-
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.
swaro SV's 10x42 vs. 10x50 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter handwerk
- Start date
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Welcome to the forum! .... you might want to also pop over to the 'Say hello' forum just to introduce yourself .... :hi:
As far as your question goes, I can say that for me I much prefer the 10x50 in the low light, but even a 5mm Exit Pupil limits me. I even far prefer it during the middle of the day. Apart from the WOW view, part of this is because the x50 fits my hands better, feels more comfortable, and is very steady to hold. I do find it heavy though - perhaps the only major drawback (other than the expense!
. Having said that though, the x42 is even less of a lightweight in comparison to its objective size, and even in absolute terms its definitely no lightweight either. (o)<
So for me, I find nothing to recommend the 10x42, mind you, I feel the same way about the 8.5x42 too. The 8x32 SV is the only other one in the range which grabs any love from me, which is interesting since its 4mm exit pupil is pretty much line ball with the 4.2mm of the 10x42 - it just strikes me as all together more remarkable - probably because it is more consistent as a package, ie. a gem of a compact, lightweight package. :cat:
I don't notice an advantage in glare handling of one over the other, but I haven't noticed some of the glare handling problems of the SV's that some other people on here have experienced. For the record, I always wear transition glasses due to short-sightedness, and find myself needing just about all of the ER that the SV's offer. I back the eye cups out just a smidge (the exact same smidge as on the Zeiss 8x42 HT - go figure! . I find the 10x50 SV and curiously the 8x32 SV to offer excellent 'eyeroamaboutability'. It's the 10x50 SV for me hands down. :t:
Chosun :gh:
As far as your question goes, I can say that for me I much prefer the 10x50 in the low light, but even a 5mm Exit Pupil limits me. I even far prefer it during the middle of the day. Apart from the WOW view, part of this is because the x50 fits my hands better, feels more comfortable, and is very steady to hold. I do find it heavy though - perhaps the only major drawback (other than the expense!
. Having said that though, the x42 is even less of a lightweight in comparison to its objective size, and even in absolute terms its definitely no lightweight either. (o)<So for me, I find nothing to recommend the 10x42, mind you, I feel the same way about the 8.5x42 too. The 8x32 SV is the only other one in the range which grabs any love from me, which is interesting since its 4mm exit pupil is pretty much line ball with the 4.2mm of the 10x42 - it just strikes me as all together more remarkable - probably because it is more consistent as a package, ie. a gem of a compact, lightweight package. :cat:
I don't notice an advantage in glare handling of one over the other, but I haven't noticed some of the glare handling problems of the SV's that some other people on here have experienced. For the record, I always wear transition glasses due to short-sightedness, and find myself needing just about all of the ER that the SV's offer. I back the eye cups out just a smidge (the exact same smidge as on the Zeiss 8x42 HT - go figure!
. I find the 10x50 SV and curiously the 8x32 SV to offer excellent 'eyeroamaboutability'. It's the 10x50 SV for me hands down. :t:Chosun :gh:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Hi HW and welcome to BF! :hi:
My overall experiences are very similar to CJ's and related comments are well represented throughout the Swarovski heading under threads by Gigs HERE a year ago and Pileatus HERE 2 years ago! User comments extol the optical and ergonomic positives of the EL 10x50 SV but as CJ cautions, the weight is sometimes brought up as a negative. For me, in this size format and design, I find the weight as a positive in stabilizing the 10X FOV format from hand shake, even over the lighter 6oz of the 10x42 SV. The 10x42's are great optically in so many aspects, but never fully created that clear and immersive "picture window view" that I crave from the 10x50's!
If possible, IMHO answering your question would best be done by glassing with these EL's side by side, yourself, to determine which would be best for You! :t:
Ted
Last edited:
The 10x50 SV has without a doubt better optics than the 10x42 SV in every way you can think of. A 42mm objective CAN NOT compete with a 50mm. It is a matter of physics. The 10x50 SV isn't that much harder IMHO to carry than the 10x42 SV and it is definitely superior in optics. There is no DOUBT about it. A 50mm kills a 42mm every time. Just ask your Physics teacher.
