Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure Review
Swarovski’s 12x42 NL Pures were the first ever binoculars to
meet all my long-wished-for criteria: wide, flat field; high power; good eye
relief; precise focuser and superb optical quality. I loved them, but I thought
NL Pure would stick at the mainstream 42mm and 32mm sizes. I was wrong.
Recently, Swarovski expanded the NL range to replace the 50mm EL models,
my previous favourites in this size. And just as they did with the 12x42s, they
upped the highest power –
this time from 12x to 14x – due to the super-stable new hold.
Given that astronomy is a big use case for me (and maybe for you too)
that highest-power model is the one I’m reviewing first. So are the 14x52
NL Pures the big improvement over the 12x50 ELs the 12x42 model was over
the 10x42s? Let’s find out …
Swarovski
NL Pure 14x52 (centre) alongside Fuji 14x40s and SW EL 12x50s.
At A Glance
|
Magnification |
14x |
|
Objective Size |
52mm |
|
Eye Relief |
~17mm (but feels like more) |
|
Actual Field of View |
5.3° |
|
Apparent field of view |
70° |
|
Close focus |
~2.5m |
|
Transmissivity |
91% |
|
Length |
174mm w/o caps |
|
Weight |
1050g |
Data
from Swarovski/Me.
What’s in the Box?
The NL Pures get a subtly different box from the ELs – longer and
thinner, but with the same artwork.
Design and Build
Swarovski’s ‘NL Pure’ line are currently top-of-the-range,
largely replacing the venerable ‘EL’. What does ‘NL’
stand for? ‘Nature Lovers’, apparently.
Standout features of the NL Pure line include a very wide apparent field
of ~70°
that’s corrected right to the edge, an unusual waisted body that is super snug to hold,
plenty of eye relief for use with glasses and top-line mechanical features too.
In other respects, the NL Pures are typical Swarovskis – thoughtfully
designed and beautifully made in Austria.
The NL Pure line started off with a brace of models in the main birding
aperture of 42mm, followed by the increasingly popular compact 32mm format. The
largest aperture 10x52 and 14x52 models are the most recent additions, replacing
the 10x50 and 12x50 ELs in the larger size. The 10x50 and 12x50 ELs were
intended primarily for hunting and nature viewing in low light and I assume the
new NL Pure 10x52 and 14x52 are the same. Still, I’d expect them to be
outstanding for astronomy too.
The Competition
A magnification of 14x is unusually high in a 50mm premium binocular and
even 12x isn’t that common. Obvious European competitors might include
Leica’s 12x50 Ultravids and Meopta’s Meostar 12x50s. Zeiss
currently only offer higher powers in their big-eye mid-range Conquests.
Stepping outside the world of European ‘Alpha’ makers, Vortex
make a 12x50 Razor in both HD and UHD ranges. You could also consider a
stabilised model, such as Canon’s 15x50s or Fujinon’s 14x40s that I
use as a comparison point throughout this review.
If you want a pair of premium 12x50s but don’t want to spend this
kind of money, you could try to hunt down a pair of long-discontinued Nikon SE
12x50s – once the gold standard and still very good.
Body
The NL Pure range have ditched the EL’s double bridge and returned
to a single bridge design with long barrels, perhaps because a double bridge
wouldn’t allow the innovative ‘wasp-waisted’ hold: Swarovski have
used complex curves to produce a flattened cross-section that fits the hand
more snugly than any other.
Otherwise, the 14x52 NL Pures are much like other recent Swarovskis, with
their standard armour that’s warm to hold and grippy, but doesn’t
smell rubbery and isn’t too much of a dust magnet. Just as for the ELs,
the bare-metal parts of the bridge are satin-black powder coated.
Dimensions are exactly as claimed. At 174mm long, the 14x52s NLs are just
16mm longer than the 12x42 model and identical to the 12x50 ELs. Weight at a
measured 1050g is ~200g more than the 12x42s and 30g more than the brochure,
likely because that includes the front caps. That’s just a little more
than the 12x50 Els.
The NL Pure models are claimed waterproof to SW’s usual 4m. Build
quality on this pair is impeccable, as usual with Swarovski, but I did
encounter a pair of ELs with an optical fault recently, so at this price make
sure you buy from somewhere that accepts returns.
Focuser
The focuser, a large ribbed wheel at the front of the bridge, is set
further forward and subtly different in style from the ELs’. It is light
of action, ultra smooth and fluid, very precise. The action is just a bit
better than the ELs’.
Dioptre adjustment, via a separate wheel with a little lever set well
back from the focuser, is super easy to find and use. It has a scale (in actual
dioptres to +/- 4) on the underside and a neutral stop that make a tiny audible
click. Again, this is different from the ELs, where you pull out the focuser
knob to adjust dioptre.
