-
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.
Zeiss SFL 8 x 30 Review (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Dipperdapper
- Start date
Andrew Rowlands
Well-known member
Why PM when this is forum is made for making comments?
Nice review, Neil! Well done and very accurate!
Ignatius
Inactive member
The bar is an SI unit (10 m of water) and most people who had physics at school know that 400 Mbar is roughly equal to 4 m of water. So why he needs to be so pretentious about a perfectly correct unit escapes me.
Quite possibly the European units of measurement directives, especially the Directive 80/181/EEC, no longer apply to the UK post-Brexit. They'll be back to imperial soon 🤪
Quite possibly the European units of measurement directives, especially the Directive 80/181/EEC, no longer apply to the UK post-Brexit. They'll be back to imperial soon 🤪
laurencejackson
Well-known member
Great review, thank you 
My one and only negative observation was the poor quality of the comparison picture with the Conquest, which appears so distorted to make the conquest appear even larger in relation to the SFL than it is. Particularly when comparing sizes of bins in a review, I feel photos should accurate and as true as possible. Head on, directly above etc, just not from the side. Excellent review though and very helpful, perhaps we should have more if these mini-reviews from members, including myself! ?
My one and only negative observation was the poor quality of the comparison picture with the Conquest, which appears so distorted to make the conquest appear even larger in relation to the SFL than it is. Particularly when comparing sizes of bins in a review, I feel photos should accurate and as true as possible. Head on, directly above etc, just not from the side. Excellent review though and very helpful, perhaps we should have more if these mini-reviews from members, including myself! ?I’m curious about this as well.
tenex
reality-based
Uh... because he's not comfortable with all past comments he's provoked?
So SFL was designed by another "newly head-hunted optical engineer from Swarovski"? Who? (Following Gerold Dobler on the SF... is this a trend?)
What is all the peculiar scatter around the exit pupil photos?
"With strong winds whipping by me in the open air, I found it much more challenging to hold steady compared with a full size 8 x 42 under the same conditions." -- A good observation too seldom heard; small size and light weight are not always an advantage.
It's nice to have a measured review of a very good but not great binocular.
I just tried these for the first time and I really like them. The short barrels were not a problem for my wide hands as I thought they might be. The problem for me with all 30s and 32s on the market is that the magnification is not correct, it should be 6x-7x. 30mm can't give the same performance at 8x as a 42mm. The magnification should come down along with the aperture IMO.
In particular, being asked to spend this much on a 30mm instrument, the magnification should be ideal, not close to ideal IMO. That's why I don't buy them. My 7x35 porros are a better match for what I like sub-40mm in aperture.
But if I was going to spend big on 30-32's, these would be the ones I like. In particular, the focuser and central sharpness are what I like with the SFL. I've found the focuser in other premium compacts to be lacking (e.g. Nikon Monarch 8x30, Swaro CL and Curio, Kowa 8x33). And a full size 32 is too close to a full size 42 in size, weight and cost while still being small aperture.
It would be nice if the SFL's had less CA around the periphery. Over $1,000 I start to get upset about things like CA, prism spikes, bad focusers. They shouldn't have them IMO.
In particular, being asked to spend this much on a 30mm instrument, the magnification should be ideal, not close to ideal IMO. That's why I don't buy them. My 7x35 porros are a better match for what I like sub-40mm in aperture.
But if I was going to spend big on 30-32's, these would be the ones I like. In particular, the focuser and central sharpness are what I like with the SFL. I've found the focuser in other premium compacts to be lacking (e.g. Nikon Monarch 8x30, Swaro CL and Curio, Kowa 8x33). And a full size 32 is too close to a full size 42 in size, weight and cost while still being small aperture.
It would be nice if the SFL's had less CA around the periphery. Over $1,000 I start to get upset about things like CA, prism spikes, bad focusers. They shouldn't have them IMO.
Last edited:
Dipperdapper
Well-known member
400Mbar = 4 x 10^8 Bar = 4 x 10^13 Pa
400mbar = 4 x 10^4 Pa
“Zeiss claim that the SFL is watertight to 400mbar water pressure. Why they use millibar units is a bit of a mystery to me. Isn’t immersive depth much more accessible to the average Joe? Both Swarovski and Leica publish depths and not pressure. Quite sensibly I’d say.”
😁
I have an SF 10x32, and I don't find your theory about magnification matching aperture size to be true. If well-designed, a 10x32 or 8x30 can perform quite well. A full size 32mm can perform very close to a full size 42mm, especially if you use them mainly in the daylight. I agree the SFL does have edge CA, but many binoculars at this price point do also. The focuser in the Zeiss SFL is considerably better than other compacts like the Nikon Monarch 8x30, Swaro CL, Curio and Kowa 8x33. Zeiss focusers especially the SFL and SF are some of the best IMO.
Last edited:
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
Perhaps because the relationship between pressure and immersive depth is only correct under Earth gravity - they may consider buyers once upon a time using them on other planets, too. How long was the guarantee again?
Cheers,
Holger
Ignatius
Inactive member
Ooops ... sorry about that spelling mistake. 400 Mbar would make them useful on Venus though
Today I received my new SFL 8x30. A replacement for the sample which had a dark dust particle attached on the prism.
Many years I have searched for a 8x30/32 with sufficient eye relief for me with eyeglasses, as a complement to my 6x32 models. Primary a complement to the best of my three 6x32 models: Vortex Viper HD.
Here is a picture of all four of my 30/32mm glasses. From left:
Leupold Katmai 6x32, Zeiss SFL 8x30, Vortex Bantam 6,5x32 and Vortex Viper HD 6x32.