Last edited:
JabaliHunter
Well-known member
Without a doubt.
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Richard,
I don't believe you can make a mistake with the EL 10x42 SV bins, they are great optics that do many things extremely well. The 10x50 has some shortcomings (weight-size-cost) compared to the 10x42 SV, which in my experience is one of the best 10x42's ever made...you done good! :t:
Ted
Thank you.
That's what I keep telling myself, and that's why I chose the 10X42 in the first place.
Take care.
R
SuperDuty
Well-known member
The 10x42 format has plenty going for it especially if you spend any length of time in the field and/or like to carry more than one glass. The afov on the 10x50 is truly something to behold but color rendition, resolution and edge sharpness is equal across these two formats. Enjoy what I consider the loveliest 10 x 42 money can buy.
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
If most of the use is in low light I would get the 10x50,
but in daylight, lugging it around, it's a heavy beast.
but in daylight, lugging it around, it's a heavy beast.
Based on your typical usage how long will you be using them at dawn and dusk compared to the rest of the day?
Do you spend a lot of time Owling?
Dennis,
There has been a question in my mind about this and I have decided to ask it.
If your 10x50 SV was as good as you say it was why didn't you keep it? Or do you still have it and use it on occasion?
Bob
SV 10x42 close focus is one of the best at 4.9 ft. SV 10x50 is at 9.2 ft. A huge deal if you want to admire butterflies or the rapidly spreading athletes foot infection on your toes
That and the extra weight makes the 10x50 unattractive to me in spite of the optical prowess. You made the right choice.I have to agree with CJ that the SV 8x32 is a stellar package. 400 gm less than the SV 10x50, no blackouts, excellent low light capability, wide FOV which also makes the close focus work great without adjusting the IPD, and true single hand use have all made that my favorite pair. IMO it is the best of the SV's.
Still have the 10x50 SV. I have been using the Trac Toric 8x42 more than my 8x32 SV because it shows less glare and It pans nicer without showing any type of RB. I really like the Toric. I also have a Canon 10x42 IS-L for detail. I don't like the ergonomics of the Canon but it is good for detail and astronomy.
The 10x50 SV's are definitely better optically especially at dusk and dawn. Anytime you have a bigger objective lens your optics are going to be better. Of course the 10x50 SV is bigger and heavier than the 10x42. You have to decide what is more important to you. The view or the size and weight. It is the same reason Henry Link likes his Zeiss 8x56 FL's. In optics the bigger the better if you want the best view. There are less optical aberrations the bigger the objective gets because you are looking through the sweet spot of the glass. All the optical aberrations go past you eyes with a bigger objective.
Last edited:
I'm not as talented in expressing technicalities of optics and how they differ, but I owned the 10x42 SV and 10x50SV at the same time. I found the 10x42SV to be the best of that configuration that I had ever used. There is something special about the 10x50 though that makes it superior to my 55 yr old eyes. The immersive view (as mentioned), the view that makes you feel like you are in the picture, not looking at it, almost a 3D like view if possible in a roof. All of that makes the 10x50SV the finest glass I've ever seen, used, owned, etc and I've been fortunate to see most of the high end stuff.
That being said, if you don't have them side by side I doubt you'll ever know what your missing. I could happily hunt with a 10x42 SV and never look back. Mount those 10x50's on a tripod though......WOW!
That being said, if you don't have them side by side I doubt you'll ever know what your missing. I could happily hunt with a 10x42 SV and never look back. Mount those 10x50's on a tripod though......WOW!
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Thought you expressed that very well, JG...Agree with your 10x50 assessment 100%!! :t:
The two biggest WOW binoculars I have ever looked through are the Swarovski SV 10x50 and the Canon 10x42 IS-L partly because of their BIG AFOV. The Canon has crummy ergonomics though. Put the big Swaro on a tripod and it will knock your socks off.