Close focus is about 2.5m (where merge is still excellent): better than
claimed. From there to past infinity is just under two turns of the wheel, so
this isn’t the fastest focuser, but it allows the high precision that the
high power (and so shallower depth of field) requires.
NL
Pures have unique and highly effective dioptre adjustment.
Optics - Prisms
The NL Pure range use a conventional Schmidt-Pechan (a.k.a. Roof) prism
like the ELs before them, not high-transmission Abbe-König prisms. Still,
they manage a transmission of 91% which is just a few percent less than Swarovski’s
own Abbe-König SLCs.
Optics - Objectives
The increase of objective size from 50mm to 52mm may not sound like a big
deal, but in fact it gives a useful 8% increase in light-gathering over the
12x50s.
Investigation with a laser shows a triplet objective in a 1+2
configuration, basically the same as the 12x50 ELs. However, in the EL the
front two elements exhibit different scatter levels, whilst in the NL Pure they
are the same (the effect is subtle and hard to photograph). This may
suggest a different combination of glasses in the newer design.
There are two substantial knife-edge baffles – one behind the
objectives, another set back near the prisms, with lots of smaller ones in
between. Just as with the ELs, and unlike many premium bino’s, there is
no baffled ring in front of the objectives.
The coatings are identical to my (recent) 12x50 ELs, and are among the
most transmissive I’ve seen.
14x52
NL Pures: objective coatings and baffles.
Swarovski
12x50 ELs (left), 14x52 NL Pures (right): objectives and baffles compared.
Laser
test of Swarovski 12x50 ELs (left), 14x52 NL Pures (right): front element has
different laser scatter, others the same.
Optics - Eyepieces
These are a modern, multi-element eyepiece design with dished 29mm
diameter eye lenses – similar to, but larger than, the 26mm ones on the
12x50 ELs. Swarovski quote 12 elements per side total for the NLs and if we
subtract three for the objective, one for the focusing lens and two for the
prisms, we are left with six elements for the eyepieces, probably including a
two-element field flattener.
I measured about 17mm eye relief from the rim of the cups, just as
claimed, but it feels like more: noticeably more than the replaced EL 12x50s. I
can comfortably see the whole field with spec’s, which I can’t
quite with the ELs. This is not because the NLPs have any more ER from the
glass, but because the eye lenses are far less recessed within the cups! Adding
to comfort, blackouts are very well controlled too.
A wide flat field is perhaps NL Pure’s standout feature. The 14x52’s
true field is very wide at 5.3°, the apparent field of 70° the best of the best in binocular terms (only the
12x42s have a degree more apparent at 71°). Older wide field designs
typically have much less eye relief and a very curved field.
For comparison, Fujinon’s 14x40s manage a mere 4°, Canon’s 14x32s a little more with 4.3°. SW’s own previous best high-power model, the
12x50 EL, has a 5.7° true field due to the lower
power, but just 63° apparent.
As an aside, note that the eyepieces must be 12-15mm focal length and it
may not be possible to squeeze out much more flat field with good eye relief.
Wider-field astro’ eyepieces of this focal length are usually huge and/or
have limited eye relief.
The eye cups are the best – solid and stable with a smooth and
positive click-stop action and no less than six extended positions to choose
from. The ELs’ were good too, but recessed the eye lenses more as noted
and were quite different in design (see below).
NL Pure eyepieces are similar to
the 12x50 ELs’ but even larger.
Eyecups fully retracted and
extended. There are 5 intermediate click-stops.
Accessories
These have the snug semi-rigid case with horizontal zip of other NL
Pures: more modern perhaps than the field case for the ELs, but a bit less
functional for me.
Like later ELs, the push-in rubber objective caps are attached and work
well – a secure fit but not too hard to squeeze in. The soft rubber
eyepiece cap is conventional, but again fits snugly.
The Field Pro strap has a broad pad and allows you to change the length
with a winder. Undoubtedly a better system in use, the Field Pro lugs are
fiddly and it’s possible to get them disastrously wrong if you push but
don’t twist properly, after which they can pop off without warning
– please take note!
Other included accessories include that bar of special soap(!) The NL
Pure options catalogue features the equally unexpected forehead rest thingy
that’s supposed to reduce shakes. I didn’t try it because I know
I’ll catch it on a stile or a branch; but others have reported that it
works. Another optional accessory is a tripod adapter, but the bino’s may
need to be retrofitted with the lug (free for the first year after you buy the
adapter).
In
Use – Daytime
Ergonomics and Handling
Like other NL Pure models, these are not an especially light binocular,
but the sculpted grip gives them an unbeatably snug hold for me. It makes them
as steady as the 12x50 ELs in use and more comfortable.
