Which one are you choosing, NL Pure 14x52 or 10x52?

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

Hey guys, just wanted to see which of the two new NL Pure offerings you’re most interested in, and why! Before these were released the NL 12x42 was king, but in your opinion do the 14x52 or 10x52 take the crown?

For anyone who hasn’t seen the unboxing, you can check out Mark’s unboxing and overview of the 14x52 and 10x52!

Unboxing the 14x52 NL Pure

 

[naneumranch]

The 14x52 will be a tripod glass only. I more curious of the comparison of the 10x52 and the 12x42s as an overall carry glass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BBob]

I’m keeping the 10x32, 12x42 and will likely eventually purchase a 14x52. I have no use for a 10x52.

 

[Vaultman]

Neither for me.
If I had Pure type $ it'd be for the 12's.
I can handhold 12x pretty decent since getting used to it about 9 years ago.

 

[Ryan Avery]

14s have you shipped mine yet

 

[IDVortex]

I don't want a divorce, so looking at Maven. Kinda curious why they haven't pushed more of a interest in rangefinder pures actually? Presume more interest in x52 then RF capabilities?

 

[twall13]

For me it would be the 14's, but I read an early review that the 10's are a big step up from the 10x42 NL's, specifically with the depth of field. According to the reviewer, you rarely have to touch the focus knob because of the improvement there over the 10x42's.

In a perfect world I'd have both. In reality I'll be lucky to get one of the two, so the nod would go to the 14's.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

 

[Weldor]

10x52 Meh. 14 why not just stick with the 15's you already have? 1x difference really.

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

The 14x52 will be a tripod glass only. I more curious of the comparison of the 10x52 and the 12x42s as an overall carry glass.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The 14x52s are surprisingly easy to hand hold too! I would say it’s tough to beat the 10x52 on the crisp image quality and the amount of light it gathers is impressive to say the least. I personally own the 12x42s, and I’ll be buying the 10x52s.

I still think if you are to own only one binocular (one to rule them all) you’d be well served with either the 10x52s or the 12x42s. As a carry glass, I’d personally have to go with the 10x52s.

 

[Hnthrdr]

12’s with the forehead rest are my pick… not sure I will swap them anytime soon, the play should have been 12x52’s, 10x52’ nah.

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

I’m keeping the 10x32, 12x42 and will likely eventually purchase a 14x52. I have no use for a 10x52.

Great lineup! I’d agree with you on that, unless you wanted to consolidate the 10x32 and 12x42 for the 10x52. Swarovski really knocked it out of the park with the 10x52 and 14x52!

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

Neither for me.
If I had Pure type $ it'd be for the 12's.
I can handhold 12x pretty decent since getting used to it about 9 years ago.

I personally have the 12s, but I’d take a hard look at the 10x52s for hand holding. I used them that way and got to see some goats in Montana by hand holding. Can’t go wrong with either one, but if price is a factor you can definitely get the 12s slightly used and save quite a bit of cash.

A couple ways to save on the 12s:

We have a Used Optics drop every Friday and you’ll find some NL 12s there.

Swarovski has a sale right now on the 12s (Swarovski almost never has a sale), so you can get them new and save 500 bucks.

If you ever have any questions feel free to give us a call. We’re always happy to help!

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

14s have you shipped mine yet

Soon! Yours will be shipping with a Smirnoff Ice

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

I don't want a divorce, so looking at Maven. Kinda curious why they haven't pushed more of a interest in rangefinder pures actually? Presume more interest in x52 than RF capabilities?

Hahah fair enough! I personally prefer keeping the RF capabilities and binoculars separate (because RF technology changes), but who knows they just might offer something like that in the future. The interest for these new NL Pure offerings was very high.

You can also find some great deals and savings on our Used Optics drops.

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

For me it would be the 14's, but I read an early review that the 10's are a big step up from the 10x42 NL's, specifically with the depth of field. According to the reviewer, you rarely have to touch the focus knob because of the improvement there over the 10x42's.

In a perfect world I'd have both. In reality I'll be lucky to get one of the two, so the nod would go to the 14's.

Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

Very well said! The 10x52s are in fact a big step up from the 10x42s.

If I’m only able to have one binocular to my name, I’m taking the 10x52s, but if I already have a quality lower magnification optic, then I’m with you and taking the 14x52s. Can’t go wrong with either one it’s just more of where you hunt, how you hunt, and what you already have in your optic lineup.

This is a great review of both of them if you’d like to give it a watch:

NL Pure 14x52 & 10x52

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

10x52 Meh. 14 way not just stick with the 15's you already have? 1x difference really.

These 14x52 are basically 15s, but technically they come in at 14.7x52. Swarovski didn’t want to exaggerate the spec, thus the 14x52. These optically blow the other 15s they have out of the water. Can’t go wrong with either 10x52 or 14x52, but these are certainly an upgrade.

This is a solid review of both of them:

NL Pure 14x52 & 10x52

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

12’s with the forehead rest are my pick… not sure I will swap them anytime soon, the play should have been 12x52’s, 10x52’ nah.

That forehead rest is clutch! Very expensive for what it is, but man it’s nice for hand holding haha.

I’ve got the same setup, but I think I’m going to swap for the 10x52 - it really is incredible!

 

[Hnthrdr]

That forehead rest is clutch! Very expensive for what it is, but man it’s nice for hand holding haha.

I’ve got the same setup, but I think I’m going to swap for the 10x52 - it really is incredible!

It is pretty silly, but it’s swaro so that’s how they justify it I guess, the fov on those 10’s is pretty impressive I’m sure

 

[Outdoorsmans Team Member]

It is pretty silly, but it’s swaro so that’s how they justify it I guess, the fov on those 10’s is pretty impressive I’m sure

The FOV is insane on them! I had to do a double take the first time I looked through them. People sure will be happy when they get them in hand.

 

[HingleMcCringleberry]

I'd go 8x32 if I was dying to spend 2400 on binoculars