SeldomPerched
Well-known member
This thread is a direct continuation of the one I started a day or two ago at https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=388597 . In that thread all who contributed gave me useful thoughts about the SLC 10x42 HD, based on which I decided to take a stab in the dark and order one, necessarily unseen owing to current travel and distancing provisions. I knew it would be different from the 10s in the EL series. That was an intentional choice both on grounds of cost and for other reasons mentioned further down.
Over twelve hours now since its delivery and less than 24 hours since the order was placed, I have had time to give my new SLC 10x42 HD a mini-field trial outdoors, where not only the prolonged spell of summery weather but also being currently free of the pressures of work has allowed a more relaxed evaluation. This is not an objective review; it's more a celebration of a new pair of binoculars. Sometimes you take the risk of buying something unseen and you are just lucky that things meet or surpass your expectations and everything goes according to your hopes.
The risks were certainly there. The reason for the purchase was to have a pair of 10x magnification binoculars that would be light, compact, and portable. The other 10 I have is the 10x50 EL SV Field Pro, excellent glass but, though quite light for its format, not exactly compact or a doddle to hold still. I'm fine with that bin for short spells or from a position where I can anchor my arms for a steady hold, but for a long walk or (currently) for close up spotting in the garden, it's not the 'go to' choice. I was not sure how well these smaller Swarovskis would help me against the 10x magnification shakes. Add to that there could be any number of other ergonomic factors not apparent from a review or photo or spec sheet that might turn you off a design you haven't picked up and handled before.
The first pleasant surprise on opening the box was a cosmetic one. The SLC had a good practical no nonsense look that was a lot more attractive than any photos had suggested. The item looked 'fit as a butcher's dog': solid, no looseness in the armouring, firm to grip with an excellent texture. The central hinge covers that extend to the barrels at each side are well-designed, whereas in pictures they look as though they could nip your fingers when focusing. To me the design does not look dated; instead it looks tough, simple, and functional and a suitable tool for troublefree handling. It looks and probably is as compact as a Leica Ultravid and I actually think at the time of writing that for its similar size it handles a fraction better than an Ultravid, itself a pretty and well-regarded industrial design. That's my judgement anyway, because if the thumb indentations on the SLC aren't in exactly the right place for both my hands it is much less of a problem than when the Leica's thumb ridges are in the wrong place. You can slide past a dip but you have to climb over a ridge.
I think sometimes I get too hung up about dioptre setting. This is something that Swarovski makes painless. Unlike Zeiss and Leica and possibly Nikon the dioptre clickstops seem to be correctly zeroed against the index line at the factory. This meant that knowing already how my 10x50 EL SV is set up (3 clicks from zero, moving in the minus direction), all I had to do was notch down to the same position on the new SLC. A few deliberate adjustments outdoors going slightly too far on either side to test my setting confirmed that the same three clicks to minus was indeed the proper correction. Incidentally, this was set up and checked against the print of a magazine at about 50 yards, and then tried out against indoor objects with fine detail - ceramics with colourful scenes and fine detail - to see if the setting held up at close range, about a foot out from minimum focus distance. It did and the detail looked lovely. Correctly adjusted it was clear from the 'focus snap' that this example of the SLC was manufactured to tight parameters.
Sometimes a small extension of the eyecups works best for me. Sometimes what works best is to move them all the way out then screw back down just one notch. Interestingly, working without glasses as I prefer to do when in a familiar setting and my eyesight doesn't need to be all that great to find things, I can use these SLCs with the eyecups fully retracted or just halfway out to the first detent (a few eighths of an inch, I'd guess). That was as far as I could go before starting to get a 'looking down a barrel' effect. Unlike the ELs the eyecups only have click stops at each end and one intermediate setting. Without glasses therefore I was using the space between intermediate and screwed in against the barrel. The resistance is sufficient for the eyecups to stay there even without a detent or notch at that point in their travel. At this stage it is worth saying that the eyecup action and quality are impressive: no hint of likely future deforming of the rubber end coverings: the whole assembly is firm and metal is used as in the EL series for a durable, high end finish.
With all now ready it was time to set about some viewing. When using a new pair of binos it helps to allow myself a bit of settling in time to get acclimatized. It was good that I had pretty much forgotten this was a 10x instrument; it was just an exciting new purchase and I wanted to enjoy the view. Only after a few minutes did I remember that 10x was 'supposed' to be shakier to use than 7 or 8x and by then I had proved to myself that with this glass I could hold a steady image. A big imagined hurdle not to mention purchase gamble overcome!
