New Zeiss binos 8x40 SFL and 10x40 SFL (2 Viewers)

[Maljunulo]

Somewhat under discussed on BF, (for whatever reason), price is a large factor in our purchase decision no matter how much we talk about ergos, FOV, color/tint, focuser smoothness, etc. Value matters. We've talked about the potential for the SFLs to cannibalize several times. It seems clearer the SF/NL 32s are squarely in the sights of the SFL with its similar length, weight, better EP and price. Maybe to a smaller degree but folks who dislike the weight of 42s but are worried about EP will also find the SFL something to evaluate. If the SFL price was closer to Conquest, maybe some would trade up, but I share your guess there, Paul. I wonder if we're going to see the SFL is more a competitor to existing models, something to take share, rather than being a revolutionary, new, higher performance bino, that has increased the size of the pie?

Our buying will decide.

Bingo!

 

[Paultricounty]

Not too much need for teeth gnashing Paul. Swaros already done it. NL 32s seem a reasonable, maybe slightly better replacement for the EL32, performance-wise. Some prefer them to the SFs. Admittedly the NL price does suck. And/but therein might lie the underbelly of this whole conversation.

I still think Canip has suggested a most intriguing thing about the SFL. What was Zeiss thinking? $1800.00? Huh? What? How? Why? Somewhat under discussed on BF, (for whatever reason), price is a large factor in our purchase decision no matter how much we talk about ergos, FOV, color/tint, focuser smoothness, etc. Value matters. We've talked about the potential for the SFLs to cannibalize several times. It seems clearer the SF/NL 32s are squarely in the sights of the SFL with its similar length, weight, better EP and price. Maybe to a smaller degree but folks who dislike the weight of 42s but are worried about EP will also find the SFL something to evaluate. If the SFL price was closer to Conquest, maybe some would trade up, but I share your guess there, Paul. I wonder if we're going to see the SFL is more a competitor to existing models, something to take share, rather than being a revolutionary, new, higher performance bino, that has increased the size of the pie?

Cant help but be reminded of the summer of 2020, (was it?). Time flies. Much conversation here was about the spring announced SF32. All the buzz, folks were laying down deposits and posting hypothetical anticipatory conversations like these, but still waiting mid summer.. for fall delivery. Then Swaro dropped the NL bomb with the 42s. Folks went back to the drawing boards. The conversation switched. Deposits were canceled. If Zeiss lacked market intelligence, was blindsided as it seemed they might've been, they had to be pissed. The SF 32s finally landed, if with a bit of wind sucked from their sails. And to a couple early reviews that weren't the best. Then 6 months - 8 months later the NL32 dropped. The bino wars are on. We get to spectate, comment, debate. Our buying will decide.

Anybody watch Serena Williams last night? Sorry, ahem.

Tom, I was thinking more in the way of what Zeiss did. Swaro kept the 42 EL after the NL’s came out as a less expensive top tier option from Austria. They discontinued the 32EL, not sure why, NL32’s are now the only choice and very expensive for 32’s. That may leave an opening for a light EL level 35 or 40 priced above SLC to compete with SFL.

Didn’t see Serena 3rd round loss last night, it kind of was expected. I watched her fist round win to the second seed , a slug fest. That was an upset right there. I did watch Thursday nights double match though.

Paul

 

[kimmik]

Hi Lee,

I see it in my 8x32 and seen it in the 8x42, not in the 10x42. I think (you know more than me here) could it be with eyecups all the way down and a distance from from the oculars your not taking in the full FOV? The blue ring is really all the way on the far edges. Now that I’m writing this and thinking more about it, this maybe more of a glare phenomena than an optical design issue. Maybe more to do with a combination of lighting, baffling ( but that’s good on SF) coatings and eye placement.

Paul

After examining a sf832, this phenomenon is actually named chromatic aberration of the exit pupil.

This is what the pupil looks like - so if your pupil just barely catches the blue side of the exit pupil, there will be blue ring in the peripheral image.

 

[Paultricounty]

After examining a sf832, this phenomenon is actually named chromatic aberration of the exit pupil.

This is what the pupil looks like - so if your pupil just barely catches the blue side of the exit pupil, there will be blue ring in the peripheral image.

Interesting. I can mostly eliminate if I get the oculars real close into my eye sockets , kind of more than is needed to use the whole field but it does get rid of the blue ring. I don’t see the blue ring all the time, it’s occasional and that’s when I use that technique or try to slightly change my angle.

Paul

 

[james holdsworth]

After examining a sf832, this phenomenon is actually named chromatic aberration of the exit pupil.