The focuser falls very naturally to finger. Its action is just a little
better than the ELs’ in every way – lighter, more fluid, even more
precise. Focus snap is extreme, just the finest point, but the focuser has no
trouble finding it instantly every time and you can focus through and back with
no change of focus position or play. An added benefit of that snappiness is
very easy and positive dioptre adjustment.
Eyepiece comfort is exceptional for a wide-field binocular with plenty of
eye relief and low blackouts, lots of adjustment in the cups if you view
without spec’s.
I still prefer the appearance of the ELs, but I’m used to the NL
Pure style now. Even though these are more flared than the smaller models, they
still look like a ‘normal’ binocular when worn (unlike the big and
bulky 15x56 SLCs, for example).
The View
The view is very similar to the ELs’ (it uses the same set of
SwaroVision technologies after all). That means super sharp, bright, detailed,
with natural colours. I can’t see any difference in brightness between
the 14x52 NLs and the 12x50 ELs during the day (a function of transmissivity,
not objective size, remember). The main difference is that wider and perhaps
even better corrected-to-the-edge field. Is this noticeable? Yes, it really is.
The higher power is very noticeable too. That’s both good and bad.
Good because it really pulls things close. Bad because now I do start to notice
the shakes, especially after using Fuji’s stabilised 14x40s alongside.
Optical quality (on this pair and the other NL Pures I’ve tried) is
exceptional, leading to that snappy best focus. That sharpness and focus snap
mean following birds on the wing is very easy for such a high power and the
huge field helps too. Resolution is extremely high - the limit is your shakes.
Flat field?
Yes. What you want more? I mean really, it’s exceptional. Viewing a ruler, the scale is as perfectly focused and sharp at the field stop as in the centre, with maybe just a slight softening midway. A little distortion to make panning more comfy is apparent in the outer field, but it’s cleverly done – mild and progressive.
An
apparent FOV of 70° is surprisingly hard to photograph!
Chromatic Aberration
False colour is very
low, similar to the 12x50 ELs, put perhaps a touch less. Even viewing against a
bright sky generates an almost perfectly clean image centre field. What false
colour remains is mostly off-axis from the eyepieces and/or prisms and not the
objectives.
Stray Light and Ghosting
I couldn’t
generate any significant ghosts or spikes, even on a brilliant LED security
light. There was a little veiling flare when working around bright lights at
night, typical of the other NL Pure models I’ve tested.
In
Use – Dusk
The 14x52s are not a full-fat big-eye binocular like the 15x56s, but I
can start to see a light intensifier effect in the understory at dusk, or when looking
out over the bay at night. I think I was able to detect that 8% increase in
light gathering compared with the 12x50 ELs.
In
Use – Observing the Night Sky
As during the day, eyepiece comfort is outstanding, with loads of eye
relief. Unusually, you can actually move your eyes around that wide view
without getting blackouts.
The wonderfully expansive field delivers masses of sparklingly pinpoint stars to the field edge, with perhaps just a trace of astigmatism creeping in at the field stop. These have real wow factor for Milky Way star fields, with a compelling combination of magnification and field width. Star colours are very strongly rendered too.
The focus action is perfect for astronomy – super smooth, fluid,
precise and free of play or backlash or stickiness. Focus snap is extreme, but
the focuser finds it instantly – think fine refractor with a
micro-focuser.
At high angles the hold remains light and very comfortable. I really like
that flared shape. But shakes start to feel like their Achilles heel at this
power, especially after using the stabilised Fuji 14x40s. I had my steadiest
views lying on a bench and resting them on my glasses. That weird forehead rest
may well help.
The Moon
The 14x52s delivered
a very crisp and detailed waning gibbous (19.5 day) Moon. A magnification of
14x reveals all the main features, including bright Tycho with its rays arcing
out across Mare Nubium towards even brighter Aristarchus in Oceanus
Procellarum. It’s a phase that really highlights the great impact basin
of Mare Imbrium with its bordering Apennine mountains and dark floored crater
Plato.
It’s a great
view, pin-sharp with almost no false colour in focus. But viewing the Moon high
in the sky, I really started to notice the shakes and you’d need to rest
on something to see all the fine lunar detail on offer.
Planets
Planets are great at
revealing optical defects, but Jupiter was a completely clean disk through the
14x52s, with no flare. Binocular views of Jupiter don’t come any better
and I think I got hints of NEB and SEB – always tough to spot with
bino’s.
Venus’
brilliance caused enough flare that I couldn’t reliably make out its
phase, but almost no false colour either, even out of focus. Mars appeared as a
tiny, intensely orange disk, again with no significant flare.
The NL Pures
transmitted Saturn’s creamy pink hue very strongly. I couldn’t see
the rings as their usual binocular ‘handles’ because they’re
now almost edge-on, but Saturn was clearly ovoid not round.
