Think about it Brummie. If you put a 2.0mm-thick o-ring under the eyecup, the eyecup is already 2.0mm higher before you unscrew it up to maximum extension so it ends up 2.0mm higher.
-
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 8x30? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter PHog
- Start date
The problem is the variation in shape and size of people's facial features. Those Conquest eyecups were not too short for everybody but they were for a large number.
Seems to me this is a good example of how the differences in facial features influence how an individual handles a bino. The man holding the SFLs appears to be looking directly down the optical axis (as he should be) and if he had lowered the binos enough to fit into his eye sockets (which might not even be possible) he would not be looking down the optical axis at all. Nor am I convinced the eyecups are fully extended.
Last edited:
Maybe we mean different things by “eyecup”. I mean the entire assembly, including the rubbery ring that makes contact with your face AND the tube that screws into and attaches it to the ocular lens housing. Are you talking about pulling apart those two components and putting an o-ring between them? I would never do that without reassurance that it won’t damage the eyecup or cause the rubbery ring to come loose. A diagram or picture would help.
Sorry, but no. The whole point of having variable eyecups is to accommodate different users (including eyeglass wearers). So if they don’t extend far enough to accommodate a large section of users, then the problem is not that those users have funny faces, it’s that you’ve done a shite job of designing your eyecups. Again, making sure your eyecup extension corresponds to the ER is not rocket science for a precision optical instrument. A maker of precision rifles wouldn’t design one with a 3” stock, too short for many people to brace it properly, and then blame those people for not having sufficiently prominent shoulders.
I’m not 100% sure. There is a web review by “northernrustic” which seems to show the eyecups extending further. But Eitan’s photo was apparently at full extension, and seems to show that extension is only about half of the stated ER. It's also supposed to have 4 stops, and it seems a very shallow extension for 4 detentes.
Last edited:
I mean the entire assembly too. So I would unscrew they eyecup from the bino and put the o-ring in the bottom of the socket the eyecups screws into and then screw the eyecup back in. It will then sit higher and when extended will be that bit higher than before.
Thanks. I think I understand - if the assembly is a double tube, so that part of the tube always remains in contact with the bottom of the socket. But are all eyecups designed like that? I'll look at my SFL 40 tonight to be sure.
You are right to ask if all binos are like this. All my Zeisses have had removable eyecups, you just unscrewed them to the top position then kept on unscrewing, which allowed access to the cavities into which the eyecups screwed and you could insert an o-ring here to lift the eyecups up somewhat. Incidentally you can also put o-rings around the eyecups to position them in between the built-in 'click-stops' should you need to.
I haven't tried this with SFLs as the 40mm unit I tried and reviewed didn't need such adjustments so I can't guarantee the eyecups just unscrew in the usual way. However I would be surprised if they differ since Zeiss designed the SFLs.
Last edited:
Removable eyecups also allow easier and more thorough cleaning of the oculars, I find.
Yes, the SFL40 eyecups work that way.
Also on the SFL40 the threaded section is quite broad, so you could probably put a couple of spacers in there and still get a solid screw-in [probably not the technical term].
Last edited:
Thank you Brummie.
stevenberk
Active member
If I unscrew the eyecups and insert o-rings to extend the eyecup (i.e., reduce depth of its seating) to reduce blackouts/beans without eyeglasses, I assume that means I will lose on the other end, if I use the binoculars with, say, sunglasses. Anyone have actual experience with this method, with Zeiss SFL? As an alternative, I have "extended" eyecups with generic, soft rubber eyecup add-ons, e.g., for my Canon IS 10x30 (first generation). Only problem was widened eyecup diameter and a reduction in effective minimum IPD. Only do this with soft rubber add-ons.
Last edited:
You may lose some fov but its a cheap solution to try out.
Not exactly sure what you mean here. If it's regarding FOV, I use 3/32" thick o-rings with no loss of FOV.
Last edited:
stevenberk
Active member
Thanks for the specifics.
To be more specific, I was referring to my 8x40 SFLs.
stevenberk
Active member
Good to know.
tenex
reality-based
No. Leicas aren't. Swarovskis are.
Fresh meat for you wolves (crows? magpies? turkey vultures...), while we wait for these SFL 30s to ship....
www.rokslide.com
Zeiss SFL 8x30 Compact Binocular Review
Compact binoculars used to be laughable. They were almost like toys and I ignored them for years. Zeiss has changed my mind with their new Zeiss SFL 8×30 binoculars. Backing up to 2021, Zeiss released their SF (Smart Focus) Binoculars, and then in 2022, their SFL (Smart Focus Light) Binoculars...
www.rokslide.com
It's already been chewed and digested.
Unless weight and size were my number one priority, I would buy a used LNIB Swarovski NL 8x32 or Zeiss SF 8x32 for around $2000 instead of the Zeiss SFL 8x30 for $1500. $500 is not really a lot of money when you are spending $1500 anyway. I think the NL is a little better than the SF. I think the NL 8x32 is the best 8x32 binocular you can buy. With either the NL or the SF, you are getting Swarovski and Zeiss top alpha binocular. Either one has a much bigger FOV and sharper edges than the SFL 8x30, and eye placement will be easier also because of the bigger exit pupil. I had the Zeiss SFL 8x40 and the Swarovski NL 8x32 at the same time and I compared them closely and the NL simply blew the SFL away and the SFL 8x40 is going to be better than the SFL 8x30. I sold the SFL 8x40 the next day. Also, the build quality is better on the NL and SF than the SFL. The SFL is made in Japan, whereas, the SF is made in Germany and the NL is made in Austria. Also, I had no issues with either the SF or NL as far as the eye cups being too short for the eye relief. The SFL 8x30 has a long eye relief so unless the eye cups are very long and big in diameter the eye relief will probably be too long for the eye cups meaning they will be floaters. Just my thoughts on the SFL 8x30. You could probably snag these NIB Swarovski NL 8x32 for $2100 on eBay.
Swarovski NL PURE 8x32 Binocular Green 708026362323 | eBay
Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Swarovski NL PURE 8x32 Binocular Green at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!
www.ebay.com
