Swift Eaglet 7x36 825R or Leitz 7x35 ? (1 Viewer)

Hi....everyone. Many years back I owned the Leitz 7x35 & the older version of the 7x36 eaglet. When I saw the newer model of the 7x36 Eaglet CFT on sale for $234.90 at Binoculars.com I had a instant relapse( Iam a Binoholic). They arrived yesterday right from Swift Optics thru Binoculars.com. Who out there still has the old Leitz & the newer Eaglet ? I sure would like to know how they compare to each other since my memory is a little vague. The optics on these new Eaglets sure are sweet ! ........ Gwen

Gwen,

Congratulations! on a "sweet deal". That's the best price I've seen. They are up to $261 on sale at bin.com. Usually, they cost over $400.

How sweet are they?

In particular, any truth to the "edge to edge" sharpness in the ads?

I recently tried an ZR 7x36 ED2, and I'm guessing that the 49* AFOV on the Eaglet would probably look tunnelesque next to the ZR's 63* bay window.

But the ZR wasn't sharp across the field (though the fall off at the edges was gradual enough not to be distracting) but the pincushion was fairly wicked, though very surprisingly I didn't find it distracting while panning, in fact, pincushion while panning is more noticeable in my 8x EII even though it has less pincushion.

The ZR's pincushion was most noticeable looking at objects with straight lines such as telephone polls and buildings, my computer screen, etc. Birds in the centerfield were crisp and undistorted.

So if I were going to trade off 2 whole degrees of FOV, I'd want the bin to be sharp to the edge (or nearly) and have no distracting aberrations (rolling ball or excessive pincushion), particularly if I paid the same price as the ZR (which the Eaglet is when not on sale).

It seems with simple Kellner EPs and 3-element objectives that should be doable.

Also, how is the CA control? The ED glass in the ZR does a very good job of controlling false color. I used the bin under winter weather conditions, dark gray skies and a complete snow cover. I had to look fairly far off axis to see CA.

I didn't think my EII had that much CA until I looked at some Cedar Waxwings in a bunch of trees that were backlit by overcast gray skies. I saw noticeable green fringing on tree trunks and branches through the EII. Nada with the ZR. Sky/trees. Nothing in between. Easier to spot the waxwings without the color fringing.

Stray light was an issue on the one day when the sun was out, but not otherwise, and ZR addressed this with the upgrade.

The ZR was also very bright and held up under dismal skies and at twilight.

The Cold Fusion Technology is supposed to reflect 99.8% off the prisms! Yazooks! Of course, that's just one optical element, but that's still impressive if the rest of the optical train is close to that.

I'd like to see a "shootout" btwn the ZR and Swift. Same configurations, but each company used different design approaches.

I would think the older Leitz with no phase coating wouldn't be as good competition, but I could be wrong. My friend Steve's old 7x30 SLC was sharper and brighter than I would have imagined for a non-phased coated bin.

I haven't been able to find any reviews of this new "Cold Fusion" Eaglet model, so please give us a mini-review. Thanks!

That is a sweet deal on the Eaglet and classified it as a true best buy. I have had a CFT Eaglet for, well for ever since they came out with the CFT coatings.

As to Gwen's op on the Trinovid, I remember the Trinovid with a wider field, but I really do not think it was as bright or as sharp as the new Eaglet, but that is from memory and probably should not be trusted.

As to Brock's post, I have the ZEN ED, the Swift Eaglet, and the Leupold Switch Power 7/12, so I'll offer a few comments. I think I recall Gwen having the ZEN ED as well, so maybe we can get some additional perspectives.

I'll try to go through Brock's questions one by one.

First, the edge sharpness is a little better on the Swift, and in fact the edge sharpness is really better than decent. It is not however a perfect edge to edge sharp view. There is some pincushion, but not to the degree it exists in the ZEN, but the sweet spot on the ZEN is way bigger than the Swift. While I confess to having some puzzlement over the desire for edge to edge sharpness, I can understand it is there.

