Swaro NL 8x42 and 12x42?

[bkraushaar]

Is there enough difference between these two binos to ever justify owning both? (say, the 8s would be for archery, tighter terrain, more hand-holding and the 12s would be for bigger country and lots of time on a tripod?) Or maybe another way to ask this is what's an ideal/awesome two-bino setup?

 

[roosiebull]

Is there enough difference between these two binos to ever justify owning both? (say, the 8s would be for archery, tighter terrain, more hand-holding and the 12s would be for bigger country and lots of time on a tripod?) Or maybe another way to ask this is what's an ideal/awesome two-bino setup?

I can’t imagine there is a better 2 bino setup

I have the 12’s and really want the 8’s. I expect the 8’s to be the most enjoyable bino to look through knowing what the NL pure line offers, and knowing how much I liked the 8.5x EL. The FOV on the NL as well as the crazy edge to edge clarity of them, I think the 8’s have to be something special.

Part of me doesn’t want to spend the money on a fairly niche optic for me, and just getting a set of kowas for my lower mag, but I think if I do get the 8 NL, it won’t be a niche optic, I assume it will stay in my harness and I’ll pack my 12’s for the tripod rather than having them on my chest

My current 8’s are the 8x30slc but I don’t love them and don’t use them

 

[antlerz]

Or the SFL 8x - handier

 

[Axlrod]

I just have the 12x NL. been a couple years for all types of hunting, it's all I ever wanted.

 

[LIWolverine]

Having owned the 10’s and 12’s I will be getting another set of 12’s and 8’s. It seems like the perfect setup for me. 8’s for Eastern whitetail and 12’s for everything else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[6.5x284]

I have both. Love the 8x for archery and lots of timbered rifle applications. Moving away from archery while I focus on some other species so will sell the 8x but for a guy that does archery and then rifle out west it’s a fantastic combo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Spiral Horn]

Nothing wrong with that setup. The 12x NL just makes a lot of sense if it will be primarily used on a tripod due to its very wide FOV for that magnification, but I’m not a fan of 12x and above for handheld use. In addition, a lot of folks really get too caught up in the idea that more magnification is always better in spotting game. In my experience that isn‘t necessarily true. In my setup - a 10x glass is used to spot game and then switch to my spotter to judge/evaluate.

To me, the 8x is the optimal configuration of the NL optical design. Beautiful, bright, crisp, saturated and ultra-wide view. It highlights all of the best features of the optic. But there are many other excellent choices for an 8x glass — my current preference is an 8x40 Zeiss SFL. As a deer woods glass It is easier handling, better focusing, and has an easier overall view than the NL - and much easer for quick, one-handed looks.

 

[Shortmag11]

I can’t imagine there is a better 2 bino setup

I have the 12’s and really want the 8’s. I expect the 8’s to be the most enjoyable bino to look through knowing what the NL pure line offers, and knowing how much I liked the 8.5x EL. The FOV on the NL as well as the crazy edge to edge clarity of them, I think the 8’s have to be something special.

Part of me doesn’t want to spend the money on a fairly niche optic for me, and just getting a set of kowas for my lower mag, but I think if I do get the 8 NL, it won’t be a niche optic, I assume it will stay in my harness and I’ll pack my 12’s for the tripod rather than having them on my chest

My current 8’s are the 8x30slc but I don’t love them and don’t use them

For someone who has never used an EL or NL can you explain the difference between them and the SLC. I’m mainly looking for the clearest and brightest binos I can find for low light conditions. Currently using SLC and have been comptenplating the Leica Noctivid. Recently tried a Victory HT and was not overly impressed. Thanks

 

[Spiral Horn]

If using an SLC there really is no compelling reason to upgrade. The big difference is the flat field of the EL and NL and NLs wider FOV. To me the SLC is a better handling glass - my main dislike is the slow focus but interestingly that turns into an advantage for precise focus when used on a tripod.

 

[roweraay]

I have the 8x42 NLs currently, and had the 12x42 NL earlier. I had both of them for a brief period of overlap, and here are my thoughts.

The NL Pure optics are designed to accomodate the 12x42, and thus with the 8x42, the optics are not stressed at all (there’s a lot of reserve capacity in there), and the sheer resolution and micro-contrast from the 8x42NL is exceptional, and to my eyes, compares favorably with other high quality 10s. The 477 feet FOV at 1000 yards, is a huge icing on the cake. The 8x42, with its 5.3mm exit pupil, is exceptionally bright and light intensifying when the light fades.

The 12x42NL is by itself an exceptional optic, and I would have no problem whatsoever, using it as a one-and-done bino, especially due to its fantastic FOV and the way it molds to one’s hands, I had absolutely no problems in handholding it, along with the forehead rest, when I had it.

 

[roweraay]

Another suggestion, if going for a 2-bino Swaroski setup, would be a combo of 8x42 NL Pures and the 15x56 SLC HD. I might add the 15x56 sometime in the near future.

 

[roosiebull]

Another suggestion, if going for a 2-bino Swaroski setup, would be a combo of 8x42 NL Pures and the 15x56 SLC HD. I might add the 15x56 sometime in the near future.