This is what the pupil looks like - so if your pupil just barely catches the blue side of the exit pupil, there will be blue ring in the peripheral image.

I know of spherical aberration of the exit pupil but have never heard of, or can find any reference to, chromatic aberration of the exit pupil.

 

[kimmik]

I did a simulation to demonstrate, and posted in my thread on exit pupil aberrations.

A unified theory: Exit pupil aberrations and Eye position, types of image blackout

With some experimentation, calculations, this is a breakdown of different types of image black out that seems to me most commonly experienced when roaming the eye around looking through binoculars. SAEP being spherical aberration of exit pupil, prism vignette being the "almond" shape of the...

www.birdforum.net

 

[alexandros07]

Seems like a very interesting product but I wonder how they will compare with the SF.
Because if they are as good or even "almost as good", I see no point in getting something bigger & heavier.

But I would be very interested as they would replace my NL Pure 8x32 & 8x42.

Did you bought the SFL? Comparatively with the NL pure, did you notice any big difference?

 

[Paultricounty]

Did you bought the SFL? Comparatively with the NL pure, did you notice any big difference?

I can’t speak for the NL 32 , but I did direct comparison with the SF8x32 and IMO it was superior to the SFL in almost every area optically. One thing I didn’t expect was that the eye box on the SFL 40 was not any easier than the 32. Outside on a sunny day I didn’t expect a difference , but indoors I did expect the SFL to be a little more comfortable due to the exit pupal. But both binos have a very comfortable eyebox.

 

[pm42]

Did you bought the SFL? Comparatively with the NL pure, did you notice any big difference?

Yes I bought them. The NL pure 8x42 are even better in my opinion. But I prefer the SFL 8x40 to the NL pure 8x32.
But we are talking about excellent binoculars so you can choose based on your preferences: FOV, weight, size, contrast, flare resistance, ergonomics, etc.

 

[HenRun]

I have no experience with the Pure NL 8x42.

I went from the Pure NL 8x32 to the SFL 8x40 with no regrets. A good friend has my former NL 8x32 and on this level it boils down to minor differences and ergonomics. I think they are both superb.

I did swap back my old FL 8x32 and it has a few drawbacks but it is still a top notch bino. The SFL does a few things better for me but the venerable FL is still a great bino.

For some reason neither of us got along with the SF binos.

 

[ZDHart]

I've tried them all and with the high-end of binoculars... SF, SFL, NL, UV-HD+, yada yada... they're all so good that in the end, it really just comes down to your own personal "feel-in-the-hand" and what the subjective quality of the "view" looks like - to you.

You can't go by specs on paper, nor by whatever anyone else says about them.

Experience them personally, then go with what feels-best / views-sweetest best to you.

 

[Swissboy]

I've tried them all and with the high-end of binoculars... SF, SFL, NL, UV-HD+, yada yada... they're all so good that in the end, it really just comes down to your own personal "feel-in-the-hand" and what the subjective quality of the "view" looks like - to you.

You can't go by specs on paper, nor by whatever anyone else says about them.

Experience them personally, then go with what feels-best / views-sweetest best to you.

It's not just the "view". One may have specific priorities such as glare, weight, or even just whether one likes brand specific gimmicks such as FP etc.

 

[edwincjones]

So, after 871 posts are there any consensus on the SFLs?

My brief reading of some (not all) of the posts indicate that they are not as good as the premiums
but better than the mid range-about what one would expect for the price point.

edj

 

[Paultricounty]

It's not just the "view". One may have specific priorities such as glare, weight, or even just whether one likes brand specific gimmicks such as FP etc.

I’m pretty sure ZD’s first sentence covered exactly that. And many don’t consider FP a brand gimmick, it’s actually an improvement on an ancient design.

 

[Paultricounty]

So, after 871 posts are there any consensus on the SFLs?

My brief reading of some (not all) of the posts indicate that they are not as good as the premiums
but better than the mid range-about what one would expect for the price point.

edj

I’d say that’s a pretty good summation. Most people will not see the difference between this level and the best of the best , unless with side by side comparisons. Because they are better than mid range options and cost less than the premiums, they are excellent options for people who want to save 5 ounces and don’t wanna pay the extra money.

 

[b-lilja]

I’d say that’s a pretty good summation. Most people will not see the difference between this level and the best of the best , unless with side by side comparisons. Because they are better than mid range options and cost less than the premiums, they are excellent options for people who want to save 5 ounces and don’t wanna pay the extra mon

I find the summary hilarious, particularly Paultricounty's comment, given the level of non-consensus on this thread, and his definitely being at one end of the opinion spectrum on the SFLs - if there is any consensus, like every other binocular I've read about on BF, it is there's a lack of consensus, personal opinions, optic systems, use preferences, etc..

