Is there anyone who has experience with the two binoculars? Which gives more pleasing and wider view, with more wow effect and clarity? Is it true that swarovision is sharper than zeiss sf? Thanks!
Having both, I would stick with the Zeiss SF 10X42 if I could only keep one. Both are excellent but the SF is the more complete package and is better suited for all around general use.
The advantages of the Zeiss SF 10X42 are:
- Lighter weight
- Rearward balance for a more comfortable and steady hold.
- Better focus ergonomics
- CA handling
- Glare handling
- Wider field of view
- Possibly less rolling ball.
- Smoother focus
My primary reason for getting the Swaro is for the better light gathering in the poor light of early morning or late evening and very gloomy days. I do early and late game spotting in the AZ mountains during the summer and use the Swaro for looking over large meadows while braced on the truck window frame. It is a heavy beast with a lot of forward weight pulling downward. This is due to the all of that glass of the objective lenses. As typical of Swaros, it has excellent eyepiece design with just the right length eye cups that make for very easy eye placement when viewing without glasses. It is a joy to use for my purposes. Both have flat field views and retain sharpness almost to the edge. The Swaro goes out a a little more than the SF but the difference is not enough to make any difference.
The Swaro has a larger exit pupil which in theory should make for easier eye placement. In actual use, I see no difference in ease of eye placement due to exit pupil size. Both are well designed and eye placement is quick and natural. According to what I have read here, a person's pupil size is generally less than 3 mm during daylight viewing. The 4.2 exit pupil is more than enough for easy placement and 5 mm is just overkill. I have used both doing some late evening comparisons and did not notice the Swaro being any easier.
Both have excellent optics so one is not going to blow away the other. Technically, the larger objective should give an advantage to the Swaro but if there is a difference, it will be hard to see in field use.
Other than field of view, I consider them optically equivalent which means both are great but not exactly the same. The biggest noticeable different is in color balance. One is not better than the other, just a little different. Both are close to neutral, but the Swaro looks to be a little to the bright blue side and the Zeiss slightly to the yellow green. What gives a better presentation depends on the current lighting, the colors of what is being viewed and the personal preferences of the viewer. Which one looks best can change under different conditions.
Ths SF does handle glare slightly better than the Swaro. There have been certain times when I can detect a very light overall veiling glare with the Swaro that does not appear with the SF. It is very subtle and I suspect many may not pick up on it. It is more noticeable when doing a side by side with a binocular that does not pick it up. I wonder if the more blue color balance amplifies it a little more. I have also noticed that the SF cuts though early morning haze from moisture just a little bit better. I wonder if that is due to the very slight yellow green color cast.
Which one gives the more impressive view can vary under different circumstances but generally speaking, I say it is the SF. A good part is due to the impressive wider FOV. The SF should be a sharper view when using it free hand due to the more steady hold from the lighter weight and rear balance. The glare can be slightly less and CA issues should be less noticeable. I am less aware that I am using a binocular with the SF just due to the weight and balance differences.
If you are primarily after an impressive view, then consider instead a Zeiss SF 8X42. As impressive as the view is from 10X42 SF, it is even more so with the 8X42. This comes mainly from the advantages of a 8X vs. a 10X. The FOV is wider, there is less magnified shake for a sharper easier view, the exit pupils are larger for a brighter view in poor light and the depth of field is greater. The one possible downside the a few people need to consider with the 8X SF is that it tends to show rolling ball more than the 10X.
I do not see any rolling ball with the 10X SF but I do pick up the beginnings of it with the 10X50 Swaro. I have had people use my SF that do pick up rolling ball. Some members have reported it is more obvious in the Swaro 10x42 and some have said just the opposite. We do have one member that brought the Swaro 10x50 but had to return it because of the rolling ball. The conclusion I came to is it more likely to be an issue with the Swaro than the SF, but neither is immune for everybody so be sure and have a return option just in case.
As far as which is sharper, beats me. The resolving power of both either equal or exceed my visual acuity which I think is better than 20/20 but not quite 20/15. Hati, what is your visual acuity? If it is 20/20, then I suspect the resolving power is not relevant, if it is 20/10, then it may be a factor.
I did take the Swaro out last year for a several hour bird walk and it did a fantastic job but I was beat by the time I got back. The weight from just physically carrying it while using a conventional neck strap and then the ongoing repeated effort of holding it steady while viewing was noticeably more fatiguing than doing the same outing with the SF.
I view the Zeiss SF 10X42 as a great all around binocular and the Swaro 10X50 as more of a special purpose choice. Of course this varies between individuals as everyone has their own weighted priorities and personal preferences.