In this question, i would like to use them as a reference.
Apart from the obvious (roof vs porro, fov, wp vs not wp, CA vs non-CA, yada yada
), optical quality-wise, how would the Zeiss 8x32 FL compare to them?Thanks
I have the now out-of-production Nikon 8x32 SE.
In this question, i would like to use them as a reference.
Apart from the obvious (roof vs porro, fov, wp vs not wp, CA vs non-CA, yada yada ), optical quality-wise, how would the Zeiss 8x32 FL compare to them?
Thanks
[QUOTE=jaymoynihan;1569874]I have the now out-of-production Nikon 8x32 SE.
In this question, i would like to use them as a reference.
Apart from the obvious (roof vs porro, fov, wp vs not wp, CA vs non-CA, yada yada ), optical quality-wise, how would the Zeiss 8x32 FL compare to them?
Thanks[/QUOTE]
I've owned both of these binoculars for extended periods. The FLs are a few ounces lighter and are more compact, have a slightly wider FOV, and have very low color aberration. The SEs have slightly better resolution and contrast in the center, sharper edges, a slight but distinct advantage in low light and shadow detail, and slight CA that is visible even in the center field if your eye is not centered in the ocular. To boil it down to the bottom line, both are good enough to be a primary binocular, but I found I could simply make out what I was seeing in critical viewing more often with the SE. A few weeks with another example of the 8x32 FL only confirmed that impression.
Hello JayMoynihan,
They are both highly regarded binoculars but they are different. It is probably a matter of personal preferences. However, some find the SE's kidney bean effect just too much of a problem. I would not disagree with Fireform's description of these two binoculars but I prefer the 8x32 FL which has a slightly wider view and twist up eye cups. I owned both but I kept the Zeiss.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood