It’s May!—has anybody bought/tried out a NL Pure 32 yet? (3 Viewers)

[cycleguy]

For 20 years, I've used a 8x32 Trinovid which is very small. I recently bought a NL Pure 8x32. It is 3cm longer and in my bag or around my neck, it does not make that big of a difference.
And I prefer the handling and bigger ER of the swaro (I would have bought an Ultravid 8x32 if not).

If I want something compact, I also have the Zeiss Victory 8x25: size & weight allow me to carry it into a pocket and forget them, something harder with a 8x32.

Yes, Yes ... in hand and at the face it may not make a difference. However, a slight minutia of size may make a big difference in the jacket or hoodie pocket. Maybe snag up more and not able to quickly deploy or put back, or maybe no longer fit altogether and have to carry around the neck, or maybe that convenient pocket on the outside of the day pack no longer works and must be carried in the main compartment amongst other gear. Yes, Yes ... 8x25 resolves all these issues and more. But maybe some find the ergos of x25 so off that they cannot be considered. This is the downside of the enlarged x32 for me. I suspect some others feel the same. Luckily, x30 seems to be filling this spot. Will a so called large x32 cannibalize the x42?????

CG

 

[Waldemar54]

Few thoughts... questions really.

This thing called glare, especially when linked to a binocular seems a will of the wisp. Its there for some and not for others. If its not there for someone, then how can they relate to it? Its like being born blind or deaf. If you've never (or don't) experience sight or sound, how do you know what it is?

Isn't glare everywhere? I don't need binoculars to be effected by it. What about sunlight bouncing off the car in front's glass, rearview mirror or chrome bit? Or how bout, when fly fishing, wading thigh deep in water, trying to see the fly, and fish take, with sun bouncing off the water's surface? In those situations I put on polarized sunglasses. Reading these posts and wondering, this winter while out chasing migratory waterfowl, late in the day, with the sun sliding towards the Golden Gate, do west, looking in that direction glare was awful. It was awful to my naked eye. When I put my 1042 ELs up to see, it was improved. Turning 180 degrees, it wasn't there. Is this, what folks who see glare, are talking about?

Supposing after years of use, of binoculars and other items used to see things way off, like spotting scopes or rifle scopes, in all kinds of terrain, weather, light conditions, where what's available is all there is, one just automatically figures out how to work around it. Isn't glare just a natural thing, that's everywhere that most of us, just learn to deal with?

What if folks come here, looking for "wisdom" on binocular performance don't know about glare, as a thing produced within a pair, read about it, then become convinced its a thing, something they need to look for, even though its actually a normal part of the human eye/brain, sun, etc?

Not for the first time, what about cataracts? Glare, especially at night with oncoming headlights or streetlights is a classic symptom. What do cataracts do to the natural glare of sunlight, when looking through binoculars? What if folks reporting they see it, are actually peering through their own deteriorating natural human lens AND don't know it?

Hi GrampaTom, Very good thoughts; did anybody answer it to your satisfaction?

 

[GrampaTom]

Hi GrampaTom, Very good thoughts; did anybody answer it to your satisfaction?

Thats an oldie. So old, forgot I wrote it. No, unfortunately not. Thanks for noticing and asking.