I have the 15x56 SLC and they are like carrying a spotting scope around your neck. The only way to review binoculars is to actually pick up a pair. I tested the NL against my tried and true SLCs and qualitatively I couldn't discern that great of a difference in optical quality. Where I live in California the bird life is stupendous. At the end of the day, that's what matters. You've got to have birds to see through our $2500-3500 pairs of glass.
Well said! The NL has a slightly wider FOV and SWAROVISION optics to give it more vivid colors and a better image at the edge of the FOV, but since the glass quality of the NL and SLC 15x56 is the same, there is no night and day difference in the image quality. There is, however, a night and day difference in the ergonomics, and the NL weighs a bit less and takes up less space. Combining all these improvements makes it worth the leap for some, but the SLC 15x56 is still amazing. Like you said, the most important things is the birds on the other end!
El Zeiss Victory 10X54 es superior en transmisión de luz, es mucho mejor que el Swarovski NL puré, en luminosidad no hay prismático en el mundo mejor que el Zeiss Victory HT😂😂
Hey, low light performance nl 14x52 vs slc 15x56- what is the better bino? On paper the slc is the winner, but would love to hear about a real world comparison.
Interesting, according to Swarovskis website the 10x42 and 10x52 have the same brightness percentage. Unless that’s a calculation taking the exit pupil into consideration…thoughts?
Great question! You are correct that the 10x42 and 10x52 both have 91% light transmission. But the 10x52's 5.2 mm exit pupil makes it brighter than the 10x42's 4.2 mm exit pupil.
trick question. The Austrians are reporting the efficiency of the NL system. They are saying the lens prism system is 91% efficient in transmitting the available light through the ocular. A 50mm lens is going to have more light to transmit than a 40mm. a 360 HP 4.0 litre engine vs a 450 HP 5.0 are equally efficient, but the 5.0 is bigger....get it?
I had a question on hand-holding the 14x52. I could easily handhold the 12x42 NLs, steadily, when paired with the optional Forehead rest. Just wondering if the 14x52 is similar enough from a steadiness standpoint, when paired with the optional forehead rest. Thank you.
If you were able to handhold the 12x42 easily enough with the forehead rest, you should have a similar experience with the 14x52 and the forehead rest. Increasing the magnification makes vibration more pronounced, but the increased weight will offset that to some extent. Counterintuitively, heavier binoculars can provide a more stable view. And since the NLs are so ergonomic, they are very comfortable to hold steadily.
@@Optics4birding thank you very much. I just wish the 14x52s were back in stock, so that I could buy them. Do you have an estimate on when they would come back in stock ?
@@OBrandt-i5c Unfortunately we cannot give a precise ETA at the moment. We are eagerly waiting for them to become available, but we don't anticipate having stock on the shelves for another month or two at least. We recommend placing an order to get in line. You won't be charged until it ships and you can cancel anytime with no penalty if you find it in stock elsewhere before it ships. We still have a list of customers with orders in place, and their orders take precedence. Sorry we don't have better news, but this is the fastest way to get one if you're interested!
@@Optics4birding Thank you very much. I just bought a used Zeiss 15x60 GAT* binocular, which too has an identical 70 degree AFOV as the 14x52, and being a Porro-Prism, has a deeper DoF......should get to me by tomorrow. Based on how it performs, I will keep using it till the 14x52 becomes widely available again.
Check out the jay Scott outdoors podcast, they just covered it, and the consensus seems to be they’re good for hand holding, and excellent on a tripod.
@@progradepainting3755 I did not see a proper response to this question on the jay Scott podcast. I found I could easily handhold the 12x42 NLs, when paired with the optional forehead rest. Not sure if it is the same with the 14x52......is it steady enough, if paired with the optional forehead rest ?
Image stabilization isn’t everything. Glass quality matters a lot, especially if you are really stretching the distance out. A steadier image doesn’t matter if it’s a cloudy one, and I always have a tripod if I need to have a shake-free view. Are image stabilized binoculars bad? No, and they definitely have advantages. However, if you’re looking at Swarovski, and especially if you’re looking at higher powered ones like the new 14x52, you’re probably in the market for the best glass you can get your hands on. If Swarovski (or any of the adjacent top brands) comes out with them, then I’ll consider looking at a set. However, if it’s anything like rangefinding binoculars, you lose some optical quality with the addition of the on board electronics required to function.
Thank you so much! We did a review for the NL 42 separately before we knew about the NL 52. It isn't specific to the 12x42, more of a general review for the entire series, but hopefully it helps! Here you go: ruclips.net/video/ypAwgy7wK1I/видео.html
I have the 8x42 NL was was looking at the 15x56 SLC as a supplement, but will now go with the 14x52NL to pair with the 8x42
I have the 15x56 SLC and they are like carrying a spotting scope around your neck. The only way to review binoculars is to actually pick up a pair. I tested the NL against my tried and true SLCs and qualitatively I couldn't discern that great of a difference in optical quality. Where I live in California the bird life is stupendous. At the end of the day, that's what matters. You've got to have birds to see through our $2500-3500 pairs of glass.
Well said! The NL has a slightly wider FOV and SWAROVISION optics to give it more vivid colors and a better image at the edge of the FOV, but since the glass quality of the NL and SLC 15x56 is the same, there is no night and day difference in the image quality. There is, however, a night and day difference in the ergonomics, and the NL weighs a bit less and takes up less space. Combining all these improvements makes it worth the leap for some, but the SLC 15x56 is still amazing. Like you said, the most important things is the birds on the other end!