How did the image look compared with what I've been used to from other glass? A bit different: for a few minutes I wasn't sure of it and knew I had to be patient. Patience brought its reward. Initially an apparent lack of depth of field compared to other 42s I have used was off-putting. Within half an hour it was just part of the signature of this SLC. It started to add something instead of detract. What it added was, in camera terms, a sense of bokeh: an attractive fall-off in sharpness behind the focused object or plane. Somehow this looked different and better than what I see with 32s, which don't quite give me the same viewing satisfaction despite being good glass. But I digress.
When Swarovski is mentioned it isn't usually long till 'flat field' comes up in conversation. I have nothing against flat field and sometimes it gives an advantage in viewing, especially for stargazing (I don't do it) or when a viewing position doesn't allow much room to turn the binoculars, e.g. from a small window. However I never understand why some critics see lack of flat field as a design fault. It's a different design philosophy or emphasis, with good and possibly bad points depending on your priorities for binocular performance. The SLCs are not flat field of course and - am I allowed to say this? - seem to have a more three-dimensional image quality and a large sweet spot in the centre. Any outer field aberrations do not have the effect on me of spoiling the overall view.
** Next day addendum: looking through the SLC again today I realize that even out towards the edges the image is very useable. I would say that performance holds up better in the outer 20% or so than in the 7x42 T*FL, itself a respected design. **
Focuser: no shortcomings in consistency or ease of operation, but see the sentence after next. It moves positively without any play when changing direction and it moves evenly and smoothly. Not like an EDG - but probably not much else is as easy to focus as an EDG, from my own experience with just one Nikon bin and from the comments of reviewers and Birdforum members. The first time I tried to follow some birds flying directly overhead today with the SLC, the amount of turn needed was too much for me to keep up and I lost them. This could just be unfamiliarity and a question of getting used to it; then again it could be a minus point. I don't really have the experience to decide. It doesn't matter to me - yet. When not in a hurry I quite like a bit more turn as it helps find the correct focus point - another thing that I have had trouble with on some 32 size bins.
Today as said was a beautiful day so perhaps this was bound to make the viewing experience a generally positive one. How to describe the image and ease of view, apart from the depth of field comments made earlier? This is where I find it hard to sum things up as there are so many technical aspects that go to make up image character. What I can safely say is I am not too concerned to compare macro & micro-contrast, resolution, and so on. Instead I accept that the image is the sum of all its component parts and how that is arrived at doesn't affect my enjoyment of the view. It was a bright day today and so I saw an extremely bright image, though I read that the transmission is down a little bit on the EL series. Fine detail, in leaves for instance, was clearly rendered on the plane of focus, both close up and observable at a distance. Colour - I'll call it natural rather than neutral. Aren't they the same? By definition I think so, at least in this context, but the difference is that 'natural' reflects the joy of the SLC's view today whereas 'neutral' is just neutral, a zero and unemotional figure of neither joy nor coolness, a clinical absence of bias. So I'll stick with natural. To be honest now, that means I am not certain how the colour representation may in fact vary from strictly neutral or exact representation. Testing the SLC at close range with indoor objects: red apples in a bowl, ceramic bowls and plates and mugs with varying colours and designs - the beauty of the maker's art and use of colour was handled in a bright and saturated yet natural-looking rendition. To me there was no sense of any colour coming over as weak because it was affected by a bias towards another colour. Whenever I think of colour bias I cannot help thinking of the 'green ham' allusion that caught my imagination in others' discussion of another alpha product. None of the fruit or foodstuffs I viewed today looked off!
To sum up, and leaving aside the accessory rainguard, the band-attached objective covers, a pre-Field Pro type of strap that looks effective but which I haven't worked out or tried to attach yet, and the modern Swarovski green twin zip carry case, this is still a lot of writing so far to arrive at a simple conclusion ...
... The conclusion is that this is a sturdy no nonsense binocular, easy and well-balanced with minimum shake, compact and short for its class, and giving a well-defined, rounded image that I personally find very pleasing. It is somehow different from the offerings of other alpha marques I have used as well as from the parallel Swarovski EL family of binoculars. I look forward to giving it a lot of regular use and am interested yet to see what views it gives in duller or wet conditions. It would presumably make a good choice for a travel binocular if you are confident you can hold a 10x magnification binocular steady on the go. It just has that nice compact size and handling that I like.
