• 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.

Premium 10x42 Leica/Swarovski/Zeiss compared (1 Viewer)

B

birdman_euston

Member
I've spent the past 11 days field-testing premium 10x42 bins - a step up from the mid-priced 7x35 Bushnells I used for 35 years. Here are my impressions (NB these results may not apply to 8x models):

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 10x42
PROS: sharp, colour-saturated, contrasting image (has that ‘wow’ factor) in good light; smoothest, most-accurate focus; quick-adjust neckstrap; (marginally) greatest depth of field
CONS: forward centre-of-gravity; highest weight; (marginally) darkest image in dull/low light due to red colour-bias

Zeiss Victory SF 10x42
PROS: balanced centre-of-gravity; widest field of view; fastest, most-comfortable focus; bright, ‘natural’-colour image
CONS: looser focus; less-brilliant, (debatably) washed-out image; (marginally) blue colour-bias

Leica Ultravid HD-Plus 10x42
PROS: compact size; lowest weight; (marginally) brightest image in dull/low light
CONS: loosest focus; image less sharp distally, causing a slight ‘rolling-ball’ effect while panning; yellow colour-bias

———

Because much of my birding time is spent skywatching for migrants (aka vismigging), having settled on Swarovski (for best image & focussing) I then tried their higher-magnification 12x50 model:

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 12x50
PROS: not too large and heavy (for me); reasonably bright image; focus as good as 10x42 model
CONS: image not as brilliant as that in the 10x42 model, which limits the gain from greater magnification; reflection appears when pointed near sun
Overall, this is the best model of the four for vismigging (if it's not too cumbersome for you) but for all-round birding performance, I’m going with the Swarovski 10x42s.
 
Last edited:
Funny thing is, many of your findings would be the exact opposite of other testers of these binoculars. Not to say you are wrong but [picking a ''best''] seems a very personal and subjective path to choosing the right binocular for each individuals tastes and preferences.
 
Last edited:
birdman_euston said:
I've spent the past 11 days field-testing premium 10x42 bins - a step up from the mid-priced 7x35 Bushnells I used for 35 years. Here are my impressions (NB these results may not apply to 8x models):

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 10x42
PROS: sharp, colour-saturated, contrasting image (has that ‘wow’ factor) in good light; smoothest, most-accurate focus; quick-adjust neckstrap; (marginally) greatest depth of field
CONS: forward centre-of-gravity; highest weight; (marginally) darkest image in dull/low light due to red colour-bias

Zeiss Victory SF 10x42
PROS: balanced centre of gravity; widest field of view; fastest, most-comfortable focus; bright, ‘natural’-colour image
CONS: looser focus; less-brilliant, (debatably) washed-out image; blue colour-bias

Leitz Ultravid HD-Plus 10x42
PROS: compact size; lowest weight; (marginally) brightest image in dull/low light
CONS: loosest focus; image less sharp distally, causing a slight ‘rolling-ball’ effect while panning; yellow colour-bias

———

Because much of my birding time is spent skywatching for migrants (aka vismigging), having settled on Swarovski (best image & focussing) I then tried their higher-magnification 12x50 model:

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 12x50
PROS: not too large and heavy (for me); reasonably bright image; focus as good as 10x42 model
CONS: image not as brilliant as in 10x42 model, partly nullifying the benefits of greater magnification; reflection appears when pointed near sun
Overall, this is the best model of the four for vismigging (if they're not too cumbersome for you) but for all-round birding performance, I’m going with the Swarovski 10x42s.
Click to expand...

For overall birding the 42mm SVs are hard to beat. All three of the 42mms you tested are probably the cream of the crop. I can give good reasons for purchasing any one of those three.
 
birdman_euston said:
I've spent the past 11 days field-testing premium 10x42 bins - a step up from the mid-priced 7x35 Bushnells I used for 35 years. Here are my impressions (NB these results may not apply to 8x models):

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 10x42
PROS: sharp, colour-saturated, contrasting image (has that ‘wow’ factor) in good light; smoothest, most-accurate focus; quick-adjust neckstrap; (marginally) greatest depth of field
CONS: forward centre-of-gravity; highest weight; (marginally) darkest image in dull/low light due to red colour-bias

Zeiss Victory SF 10x42
PROS: balanced centre-of-gravity; widest field of view; fastest, most-comfortable focus; bright, ‘natural’-colour image
CONS: looser focus; less-brilliant, (debatably) washed-out image; (marginally) blue colour-bias

Leitz Ultravid HD-Plus 10x42
PROS: compact size; lowest weight; (marginally) brightest image in dull/low light
CONS: loosest focus; image less sharp distally, causing a slight ‘rolling-ball’ effect while panning; yellow colour-bias

———

Because much of my birding time is spent skywatching for migrants (aka vistmigging), having settled on Swarovski (for best image & focussing) I then tried their higher-magnification 12x50 model:

Swarovski EL Swarovision FieldPro 12x50
PROS: not too large and heavy (for me); reasonably bright image; focus as good as 10x42 model
CONS: image not as brilliant as in 10x42 model, which limits the gain from greater magnification; reflection appears when pointed near sun
Overall, this is the best model of the four for vismigging (if they're not too cumbersome for you) but for all-round birding performance, I’m going with the Swarovski 10x42s.
Click to expand...
Probably the three best binoculars made in the most popular format. Nice review. Concise and to the point. It is always nice to have others feedback and opinions on top binoculars. Curious why you tried the 12x50 SV's instead of the 10x50 SV's since you seem to like the 10x magnification. I think the image would have been at least as brilliant as the 10x42 SV's.
 