I have compared carefully and claim that Bantam actually is 6x and not 6,5x. At least if the other are 6x.
Zeiss have done a great job to achieve such a long eye relief on a 8x binocular with 65deg AFOV in such a compact binocular.
In this picture you can see how the eyecup design allows the eyeglass lens come as close as possible to make use of the eye relief.
I think SFL 8x30 is an excellent midsized binocular for birdwatching and backpacking and with brightness enough for a bit dawn and dusk use. And while it's not in any way important for the practical use, it's fun that it's (in my opinion) one of the absolute best looking binoculars all time. It's clean and Zeiss design team really succeeded here.
I may add some more information later.
Many years I have searched for a 8x30/32 with sufficient eye relief for me with eyeglasses, as a complement to my 6x32 models. Primary a complement to the best of my three 6x32 models: Vortex Viper HD.
Here is a picture of all four of my 30/32mm glasses. From left:
Leupold Katmai 6x32, Zeiss SFL 8x30, Vortex Bantam 6,5x32 and Vortex Viper HD 6x32.
I have compared carefully and claim that Bantam actually is 6x and not 6,5x. At least if the other are 6x.
Zeiss have done a great job to achieve such a long eye relief on a 8x binocular with 65deg AFOV in such a compact binocular.
In this picture you can see how the eyecup design allows the eyeglass lens come as close as possible to make use of the eye relief.
I think SFL 8x30 is an excellent midsized binocular for birdwatching and backpacking and with brightness enough for a bit dawn and dusk use. And while it's not in any way important for the practical use, it's fun that it's (in my opinion) one of the absolute best looking binoculars all time. It's clean and Zeiss design team really succeeded here.
I may add some more information later.
Last edited:
yarrellii
Well-known member
@Swedpat Please, keep us updated with your impressions. What do you make of the focus wheel position? When I tried it in a shop it left me a bit cold. I guess it was simply "new and different", but it's precisely when you try new and different things that you sometimes find something that makes you think "Wow, look what I've been missing". It is my understanding that many people found that when trying the 42 mm SF, but in the 8x30 SFL I'm not sure if I get it. I'd be interested to know what's your first impression and how does it evolve.
Hi! Yes, I earlier read there are some thoughts about the focus wheel position.
The wheel is pretty much in the middle of the tube length while more common position is just below the eyepieces.
While I use the index finger with for example Vortex Viper HD 6x32, I use the middle and ring finger with SFL 8x30. This works very good for me.
When it comes to the feeling of the focus wheel it could be better. Viper 6x32 is a bit stiffer but has a very distinct feeling. I like it more than the wheel of SFL 8x30, which is softer and a I think it's a very slight play. Maybe not really a problem, but I wonder why there are a number of even budget binoculars who are better in this respect than some high grade models.
Otherwise I am very satisfied with SFL 8x30. Very sharp and contrasty image with pretty large sweet spot.
The stated 63deg AFOV is very noticeable compared to the 48deg of Vortex 6x32. The 8x30 actually has very slightly wider TFOV than the 6x32!
Last edited:
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
FWIW my 8x30 has a perfect focus wheel. No play and like buttah…. I also happen to love the location of wheel on SFLs. I use middle finger(s) and being my longest finger, it makes for very quick adjustments.
I actually don’t care for bins with wheel at eyepiece end :-/
I actually don’t care for bins with wheel at eyepiece end :-/
I am still a bit unsure if it's a play. It's just so smooth so it does not feel a sharp increase in resistance like with the focuser of Viper HD 6x32.
By the way. I tried to compare the low light performance between the 8x30 and 6x32.
Theoretically a 6x32 has twice the brightness than a 8x30. The noticable difference in exit pupil is also substantial.
In real lowlight I can notice that the image is dimmer with the 8x30. But it requires almost pitch black to really see more with 6x32, and I think it's difficult to find a situation where the 6x32 really is better.
This of course partly because higher magnification offsets somewhat to the lower brightness. But if I recall right I read somewhere the Viper HD has 85% light transmission. And SFL has 90%. The image of SFL is also whiter and provides higher contrast.
These contributing factors result in that the 8x30 in this case is almost as good in lowlight as the 6x32.
I would like a SFL 6x30!
But unless Zeiss offer such a model, Viper HD 6x32 continues to be a keeper.
By the way. I tried to compare the low light performance between the 8x30 and 6x32.
Theoretically a 6x32 has twice the brightness than a 8x30. The noticable difference in exit pupil is also substantial.
In real lowlight I can notice that the image is dimmer with the 8x30. But it requires almost pitch black to really see more with 6x32, and I think it's difficult to find a situation where the 6x32 really is better.
This of course partly because higher magnification offsets somewhat to the lower brightness. But if I recall right I read somewhere the Viper HD has 85% light transmission. And SFL has 90%. The image of SFL is also whiter and provides higher contrast.
These contributing factors result in that the 8x30 in this case is almost as good in lowlight as the 6x32.
I would like a SFL 6x30!
But unless Zeiss offer such a model, Viper HD 6x32 continues to be a keeper.
Last edited:
Having complained bitterly about how tricky they are for eye placement in the past, when I was wearing glasses, I can now say I've bonded with mine, having ditched my glasses for the time being (following cataract surgery). The deer rut is in full swing here and yesterday I carried my 8x30 SFL's. They are everything you say, but I'll add that I find them to be an outstandingly bright glass for an 8x30, performing beyond what might be expected of such a small aperture glass in a dense woodland setting.
