Swarovski NL pure 10x42

[Justglasssin]

Hello everyone, I have been researching the Swarovski NL pure 10 X 42 for quite a while now. I’m looking to upgrade from vortex UHD 10 x 50. While conducting research, I was reading that some people had issues with fogging and with the focus wheel getting stiff overtime. However, it appears that people only made these complaints around the time that they were first released three years ago. I’m wondering if people are still having these issues, I’ve definitely heard a lot of positives. I myself really enjoyed looking through them at Cabela’s. I even went outside with them at dusk, and was very impressed. I love the field of view. It’s basically what you could find in an eight power. I’m between these and the Leica noctivid. So basically to any NL pure owners out there are you still happy with your investment that you made? Thank you. Have fun.

 

[BBob]

No issues with mine. The first pair I bought was about a year or mby less from initial release. I think I'm headed into my 3rd season with those. I have many friends with older and newer and no issues that I know of.

 

[Justglasssin]

No issues with mine. The first pair I bought was about a year or mby less from initial release. I think I'm headed into my 3rd season with those. I have many friends with older and newer and no issues that I know of.

Thank you! Appreciate the feedback.

 

[General RE LEE]

I just ordered an 8x42 set. I highly doubt they were fogging internally. Likely someone hunting on a cold morning and their warm breath was coming up and out of a face covering and hitting the eye piece. No fix for that.

 

[Justglasssin]

I just ordered an 8x42 set. I highly doubt they were fogging internally. Likely someone hunting on a cold morning and their warm breath was coming up and out of a face covering and hitting the eye piece. No fix for that.

I feel like you’re definitely right. Some people are saying that Swarovski started using different coatings, because what they used before was derived from animals. Don’t know how true that is, when I called swarovski they denied changing any coatings. I know in the optics community, especially in the birding world can be very particular as well. Which is understandable, at such a high price. Thanks!

 

[Sanchez]

I have had them for a couple years. I am very happy with them overall.

The only issue I have had is I twice broke off the forehead rest which was replaced free on warranty. I may be a little rough on them.

 

[MightyWhitey]

Third season with mine and no issues. I love em. And I probably don’t treat them as good as I should.

 

[camelcluch]

I got a pair in March. No issues

 

[mainbeam pursuit2]

I've had the 12x42 and now the 10x42. Never any issues with either one.

 

[Spiral Horn]

I own a 10x42 NL Pure along with a plethora of other binoculars. Been using it quite a bit for the past few months. Still on the fence on which I like better, the NL or the Zeiss Victory SF. Optics are very close and mostly a matter of preference. One obvious thing to me is the SF (although slightly larger) handles better, with better balance in the hand (less holding fatigue), and I prefer the SF focuser. Biggest negative for the SF is the eyecups which are much too fragile.

As far as the OP’s specific questions about identified issues with some NL samples, such as the focus stiction and fogging. First some background — a few years ago Swarovski made a corporate decision to move to less environmentally impacting materials in all of its product. This was noted in their company reports (there were no press releases to the Sports Optics Market [must not have been seen by the marketing folks as an advantage]). The immediate effects were the removal of SwaroClean external protective lens coatings (NL Pure doesn’t have it), a change to the external armor (NL Pure armor has some noted deterioration issues), and who knows about the once super-slick materials used throughout the mechanism. So, yes, there were impacts.

I live in a high-humidity area of the country and can say in my limited use, that while all optics fog during rapid changes changes in temperature and humidity (like moving from an air-conditioned vehicle to a humid summer day), I get the sense that the NLs externally fog a bit more easily than other premium offerings (how much so = TBD). As far as focus stiction - while it hasn’t happened to me I’ve read that this most commonly occurs in the NL after the device has been completely saturated. In addition, I’ve not heard of this since some specimens around the initial launch. So, SW might have made some changes to correct.

 

[Justglasssin]

I own a 10x42 NL Pure along with a plethora of other binoculars. Been using it quite a bit for the past few months. Still on the fence on which I like better, the NL or the Zeiss Victory SF. Optics are very close and mostly a matter of preference. One obvious thing to me is the SF (although slightly larger) handles better, with better balance in the hand (less holding fatigue), and I prefer the SF focuser. Biggest negative for the SF is the eyecups which are much too fragile.

As far as the OP’s specific questions about identified issues with some NL samples, such as the focus stiction and fogging. First some background — a few years ago Swarovski made a corporate decision to move to less environmentally impacting materials in all of its product. This was noted in their company reports (there were no press releases to the Sports Optics Market [must not have been seen by the marketing folks as an advantage]). The immediate effects were the removal of SwaroClean external protective lens coatings (NL Pure doesn’t have it), a change to the external armor (NL Pure armor has some noted deterioration issues), and who knows about the once super-slick materials used throughout the mechanism. So, yes, there were impacts.

I live in a high-humidity area of the country and can say in my limited use, that while all optics fog during rapid changes changes in temperature and humidity (like moving from an air-conditioned vehicle to a humid summer day), I get the sense that the NLs externally fog a bit more easily than other premium offerings (how much so = TBD). As far as focus stiction - while it hasn’t happened to me I’ve read that this most commonly occurs in the NL after the device has been completely saturated. In addition, I’ve not heard of this since some specimens around the initial launch. So, SW might have made some changes to correct.

