Bargain new Habicht (1 Viewer)

[Bencw]

Well, I was not really looking for one of these but couldn't pass it up. Swarovski habicht 8x30W porro, bought new this year, £629 from Clifton Cameras, never used, boxed, paperwork, as it was originally sold, with reciept, for sale at £469, but wait, I had a 15% discount voucher, so got it for £398. Maybe I bought from someone on here, i'm really pleased to have got it though. Now, I have a few good 8X30 porro's in the collection, including the Nikon E11, Kern Pizar, Leitz Binuxit, Zeiss Oberkochen. I have posted before comparison, but in short, for me personally the Nikon E11 was overall the best, although the Kern is the brightest. Now I had the chance to finally compare the E11 with the Habicht.
Well plenty has been written on the merits of both so I will just stick to what I found. They are both superb, and there is really little in it in my opinion. The Habicht is fractionally brighter, (but not as bright as the Kern), the E11 to me, has fractionally better colour depth, but in both respects it is marginal and only to my eye. The 462ft@1000yds Fov of the E11 beats the Habicht 408ft hands down. The Habicht is waterproof to 4m, the E11 is not. Clarity and detail are to me, about the same, nothing in it. The E11 is smooth focusing, the Habicht a little stiff, maybe due to being watertight. The EII to me, seems a more relaxed view, probably due to wide FOV. I have no problems with glare or CA with either binocular. The build quality of the Habicht appears to me to be a fair bit better than the E11. This is just my personal finding, I know people differ, but I am somewhat surprised to have to say, that although it does not exude the quality of the Habicht, to me the Nikon E11 is overall still the best 8x30 porro for practical use. So, if you are looking for a good 8x30 porro, and you are considering, the admittedly excellent Habicht, my advice would be that unless you desperately need a waterproof binocular, go compare with the E11 first, not only is it half the price of the Habicht, but in my humble opinion it is overall better to use. If you compare you may find it is the same for you.

 

[Binastro]

Thanks for the report Ben.

For me the FOV of the Habichts has always been the reason I have not considered it.

If you look into the street at night with a nearby streetlight in the field of view, which shows more ghost images and loss of contrast or flare that masks dark objects? The EII or the Habicht?

For me the EII is extremely good, up there with Leica.

 

[Bencw]

Thanks Binastro, I will have a look at the streetlamp and let you know. I thought worth posting, as I think I have read on here that people have difficulty finding the Habicht 8x30W in the USA. I know we all differ in our opinion, but I would have to say, dont break your neck trying to get one, if you can easily get the E11 your really not missing out on much, if anything.

 

[iveljay]

In the recent fine weather I got out the 8x porros with the idea of a cull. After much staring and adjustment I had to concede that most had something the others didn't - even my old Jenoptems made up for loss of contrast by having the smoothest focussing action of anything.
I do find the Habicht and EII drawn on points but scoring for different things - my head tells me the EIIs are the best but I do seem to use the Habichts more - I just get more pleasure from using them. We don't have many streetlights around here so its not a test I have carried out!
Anyway I have seen excellent second hand offers at Cliftons in the past, but never been quick enough to get one, so congrats on your purchase.
N.B. The collection stays intact other than a few low value mistakes that no one could love.

 

[Sancho]

Good comparo, Bencw. I've had 5 pairs of EII and 2 of Habicht ober the years. The EII is the bino that I now won't be parted with. Superb, and optically (which means lots of things to different people) on a par with SV's etc. The Habichts are cute and beautiful, but I couldn't abide their stray light issues. Pity, a top bino otherwise.

 

[[email protected]]

Well, I was not really looking for one of these but couldn't pass it up. Swarovski habicht 8x30W porro, bought new this year, £629 from Clifton Cameras, never used, boxed, paperwork, as it was originally sold, with reciept, for sale at £469, but wait, I had a 15% discount voucher, so got it for £398. Maybe I bought from someone on here, i'm really pleased to have got it though. Now, I have a few good 8X30 porro's in the collection, including the Nikon E11, Kern Pizar, Leitz Binuxit, Zeiss Oberkochen. I have posted before comparison, but in short, for me personally the Nikon E11 was overall the best, although the Kern is the brightest. Now I had the chance to finally compare the E11 with the Habicht.
Well plenty has been written on the merits of both so I will just stick to what I found. They are both superb, and there is really little in it in my opinion. The Habicht is fractionally brighter, (but not as bright as the Kern), the E11 to me, has fractionally better colour depth, but in both respects it is marginal and only to my eye. The 462ft@1000yds Fov of the E11 beats the Habicht 408ft hands down. The Habicht is waterproof to 4m, the E11 is not. Clarity and detail are to me, about the same, nothing in it. The E11 is smooth focusing, the Habicht a little stiff, maybe due to being watertight. The EII to me, seems a more relaxed view, probably due to wide FOV. I have no problems with glare or CA with either binocular. The build quality of the Habicht appears to me to be a fair bit better than the E11. This is just my personal finding, I know people differ, but I am somewhat surprised to have to say, that although it does not exude the quality of the Habicht, to me the Nikon E11 is overall still the best 8x30 porro for practical use. So, if you are looking for a good 8x30 porro, and you are considering, the admittedly excellent Habicht, my advice would be that unless you desperately need a waterproof binocular, go compare with the E11 first, not only is it half the price of the Habicht, but in my humble opinion it is overall better to use. If you compare you may find it is the same for you.

