• 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.

New Swarovski SLC 42 Binoculars (2 Viewers)

AFAIK Minox was the first manufacturer that introduced higher focus speed at closer focus distance with consumer optics (HG series). They called this system "Quick-Close-Focus (QCF)". Don't know if there were any patent issues forcing Swarovski to give this up, though.

BTW, when I did try those SLC-HDs for the first time, my initial thought was that opticalwise they did remind me to a Leica Trino/Ultravid. A very fast three (4 if focussing lens included) element objective lens cell with (compared to former SLC and EL bins) small S-P prisms. But when I looked through them inspecting for off center aberrations I couldn't help to think that they were very similar to the old EL series, just with enhanced correction of lateral CA. So in some way they seemed to me like a marriage of a Leica objective-prism unit with a Swaro eyepiece.

Steve
 
Last edited:
Ed,

For some reason, the subtleties of the SLC HD focus mechanism had escaped me, and I did not notice it when I tested the binocular. Part of the reason is that I have pretty much stopped reading the marketing literature of any and all of the manufacturers, being weary of the all-too-frequent hyperbole and false claims made in them. I also do not tend to look very close very often when I'm out in the field, so focus behavior in the 2-10 meter range is not high on my list of things to pay particular attention to. I usually just measure the shortest focusing distance and the amount of focus wheel rotation needed to go from 10 m - 1 km.

I'll try to go and take a look at one while they are still available, and do a little bit of crude testing with focus wheel movement needed to compensate between my glasses vs. naked eye at different distances to see what kind of differences there are compared to Swarovisions.

I fully agree that it is regrettable that, for reasons known best to them, people who haven't bought, used, or sometimes even tested certain binocular models seem to feel the need to criticize them over and over again. Personally, as regards Swaro focusing mechanisms, I have tested a lot of them, and have just taken the uneven resistance between close-to-far and far-to-close focusing directions as an unavoidable (which it is, since the mechanism has a spring that compresses in one direction and expands in the other, which takes energy, which comes from your finger) and harmless consequence of the chosen design. A similar spring is used in the Zeiss HT models, but perhaps due to their larger-diameter focusing wheel, there have not been many complaints about it.
...
Kimmo

Hi Kimmo,

I greatly look forward to hearing your thoughts and observations. :t:

Ed
 
Last edited:
AFAIK Minox was the first manufacturer that introduced higher focus speed at closer focus distance with consumer optics (HG series). They called this system "Quick-Close-Focus (QCF)"...

Interesting--I didn't realize these had variable-ratio focus because in the USA, the QCF feature was advertised as being about reading the focus distance off the knob, not a difference in focus design itself. Looking images on the internet, which show the calibrated knob, it seems they do have a slightly faster close focus ratio because the proportional movement is not as Henry Link describes for a conventional design based on Surveyor's chart. But are you sure these pre-dated the Brunton Epoch line (introduced in ~2004)?

In visiting the Brunton website recently, I notice that the regular full-sized Epochs have been re-specced and now only focus to 6 feet rather than 3 even though they supposedly still retain variable ratio focus. The newer Epoch MD has 3 ft close focus according to the website.

--AP
 
I initially wrote a longer comment to Kimmo, then tried to simplify it, and finally deleted it because it sounded too technical. Nonetheless, I would be remiss not to point out that focusers are dynamic system components producing continuous visual and tactile feedbacks to the user. In the aerospace domain, optimizing them would be similar to tweaking a vehicle's 'handling qualities,' which no one can predict by simply studying their mechanisms or underlying equations.

For those who might be curious, the attached rather generic paper is written by the father of system dynamics, Jay Forrester. It might provide a paradigm shift giving insight into why simply measuring a stand-alone instrument will necessarily fall short of understanding it in use.

Ed
 

Attachments

  • Dynamic Systems J. W. Forrester 2009.pdf
    865 KB · Views: 108
Last edited:
I went and investigated the focussing behavior of the SLC HD, SV EL and a couple of other binoculars yesterday. The purpose was to see if there would be anything unusual about their gearing, since there has recently been some conflicting views about whether the way they focus in close range differs from normal or not.

The source of this notion, as far as I can tell, is Gijs van Ginkel's August 2010 group test of 8/8.5x42 binoculars, linked elsewhere on this thread, where he says: "With 2.5 rotations (from close focus to infinity) the brand new Swarovski Swarovision EL therefore ought to be out of the running. However, this is not the case as Swarovski has developed a particularly clever focusing wheel that uses logarithmic speed. In other words, around one rotation changes the focus from infinity to just a few meters, with the remaining rotation adjusting the short distance down to 1,5 meters. This means that the binoculars can very quickly be set to large distances, while remaining sufficiently fast and very precise at short distances. The new Swarovski SLC-HD's also have a focussing wheel with logarithmic speed and the rotational resistance is even more smooth than that of the EL Swarovision."

To put it briefly, my conclusion is that there is nothing unusual about the "logarithmic speed" of the Swarovski focusers. Like Henry and Ron (Surveyor) have said in their earlier posts to this thread, all normal binoculars focus "logarithmically," and differences in focus behavior come from gearing ratio (how many degrees you need to turn the wheel to effect a one diopter change of focus), focus wheel feel and resistance, and focus wheel size and positioning. In fact, if one just reads what Dr. van Ginkel says in the above quote and then checks just about any binocular that focuses as close as about 2 meters, the binocular will behave like he says, Swarovski or not.

What I did was compare focus between viewing with my uncorrected eyes versus with my bifocals, using the distance viewing area of the glasses that have ca 2 diopter positive correction. I simply checked how much I needed to turn the focus wheel to re-focus between no glasses or glasses on, and did this for various distances between 2 km and under 2 meters. Thinking here is that if there is a system that speeds up the gearing at close ranges (which is what you would like), the amount of focus wheel rotation needed to compensate for the eyeglasses would be less at short distances and more at far distances. There was no difference. Not in the SLC HD, not in the EL SV, not in a Nikon EDG 8x42 nor in my Canon 10x42 IS L. Due to different focus gear ratios, the amount of rotation needed for the compensation varied between different binoculars, but for any of the binoculars it remained constant irrespective of the distance being viewed.

I will mostly stay out of discussing the separate topic of the quality of the focus movement in the various models, but will say that for me, the Swarovski focusing system works just fine and I pay no attention to it when using the binoculars. The same goes for most of the rest. The EDG I tried was smooth, but also there I could feel enough slight unevenness to its movement that were I inclined to criticize it for not being perfect, I could. Same goes for the Zeiss Victory HT I also tried.

Kimmo
 
Interesting--I didn't realize these had variable-ratio focus because in the USA, the QCF feature was advertised as being about reading the focus distance off the knob, not a difference in focus design itself. Looking images on the internet, which show the calibrated knob, it seems they do have a slightly faster close focus ratio because the proportional movement is not as Henry Link describes for a conventional design based on Surveyor's chart. But are you sure these pre-dated the Brunton Epoch line (introduced in ~2004)?

In visiting the Brunton website recently, I notice that the regular full-sized Epochs have been re-specced and now only focus to 6 feet rather than 3 even though they supposedly still retain variable ratio focus. The newer Epoch MD has 3 ft close focus according to the website.

--AP

Hi Alexis,

I know nothing about Brunton binoculars. AFAIK this brand is not known or available over here. I don't recall the exact year when Minox introduced their QCF. But it was certainly after 2004. I think it was about 2007/2008. IMO the basic idea, however, isn't really that surpring new from the perspective of mechanical engineering. Different focussing speed mechanics could be considered as a kind of gearing mechnism, which are quite common in the world of engineering. The distant scale printed at the focus wheel is another feature of the HG line of Minox. Such a scale was available at spotting scopes of Meopta before, so here Minox wasn't the first manufacturer using this with consumer optics but perhaps the first with binoculars.

Regards, Steve
 
Kimmo, thanks. That uncertainty cleared. The test could have been carried out by quite a few people here! Myself was waiting for a close-focusing 8x I'll get in 1-2 wks to compare a friend's Sw. SLC HD 8x with it.

Personally v. surprised that Sw. should have announced such a thing. Apart from Dr van G. the optics review website I got to by googling refers to the "logarithmic" focusing system, and I assume the patent Sw. refers to in the material the retailer copies (pl. see above) was for that.

But another puzzle remains re Sw. What's the mechanism present in the SLC HD that's dropped in the new SLC saving 20 parts? Actually, have found (once) the response by Swaro.'s query service in their website excellent. Perhaps someone who'd be willing to follow up if necessary might like to clear this up with them?
 
Last edited:
...To put it briefly, my conclusion is that there is nothing unusual about the "logarithmic speed" of the Swarovski focusers...

Thanks Kimmo, for confirmation. As a frequent user of the close-focus ability of binoculars, I find it maddening that there is so much confusion and misinformation about these matters. As Steve (hinnark) notes, the mechanics of building a variable-ratio focus shouldn't require any cutting-edge engineering, so while it would complicate assembly a bit, I don't see why we don't see it routinely in binoculars, hence my dedication to the cause.

Today's bins come very close to the ideal I've imagined for natural history fieldwork since I started birding. I've lived through the revolution in offering decent eye-relief in bins for eyeglasses wearers, the revolution in offering decent close focus, the introductions of phase and dielectric coatings in roofs, Zeiss at least has taken up the task of offering x32 and x42 roof-prism bins with tight IPD spec (another one of my crusades...now we just need to see this happen at lower prices, and in reverse-porro compacts), so I hope the incorporation of variable-ratio focus to complement the ultra-close (3-5 ft) focus that we already see in some models is next.

C'mon Swarovski, lead the way! The SV EL are nearly perfect with their open-hinge handling, flat-field performance, superb eye-relief, excellent FOV, and excellent contrast and CA control. Now give them the focus drive that they deserve to make their excellent close-focus ability of practical use! Doing it all, even if difficult, is what being an alpha/luxury/prestige/leading optics maker is all about!

--AP
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by kabsetz View Post

....I fully agree that it is regrettable that, for reasons known best to them, people who haven't bought, used, or sometimes even tested certain binocular models seem to feel the need to criticize them over and over again. Personally, as regards Swaro focusing mechanisms, I have tested a lot of them, and have just taken the uneven resistance between close-to-far and far-to-close focusing directions as an unavoidable (which it is, since the mechanism has a spring that compresses in one direction and expands in the other, which takes energy, which comes from your finger) and harmless consequence of the chosen design. A similar spring is used in the Zeiss HT models, but perhaps due to their larger-diameter focusing wheel, there have not been many complaints about it.
...
Kimmo

Well, Kimmo can't be talking about me since I've tried three SLCs (each made a decade apart) and two ELs (made almost a decade apart), but what I find regrettable that, for reasons known best to them, [some] people who have bought, used, or sometimes even tested Swarovski binoculars seem to feel the need to say that there are no problems with [any] Swaro focusers over and over again, or in Pily's latest charade (after stating emphatically that every Swaro he's tried had a smooth focuser) that the stiff focusers (WHAT stiff focusers? I thought they all were smooth?) will eventually break in and smooth out.

NOT SO! I've tried two Swaros with coarse focusers that were 7 and 9 years old, respectively, and the owners said, if anything, the focusers had gotten stiffer. And a third sample, made in 2009, that was just harder to turn in one direction never changed, because, as Kimmo and others have pointed out, that issue has to do with the one-way spring design.

Kimmo says that the focusers are harder to turn in one direction, which doesn't bother him, and it doesn't bother some others, but I have been pointing out more issues than different direction resistance, but also on gritty/stiff/coarse Swaro focusers, which there have been numerous reports posted about on these forums, most recently with two members who attended the Bird Fair and found this to still be true on the new SLCs despite the other changes to the focuser mechanism!

Whatever is causing these issues, it's certainly not a "harmless consequence" for everyone, nor is this "unavoidable" since Nikon, Zeiss and other sports optics manufacturers manage to make focusers that turn smoothly without a gritty or coarse feeling and w/out harder resistance in one direction.

If it's just a matter of using a larger focuser wheel, as Kimmo suggests, then go to it Absam wizards! Supersize those wheels. It's a cheap fix.

I'm not sure why Swaro engineers chose this focuser design and the original focuser speed, but those characteristics apparently didn't bother hunters, which had been Swaro's target buyers for decades. But then birders started migrating to the brand when the EL was introduced, and birders have different needs than hunters.

So we began hearing complaints from birders about the slow focuser on the original EL (having tried one, I know what they mean). Why the complaints? Because birders need faster focusers to catch flitting birds whereas hunter's targets are much bigger and are observed at a long distance where little focus travel is needed.

So to cater to birders, Swaro made the focusers faster on the ELs. What I'm saying now is that it's time to fix the other issues with Swaro focusers or at least on some of them -- the lack of consistency is in itself a problem because those who luck out and get a good sample have no clue to what others are talking about. It's the gritty/stiff/coarse and harder to turn in one direction focusers that need to be addressed, because those are not characteristics that most birders look for in any bin, particularly not in an alpha costing around $2K.

Yet many are willing to put up with the subpar focusers to gain the fantastic view, robust build, comfortable ergonomics and best warranty in the business. And let's not forget the prestige factor of owning "the best!" It's a lot to gain, so I can understand why some might overlook the focuser issues, but for $2K, IMO, they should get it all.

To me, this sounds like a reasonable request, just as the request for a faster focuser was reasonable, but as I've learned (and as others have learned), for reasons known best to them, some Swaro fanboys insist, despite these numerous reports of focuser issues by various members on BF and in reviews, that Swaros are infallible. It's like they identify so closely with their bins that they feel any criticism of their favorite brand (not just focusers,"rolling ball," chromatic aberration, cases, etc.) is a criticism of them.

Of course, it does become a criticism of them when they start spouting chauvinistic hyperbole, but it really has nothing at all to do with them, it's simply a call to arms for Swarovski to take these criticisms about the focuser issues as seriously as they did the focuser speed. We know that in the past, Swaro has responded to customer complaints about the focuser speed, but on these other focuser issues, it appears the company would rather deal with the issues when an owner sends his bins in for focuser repairs like Pier did with both of his SV ELs.

Since the company is apparently not interested in changing the focuser design, and because Swaro fanboys are insistent on creating a "cover up," there's really no point in mentioning the focuser issues any longer, it's waste of time.

Case closed. :flyaway:

<B>
 
Brock,

If it makes you feel any better, and for what it's worth to others, I can confirm that Swarovski focusers, at least on the original EL and SLC bins, have often (i.e. many units that I've tried over the years) been stiff, gritty, and in the case of the EL require more force to focus one way than the other. The original EL also had a tendency to get stiffer with time. I had to send mine back to Swarovski once for service to get it smooth (or at least lower friction, less gritty), and the same is true for most of my friends who owned the original 8.5x42 EL. My 8x32 EL has a very smooth low friction focus. Leica focus tends to be smooth once motion is started (there is a bit of stiction) and so long as one uses a firm action (a light touch, as when using the very tip of a finger, can produce the dreaded juddery movement). I can also confirm that every Nikon LX/HG and Zeiss FL that I've tried has been smooth and had low even resistance. Personally, because I use a very firm 2-finger (index and middle fingers) focus with full sized bins, I generally get on well with all focusers so long as they are not too stiff. My Swarovski 8.5x42 EL, Leica 8x32 BA, Leica 8x42 Ultravid, and Zeiss 7x42 Classic have all been serviced due to the focus becoming too stiff after much use.

--AP
 
Last edited:
Found this catalog by Sw. (USA?) 2011: aa.swarovskioptik.com/download/pdf/en_US/Nature.US.pdf. SLC HD 42 mm: (page 32) "New focusing mechanism - from near to far in an instant ... Only one and a half turns of the focusing wheel take you from infinity to the shortest focusing distance of 6 ft (below 2 m)", (page 33) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". SLC 56 mm: (page 34) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". About Swarovision there's only this, for the 42 mm models: (page 24) "New focusing mechanism for simple, precise focusing". PS. There is a cutaway of the SLC HD (page 32), but I cannot make out in it the mecahnism we seek. To repeat: What is the focusing system described by Sw. using the word "logarithmic" in the text Gijs et al. have seen, what is the patented system, and are they the same thing?
 
Last edited:
... The source of this notion, as far as I can tell, is Gijs van Ginkel's August 2010 group test of 8/8.5x42 binoculars, linked elsewhere on this thread, where he says: "With 2.5 rotations (from close focus to infinity) the brand new Swarovski Swarovision EL therefore ought to be out of the running. However, this is not the case as Swarovski has developed a particularly clever focusing wheel that uses logarithmic speed. In other words, around one rotation changes the focus from infinity to just a few meters, with the remaining rotation adjusting the short distance down to 1,5 meters. This means that the binoculars can very quickly be set to large distances, while remaining sufficiently fast and very precise at short distances. The new Swarovski SLC-HD's also have a focussing wheel with logarithmic speed and the rotational resistance is even more smooth than that of the EL Swarovision."

... To put it briefly, my conclusion is that there is nothing unusual about the "logarithmic speed" of the Swarovski focusers. Like Henry and Ron (Surveyor) have said in their earlier posts to this thread, all normal binoculars focus "logarithmically," and differences in focus behavior come from gearing ratio (how many degrees you need to turn the wheel to effect a one diopter change of focus), focus wheel feel and resistance, and focus wheel size and positioning. In fact, if one just reads what Dr. van Ginkel says in the above quote and then checks just about any binocular that focuses as close as about 2 meters, the binocular will behave like he says, Swarovski or not.