Thank you for your detailed response. So I reached out to Swarovski more than once, they claim that the current NL Pure on the market is the same as release. They also claim that they haven’t heard of any such issues with fogging or the focus wheel. Which I wouldn’t expect them to admit anyways but I thought I would inquire regardless. You seem to have quite the collection with having the NL Pure and the Zeiss. I do enjoy my razor UHDs but I just want more and can afford more now. I was really looking into the EL 10x50 and Leicas as well, just like the large FOV in the Pures. I will most likely still pull the trigger on them. I could always sell down the road if I have trouble with them. If the armor is deteriorating I would hope that swaro would service them for people. Thanks again

 

[Kenn]

I own a 10x42 NL Pure along with a plethora of other binoculars. Been using it quite a bit for the past few months. Still on the fence on which I like better, the NL or the Zeiss Victory SF. Optics are very close and mostly a matter of preference. One obvious thing to me is the SF (although slightly larger) handles better, with better balance in the hand (less holding fatigue), and I prefer the SF focuser. Biggest negative for the SF is the eyecups which are much too fragile.

As far as the OP’s specific questions about identified issues with some NL samples, such as the focus stiction and fogging. First some background — a few years ago Swarovski made a corporate decision to move to less environmentally impacting materials in all of its product. This was noted in their company reports (there were no press releases to the Sports Optics Market [must not have been seen by the marketing folks as an advantage]). The immediate effects were the removal of SwaroClean external protective lens coatings (NL Pure doesn’t have it), a change to the external armor (NL Pure armor has some noted deterioration issues), and who knows about the once super-slick materials used throughout the mechanism. So, yes, there were impacts.

I live in a high-humidity area of the country and can say in my limited use, that while all optics fog during rapid changes changes in temperature and humidity (like moving from an air-conditioned vehicle to a humid summer day), I get the sense that the NLs externally fog a bit more easily than other premium offerings (how much so = TBD). As far as focus stiction - while it hasn’t happened to me I’ve read that this most commonly occurs in the NL after the device has been completely saturated. In addition, I’ve not heard of this since some specimens around the initial launch. So, SW might have made some changes to correct.

Exactly my experience with the 10X42s. I use them on a tripod next to my 15X56 and the 10's seem to fog up in the morning much quicker.

 

[Jack321]

No issues with my NL Pures, they're fantastic.

In Montana 2 yrs ago, my buddy had 10x50s Razors and I had my 10x42 NLs. We were glassing up a mountain in a clearing while in the valley.

I glassed up a muley doe and a fawn and pointed em out to my buddy.

He found em in his Razors, and asked "You sure a doe and fawn?"

Instead of replying, I gave him my NLs and he looked up, "Huh! Yup and the fawns still a lighter, redish color than the mom. Damn these are nice binos!"

And the rest is history.

Fogging....any optic is going to fog from cold to hot and vice versa. When it's -20° and I'm in my deer stand with my balaclava on and I pull my binos up, yeah the condensation from my breath fogs them up. But 10-12 yrs ago, I had some Bushnells that were "100% fog resistant" and they did the same thing my NLs did!

Absolutely nothing to do with the binoculars.

Buy them and you'll never have to guess if there's, "something better out there."

 

[Schoolhousegrizz]

Going environmentally friendly with new products has got me a little concerned. I may look elsewhere than swaro. They didn't release it to the sports optic people because they know what we think of environmentally friendly bs. All the global warming, trans this, trans that, and wokeness crowd is the same crowd worrying about envirmentally friendly non sense. Go woke go broke. Swaro didn't want the word to get out. I'm going to look elsewhere or look at their older models.

I also listened to a podcast with Robbie Denning that talked about his swaro ATC fogging up big time and wouldn't go back to normal. He had to send it back in.

 

[Kenn]

Fogging....any optic is going to fog from cold to hot and vice versa. When it's -20° and I'm in my deer stand with my balaclava on and I pull my binos up, yeah the condensation from my breath fogs them up. But 10-12 yrs ago, I had some Bushnells that were "100% fog resistant" and they did the same thing my NLs did!

Yes, all optics will fog up. I glass off tripods with the NL's, Zeiss SF's and Swaro 15X56, and the NL's are always the first to fog. I love them, and don't regret buying them, but all bins do not fog at the same rate.

 

[Reed104R]

If you end up with the NL Pures, let us know how they compare and if you think they are worth the additional $1500 over the UHD's.

 

[Jack321]

If you end up with the NL Pures, let us know how they compare and if you think they are worth the additional $1500 over the UHD's.

I'd have to admit, I hunt primarily east of the Mississippi, if I hunted exclusively in these white tail woods, Razors would be perfectly fine. Heck, $200 Diamondbacks would suffice.

But I do believe out west, hunting in the mountains, where your glassing for long periods of time over great distances and you need those crisp, finer details to REALLY distinguish things, then that's what separate the men from the boys with binos.

 

[Kenn]

If you end up with the NL Pures, let us know how they compare and if you think they are worth the additional $1500 over the UHD's.

I have too many binoculars and absolutely love the the alphas, but I would have a hard time saying that the NL's are "worth" $1500 more. I doubt very much that you will see more game, but you might enjoy the search a little more. I justify the upgrade by thinking that the Swaros won't lose much value, but that's even questionable.

 

[Justglasssin]

If you end up with the NL Pures, let us know how they compare and if you think they are worth the additional $1500 over the UHD's.

Hey so I did get them a few weeks ago. I absolutely love them so far. I would say for me personally I think it’s worth it, for the average person however it is not. I still love my UHDs and keep them in my vehicle in case I happen to randomly go shooting or birding. Also my wife and father will use them if we are out hiking or birding. The FOV on the NL Pures proves to be a game changer. I also am using their headrest on them which really helps keep them stable. If you are someone like me who is more of an optics/gear snob it’s worth the leap. If you’re just looking for some good glass and don’t mind the bulkyness of the UHDs they are a solid option even at that price point. Just don’t pay fully price, I got my uhd 10x50 from a camera supply store for 1400. Goodluck, have fun

 

[Reed104R]

Thanks for the update! FOV is amazing and I think the NL Pures are the best there is! I really like the UHD's and agree there's no reason to pay retail.