I was planning to buy 10x52, but thanks to your in-detailed video, that was save my money and usability. Good luck. Thanks again. From Sri Lanka
i want to see a comparison test of the Zeiss 10 x 54 Victory HT and Swaro 10 x 52 NL Pure
Stay tuned!! 🤩
El Zeiss Victory 10X54 es superior en transmisión de luz, es mucho mejor que el Swarovski NL puré, en luminosidad no hay prismático en el mundo mejor que el Zeiss Victory HT😂😂
Es zeiss victory tiene una luminosidad del 95% mientras el Swarovski la tiene del 91%😂
@@Optics4birdingthanks looking forward to it…I have 8x42 Nikon Edg ii and want my next in 50mm category. This review will be very helpful
Hey, low light performance nl 14x52 vs slc 15x56- what is the better bino? On paper the slc is the winner, but would love to hear about a real world comparison.
nl pure 10x52, 14x52 ,10x42 실제 보여지는 모습을 카메라로 담은 영상도 부탁드립니다.
Interesting, according to Swarovskis website the 10x42 and 10x52 have the same brightness percentage. Unless that’s a calculation taking the exit pupil into consideration…thoughts?
Great question! You are correct that the 10x42 and 10x52 both have 91% light transmission. But the 10x52's 5.2 mm exit pupil makes it brighter than the 10x42's 4.2 mm exit pupil.
trick question. The Austrians are reporting the efficiency of the NL system. They are saying the lens prism system is 91% efficient in transmitting the available light through the ocular. A 50mm lens is going to have more light to transmit than a 40mm. a 360 HP 4.0 litre engine vs a 450 HP 5.0 are equally efficient, but the 5.0 is bigger....get it?
@@swiftusmaximus5651 I’m picking up what you’re putting down. Nice analogy lol
@@Optics4birdingel zeiss es superior a Swarovski tiene 95 de luminosidad noy prismático.que supere al Zeiss😂😂
I had a question on hand-holding the 14x52. I could easily handhold the 12x42 NLs, steadily, when paired with the optional Forehead rest. Just wondering if the 14x52 is similar enough from a steadiness standpoint, when paired with the optional forehead rest. Thank you.
If you were able to handhold the 12x42 easily enough with the forehead rest, you should have a similar experience with the 14x52 and the forehead rest. Increasing the magnification makes vibration more pronounced, but the increased weight will offset that to some extent. Counterintuitively, heavier binoculars can provide a more stable view. And since the NLs are so ergonomic, they are very comfortable to hold steadily.
@@Optics4birding thank you very much. I just wish the 14x52s were back in stock, so that I could buy them. Do you have an estimate on when they would come back in stock ?
@@OBrandt-i5c Unfortunately we cannot give a precise ETA at the moment. We are eagerly waiting for them to become available, but we don't anticipate having stock on the shelves for another month or two at least. We recommend placing an order to get in line. You won't be charged until it ships and you can cancel anytime with no penalty if you find it in stock elsewhere before it ships. We still have a list of customers with orders in place, and their orders take precedence. Sorry we don't have better news, but this is the fastest way to get one if you're interested!
@@Optics4birding Thank you very much. I just bought a used Zeiss 15x60 GAT* binocular, which too has an identical 70 degree AFOV as the 14x52, and being a Porro-Prism, has a deeper DoF......should get to me by tomorrow. Based on how it performs, I will keep using it till the 14x52 becomes widely available again.
Can't wait to hear how well the 14x52 handle without a tripod.
Check out the jay Scott outdoors podcast, they just covered it, and the consensus seems to be they’re good for hand holding, and excellent on a tripod.
@@progradepainting3755 I did not see a proper response to this question on the jay Scott podcast. I found I could easily handhold the 12x42 NLs, when paired with the optional forehead rest. Not sure if it is the same with the 14x52......is it steady enough, if paired with the optional forehead rest ?
😊Is it NL 100% Edage to edage Sharpness same as EL or did u Fail again?
Image stabilisation! Losing money keep bringing super expensive stuff out that doesn’t have stabilisation.
Image stabilization isn’t everything. Glass quality matters a lot, especially if you are really stretching the distance out. A steadier image doesn’t matter if it’s a cloudy one, and I always have a tripod if I need to have a shake-free view.
Are image stabilized binoculars bad? No, and they definitely have advantages. However, if you’re looking at Swarovski, and especially if you’re looking at higher powered ones like the new 14x52, you’re probably in the market for the best glass you can get your hands on. If Swarovski (or any of the adjacent top brands) comes out with them, then I’ll consider looking at a set. However, if it’s anything like rangefinding binoculars, you lose some optical quality with the addition of the on board electronics required to function.
All the image stabilisation bins Iv used have been garbage , just adds weight complexity and cost , just a silly idea best left in the past 😂
@@jasonhiggins6431you haven’t used them if that’s your impression
@@redacted2618I am talking about same glass quality as any sensible person would have assumed !
@@jasonhiggins6431 sig sauer zulu 6 gen 2 IS freaky good. still planning to add 14x52. dirty harry thug "i just have to know"
Lovely review indeed. Could u pls review the NL 12X42 ?…thank U!
Thank you so much! We did a review for the NL 42 separately before we knew about the NL 52. It isn't specific to the 12x42, more of a general review for the entire series, but hopefully it helps! Here you go: ruclips.net/video/ypAwgy7wK1I/видео.html