Swarovski NL Pure Binocular

[Justin Crossley]

By now most of you have probably heard the news about Swarovski's new binocular line. The NL Pure is their first new binocular offering in a really long time. The guys at Outdoorsmans have been testing them out and are excited for these to hit the market.

Here is what Chris Denham, Editor-In-Chief of Western Hunter Magazine had to say about them.

Swarovski NL Pure

***Review Added***
Swarovski NL Pure 12x42 Binocular Review, By Matt Cashell

Post any comments or questions you have below and we'll pass them on to Outdoorsmans.

 

[robby denning]

20% more FOV? That’s huge. Man I can’t wait to take a look through these.

 

[Trial153]

I can see myself paying for the FOV in the 12x, off tripods that's going to really shine.

 

[When]

477 feet@1000 yards? Leica Noctivid 8x42@1000 yards is 404 feet in comparison. Wow!

 

[robby denning]

I can see myself paying for the FOV in the 12x, off tripods that's going to really shine.

Yeah for years I didn’t realize how much game I spotted due to a wide FOV. I used to think I was spotting everything in the center of my Bino’s, but that’s just not true, especially when deer are up and moving but still obscured and hard to see, catching a little movement off in the side of the binocular can make all the difference.

 

[AGPank]

Great specs, nice look. Not worth almost $3k for me. I was hoping for digital image capture by now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[realunlucky]

Yeah for years I didn’t realize how much game I spotted due to a wide FIV. I used to think I was spotting everything in the center of my Bino’s, but that’s just not true, especially when deer are up and moving but still obscured and hard to see, catching a little movement off in the side of the binocular can make all the difference.

Humans like most prey animals catch movement much better in the peripheral so increasing that even by a small margin would be huge. 20% imagine that's truly game changing.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

Way out of my budget at those prices. I bet they're nice, they're just not THAT nice to me.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[eltaco]

Did that reviewer actually look thru them? This info looks regurgitated from the marketing info.

I’m really curious how they compare to the SLC and EL. I see the giant FOV difference, but not yet sure if these have a “flat field” view similar to the EL, or more similar to SLC.

 

[handwerk]

Do these have the field flattening lenses of the SV and how is pincushion distortion handled?

 

[Mark@Outdoorsmans]

Did that reviewer actually look thru them? This info looks regurgitated from the marketing info.

I’m really curious how they compare to the SLC and EL. I see the giant FOV difference, but not yet sure if these have a “flat field” view similar to the EL, or more similar to SLC.

He spent about a month with them before recording this review. All of the info is based on personal experience and technical specs.

The field of view is great on paper and even better in person. They have all the same technology as the EL including the field flattening. The edge resolution is basically as good as it can get. With the increased FOV the NL will impress you even when compared side by side with the ELs.

 

[MuleDeerMike]

Are these going to be in the #1 spot overall for top alpha glass now?

 

[sneaky]

Are these going to be in the #1 spot overall for top alpha glass now?

That would be highly subjective as everyone's eyes are different. What works tremendously well for one person, doesn't work at all for another.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[eltaco]

He spent about a month with them before recording this review. All of the info is based on personal experience and technical specs.

The field of view is great on paper and even better in person. They have all the same technology as the EL including the field flattening. The edge resolution is basically as good as it can get. With the increased FOV the NL will impress you even when compared side by side with the ELs.

Thanks Mark, I failed to watch the video and only read the Rokslide review, which was pretty short on details.

With them having the flat field, for me it is only going to come down to how the 10x42 NL holds up against my 10x50 EL for low light use. As much as I love my EL, seems from first glance the NL has the edge in specs in all other areas.

 

[MuleDeerMike]

That would be highly subjective as everyone's eyes are different. What works tremendously well for one person, doesn't work at all for another.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Fully understand that. But generally speaking, the EL are regarded as the superior glass to the SLC. And to be honest, no one who has ever looked through Swaro's 5 minutes before quittin time has said they're anything less than amazing. So I'm assuming the NL will top the EL for all around glassing when hunting. I really like my SLC's and likely will not upgrade for a decade or more but I'm also looking forward to more reviews on these NL's as the season rolls on.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[When]

Basically, a wider field of view means more light enters the objectives thus better low light performance.

 

[Mark@Outdoorsmans]

Thanks Mark, I failed to watch the video and only read the Rokslide review, which was pretty short on details.

With them having the flat field, for me it is only going to come down to how the 10x42 NL holds up against my 10x50 EL for low light use. As much as I love my EL, seems from first glance the NL has the edge in specs in all other areas.

We are very excited to compare the 10x42 EL to the NL and same with the 12x42 NL to EL. The 8x42 N:L is one of the most impressive images I have ever seen through a binocular and this is solely because of the field of view. Brightness between the 8.5x42 EL and the 8x42 NL easily goes to the NL. On paper they are very similar but in use it is an obvious winner to the NL.

 

[AGPank]

Basically, a wider field of view means more light enters the objectives thus better low light performance.

From a scientific perspective the light performance comes the ratio of objective over magnification, or exit pupil. 10x42 = 4.2mm exit pupil.

Low light performance is also dependent on prism design, light transmission, coatings, exit pupil is still a reliable judgement of low light performance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[When]

From a scientific perspective the light performance comes the ratio of objective over magnification, or exit pupil. 10x42 = 4.2mm exit pupil.

Low light performance is also dependent on prism design, light transmission, coatings, exit pupil is still a reliable judgement of low light performance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you.

 

[Wapiti1]

477 feet@1000 yards? Leica Noctivid 8x42@1000 yards is 404 feet in comparison. Wow!

For comparison across a few brands:

Zeiss 8X42 Victory SF is at 444 ft @1000yd. Blaser 8X42 is 424 @1000yd. Vortex Razor UHD is 420ft at 1000yd. Nikon Monarch HG is 435 @1000yd.

Swaro SLC 8X42s are 408 ft @ 1000yd. and 8X32 EL's are 423 @1000yd.

All Leica 8X binocs (that I looked at) are at 380-400ft @ 1000yd.

So, 30-70 feet of added FOV over other 8X competitors. I'd love to look through a pair and see how they handle a lot of the distortion issues that wide FOV creates, and then see how bright they really are. Add FOV, add distortion, add correction lenses, or modify the shape of an existing lens. Lot's of tradeoffs to get there. EL's annoy me with the rolling ball effect, so I like SLC's in the Swaro lines for general scanning use.

The benefits will really pop at 12X and higher IMO if they get better than the typical 300ft @1000yd 12X binos give you or the 240ft 15's get you. 300ft or close to it out of 15's would be sweet.

I can't find specs on the other NL Pure models. Does anyone have those?

Jeremy