New Zeiss SFL 10/12x50 – Top Tier or Hype?

[_MountainBum]

Zeiss just dropped their new SFL 10x50 and 12x50 binos, and from the early buzz, it sounds like they might be giving the Swarovski NLs a run for their money. I’m curious where you guys think they fall on the optics totem pole.

I currently run a pair of 10x42 Zeiss Victory HTs and have been happy with them overall — good low-light performance and clarity. But I’m wondering if the SFLs are enough of a step up (or even a lateral move with better ergonomics and size) to justify the upgrade.

For those who have handled them or seen direct comparisons:

– How do they stack up to NL Pures, Victory SFs, and HTs?

– Any noticeable optical tradeoffs or advantages?

Appreciate any input from those who’ve had hands-on time or solid intel.

 

[VirginiaBeach]

They don’t match up to the NL pure. I have checked out the 10 and the 12 x 50s. They are very nice binoculars bit it’s kind of like going to Best Buy and looking at TVs side by side and seeing that A is better than B but if you had never seen A you would be totally happy with B. I think they are a fantastic option and probably the best image in that price point but the NL image is better, the FOV is way better and the ergonomics are better. The NL pure is still the best bino out there. The SFL to me is more in competition with the Swaro SLC line or the Meopta binos than the NL.

Edited to add this:

The Zeiss SFs are also still better than the SFL. I don’t have any experience with the HTs.

 

[Blackbird]

I got the 12x50s not long ago now so haven’t really had a lot of time behind them to really pick them apart. I would say first impression is that they are much better than the meoptas which is what I replaced. They definitely are lightweight and small feeling for 12’s. I plan on putting them next to my buddies NL’s soon to see exactly what your question is asking because I am wondering the same thing.

 

[timberbuck]

These are not intended to compete with the NL's. What they will do is deliver a brighter image than a 42mm NL with roughly the same size and weight as a 42mm NL. No the FOV is not as large nor are they as clear on the edges as a NL. Theye cost roughly 1/3 the price. Excellent option for the price and offering top tier brightness and center image sharpness.

 

[_MountainBum]

These are not intended to compete with the NL's. What they will do is deliver a brighter image than a 42mm NL with roughly the same size and weight as a 42mm NL. No the FOV is not as large nor are they as clear on the edges as a NL. Theye cost roughly 1/3 the price. Excellent option for the price and offering top tier brightness and center image sharpness.

I’ve been comparing the stats to a pair of Maven B6’s I have and on paper offer little jump for 900 additional dollars in price, but I do love Zeiss and consider them the more premium build.

Same SP prisms
same exit puple
Mavens with higher light transmission
Zeiss with slightly wider FOV
Near identical eye relief.

 

[Airohunter]

I can't compare to the NL's directly as I have never had them side by side. I will say that I was un-impressed with the 10x40 SFL that I had, just didn't feel like it was that much better than anything else in it's price range. However I have the 12x50 SFL and absolutely think they are worth every penny, they are bright, clear and have a great field of view, they are a bit larger and fit my hands great.

 

[Bugger]

Theye cost roughly 1/3 the price.

I wish! Probably a typo but definitely a third less than the NL’s.

 

[Tahoe1305]

If anyone has some 12x SFLs they want to part with for a bit, I can write up a fairly in depth comparison against NLs. I’ve done it a handful of times on here.

 

[Nomax]

I just ordered the SFL 8x50 for a low light hunting binocular in South GA. I will only be able to compare them to the Razor UHD, Zeiss CHDX, and Tract unfortunately.

The reviews on birdforum.net place it between the Conquest and SF lines. The greatest improvement from the CHDX being build quality and compactness. Optically, it was a small step up from the CHDX, but not SF levels. The biggest question on the 50mm SFL is the short focal length lends toward greater CA. Multiple people have stated that Zeiss reps have told them that the fluorite lens were not used in the SFL series to keep the SF series ahead of it. Some reviews have said the CA is there but controlled very well and others say they can't stand it. It seems the 10x and 12x have more complaints on CA than the 8x. Birdforum.net Zeiss 50mm review, another Birdforum.net experience, another Birdforum.net experience round 2

I notice CA and dislike it in scopes for target shooting, but hunting in pine trees doesn't present many challenging, high contrast situations for binocular use.

The Razor UHD use the Abbe-Koeing prism design like the Zeiss HT and the reviews give a slight edge to the HT in brightness. I will compare the SFL to the Razor UHD when I get them and report back. I think it will be brighter than the 42mm HT, but not the 56mm HT. Birdforum.net Razor UHD vs Zeiss HT

A review of the SFL comparing it to the NL. It is more positive than the reviews on birdforum.net. Outdoor Pursuit: Zeiss SFL 50mm vs Swarovski NL Pure 42mm

 

[_MountainBum]

Was able to spend about a half an hour behind the 12X50s today, I was impressed. The footprint is amazing. Feels like I am holding a compact 8x. Brightness is incredible, clarity edge to edge is on par at least with the EL’s. Eye cups are meh, kind of mushy - but a very solid bino and probably my #1 for 12x’s given performance, price point, and the footprint. I’ll buy a pair this summer.

 

[Jakeb]

Was able to spend about a half an hour behind the 12X50s today, I was impressed. The footprint is amazing. Feels like I am holding a compact 8x. Brightness is incredible, clarity edge to edge is on par at least with the EL’s. Eye cups are meh, kind of mushy - but a very solid bino and probably my #1 for 12x’s given performance, price point, and the footprint. I’ll buy a pair this summer.

Would you say they are a step above slc’s? I’ve been debating on replacing my slc 10’s with sfl 12’s.

 

[_MountainBum]

Would you say they are a step above slc’s? I’ve been debating on replacing my slc 10’s with sfl 12’s.

I personally haven’t owned the SLC’s but given their performance aside the EL’s I’d probably take them over either. If Swaro didn’t discontinue the 12X EL and made some refinements it might be a different situation.

 

[Jakeb]

I personally haven’t owned the SLC’s but given their performance aside the EL’s I’d probably take them over either. If Swaro didn’t discontinue the 12X EL and made some refinements it might be a different situation.

Thanks!

 

[Nomax]

Was able to spend about a half an hour behind the 12X50s today, I was impressed. The footprint is amazing. Feels like I am holding a compact 8x. Brightness is incredible, clarity edge to edge is on par at least with the EL’s. Eye cups are meh, kind of mushy - but a very solid bino and probably my #1 for 12x’s given performance, price point, and the footprint. I’ll buy a pair this summer.

In your short time behind them, how do you feel the SFL compared to the B6?

 

[_MountainBum]

In your short time behind them, how do you feel the SFL compared to the B6?

I was surprised, on paper they seemed close if not the same, but I felt the brightness was better in the Zeiss despite the higher transmission percentage in the B6, the field flatteners also made a pretty substantial difference for me. Carries more clarity to the edge and just makes the image more crisp.

The B6’s are still an amazing bino for the money, and can be found for less than half the cost of these - so it’s not really a direct comparison, but if money isn’t a major deciding factor I’d invest into the SFL’s