there as a do-it-all? For me anyway, probably not.
If anyone from Swarovski is reading and would like to reimburse me for the strap and case I’ve had to acquire to make your NL work then that would be nice. You can have yours back.
I was an early-uptaker and have essentially used the 12x NL as my (full size) do-it-(almost)-all solution for about 18 months now.
Picking up on some of the themes already posted, here are a few random thoughts.
I’ve used mine in all habitats at all times of day with great success. The quality of image, 12x magnification, extremely impressive field of view (both actual and perceived); plus combination of ergonomics and the nicely-engineered reliable mechanicals mean that subjects in almost all habitats and circumstances can generally be acquired very quickly. And once they are, you’re most definitely in (not at) the show.
The 12x magnification absolutely does facilitate picking out and identifying subjects that an 8x or 10x would be challenged by. Conversely, even in very closed habitats the 12x NL is still utterly viable. Only when it comes to things like following fast-flying dragonflies at close quarters does the 12x become something of a liability.
I can hold it still enough, but, this has taken some work. I’ve found that experimenting with different grips makes a significant difference. On this point - and as is reasonably well accepted - it’s too simplistic to associate magnification alone with steadiness of image, there are numerous other factors such as weight, balance and ergonomics at play. I can hand-hold my Monarch 5 16x56 almost as steadily as the 12x NL, but there are some 10x’s that I struggle to hold as still as the 16x56. I think the matter of the shakes is a very personal thing and it’s folly to generalise. Simplistically, you need to give it a go rather than rely on the personal accounts of others.
The headrest. Hmmm… I tried it, and as far as steadying the image was concerned, for me it made not one jot of difference. It did, though, make the binocular far more cumbersome and very successfully prevented the casual use of hats. I sold it.
Careful eye placement is rewarding. The 12x is unforgiving if IPD and eye relief are anything other than spot-on. I’ve found that my very personal requirements mean that eyecups screwed out between 2 and 3 stops from the fully-in position almost completely eliminates glare without introducing the spectre of kidney-beaning. I use 3 x nitrile ‘O’ rings to achieve this position. Position 2 = kidney beans, position 3 = glare. Once set up correctly, I can now bring the binocular to my eye very quickly and am reliably rewarded with very speedy and utterly absorbing acquisition.
The case is, for me, useless. I like to be able to get to my bins very quickly without having to fight zips and a tangle of bundled-up neckstraps. The case is in the original box: somewhere deep in storage.
Same with the strap. I wear my bins quite short on my chest rather than have them bouncing off my belly. For me, the (neoprene part of the) strap is too long. Specifically, I can barely adjust it to be short enough to achieve the position I prefer, and even when it just about will go short enough, there’s then absolutely no way it will accommodate the eyepiece cover.
Ah, the eyepiece cover. Much has been written already: it’s just clownshoes. I’ve had to heavily modify mine to make it work in the field. As well as carefully removing the stupid internal indents that mean it can barely be removed from the binocular, I’ve also taken off the strap-guide from the side I don’t tether. This now makes for a snag-free, swift and easy removal / replacement. This is not a fight we should have given the price point and Swarovski’s supposed attention to detail.
Regarding the accessories in general, my own conclusion is that they’re more about gimmick and corporate identity than practicality. In this vein, I must thank Nikon for making simple cases and straps that allow the NL to actually work in the field.
So, in my case anyway, following some experimentation and modification, I’m very happily able to use the 12x NL as an extremely competent and rewarding do-almost-everything binocular. For sure, it’s the closest I’ve come yet to an instrument that I can take to any place at any time and be confident that there are few other binoculars that would make my life better at that precise moment.
Perfect? Absolutely not. Is there much better out there as a do-it-all? For me anyway, probably not.
If anyone from Swarovski is reading and would like to reimburse me for the strap and case I’ve had to acquire to make your NL work then that would be nice. You can have yours back.
Attachments
Last edited:
Do you have other binoculars as well? What kind of binoculars would you you buy complement this pair? What do you miss the most?
I am just curious. If you have two pairs and one of them is the NL 12x42. What would be the "perfect" pair?
...the "perfect pairing" is with, of coarse, the NL 8x32.
crinklystarfish
Well-known member
I do have other binoculars, yes, from compacts to +sizes; plus a Leica monocular and a Swarovski scope.
But, the whole point of my NL 12x purchase was to simplify life and avoid the whole "which optic(s) is/are most likely to work best for most of today" conundrum. And the need to clean 2 or three sets of lenses at the end of the day.
The upshot is that using the NL 12x has resulted in my other bins, and scope, essentially being relegated to a hiatus in storage.
I carry my Leica 8x20 Monovid most of the time as a matter of course, but any time I specifically go wildlife watching the NL 12x is all I take. I was out just yesterday on a wetland reserve and never once thought I'd rather have had anything else with me. From close-by flitting in bushes, through wildfowl and raptors in flight, to very distant skulking waders, the NL 12x just plain worked.
Of course, it isn't magic and there are some occasions where a good wide-field 6-8x would be better for dragonflies etc, and yet more where a scope would be genuinely necessary for very distant / difficult stuff, but in general the NL12x has it covered.
One other aspect that I've enjoyed is the extra detail 12x affords from subjects that are quite close by. I think I would now feel disadvantaged and impoverished were I forced to return to an 8x or 10x in almost all circumstances.
So, in a more-or-less direct answer to the specific question, I really don't crave another binocular to complement the NL12x. I don't feel like there's a hole worth filling.
I like the way you are thinking: "One pair of binoculars to cover all the needs".
I also think the 12x42 is good candidate to be this pair. It is not too heavy, nice afov, etc. etc.
You are not missing sometime lighter? (ok, you take the 8x20 monovid in that case I assume) You do not want a bigger exit pupil? You do not want something that is more glare resistant in circumstance glare can be quite annoying?
I am thinking about buying a good scope, but sometimes I think I better buy a NL Pure 12x42 and sell one of my two binoculars (NL10x32 or SLC 8x42). Probably the last one, because I really like higher magnification....
I also think the 12x42 is good candidate to be this pair. It is not too heavy, nice afov, etc. etc.
You are not missing sometime lighter? (ok, you take the 8x20 monovid in that case I assume) You do not want a bigger exit pupil? You do not want something that is more glare resistant in circumstance glare can be quite annoying?
I am thinking about buying a good scope, but sometimes I think I better buy a NL Pure 12x42 and sell one of my two binoculars (NL10x32 or SLC 8x42). Probably the last one, because I really like higher magnification....
PeterPS
Well-Known Member
I have enjoyed reading your review and your candid comments. Like you I am not a fan of Swaro cases and have replaced them with Nikon, Vortex and Kowa cases, which are more practical; same about Swaro straps. By the way the only cases of premium/alpha binos that I like and use are those of Zeiss FL models.
I agree with your comment about glare vs blackouts in the NL: for many people the optimal extension of the eyecups falls in between stops. I guess you are using your binos with glasses. For someone who does not use glasses the best position can be between stops 6 and 7, which would require many more O-rings for each eyecup---not a nice sight!
Like you I am also using 12x binos quite often, and enjoy the extra detail that you can see with them. However my favorite 12x is not the NL but Swaro 12x50 SV---try one, you might sell your NL......