A final point. The fact that the SLC was despatched so promptly by the dealer and that the initial telephone service was so helpful got the whole experience off to a favourable and memorable start. I hope that this account adds some information and colour to the more technical information you may have already read about the Swarovski 10x42 SLC HD binocular. It has already been great fun using the SLC and its magnification to search out some loud but very small birds in large tall trees.
Tom
Over twelve hours now since its delivery and less than 24 hours since the order was placed, I have had time to give my new SLC 10x42 HD a mini-field trial outdoors, where not only the prolonged spell of summery weather but also being currently free of the pressures of work has allowed a more relaxed evaluation. This is not an objective review; it's more a celebration of a new pair of binoculars. Sometimes you take the risk of buying something unseen and you are just lucky that things meet or surpass your expectations and everything goes according to your hopes.
The risks were certainly there. The reason for the purchase was to have a pair of 10x magnification binoculars that would be light, compact, and portable. The other 10 I have is the 10x50 EL SV Field Pro, excellent glass but, though quite light for its format, not exactly compact or a doddle to hold still. I'm fine with that bin for short spells or from a position where I can anchor my arms for a steady hold, but for a long walk or (currently) for close up spotting in the garden, it's not the 'go to' choice. I was not sure how well these smaller Swarovskis would help me against the 10x magnification shakes. Add to that there could be any number of other ergonomic factors not apparent from a review or photo or spec sheet that might turn you off a design you haven't picked up and handled before.
The first pleasant surprise on opening the box was a cosmetic one. The SLC had a good practical no nonsense look that was a lot more attractive than any photos had suggested. The item looked 'fit as a butcher's dog': solid, no looseness in the armouring, firm to grip with an excellent texture. The central hinge covers that extend to the barrels at each side are well-designed, whereas in pictures they look as though they could nip your fingers when focusing. To me the design does not look dated; instead it looks tough, simple, and functional and a suitable tool for troublefree handling. It looks and probably is as compact as a Leica Ultravid and I actually think at the time of writing that for its similar size it handles a fraction better than an Ultravid, itself a pretty and well-regarded industrial design. That's my judgement anyway, because if the thumb indentations on the SLC aren't in exactly the right place for both my hands it is much less of a problem than when the Leica's thumb ridges are in the wrong place. You can slide past a dip but you have to climb over a ridge.
I think sometimes I get too hung up about dioptre setting. This is something that Swarovski makes painless. Unlike Zeiss and Leica and possibly Nikon the dioptre clickstops seem to be correctly zeroed against the index line at the factory. This meant that knowing already how my 10x50 EL SV is set up (3 clicks from zero, moving in the minus direction), all I had to do was notch down to the same position on the new SLC. A few deliberate adjustments outdoors going slightly too far on either side to test my setting confirmed that the same three clicks to minus was indeed the proper correction. Incidentally, this was set up and checked against the print of a magazine at about 50 yards, and then tried out against indoor objects with fine detail - ceramics with colourful scenes and fine detail - to see if the setting held up at close range, about a foot out from minimum focus distance. It did and the detail looked lovely. Correctly adjusted it was clear from the 'focus snap' that this example of the SLC was manufactured to tight parameters.
Sometimes a small extension of the eyecups works best for me. Sometimes what works best is to move them all the way out then screw back down just one notch. Interestingly, working without glasses as I prefer to do when in a familiar setting and my eyesight doesn't need to be all that great to find things, I can use these SLCs with the eyecups fully retracted or just halfway out to the first detent (a few eighths of an inch, I'd guess). That was as far as I could go before starting to get a 'looking down a barrel' effect. Unlike the ELs the eyecups only have click stops at each end and one intermediate setting. Without glasses therefore I was using the space between intermediate and screwed in against the barrel. The resistance is sufficient for the eyecups to stay there even without a detent or notch at that point in their travel. At this stage it is worth saying that the eyecup action and quality are impressive: no hint of likely future deforming of the rubber end coverings: the whole assembly is firm and metal is used as in the EL series for a durable, high end finish.
With all now ready it was time to set about some viewing. When using a new pair of binos it helps to allow myself a bit of settling in time to get acclimatized. It was good that I had pretty much forgotten this was a 10x instrument; it was just an exciting new purchase and I wanted to enjoy the view. Only after a few minutes did I remember that 10x was 'supposed' to be shakier to use than 7 or 8x and by then I had proved to myself that with this glass I could hold a steady image. A big imagined hurdle not to mention purchase gamble overcome!