Hi Kimmo/all,

I appreciate your efforts (as well as Henry's, Ron's and others') to examine the validity of Gijs' characterization of the SLC-HD's so-called "logarithmic focuser." And I'm sure your findings are basically correct.

For my part, I can only repeat what I said earlier that I enjoy the the 8x42-HD's focuser, from near to far (2.0 turns), and that it integrates beautifully with my viewing requirements at various distances. I don't know how this was accomplished, whether it was an accident or my perception, but I consider it a dynamic systems property. Since it's so good, I'd like to believe that someone actually engineered it to meet human visual-tactile feedback requirements, but, unfortunately, such things are hard to measure without opinion rating scales like those used in the aerospace industry.

Regards,
Ed
 
Last edited:
There have been attempts to implement non-linear gears into focusing mechanisms, but the results have not been encouraging - as far as I know it wasn't about technical problems, but rather about confused users who simply couldn't cope with the varying speeds. Imagine somebody using several binoculars, each of them having their individual speed-layout, which may be quite confusing in the field.

According to my information the non-linear mechanism has never been implemented into any Swarovski binocular, so I guess Kimmo's observation was correct. The new SLC has a simpler mechanism just because the focus travel has been reduced.

I have twice tried to purchase a used EL 8.5x42 (pre-SV version), but in both cases the focuser was virtually unusable, and I finally gave up. We will have to wait before being able to judge about reliability and ruggedness of present day's focusers. My personal bet would be: The new SLC focusing-mechanism may have a longer average lifetime than the highly stretched mechanism of the SV - time will tell :)

Cheers,
Holger
 
Brock,

If it makes you feel any better, and for what it's worth to others, I can confirm that Swarovski focusers, at least on the original EL and SLC bins, have often (i.e. many units that I've tried over the years) been stiff, gritty, and in the case of the EL require more force to focus one way than the other. The original EL also had a tendency to get stiffer with time. I had to send mine back to Swarovski once for service to get it smooth (or at least lower friction, less gritty), and the same is true for most of my friends who owned the original 8.5x42 EL.

Alex

You have described perfectly what happened with my 2003 year EL. It was OK at first (differential effort in the two directions not too distracting) then after about 6 months it got stiffer and grittier and developed some free play: horrible. Sent it to the factory and it came back much better but not as new.

So back to Zeiss I went.

Lee
 
Engineering
Did you read the complaints on BF about the focus mechanism? I guess we’re screwed.

Sales
Call the warehouse and get more product out to North America! They’re consuming them faster than we can make them!

Corporate Blog
Should we comment on the focus? I really think we need to get out in front of this before we lose market share.

Engineering
Ok, let’s do a complete redesign. Maybe the rock and rollers on BF will offer their expertise. Otherwise, this could be an epic fail!

Corporate Blog
Release the following immediately.
Focus is on focus redesign. The new focus team will coordinate all efforts with the foci development group to avoid confusion. The foci team will focus on optics (glass, light, refraction, etc.); the focus group will engineer a working focus mechanism (metal, bearings, etc.).

Sales
Where are those damn binoculars? I’ve got people all over the world screaming for more product. Get them off the line and out to the customer.

Marketing
In response to worldwide demand and a shortage of production capability, we’re increasing prices. When we say elite we mean it.

Engineering
Damn, another focus complaint appeared on BF. Do you think our jobs are on the line?

Sales
Orders are streaming in. The focus should not be on the focus but on production. Let’s get focused, people.

Corporate Blog
Owners are replying that the focus works just fine, even in brutally cold weather. Maybe this is all much ado about nothing. For immediate release: “We take all our customers concerns seriously. Our focus is to focus on your focus and that’s what we’ve done, from the beginning. We’ve addressed the problem by acknowledging there never was a problem. Please visit our new website.”

Engineering
Whew, that was close. Hey, did you read the latest BF post. It’s something about an Absam Ring.

President
Absam ring? Posted in an optics forum? Direct that to the jewelry division!

Engineering
What the hell is an Absam ring?

Sales
Who cares, I need more binoculars and I need them now.
 
The way that started out, I thought it was going to be a Star Trek episode .... you know - boldly going where no Swaro has gone before ....... into the 'smooth focusing' universe .....

"Engage focus Mr Sulu" .....



