• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

swarovski sv 10x42 or zeiss sf 10x42 (1 Viewer)

Nase

Active member
I am very interested which is brighter bino with more contrast: zeiss sf/ht 10x42 or swarovski sv 10x42? Many thanks!
 
Hi Nase,

as I own a Zeiss SF and know the other bins, this is my experience:

Zeiss HT: brightest image (highest transmission)
Zeiss SF: very bright image, widest field of view, best handling,
Swaro SV: image brightness equal to Zeiss SF, sharp to the very edge

The bins of my dreams had the brightness of the HT, the view and handling of the SF and the image of the SV.

Just buy each of them :-D
 
I agree with Vollmeise but with this note. Swaro EL is a little sharper at the extreme edge of the field of view but SF is not unsharp, it is easily usable-sharp and with a field of view that is almost 15% bigger (by area) you are likely see stuff at the edge of the SF's field of view that won't even be visible through the EL.

There is more to binos than just field of view and edge sharpness of course and both EL and SF are terrific binos.

Lee
 
FWIW, I am thinking about upgrading from 2008 8.5x42 EL to the 2014 vintage SF. 8x42

I have experience with the same late model EL 8.5x42. They are very good
but the Zeiss SF is a nice step up.

Proceed with confidence, you will enjoy the many advantages.

Those advantages are well mentioned on the site, nicer balance, much smoother and better focuser, wider FOV and more.

If you do get the Zeiss, be sure to come back and tell us what you think.

Jerry
 
I have owned (and sold) both Nikon EDG and Swarovski 10x42 binoculars, and concluded that I was more comfortable with an 8 power until getting the Zeiss SF 10x42. It has now become my favorite daily use binocular because the balance makes it easier to hold steady and truly take advantage of the extra power.
 
I really like the 8x42 format, not sure what I gain by 8.5x. If I want power, I will jump directly to the 10x

Zeiss 8x56 FL does seem like an interesting proposition.
 
I really like the 8x42 format, not sure what I gain by 8.5x. If I want power, I will jump directly to the 10x

Zeiss 8x56 FL does seem like an interesting proposition.
You probably don't want to carry the 56mm's unless you have a harness but they sure are good from a stand or when you are not walking or hiking much. The Swarovski SLC HD 8x56 surprised me. Almost no veiling glare, no CA and amazingly sharp on axis and sharp to the edge and the low light performance and contrast has to be seen to be believed. Here is a good review of the Swarovski SLC HD 8x56 versus the Zeiss 8x56 FL.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/446051-swarovski-slc-56-wb-vs-zeiss-victory-fl-56/
 
I understand the point that the bigger the objective, the more light it gathers, the brighter the image is.
 
The HT is brighter as several tests reveal by a small amount. I owned a 10X42 HT and saw no really benefit. More importantly to me is the SF and SV tend to present a more neutral image IMO. I actually like an older FL 10X42 than I did the HT.

The SF/SV debate will continue. Currently I send to prefer the image and perfect mechanics of the Noctivid 10X42.

I will say a Swarovski product tends to beat everyone in the used binocular market as far as commanding a higher price.
 

Attachments

  • DSC_0564.JPG
    DSC_0564.JPG
    56.2 KB · Views: 359
Henry Links Review of his 8x56 FL explains the benefits of the bigger aperture well. It is not just brighter. It has a better quality image than smaller apertures.

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=840895&postcount=1

That is an interesting read.

I am trying to decide what to do, replace my 2008 Swaro EL with a Zeiss SF 8x42 or keep the 2008 EL and get an additional SLC 10x56 - are these available for sale in US now? I heard they weren't circa 2014.

I think there is only so much you can do with the 8x42 format, to get a step in a different dimension must have a 50 or 56mm objective. 10 power seems about right for that configuration.
 
The HT is brighter as several tests reveal by a small amount. I owned a 10X42 HT and saw no really benefit. More importantly to me is the SF and SV tend to present a more neutral image IMO. I actually like an older FL 10X42 than I did the HT.

The SF/SV debate will continue. Currently I send to prefer the image and perfect mechanics of the Noctivid 10X42.

I will say a Swarovski product tends to beat everyone in the used binocular market as far as commanding a higher price.

@chill6x6 ...Awesome photo!

If I took all 3 of those binos, taped up the logos, the armor, etc - basically made it difficult for you to know which was which, and then you tossed em up to your eyes...which view - in your opinion - is just the most "wow, wow, wow"
 
That is an interesting read.

I am trying to decide what to do, replace my 2008 Swaro EL with a Zeiss SF 8x42 or keep the 2008 EL and get an additional SLC 10x56 - are these available for sale in US now? I heard they weren't circa 2014.

I think there is only so much you can do with the 8x42 format, to get a step in a different dimension must have a 50 or 56mm objective. 10 power seems about right for that configuration.
I bought my Swarovski SLC 8x56's through Amazon.com with Eurooptics LTD as the seller and they are excellent. They also have the SLC 10x56's here.
https://www.amazon.com/Swarovski-SL...UTF8&qid=1522200737&sr=8-1&keywords=SLC+10x56
 
I think there is only so much you can do with the 8x42 format

Etc
While I understand what you mean, to appreciate what can still be done with 8x42 do try to get a look through an SF 8x42 over a decent expanse of ground. If you calculate the area of its field of view it is well over 20% bigger than the fov of Swaro's EL and the point of balance is significantly moved back away from the objectives so making them easier to hold up for longer.
Don't take my word for it, try them out.

Lee
 
Well, of course you gain some FOV by going from 8.5x to 8x.
I am not a fan of 8.5x power.
It appears to be nice, but when I want 8x, I want 8x and when I want 10x, that's what I want.

At this point I am trying to decide if I want to stay with the 8x format or get a 10x56 to try something new. Ideally what I want is both 8x42 Zeiss SF and a 10x56 SLC.

I had a Leica 8x42 and found it absolutely stunning. Never did felt underpowered.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top