I had the Nikon 8x30 EII and the Swarovski Habicht 8x30 W at the same time and I still have the Habicht 8x30 W. I found the Habicht to have much higher contrast than the EII, to be considerably brighter, to my eyes it was sharper meaning you can see finer detail and because of the almost 6% higher transmission the Habicht has an almost shimmer to it's view. The EII and many Nikon's are lower transmission and have a warm reddish cast to the view that I personally don't care for. The Habicht is neutral not adding any off colors for a more real color presentation. The EII is an excellent binocular but in many ways the Habicht beats it optically. Also, the Habicht is of course waterproof and fogproof and sealed from the elements and dust. A good feature to have when using your binocular in bad weather and also good for the long term. The Habicht does show some glare under certain conditions but the EII does also. IMO the Habicht is the best porro made for birding and even beats the SE and EII. The modern, updated Swarovski coatings on the Habicht take it to the next level.

 

[Bencw]

Thanks for the report Ben.

For me the FOV of the Habichts has always been the reason I have not considered it.
If you look into the street at night with a nearby streetlight in the field of view, which shows more ghost images and loss of contrast or flare that masks dark objects? The EII or the Habicht?
For me the EII is extremely good, up there with Leica.

Hi Binastro, well just spent some time with both looking near and also at streetlamps, there is really not much in it, I could even see the little flies around the lamps with both, but after a lot of comparing, I would say the Habicht has marginally the better contrast in these circumstances, but it took me a long time to come to a decision.

 

[Binastro]

That is very kind of you Ben.

With the EII and a very few other binoculars I get almost no ghost images of, or resulting from, the streetlamp about 10 yards from my window. It is more side on and has a rear shield fitted by the Council within two days of my asking. It reduces light to the rear by 90% and to my other window by about 50%.

The HR/5 has many ghosts as does the Russian 6x24 and many other binoculars, and it is most unpleasant to try to observe the night sky with these ghost images present with the street light in the field or just outside.
I do use the HR/5 quite a lot, but I wish it had no ghost images.
Your mention of the Swift Audubon having bright internal parts amazes me. Why did they not blacken them? This is basic.

These ghost images are what bother me most.

Depending on the distance of your street light and its intensity one might or might not see a few ghost images with your EII or Habicht.
Did you see any at all or simply none?

The EII is a pleasure to use because the image is so pure.
However, the streetlight almost facing me to the left is brighter and there are a few ghost images from this, but it is not a direction that I normally observe, except when trying to find Mercury after sunset.

 

[CliveP]

We started to get the new led street lights.

They point the light more downward so does improve the night sky some and also less shining into bedrooms.

I suppose it's an energy saving thing so will eventually spread all over. They do give off a sort of bleaker light than the older variously coloured filament lights but after a while adjusting they just seem pretty normal and boring as before.

 

[Bencw]

Hi Binastro,
There was a little ghosting, but it was very faint, which was why I had to compare for quite some time to try and decide which binocular showed the least. If you were not intentionally seeking it, you probably would not think about it.

Clive, they replaced some of ours with LED, and strangely left some with the old yellow light. I actually looked at both, the LED light caused hardly any ghosting or flare, I guess because it is directed straight down.

 

[Binastro]

Thanks again Ben.

The streetlight 2 deg below the roofs in the middle distance is about as bright as the full Moon or a little less, magnitude minus 12.
This is where I look for and find noctilucent clouds in summer. I have been photographing these for over 45 years, some of these photos are in the historical record.

The other streetlight is about 3 magnitudes or ~16x brighter, and this does show some ghosts with the EII. However, this is really too bright to look at. One should not look at lights brighter than the full Moon, and definitely not into modern car headlamps. Some of the blue ones are awful.

 

[CliveP]

The EII was one of my fails and ever since I've gone off porros apart from my 15x70 on the tripod but it's still not dark enough at home to see anything good at night skywise and I never feel like venturing out on a cold clear night. I just look on utube instead to see what folks post about it. I would love to visit a proper dark spot some day though.

