Epic Optics - First Look at the New Swarovski NL Pure 52's
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 06. 2024
- Swarovski just announced two new binoculars to their lineup that we are really excited about. The Swarovski NL Pure 10x52 and 14x52 binoculars are just what we needed for hunting the West.
Today we sit down with Colby Kroff of Swarovski Optics to get all the details on their new product. These binoculars can be pre-orderd now on our website epicoutdoors.com, or by calling in at 435-263-0777
Check out the full review, in depth specs and price points here on our channel. - Sport
Question for Colby that might help some future customers debating between the more compact X by 42's and the newer X by 52's. (P.S. I love Swarovski - absolutely top notch customer service that frankly supports the price)
Colby, in the context of one of the presenters saying that they felt the new NL 10x52 were in some way superior to his NL 10X42, here is the question, tied to my "dated" personal experience as well:
BTW, I own an older pair of SLC 10x42, newer pair of NL Pure 12x42 and an older Swaro spotter.
My experience: Long ago, I had conversations with Swarovski around my perception that my "old" 10X50 poro Prism bino's were "better" than the 10x42 roof prism SLC's that Swarovski gave me as a warranty replacement when something went wrong with the 10x50's. (remember what I said about customer service). This was probably in the mid- 1990's. Given the vintage of my SLC's they are not quite as good as more recent iterations. I still own and love those older 10x42 SLC's BTW.
I called Swaro to tell them "thank you" for the new smaller, lighter 10X SLC binoculars (which I prefer for my backpack hunting) but to also comment that when doing long seated glassing sessions the image quality of the new SLC's did not appear to be on par with my older 10x50's. Of course, I no longer possessed the 10x50's and could not do a side by side comparison. The difference may have simply been ergonomics for seated glassing or brightness or FOV. No question that the ergonomics of the old porro prism 10x50's was superior if only due to size and weight for seated glassing.
IIRC, Swaro responded by saying that all else being equal, the larger objective (and exit pupil) of the older 10x50's in fact does make the viewing experience better - more than just the additional light gathering and exit pupil. I think they may also have acknowledged that between those two specific bino models, the 50's probably were a little "better" than the SLC "42's" in terms of perceived image quality.
Again, IIRC, all else being equal it is true that the image tends to be better in a "50" vs a "40".
I'm quite sure that I had also read in the past that porro prism designs tended to have superior optical quality. Again, this was at least 20 years ago so my SLC's do not have HD glass and probably somewhat less effective coatings.
2nd question for Colby: Swarovski opened up a "can of worms" of sorts because now everyone knows that these new "14's" are actually "14.x" and so when calculating things like exit pupils vs. the older 15x56 one is going to wonder what is the actual magnification of the 15's? Ditto when comparing against the NL Pure 12x42. I ran the numbers and the difference in exit pupil can be material depending on how large of a decimal you put behind the 14's in the calculation and assuming you run the 12 and the 15 at exactly 12.0 and 15.0. So, please provide the exact magnifications to the first decimal on those "nearby" comparable binoculars. Thanks!
Colby, hopefully you are checking in on the comments. Appreciate your time!
P.S. to the team: Thanks for the presentation. It would be easier and more engaging to follow if folks did not talk over each other as much - especially the emcee. I had to rewind many times to hear what was said. It is also a best practice to put figures on the screen in print form.
With the added field of view, they should’ve just made them at like a 16 power.
Love my nl 12 for high country blacktails there so good I hardly pull out the spotter anymore these 14s might be the ticket. I’m with Jason just makes some 18s
I have the nl pure 10X42 and i tested the 14x52. In my opinion the difference is it not worth
I want 14 range finders
Hi guys, still confused should I upgrade my nl1242 to 1452 for bird watching?
Thanks for the comment! It really just depends on your current setup, if you use your 12x42's strictly on a tripod then you would do well to upgrade considering the added magnification! If you like to hand hold your binoculars we would NOT reccomend swapping your 12's out for 14's. The 14's are inteded to be a primarily tripod bound glass, and would not be very comfortable or effective to hand hold in our opinion! Hope this helps!
No hand holding? Even with the forehead rest?
Great question, while it depends on how steady you are able to hold a high power binocular, we do not reccommend buying the 14x52's with the intention of hand holding them. A forehead rest would provide some added stability but we still believe that these are best on a tripod. Feel free to call in and talk to our optics expert Josh more about this! 435-263-0777
interesting
At this price swaro really should include the forehead stabilizer thingy. Lame they charge an additional $175 for it. But I’m sure they are nice.
WHAT A BUNCH OF SELL OUTS! WHERE'S THE MONSTERS!!!!!
No water/dirt repelling coating,fragile objective covers and armour that rots. What's not to like!
Someone needs to tell Adam to stop smacking his gum on the mic.
Bro cmon how are you going to chew gum directly in to a mic...