Deep Sky
You might expect the 14x52 NL Pures to excel on the deep sky, so on a
clear dark night just before Christmas, I headed down to the end of the
prom’ where it’s very dark and I can see almost the whole sky, to
explore their capabilities.
Out over the bay, I had wonderful views of Orion’s sword: M42’s
extended arms and central spike, some structure in the central area around the
(resolved in steady moments) Trapezium stars. I also noted nebulosity in other areas
of the sword and perhaps around Alnitak in the belt too. The whole sword and two
belt stars - Alnitak and Alnilam - fitted almost undistorted in the
14x52’s spacious field.
In Taurus, the Pleiades were brilliant and sparkling and I found the Crab
Nebula near Zeta Tauri with a bit of searching.
I had excellent views of the Auriga clusters: the arms of the Starfish Cluster (M38)
easily resolved into stars with a bit of averted vision and fitted nicely in
the field of view with the Pinwheel Cluster (M36).
In Andromeda, I easily found galaxy M33. On the other side of orange star
Mirach, M31 had more to offer than the usual fuzzy patch, showing its dense
core and cutoff to one side where images reveal a lane of dust. Nearby companion
galaxy M110 was easy to pick out too.
Cassiopea is stuffed with clusters. On one side of star Ruchbah is the
Owl Cluster, with its spooky eyes, M103 on the other. In the nearby Double
Cluster area, the 14x52’s huge, flat field easily encompassed open
cluster Stock 2 as well. The result was a spectacular mass of stars: one of the
best views of it I’ve had. Above Stock 2, I could make out patches of
nebulosity – the Heart and Soul nebulae.
As expected, the 14x52s make a wonderful deep-sky astronomy
binocular.
Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure vs Swarovski
12x50 EL
The build and materials are very similar, as is
the optical design. The view is similar too, but the NL Pures are a little
better in every way:
·
Size and weight are almost
identical
·
That sculpted body makes the NL
Pures more comfortable and steady to hold
·
The wider field (70°
vs 63°) of
the NL Pures gives them a wonderfully open view
·
The different eye cups mean the NL
Pures have more real world eye relief for better comfort with spec’s
·
The NL Pures have a little less
chromatic aberration, especially at the field edge
·
The focuser action is a little more
fluid and smooth on the NL Pures, dioptre adjustment even easier
·
The field is perhaps even better
corrected on the NL Pures, despite the extra width
·
I may have been able to
detect the 8% difference in light gathering (52mm vs 50mm) in the lowest light
That set of small NL Pure advantages
comes with no downsides and sums to a significant improvement overall, but only
you know if it’s worth the (likely high) cost of upgrading if you already
own the ELs (as I do).
Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure vs Fujinon
14x40 TS-X
This is not a fair comparison: the SWs cost
about three times as much. But it’s an interesting one because they have
the same magnification and aim to do a broadly similar job. I also tested them
together.
I don’t need to go through their merits
feature by feature, because the NL Pures are way better in all respects …
except stabilisation. But the Fujis do highlight how much the shakes limit even
the finest unstabilised high-power binocular.
If you want the most pleasing, wide and
beautiful view, the NL Pures win every time. But if it’s resolvable
detail you’re after – whether of a distant wader, a plane flying
miles away, the Moon’s craters, or even the stars in that cluster –
the Fujis will reveal it when the Swarovskis just won’t unless you put
them on a tripod.
Summary
The 14x52 NL Pures rank among the finest binocular optics I’ve reviewed.
The view they offer is basically perfect – wide, bright, sharp to the
edge, with very little false colour on axis. Eyepiece comfort is supreme with
loads of eye relief and minimal blackouts and well controlled off-axis false
colour.
Mechanically they’re outstanding too – compact for their
aperture, with a seductively secure and comfy hold. Focus action is light,
fluid and precise. Dioptre adjustment is easy. The eye cups are superbly
designed with all the adjustability you’d ever need. Build quality on
this pair was flawless.
There is an overall sense that Swarovski worked hard to get the details
just right – the difference between a great product and a merely good
one. I try hard to avoid favouritism on Scope Views, but I’d be lying if
I said you could buy better at ~50mm aperture.
The 14x52 NL Pures only have two issues. One is price (as opposed to
value for money - which is arguably
fair). The other is lack of stabilisation: sad to admit it, but a stabilised
binocular like the Fuji 14x40s – markedly inferior in every other way
– will resolve more hand-held. Meanwhile, A big-eye pair like
Swarovski’s own 15x56 SLCs will go deeper for astronomy, but at the cost
of size, weight, field width and some eyepiece comfort.
Swarovski’s 14x52 NL Pures are the very best ~50mm binoculars
and a worthy upgrade to the ELs. But at this power, shakes become a more
noticeable drawback and stabilised models will resolve more.
