colohunter
Active Member
Been leaning towards the 12x42 NLP but the 10x50 NLP's are tempting. Not sure I'd like giving up the 12 magnification for the extra 10-15 minutes of use at night. Anyone have experience with both?
thanks,
thanks,
12x42 or 10x50 NL Pure's
- Thread starter colohunter
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Rick Richard
Well-Known Member
My decision was based on use…meaning glassing from a tripod or handheld. Since most of my glassing is done handheld I went with the 10s.
colohunter
Active Member
me too but surprisingly I can hold the 12's pretty steady, that's why I'm torn, thanks for the reply
dnb86
Well-Known Member
10x50s will be bigger and heavier and I think you'd be better off thinking 12x42 or 10x42. Not sure If you have any field experience with the NL line but it's silly how good they are especially off a tripod
colohunter
Active Member
No experience, been a Leica guy as I get a pro deal, but after looking through my neighbors 12x42 Pure's, been thinking I had to try some. I've been using the 12x50 Leica's. The 12x42's are much lighter and easier to hold. Think that's the way I'll go, thanks.
I like the 12's. My eyes can not tell the difference right at dark between the 10's. Buddy has them. We compared them and both couldn't tell any difference much. They are small really perfect size. Easy to hold.
I would go 12 unless you hunt close or in the woods. I have 10, 12 and now 14. I usually like to see more and bigger.
How do your Leica's (I don't know which model you have), compare against the NL Pure's, in glass quality/clarity?
Thanks
quandary
Well-Known Member
10x42 - FOV 399@1000, Exit Pupil 4.2mm, weight 30oz
12x42 - FOV 339@1000, Exit Pupil 3.5mm, weight 30oz
10x50 - FOV 390@1000, Exit Pupil 5.2mm, weight 36oz
14x52 - FOV 279@1000, Exit Pupil 3.6mm, weight 36oz.
To me it is a no brainer the 10x42 is the best combination of attributes for use when hunting.
Personally I went with the Zeiss 10x40 SFLs 377@1000, EP 4.0mm, 22.6oz. The Pures are nominally better glass. However for me the weight difference more than makes up for it. Plus with the price difference you have a good chunk of a quality spotter paid for if you have a need.
12x42 - FOV 339@1000, Exit Pupil 3.5mm, weight 30oz
10x50 - FOV 390@1000, Exit Pupil 5.2mm, weight 36oz
14x52 - FOV 279@1000, Exit Pupil 3.6mm, weight 36oz.
To me it is a no brainer the 10x42 is the best combination of attributes for use when hunting.
Personally I went with the Zeiss 10x40 SFLs 377@1000, EP 4.0mm, 22.6oz. The Pures are nominally better glass. However for me the weight difference more than makes up for it. Plus with the price difference you have a good chunk of a quality spotter paid for if you have a need.
Last edited:
1wildcatfan
Well-Known Member
I'd get the 12s today if I could afford them. They'll be lighter, easier to handle. Your eyes won't know the difference if you have 42 or 50 mm objectives at dusk and dawn.
colohunter
Active Member
Leica's are good, they're the Ultravid and they don't make the Noctavid in 12x50, ordered up the 12x42 NLP today, $2750 shipped, no tax, then I'll do a side by side comparison. I still have the 12x50 Leica's here at the house so I'll mess around with both this weekend. Hopefully the glass is a little better, but at the level of the Leica and Swaro's, I'm sure both are good.
Mike Matteson
Well-Known Member
Depends on what type of hunting you are doing. If it's big horn animals. You'll want a spotting scope too. if you are hunting animal in general ,then 12 powder would work. You loose field of view the higher the powder, and lost of light late evening. I have a couple of spotting scopes and now looking at angle lens type. I do use tripods that is with my binoculars, and spotting scope. Found that it was far easier to hold a location and pointing it out to others, that maybe with me. That way I don't have to require the location the animal is bedded down or standing.
