Though I'm only a rank amateur, I decided to buy these binoculars. I know a little bit about optics, but have relatively little experience compared with many here. Hopefully the following won't sound too odd.
Pleased I bought them. The build quality and image are stunning. A stark contrast to the Vortex Crossfire 8x42 I've been using for some time
For viewing birds in flight, the wide FOV on the NL Pure is especially impressive. And for birds roughly 30 or 40 feet away they're also great. But when I'm viewing birds in the mid-distance, not in flight, looking at the centre of the image, part of of my brain thinks why do I need such a huge image. It sometimes feels a bit unusual - though maybe I'll get used to it.
Funnily enough, comparing the Crossfire to the NL Pure, although there is a significant difference in the FOV, both on paper and in the feel of seeing such an expansive view, when I make a point of looking at which parts of a landscape are included in each image, there isn't a massive difference between the two pairs. Swarovski describe them as having 'almost indiscernible edges'. By that I suppose they mean the FOV is so wide that you are less aware of it, though of course it is still there.
A friend has a pair of CL Companion 8x30. The image is excellent, but maybe not quite as satisfyingly bright as the NL Pure. And the FOV is less than the NL Pure, of course. But for birds in the mid-distance, on the ground, they almost feel more natural than the NL Pure - despite the narrower FOV.
I suppose my point here is that despite the NL Pure's incredible FOV, has anyone found a much wider FOV takes a bit of getting used to?
Pleased I bought them. The build quality and image are stunning. A stark contrast to the Vortex Crossfire 8x42 I've been using for some time
For viewing birds in flight, the wide FOV on the NL Pure is especially impressive. And for birds roughly 30 or 40 feet away they're also great. But when I'm viewing birds in the mid-distance, not in flight, looking at the centre of the image, part of of my brain thinks why do I need such a huge image. It sometimes feels a bit unusual - though maybe I'll get used to it.
Funnily enough, comparing the Crossfire to the NL Pure, although there is a significant difference in the FOV, both on paper and in the feel of seeing such an expansive view, when I make a point of looking at which parts of a landscape are included in each image, there isn't a massive difference between the two pairs. Swarovski describe them as having 'almost indiscernible edges'. By that I suppose they mean the FOV is so wide that you are less aware of it, though of course it is still there.
A friend has a pair of CL Companion 8x30. The image is excellent, but maybe not quite as satisfyingly bright as the NL Pure. And the FOV is less than the NL Pure, of course. But for birds in the mid-distance, on the ground, they almost feel more natural than the NL Pure - despite the narrower FOV.
I suppose my point here is that despite the NL Pure's incredible FOV, has anyone found a much wider FOV takes a bit of getting used to?