How did the image look compared with what I've been used to from other glass? A bit different: for a few minutes I wasn't sure of it and knew I had to be patient. Patience brought its reward. Initially an apparent lack of depth of field compared to other 42s I have used was off-putting. Within half an hour it was just part of the signature of this SLC. It started to add something instead of detract. What it added was, in camera terms, a sense of bokeh: an attractive fall-off in sharpness behind the focused object or plane. Somehow this looked different and better than what I see with 32s, which don't quite give me the same viewing satisfaction despite being good glass. But I digress.
When Swarovski is mentioned it isn't usually long till 'flat field' comes up in conversation. I have nothing against flat field and sometimes it gives an advantage in viewing, especially for stargazing (I don't do it) or when a viewing position doesn't allow much room to turn the binoculars, e.g. from a small window. However I never understand why some critics see lack of flat field as a design fault. It's a different design philosophy or emphasis, with good and possibly bad points depending on your priorities for binocular performance. The SLCs are not flat field of course and - am I allowed to say this? - seem to have a more three-dimensional image quality and a large sweet spot in the centre. Any outer field aberrations do not have the effect on me of spoiling the overall view.
** Next day addendum: looking through the SLC again today I realize that even out towards the edges the image is very useable. I would say that performance holds up better in the outer 20% or so than in the 7x42 T*FL, itself a respected design. **
Focuser: no shortcomings in consistency or ease of operation, but see the sentence after next. It moves positively without any play when changing direction and it moves evenly and smoothly. Not like an EDG - but probably not much else is as easy to focus as an EDG, from my own experience with just one Nikon bin and from the comments of reviewers and Birdforum members. The first time I tried to follow some birds flying directly overhead today with the SLC, the amount of turn needed was too much for me to keep up and I lost them. This could just be unfamiliarity and a question of getting used to it; then again it could be a minus point. I don't really have the experience to decide. It doesn't matter to me - yet. When not in a hurry I quite like a bit more turn as it helps find the correct focus point - another thing that I have had trouble with on some 32 size bins.
Today as said was a beautiful day so perhaps this was bound to make the viewing experience a generally positive one. How to describe the image and ease of view, apart from the depth of field comments made earlier? This is where I find it hard to sum things up as there are so many technical aspects that go to make up image character. What I can safely say is I am not too concerned to compare macro & micro-contrast, resolution, and so on. Instead I accept that the image is the sum of all its component parts and how that is arrived at doesn't affect my enjoyment of the view. It was a bright day today and so I saw an extremely bright image, though I read that the transmission is down a little bit on the EL series. Fine detail, in leaves for instance, was clearly rendered on the plane of focus, both close up and observable at a distance. Colour - I'll call it natural rather than neutral. Aren't they the same? By definition I think so, at least in this context, but the difference is that 'natural' reflects the joy of the SLC's view today whereas 'neutral' is just neutral, a zero and unemotional figure of neither joy nor coolness, a clinical absence of bias. So I'll stick with natural. To be honest now, that means I am not certain how the colour representation may in fact vary from strictly neutral or exact representation. Testing the SLC at close range with indoor objects: red apples in a bowl, ceramic bowls and plates and mugs with varying colours and designs - the beauty of the maker's art and use of colour was handled in a bright and saturated yet natural-looking rendition. To me there was no sense of any colour coming over as weak because it was affected by a bias towards another colour. Whenever I think of colour bias I cannot help thinking of the 'green ham' allusion that caught my imagination in others' discussion of another alpha product. None of the fruit or foodstuffs I viewed today looked off!
To sum up, and leaving aside the accessory rainguard, the band-attached objective covers, a pre-Field Pro type of strap that looks effective but which I haven't worked out or tried to attach yet, and the modern Swarovski green twin zip carry case, this is still a lot of writing so far to arrive at a simple conclusion ...
... The conclusion is that this is a sturdy no nonsense binocular, easy and well-balanced with minimum shake, compact and short for its class, and giving a well-defined, rounded image that I personally find very pleasing. It is somehow different from the offerings of other alpha marques I have used as well as from the parallel Swarovski EL family of binoculars. I look forward to giving it a lot of regular use and am interested yet to see what views it gives in duller or wet conditions. It would presumably make a good choice for a travel binocular if you are confident you can hold a 10x magnification binocular steady on the go. It just has that nice compact size and handling that I like.
A final point. The fact that the SLC was despatched so promptly by the dealer and that the initial telephone service was so helpful got the whole experience off to a favourable and memorable start. I hope that this account adds some information and colour to the more technical information you may have already read about the Swarovski 10x42 SLC HD binocular. It has already been great fun using the SLC and its magnification to search out some loud but very small birds in large tall trees.
Tom
Last edited: