swarovski 12x50 sv vs nikon 12x50 se (1 Viewer)

I want to ask what is the difference in resolution, brightness and contrast between these two models? I read that nikon se 12x50 is brighter than sv 12x50, but what about clarity and contrast? Also is this models clearer, brighter and sharper than new swaro 15x56 hd? Thanks!

bockos said:

I want to ask what is the difference in resolution, brightness and contrast between these two models? I read that nikon se 12x50 is brighter than sv 12x50, but what about clarity and contrast? Also is this models clearer, brighter and sharper than new swaro 15x56 hd? Thanks!

Click to expand...

Which is better: a Rolls Royce or a Bentley? The two questions are about the same. There is no way you can lose choosing between the two. I think most of the things you are considering are below the threshold of recognition of most observers. In addition, with differences in the biological receptors between one observer and the next, I don't think the definitive answer is out there.

Go to a store that sells both, hold them and look through them for 10 minutes each, make up your mind, and lay your money down. If you say you are not qualified to know the difference, that admission should tell you volumes about your question.

The decision MUST rest with you. You are uniquely qualified to be . . . YOU! At that level of quality, I would think cost and customer service should play a grand role in your decision. Either instrument is a bino for a lifetime, producing levels of quality most observers are miles away from differentiating. And, if they did, would they say the same thing looking at the same binos next month?

I once won a Swarovski crystal Habicht for liking the Swarovski product and selling so many of them. When it came time to purchase, however, I bought an SE, took my wife to dinner, and bought a new computer with the savings. And, although I've told you what I did, not one word of that blather was meant to have any sway on what you do; again, you are unique. Perhaps you will let us know what you decided.

Beware of over-thinking your situation. SOME people have taken half a day looking through bino after bino in my showroom (get ready: I'm about to be snotty, again) SEEMINGLY in hopes of convincing onlookers that they're a savvy shopper. As Aristotle once said . . . "BULL!"

A person who is REALLY prepared to shop at the expensive end of the pool, can choose from a field of 50 quality binos in 15 minutes, and be happy with his or her choice for years. :cat:

Cheers,

Bill

I tried a 12X50SE last year for a month, for me they were just ok, you might love them. I also had the 10X42SE and IMO, the 10X42SV and 10X50SV are much better, other people have the opposite opinion. As I said, IMO.

SuperDuty said:

I tried a 12X50SE last year for a month, for me they were just ok, you might love them. I also had the 10X42SE and IMO, the 10X42SV and 10X50SV are much better, other people have the opposite opinion. As I said, IMO.

Click to expand...

That's all that counts!

Bill

PS my SE is an 8x32.

Bockos,

To put things in perspective Nikon discontinued the SE line a couple of years ago. When they stopped making them is anybodies guess. My guess it that it was well before the 10x42 SV and 10x50 SV were being designed.

They never did sell well because people prefer using roof prism binoculars.

They had flat fields since their introduction prior to the year 2000. To be fair, they should be compared to Swarovski's discontinued EL line which did not have flat fields. For at least 10 years they set the standards that the optics in other binoculars were measured against.

The SV series should have a run like that.

Bob

Have had the 12x50 SE since it first came out. Trying to recall what I paid for it - around $600. The SV lists today over $3,100, which is no mean amount. Both have first rate construction. Both have special points about them. As the old cliche goes, six of one, half a dozen of the other.

You mention brightness. Here, brightness would favor the SE because of its porro construction. Swarovski literature states its porros have a higher percentage of light transmission that its roofs. If waterproof and status is important to you, go with the SV. You can't go wrong with either. Good luck in trying to find an SE.

John

Look at page
http://scopeviews.co.uk/BinoReviews.htm
There is some review of this binoculars.

John Dracon said:

Have had the 12x50 SE since it first came out. Trying to recall what I paid for it - around $600. The SV lists today over $3,100, which is no mean amount. Both have first rate construction. Both have special points about them. As the old cliche goes, six of one, half a dozen of the other.

You mention brightness. Here, brightness would favor the SE because of its porro construction. Swarovski literature states its porros have a higher percentage of light transmission that its roofs. If waterproof and status is important to you, go with the SV. You can't go wrong with either. Good luck in trying to find an SE.

John

Click to expand...

Yes, the Swarovski Habicht porros are extremely bright, but Nikon never brought their SEs to that level of transmission, not even close. My last generation SE 8x32 looked way darker than my Swaro Habicht 8x30. The 8x Swarovisions I used are neutral to cold in colour and therefore look quite bright.