So Brock, yes the Swift view is a bit more restricted, even tunnel like, much like the Leupold, as compared to the ZEN. If one looks, it is not difficult to imagine some design kinship between the Leupold and Eaglet as far as the exterior is concerned. However, I can't get the feeling I really need more fov than the Swift has. If you are a wide fov fan, then the Swift will be too small.

The Leupold is an exceptionally fast focuser, needing little more than 3/4 turn of the wheel. The Swift is not as fast, using one full focus revolution. The Swift is far too easy on the tension required to move the focuser for me, although I suspect it will suit more people, as I find the focus action of the ZEN to be ideal for me.

The Swift I do not think has ED glass, although I have seen it listed as ED in at least one sellers description. Whatever it does have, CA is 99% as well controlled in the Eaglet as it is in the ZEN. Ditto Leupold at 7x.

The ZEN is a little brighter and sharper over a much wider expanse than either the Swift or the Leupold. I think the contrast and color saturation is a bit better in the ZEN than either of the other two. The resolution ability of the ZEN is superior to the other two, particularly at distance. For example, watching some deer at between 1,100 and 1,200 yards, detail recognition was/is better with the ZEN.

The Eaglet and Leupold are in fact compact binoculars, much more compact than the ZEN. The ZEN is about the same dimensions as the 8x42 Nikon Monarch and the other two are no bigger than any compact 32mm binocular.

I have come to like the ZEN ED 7x36 as my personal choice IF (and I repeat IF) I were to settle on a single binocular. I certainly have no need for all three, so I am now in somewhat of a quandary over selling either the Leupold or the Swift. The Swift is like an old comfortable friend, but the Leupold has the added feature of 12x at the flick of a lever. If the 12x function was a bit better, the Leupold would be the likely winner. However 12x is, I think, too much magnification for 32mm of glass.

For my eyes, the stray light is handled pretty well by all three. If pushed, I would hazard the opinion that the Swift handles it best.

Now give the Eaglet the ZEN fov with the same degree of edge sharpness as the Eaglet has (which may not be doable), and the true compact nature of the Eaglet would really have me in a quandary.

Hi Steve .... I could not have replied to brock's questions any better, you saved me some typing time. I dont have the Leupold Switch Power but you were dead on with the Zen 7x36. What makes the Eaglet so great besides its great optics is it is so compact & when you first handle it you get the feeling its built like a tank. It makes you wonder just how much binoculars are marked up when the prices are cut almost 50% & with free shipping. I still cant believe the prices of the top Alpha bins. There was a time when you had to buy them because nothing else was close. With the binos that are still coming from Japan along with the chinese products, I know I will never want to purchase another Zeiss or Leica, knowing what I saved will send me on a 2 week vaction any place I want to go ......... Gwen

Thanks for those replies. Both sound VG, depending on your preferences.

Ideally, I would like to see a 7x36 bin that has a well corrected field plus sharp optics, excellent contrast and color depth, and ED glass all in one package. And did I mention that they can't charge an arm, a leg, and an ear for it?

Tall order, but if they could build the Great Wall, put a taikonaut in space, and invent the compass, gunpowder, and printing, I think they can probably do this for under $1,000.

To keep cost down, they might have to give up some FOV, maybe 8* instead of 9*, still not bad with a 56* AFOV. 17mm usable ER, if possible.

Wrap the optics in a nicely designed open bridge frame like the EDG or ZR, make the focuser smooth but not too fast so the depth of focus is not finicky, and keep the pop up diopter on the right EP, and I think they will have a winner that will satisfy both edge sharpness and WF fans alike.

brocknroller said:

Also, how is the CA control? The ED glass in the ZR does a very good job of controlling false color. I used the bin under winter weather conditions, dark gray skies and a complete snow cover. I had to look fairly far off axis to see CA.