I couldn’t give up the FOV of the 12x’s. The slc 15 is great, but I think the FOV of the NL 12x is more beneficial for a hunting optic, especially for deer when you catch one on the edge of the sight picture flick it’s tail, the subtle movements that usually aren’t even in view… maybe if you were hunting elk only, and trying to tell a 280” bull from a 310” bull from a really long way, but I don’t know you give up much in that regard with the NL 12

 

[roweraay]

I couldn’t give up the FOV of the 12x’s. The slc 15 is great, but I think the FOV of the NL 12x is more beneficial for a hunting optic, especially for deer when you catch one on the edge of the sight picture flick it’s tail, the subtle movements that usually aren’t even in view… maybe if you were hunting elk only, and trying to tell a 280” bull from a 310” bull from a really long way, but I don’t know you give up much in that regard with the NL 12

Agree, that the FOV of the NL 12s are stunning for a 12x, along with an unprecedented AFOV of 71 degrees. I think the NL 12 can be a one-and-done bino, straddling the difference between an 8x and a 15x.

I am personally leaning to the 15x, due to the magnification and the larger objectives, as a complement to the 8x NLs. While testing the 8x NL and the 12x NL back-to-back (when I had both of them), the 8x NL surprised me with its sheer resolving power, leading me to feel that the NL optics are overbuilt for the 8x, since it is designed to accommodate upto a 12x.

 

[chris888]

For birding use, or other quick-moving creatures obviously the 8s would be the preference, especially the NLs with their huge FOV. For hunting/glassing at longer distances, the 12s are great, but you could move up to 15s as other people have said if you're not trying to hand hold as much (not NL sadly, maybe one day they'll make a 15 NL)

 

[Siggy111]

I did the one and done. The 12’s have been great for everything I do. From the mid west to AK, they have performed very well. Zero complaints.

 

[wapitispokes]

I have not directly compared the NL Pure 8x42 to the 12x42 but I own the 12's as well as an older pair of 10x42 SLC's (and a fewer other optics). This is a topic I have thought about a lot because I'd love to have a pair of 8x42's but my CFO, er lovely bride, doesn't see it the way I do. LOL.

First quick answer to your question- Yes, both.

My experience might help - not exactly your situation but here goes:

I really like optics and I am fairly perceptive to the differences between them. If I was starting over from zero, and I had no Bino's, but knew what I know now, I'd probably just get a pair of 10X NL Pure and call it good. But that is because I don't carry glass when archery elk hunting and my primary use is open country scouting and hunting. This also assumes that you'll have a decent spotting scope with you if you are hunting in conditions that support a 12x binocular and the same applies if you are carrying 10x bino's.

Put another way, I think it is a bigger relative handicap to use the 12x in closer cover or when handheld than the handicap of using the 10's in open country. The 10's are very useable in open country. I've done it for over 20 years. The 12's are better for sure, especially off a tripod, but the 10's are fine when complemented with a spotting scope. However, once you get into tighter cover or need to glass for longer periods of time without a tripod, or want to glass from a standing position - then I think the handicap of the 12's is significant.

Long winded way of saying that the 10's are a good middle ground. And I wouldn't want to own just a pair of 12's.

I say the above having owned a pair of SLC 10x42 for over 20 years, and more recently a pair of 12X NL pure's for two hunting seasons. If I only had the 12's I would definitely get a pair of 8X NL Pures to complement the 12's. But I haven't actually used the 8's yet, so I'm saying this based on my experience with 10's, 12's and various other optics. And my kind of usage.


Longer discussion for perspective.

I have a well loved pair of 10X42 SLC's and a pair of 12X42 NL Pure. Before the Swaro 10x42 I had a pair of porro prism 10x50 Swaro's that were absolutely amazing handheld. Swaro gave me the 10x42 SLC as warranty replacement for the 10x50's and said that the optics were better. I never compared the 10x50 side to side with the 10x42, but I always felt like the 10x50's were quite a bit better than the SLC 10x42 in actual field use when hand held. Point being there are a lot of factors at play when comparing a viewing experience.

I bought the 12x42 Pure's specifically with Western Deer hunting and tripod use in mind and I selected them in competition against the Swaro 15x56. I landed on the 12's partly because they should excel on a tripod while being somewhat useful handheld from a sturdy seated position while being smaller and lighter than the 15's. If Swaro came out with 15x56 NL Pures, then I might think about selling the 12's and going with the 15's.

I consulted a number of very experienced hunters (think Coues deer and such) and read / watched an enormous quantity of reviews before buying the 12x42 NL Pure. The consensus seemed to be that the 12x42 NL Pure were a reasonable substitute for the Swaro 15x56, offering very similar practical resolution in a smaller and lighter package while still being "okay" to use handheld. You didn't ask that question, but I saw the comparison come up in the replies.

That is how I landed on the 12 NL Pure.

In my case I already had a decent pair of 10's and I specifically wanted something for tripod use for open country mule deer and I did not want to give up much to the legendary Swaro 15x56 on a tripod.