I think it's to do with my wide IPD and having to really open a porro out and then it makes it awkward or odd to hold especially the small ones.

I did once have a Bushnell Legend 8x42 that was really very good but once I went to roofs that was it really.

Today I bought a Ricoh Pentax Women's Golf Championship branded 8x20 ED new boxed for £20 on auction. I think it's based on some of those models costing about £200 so I don't care what is printed on it if it has good optics, in fact it could be quite comical me wearing it or maybe I can buy some stickers8-P

 

[Rathaus]

I had the Nikon 8x30 EII and the Swarovski Habicht 8x30 W at the same time and I still have the Habicht 8x30 W. I found the Habicht to have much higher contrast than the EII, to be considerably brighter, to my eyes it was sharper meaning you can see finer detail and because of the almost 6% higher transmission the Habicht has an almost shimmer to it's view. The EII and many Nikon's are lower transmission and have a warm reddish cast to the view that I personally don't care for. The Habicht is neutral not adding any off colors for a more real color presentation. The EII is an excellent binocular but in many ways the Habicht beats it optically. Also, the Habicht is of course waterproof and fogproof and sealed from the elements and dust. A good feature to have when using your binocular in bad weather and also good for the long term. The Habicht does show some glare under certain conditions but the EII does also. IMO the Habicht is the best porro made for birding and even beats the SE and EII. The modern, updated Swarovski coatings on the Habicht take it to the next level.

Owning both, I'd agree with most of this. If a viewer has various visual limitations (no eyes are perfect, but there are large degrees of variability of personal eye function which nobody seems to reference here when they use or test an instrument) they'd do just as well with the E2, and will probably enjoy it more due to its fov. For those with the capacity for better acuity, the Habicht will reward with sharper images. This bins detail retrieval is a phenomenon. However, For me, The contrast of the Habicht is its knockout blow. Absolutely stunning.

Imo this all underlines the importance of just buying the bin that is most enjoyable to the individual. A lot of money can be saved in the process.

 

[Binastro]

It is difficult to describe ones eye function adequately, as one person cannot see through another persons eyes.
So one doesn't know what the image will look like through any given binocular to someone else. One can only guess.

One can do booster tests etc. but this still cannot describe everything.

I think some people testing have given their acuity, but relating this to any binocular is difficult.

In addition, even with top binoculars, there will be sample variation.

I am pretty sure that, hand held, I could resolve better with a Canon 8x25 IS than with a Habicht 8x30. And for extended periods.
I think many others could do the same.

Testing is not simple. It is necessarily personal to a large degree.

 

[[email protected]]

Owning both, I'd agree with most of this. If a viewer has various visual limitations (no eyes are perfect, but there are large degrees of variability of personal eye function which nobody seems to reference here when they use or test an instrument) they'd do just as well with the E2, and will probably enjoy it more due to its fov. For those with the capacity for better acuity, the Habicht will reward with sharper images. This bins detail retrieval is a phenomenon. However, For me, The contrast of the Habicht is its knockout blow. Absolutely stunning.

Imo this all underlines the importance of just buying the bin that is most enjoyable to the individual. A lot of money can be saved in the process.

I agree. I always thought the EII was a superb binocular and it is but the Habicht takes it to another level. It has better contrast, it is sharper and brighter and shows more detail. When you go from the EII to the Habicht the Habicht makes you think the EII is not a very sharp binocular but it is it is just that the Habicht is just out of this world sharp. The difference in transmission between the two makes a big difference also. The Habicht just sparkles in the daylight ,whereas,the EII has an almost dull reddish muddy look to it in comparison. Swarovski took the best simple porro design and put the best modern coatings on it and you have your best porro. You have to put the bigger GR eyecups on it to get the best performance out of the Habicht but it will reward you with stunning views. I agree with you that if your vision was less acute you may not notice a lot of difference between the EII and the Habicht but I have 20/20 vision and there is definitely a big difference.

 

[ceasar]

It is difficult to describe ones eye function adequately, as one person cannot see through another persons eyes.
So one doesn't know what the image will look like through any given binocular to someone else. One can only guess.

One can do booster tests etc. but this still cannot describe everything.

I think some people testing have given their acuity, but relating this to any binocular is difficult.

In addition, even with top binoculars, there will be sample variation.

I am pretty sure that, hand held, I could resolve better with a Canon 8x25 IS than with a Habicht 8x30. And for extended periods.
I think many others could do the same.

Testing is not simple. It is necessarily personal to a large degree.