Read the info, pay attention to those that go into detail, and try out a pair and decide for yourself.

As I have said previously, I view this is an absolutely top notch alpha pair of bins, outstanding all rounders. For me, they are the best binoculars bar none for my own preferences, and I've looked thru extensively and/or owned every alpha 8x42. I have noted many others with similar views.

Very happy that others don't agree, and I wouldn't think to actually try to reframe reality to fit my own opinion...

 

[Paultricounty]

I believe the last three posts are referring to the SFLs, not EFLs?

I think we were discussing the SFL‘s hopefully DON won’t mind that I quote him, here’s what I agreed with.
“they're all so good that in the end, it really just comes down to your own personal "feel-in-the-hand" and what the subjective quality of the "view" looks like - to you”

I find the summary hilarious, particularly Paultricounty's comment, given the level of non-consensus on this thread, and his definitely being at one end of the opinion spectrum on the SFLs - if there is any consensus, like every other binocular I've read about on BF, it is there's a lack of consensus, personal opinions, optic systems, use preferences, etc..

Sometimes there is a percentage consensus when talking about optical quality of specific binoculars and sometimes it’s all over the map. I’ve also have tried these binoculars (SFL) among a half a dozen other people that I know who compared them to all those top so called Alphas your speaking of , that I also own. I gave my opinion , like others , like yours. I’m glad you found my comment hilarious and that I was able to amuse you. Maybe one day you can return the favor.

Read the info, pay attention to those that go into detail, and try out a pair and decide for yourself.

As I have said previously, I view this is an absolutely top notch alpha pair of bins, outstanding all rounders. For me, they are the best binoculars bar none for my own preferences, and I've looked thru extensively and/or owned every alpha 8x42. I have noted many others with similar views.

I found the SFL to be a top notch pair of binoculars myself , and I believe for you they are the best bar none. But for others , not so much there are better.

Very happy that others don't agree, and I wouldn't think to actually try to reframe reality to fit my own opinion...

It seems that’s exactly what your post is trying to do. I think the summation is that nobody would disagree that everybody needs to try these for themselves and see if all the attributes and perimeters meet their needs and wants. 🙏🏼

Paul

 

[brocknroller]

I did a simulation to demonstrate, and posted in my thread on exit pupil aberrations.

A unified theory: Exit pupil aberrations and Eye position, types of image blackout

With some experimentation, calculations, this is a breakdown of different types of image black out that seems to me most commonly experienced when roaming the eye around looking through binoculars. SAEP being spherical aberration of exit pupil, prism vignette being the "almond" shape of the...

www.birdforum.net

I did a simulation to demonstrate, and posted in my thread on exit pupil aberrations.

A unified theory: Exit pupil aberrations and Eye position, types of image blackout

With some experimentation, calculations, this is a breakdown of different types of image black out that seems to me most commonly experienced when roaming the eye around looking through binoculars. SAEP being spherical aberration of exit pupil, prism vignette being the "almond" shape of the...

www.birdforum.net

Surprisingly, I have never seen this phenomenon, but I do see CA, rolling ball, mustache distortion, pincushion, AMD, astigmatism, field curvature, veiling glare, and just about any other distortion/aberration possible with binoculars. I am spared from spherical aberration of the exit pupil in the Nikon SE. I did see a thin bright blue ring at the edge of the FOV in Nikon LX binoculars, but it was uniform around the entire FOV, not red on top and blue on the bottom.

Is chromatic aberration of the exit pupil more noticeable in smaller exit pupil binoculars or does it only depend on your eye position regardless of exit pupil size?

Brock

 

[Paultricounty]

I do know that Zeiss advertises the SF and SFL as the same smart focus, but I noticed a difference in the two SFL’s I had tried in comparison to the whole line of SF’s I’ve used over the last year or so. One SFL 8x40 was a demo and was good , but seemed heavier and not as slick as the SF’s, the other 10x40 SFL was newly opened and had some stiction. Have others noticed this if they have both?

 

[kimmik]

more noticeable in smaller exit pupil binoculars or does it only depend on your eye position regardless of exit pupil size?

Now that I look for the phenomenon, it is present to varying (minimal) degree in many binoculars, more so in the wider angle eyepieces. None are bothersome though, just something to be aware of down the list.