By now, I've carried the 12 Pure's a bit in the mountains and my feeling is that compared to my SLC 10x42, I have significantly more difficulty using the 12's handheld (even with the forehead rest) and find myself wishing I had my SLC 10x42 when handholding. Like, it just isn't "fun" with the 12's handheld but I can do it from a solid locked in seated position.

Lately I mostly archery elk hunt and we almost never carry glass when doing that. I bought the 12x NL Pure's for scouting and future mule deer hunts. However, I am seriously considering a pair of 8x42 pures for Archery elk, general backpacking and so on because they would be so useful when handheld. Probably even from a standing position in the timber. One of the reasons I'm considering it is due to the phenomenal field of view. That, and I expect the 8x42 would be quite bright and just plain a lot of "fun" to use. But I would still keep my 12x NL Pures for their dedicated primary purpose.

If I didn't already own a good pair of binoculars (such as my SLC 10x42) and if I could only have one pair I'd get the 10 NL Pure's and be done with it.

In the end I may end up getting a pair of 8's to complement the 12's, with the hope that the 8's would be functional for casual use, "quick" looks while standing and for use in thicker country. I would not carry both at the same time, but would use the 8x when the activity and terrain encourages their use. Elk are a lot easier to spot than Mule Deer.

I keep the 30 year old pair of SLC 10's for my adult "boys" and friends.

 

[theotherlandon]

Lately I mostly archery elk hunt and we almost never carry glass when doing that. I bought the 12x NL Pure's for scouting and future mule deer hunts. However, I am seriously considering a pair of 8x42 pures for Archery elk, general backpacking and so on because they would be so useful when handheld. Probably even from a standing position in the timber. One of the reasons I'm considering it is due to the phenomenal field of view. That, and I expect the 8x42 would be quite bright and just plain a lot of "fun" to use. But I would still keep my 12x NL Pures for their dedicated primary purpose.

If I didn't already own a good pair of binoculars (such as my SLC 10x42) and if I could only have one pair I'd get the 10 NL Pure's and be done with it.

In the end I may end up getting a pair of 8's to complement the 12's, with the hope that the 8's would be functional for casual use, "quick" looks while standing and for use in thicker country. I would not carry both at the same time, but would use the 8x when the activity and terrain encourages their use. Elk are a lot easier to spot than Mule Deer.

I keep the 30 year old pair of SLC 10's for my adult "boys" and friends.

Are you saying the 8 NLs would be better then the 12s (for you) because of less magnification? Meaning less shown shake to the eye and wider fov? Or are you saying because of weight?

I’m asking because the 8,10, and 12 NLs are all the exact same size and same weight. I’ve seen a few others say this same thing before on RS without knowing all the NLs with an objective of 42mm are the exact same dimensions. I find weight being a bigger issue for handholding then magnification.

 

[roweraay]

Are you saying the 8 NLs would be better then the 12s (for you) because of less magnification? Meaning less shown shake to the eye and wider fov? Or are you saying because of weight?

I presume it is due to the wider FOV (477 ft at 1000 yards vs 339 ft for the 12s) and of course the lower magnification (that magnifies shake less). A better "all purpose" unit.

 

[Tex68w]

Why not consider NL12's and the old standby EL 8.5's? The exit pupil on the 8x42 NL's is astounding.

Another suggestion, if going for a 2-bino Swaroski setup, would be a combo of 8x42 NL Pures and the 15x56 SLC HD. I might add the 15x56 sometime in the near future.

This is my tentative plan, except I am running the EL Range TA 10x42 and then the SLC 15's I plan to pick up to spot with.

 

[wapitispokes]

Are you saying the 8 NLs would be better then the 12s (for you) because of less magnification? Meaning less shown shake to the eye and wider fov? Or are you saying because of weight?

I’m asking because the 8,10, and 12 NLs are all the exact same size and same weight. I’ve seen a few others say this same thing before on RS without knowing all the NLs with an objective of 42mm are the exact same dimensions. I find weight being a bigger issue for handholding then magnification.

Nothing to do with weight. I'm aware that the form factor is the same.

I am probably better than average at hand holding binoculars in a stable fashion from a seated position. I find the 12X NL Pure's to be "less fun" to use than my 10X due to the extra shake when hand held. But I did not buy them with the primary objective of hand holding, so I'm okay with that limitation. Also, I own 10X that are more "fun" to use hand held so again, I'm okay with the 12x limitation.

Thus, my point is, that for me and the way I use the bino's and given that I THINK I am pretty good at hand holding from a seated position; for me, I would NOT buy the 12x bino's if their primary use was hand held.

What I actually said was I WOULD buy them for the primary purpose of tripod use with a secondary purpose of handheld.

I also said that given that perspective, if I had a pair of 12x I'd complement them with a lower powered pair of Swaro's so that I have a pair that are more "fun" (more stable) to use handheld.

I said that if I was only going to have ONE pair, I'd recommend the 10X because they split the difference and I can handhold my 10X easily and well from a seated position without a headrest device.

I said that If I was to own two pair of bino's and If I wanted one pari to excel off a tripod for longer distance Western style spotting, I'd get the 8x and the 12X.

I also said or strongly implied, that if I really wanted a good pair of bino's and that had to perform well in mixed cover I would NOT get the 12x.

I hope that helps.