:t::t:

 

[Rathaus]

It is difficult to describe ones eye function adequately, as one person cannot see through another persons eyes.
So one doesn't know what the image will look like through any given binocular to someone else. One can only guess.

One can do booster tests etc. but this still cannot describe everything.

I think some people testing have given their acuity, but relating this to any binocular is difficult.

In addition, even with top binoculars, there will be sample variation.

I am pretty sure that, hand held, I could resolve better with a Canon 8x25 IS than with a Habicht 8x30. And for extended periods.
I think many others could do the same.

Testing is not simple. It is necessarily personal to a large degree.

Sensible comments...but if somebody is wearing plastic spectacles, or any spectacles to help rectify a plethora of vision ailments, tested, measured ground and polished to usually some kind of K-mart standards, the fact is that a new limiting factor has been introduced between the eyes and a precision instrument/binocular. There is no way on earth that spectacles will be made to the precise standards of a Swarovski binocular. The notion is both impossible and absurd.

Would I be happy for my local optometrist to measure and make plastic or glass replacement objective lenses for my Swarovski or Zeiss binoculars? Are you kidding?

I believe that the above is responsible for much of the varied views, opinions and feedback regarding various binoculars.

Just some thoughts.
Rathaus

 

[gunut]

are contact lenses made to higher standards.....

 

[typo]

I think we need to straighen out some misunderstandings here.

Way back in 2005 Henry estimated the resolution of a Nikon EII 8x30 at about 4 arcseconds which when compared to the Dawes limit of 3.86" makes it as close to optically perfect as you are ever likely to see in a binocular. I've not seen a resolution figure for the Habicht but from what I've seen I'd be content to believe it might be close to 4" as well. This degree of optical accuracy means that even at the reduced effective objective diameters the binocular resolution will still exceed even the very best eyesight.
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=377896&postcount=1

A 4" resolution for a 30mm objective would certainly translate to less than 6.5" at 20mm and most likely be around 6". If you had 20/10 (6/3) eyesight, the binocular was mounted on a tripod and the luminance of the target was adjusted to 300cd/2 then the best you could possibly see is 7.5" so the binocular would exceed this by some margin. Of course those conditions are rarely met and the functional acuity would be a lot worse.

You are not going to be able to spot any resolution difference between these binoculars. However it is quite likely that you might spot sharpness differences. This has nothing to do with the resolution performance of the binocular. It is a perception, a function of the brain. In normal viewing your brain filters out the finest detail which takes too long to accumulate, and instead interprets lower frequence detail. A bit like increasing the sharpness settings on a camera. It not only does it in black and white, but probably more relevantly, colour. The brain processes colour by comparing red/green and yellow/blue levels. A different transmission profile will produce a different colour contrast. Which seems better may well depend on the available light at the time and the colour of the target.

Both the EII and Habicht are old designs, predating the DIN ISO resolution standard introduced in 2006 which made 240/D the upper limit for resolution for a high quality binocular. The Dawes limit is 116/D, so a modern "high quality" binocular is allowed to have a resolution about 2 times worse than that EII Henry tested. A dreadful error of judgement in my opinion. If you have very good eyesight it is possible to spot that some models or samples are now optically limiting. The Swarovski CL x30 is an infamous example, and I thought the 2nd version of the ELSV 8.5x42 was pretty bad. Of course there are more examples in cheaper models, but you shouldn't be surprised if a $200 binocular betters a $2000 one in a resolution shootout. The manufacturers use the same resolution standard.

Of course the minimum requirement for a binocular with 8x magnification would be 8 fold higher resolution requirement than for spectacles at 1x. I've had badly prescribed glasses in the distant past, but my recent pairs exceed the standard required for 20/10 acuity. A lot of binoculars fail that test.

David

 

[henry link]

Hi David,

I had to look back at that 2005 review to confirm that I had really measured 4" for those two binoculars. I don't think that was accurate and I'm going to pass along the blame to the odd "Sky & Telescope" resolution chart I used at the time. It was a fan shaped affair that always left some doubt about where the increasingly fine lines at the small end finally grayed out.

As it happens I've just recently re-measured the SE and EII from that review along with two versions of the Swarovski 8x30 Habicht, this time using an Edmund glass slide of the USAF 1951 chart. The results were no surprise since I've used that slide to measure the SE, EII and one of the Habichts a few other times.

The two Habichts are quite consistent over the four telescopes as to aberrations in a star test and resolving power, about 4.5" (135/D). The EII is not quite as good, around 4.75" (142/D). In this group the SE has the lowest spherical aberration and highest resolution, about 4" when stopped down to 30mm (120/D). I haven't gotten around to doing 20mm stopped down resolution measurements, but I'm sure they will all be bunched up closer.

Henry