I didn't think my EII had that much CA until I looked at some Cedar Waxwings in a bunch of trees that were backlit by overcast gray skies. I saw noticeable green fringing on tree trunks and branches through the EII. Nada with the ZR. Sky/trees. Nothing in between. Easier to spot the waxwings without the color fringing.

Click to expand...

Ever since someone on this forum explained how to look for a CA, my eyes became obsessed in noticing them whenever I use a lesser binoculars. Life was peaceful before. I agreed that those ED binoculars did a fantastic job reigning the CA. Don't know how they can do it without using more expensive CaF2 glasses.

Eeeww! 49 degree FOV on the Swift Eaglet.

Maybe Ill pass on these, and try one of the newer 7x36's.

falcondude said:

Ever since someone on this forum explained how to look for a CA, my eyes became obsessed in noticing them whenever I use a lesser binoculars. Life was peaceful before. I agreed that those ED binoculars did a fantastic job reigning the CA. Don't know how they can do it without using more expensive CaF2 glasses.

Click to expand...

Hello Falcodude,

May I just write, "Hello 'Dude"?

The ZR 7x36 also uses a long focal length objective, which helps reduce CA.
Another way of reducing CA is to use a triplet objective.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Pinewood said:

Hello Falcodude,

May I just write, "Hello 'Dude"?

The ZR 7x36 also uses a long focal length objective, which helps reduce CA.
Another way of reducing CA is to use a triplet objective.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Click to expand...

Yes, the ZR 7x36 ED2 is long for a "midsized" bin - less than an inch shorter than the full sized ZR 8x43.

By comparison, the EII is a "midget". Here's what Henry had to say about the EII's FL and f/ratio:

"I measured the focal length of the E objective at around 110mm (about f/3.7) which makes it quite fast even by binocular standards."

With lower magnification, longer FL, and ED glass, I can see why in high contrast situations, the ED2 would be the "clear" winner over the EII.

Source:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=38202

orbitaljump said:

Eeeww! 49 degree FOV on the Swift Eaglet.

Maybe I'll pass on these, and try one of the newer 7x36's.

Click to expand...

They are 3 element Kellener (the old tried and true design) and have some pincushion but rather less than they need. For birdwatchers like me they have a bit of rolling ball on panning.

SteveC has related the story that they were designed for a police observation use (low mag, lightweight, compact, large exit pupil, waterproof, fast focus) which would also account for that -- urban ser that don't scan the bins are like astronomers who don't like pincushion as it makes the buildings "bendy".

That said they're good bins: nice view if not wide and perhaps the lightest 36mm bins out there (just over 20 oz). They're also very compact. A recent comparison (after realizing my 8x32 FL are "fat" to improve the ergonomics of the grip).

I can imagine someone doing behavior field work all day (shake becomes tiring as does weight after 8 to 10 hours in the field) really liking them.

For $261 I think they're a deal. I paid $250 second hand and was very happy with them.

There aren't too many 7x36 out there: Nikon ATB porro and the ZR 7x36 and the Swifts. I like them all in different ways!

THe Leitz will be pre-phase correction and will be in another (lesser) class.

Both Steve and I have written reviews/comments on the Eaglet ... try a search to find the thread.

I saw some Bushnell 7x36 roofs as well. Newish release.

Im not poo pooing them, I just know what I like, and I dont like looking through a 50ish degree circle. Not that the binos arent useful or good quality images, or that smaller AFOV isnt desireable for some uses. It's just a personal preference, that I know I have.

People like what they like, and I have no problem with that. But I sometimes think that learning about CA, AFOV, and edge to edge sharpness has overly complicated the lives of many binocular users. If one lets themself think "OH golly these Eaglets and their restricted fov are gonna look tunnel like", well then they will. Forget about the fov and just use the binoculars they are just fine. This from a guy whose first, and for some years time, only binocular was a Swift Nighthawk 8x40 porro with a 499' fov.