Chosun :gh:
 
Found this catalog by Sw. (USA?) 2011: aa.swarovskioptik.com/download/pdf/en_US/Nature.US.pdf. SLC HD 42 mm: (page 32) "New focusing mechanism - from near to far in an instant ... Only one and a half turns of the focusing wheel take you from infinity to the shortest focusing distance of 6 ft (below 2 m)", (page 33) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". SLC 56 mm: (page 34) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". About Swarovision there's only this, for the 42 mm models: (page 24) "New focusing mechanism for simple, precise focusing". PS. There is a cutaway of the SLC HD (page 32), but I cannot make out in it the mecahnism we seek. To repeat: What is the focusing system described by Sw. using the word "logarithmic" in the text Gijs et al. have seen, what is the patented system, and are they the same thing?

My sides are still splitting after listening to that woodpecker. :-O

Curious that the 8x42 SLC-HD actually takes 2.0 turns from 6' to inf. not 1.5 turns (unless over-travel is subtracted). Are you able to attach any of these documents, or portions, for us to read? Or, can you provide the websites? Gijs must have had something to base his comments on.

Ed

PS. I found the 2011 catalog. "From near to far in an instant" also has me baffled. Hyperbole?
 

Attachments

  • SLC-HD Focusing Mechanism.jpg
    SLC-HD Focusing Mechanism.jpg
    349.3 KB · Views: 152
Last edited:
Found this catalog by Sw. (USA?) 2011: aa.swarovskioptik.com/download/pdf/en_US/Nature.US.pdf. SLC HD 42 mm: (page 32) "New focusing mechanism - from near to far in an instant ... Only one and a half turns of the focusing wheel take you from infinity to the shortest focusing distance of 6 ft (below 2 m)", (page 33) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". SLC 56 mm: (page 34) "Patented center focus system allows rapid focusing". About Swarovision there's only this, for the 42 mm models: (page 24) "New focusing mechanism for simple, precise focusing". PS. There is a cutaway of the SLC HD (page 32), but I cannot make out in it the mecahnism we seek. To repeat: What is the focusing system described by Sw. using the word "logarithmic" in the text Gijs et al. have seen, what is the patented system, and are they the same thing?

Pomp,

I'm sorry, but he's gone ..... :gn: the team fought really hard - right up to the end ..... we did everything we could ..... modern medical science just couldn't save him ..... we're all deeply sorry for your loss ..... he's in a better place now ..... no more grittiness, and close range pokeyness to sully his alpha status ..... sit down while the nurse brings you a coffee ..... is there someone we can call for you?

It's time to let this one go, and try and move on with your future as best you can ..... under the circumstances ..... we understand how such a loss hits you ..... repeatedly .....we see it all too often ..... but he's gone now .... you'll always have the good times though ..... yesterday is only a thought away, a smile, a warm memory, the laughter of children, the delicate kiss of the sun upon your cheek .... cheer up .... why don't you just talk it through with our nurse for a while, and she can run you through our PTSD counselling options, while you wait for your friend to pick you up .....

Pomp, unless a revalation of Nixonesque proportions surfaces - this one is dead and buried. DOA .... time of death - post#165.
PM Gijs if you want closure.

All focusers are logarithmic. I don't know where Gijs picked the term up from, but I'm of the view that all that stuff is just marketing fluffery. Hyperbole as Ed said. The patented system is likely the integral center diopter /focus wheel - nothing more.

Swarovski had to say something about the new focuser - they couldn't just come out and say .... well actually, it doesn't focus as close as before, the ratio is about the same - just the larger minimum distance makes it seem quicker, and of coarse we haven't really smoothed it out any ..... truth be told - all in all - it's a bit s***house really :eek!: (That would be just CRAZY stuff!) 3:)

Move along Mulder, nothing to see here .....

"Mr Sulu - get us out of here - warp factor 3"

"Is that warp factor or metres close focus Captain?"

"Warp factor you idiot!"

"Make it so Number 1" ........ :flyaway:



Chosun :gh:
 
Last edited:
CJ, still find it difficult to believe that a co. such as this would make incorrect claims involving incorrect statements on technical matters because they "had to say something". As for the word "logarithmic", whatever it's supposed to mean in the supposed innovation, that is in material put out by Swaro, as it is quoted by both Gijs and an optics review website. If you're right in this it's the second time I've been disappointed in this way by a co. of this standing. But I get the message - well, at least I hear it!

PS Actually, much of what I have posted in this thread has been in response to direct queries or comments seeking info. by you, sometimes - as even in your last above, also by Ed in his last - already (by then) answered by me!
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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