Last edited:
james holdsworth said:
Funny thing is, many of your findings would be the exact opposite of other testers of these binoculars. Not to say you are wrong but [picking a ''best''] seems a very personal and subjective path to choosing the right binocular for each individuals tastes and preferences.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is, James, I initially thought the Zeiss option would be the best, as the Victory SF model is designed primarily for birders. Disappointment with its image and focus (ironically, 'SF' stands for 'smooth focus') prompted this field test, during which I was blown away by the Swarovski EL's. :) Again, I'm drawing no conclusions about the 8x versions of these models (a birder I respect swears by the 8x42 Zeiss, for the bright image).
 
Last edited:
james holdsworth said:
Funny thing is, many of your findings would be the exact opposite of other testers of these binoculars. Not to say you are wrong but [picking a ''best''] seems a very personal and subjective path to choosing the right binocular for each individuals tastes and preferences.
Click to expand...

Hi James:

At the expense of sounding like a broken record, (You remember . . . those old vinyl discs we used to get music from on a . . . record player.) When comparing instruments such as those tested, few indeed are the people who can attest to anything more than their subjective preference. That is, in no way, a bad thing, and all reviews have their value because it might bring to the fore factors someone might have overlooked. Yet, virtually none of the optical criteria is above our personal thresholds of recognition.

ANY of the binos mentioned would be a great blessing for a lifetime, providing excellent service all along the way. Besides everybody knows the "best" binocular is the one I'm using . . . today!:cat:

Cheers,

Bill
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
Curious why you tried the 12x50 SV's instead of the 10x50 SV's since you seem to like the 10x magnification. I think the image would have been at least as brilliant as the 10x42 SV's.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your comments. I went for the higher power (12x) in the hope of improving my chances of bringing distant, fly-away raptors close enough to ID before it was too late! Indeed there was an improvement for vismigging purposes, but it wasn't significant enough to outweigh their size/weight disadvantage when 'going mobile'.
 
Last edited:
birdman_euston said:
Thanks for your comments. I went for the higher power (12x) in the hope of improving my chances of bringing distant, fly-away raptors close enough to ID before it was too late! Indeed there was an improvement for vismigging purposes, but it wasn't significant enough to outweigh their size/weight disadvantage when 'going mobile'.
Click to expand...
I understand. I have the Swarovision 8x32 SV's and the 10x50 SV's for similar reasons. You made a wise choice. The 10x42 SV's are hard to beat for all around use. Any of those three binoculars are hard to fault.
 
Birdman,

When you are vismigging, do you not use a scope? I do a lot of similar birdwatching both in the Spring and Fall, and the typical way here is you find a good spot with wide-open views, scan with binoculars and ID with a scope.

Kimmo
 
Fair point, but my style of birding mitigates against the use of a scope: normally I cycle in, vismig from a viewpoint and then ramble on foot through my (shorebird-free) patch, which is huge (taking at least four hours to cover well, even at a brisk walking pace). That's why I was sweating blood to find binoculars that would improve my skywatching 'strike-rate' but not weigh me down. I'm thrilled to have found a model of such quality, that will meet both needs till the day I drop. :)
 
Last edited:
birdman_euston said:
Fair point, but my style of birding mitigates against the use of a scope: normally I cycle in, vismig from a viewpoint and then ramble on foot through my (shorebird-free) patch, which is huge (taking at least four hours to cover well, even at a brisk walking pace). That's why I was sweating blood to find binoculars that would improve my skywatching 'strike-rate' but not weigh me down. I'm thrilled to have found a model of such quality, that will meet both needs till the day I drop. :)
Click to expand...

Welcome to BF...Birdman! :hi:

Great 1st post with a nice personal review of three top tier 10x42 optical instruments...Thanks for sharing! As Dennis stated, hard to fault any one. You'll be very happy with the choice you made...Enjoy the View! :t:

Ted
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 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.

Similar threads

J
Brief review of Shuntu Panorama ED 10x42
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
jackjack
J
G
Leica, Zeiss & Swarovski binoculars compared: A personal report
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
Paultricounty
P
dorubird
Swarovski Swarovision EL 8x32 vs Nikon Monarch HG 8x30
2 3
Replies
45
Views
4K
Owlbarred
Owlbarred
M
Advice for first (high-end) binoculars : Safari & Birding
2 3
Replies
49
Views
6K
Elkhornsun
E
kimmik
Swarovski glare/flare is deliberate by design? A comparison with Leica
3 4 5
Replies
95
Views
8K
tenex
tenex

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top