Swarovision Fieldpro (1 Viewer)

arran

Well-known member

• Mar 4, 2017

• #1

Today I had the occasion to compare my wife's swarovision 10x42 bought in 2010 with a new Fieldpro of same magnification in the Field of a friend
Some people say the coatings have not changed since then , but I could clearly see a more pronounced contrast with the Fieldpro!
Also glare resistance seemed to be better
Any thoughts or experience if the latest generations are indeed better?
Could sample variation play a role?
Or did Swarovski mad effectieve silenced improvements throughout the years?
I am curious
Any thoughts?

 

Torview

Well-known member

• Mar 5, 2017

• #2

No question in my mind the field pro are better in the way you have described, the new polymer armour is a step up on the older rubber as far as I`m concerned.

 

J

jremmons

Wildlife Biologist

• Mar 5, 2017

• #3

I have compared the 8x32s and don't see any difference. I'd be willing to bet there were no differences. The only difference I've seen is what is apparently less rolling ball in the later 8.5x Svs as compared to the first.

 

Robert Moore

Well-known member

• Mar 5, 2017

• #4

I noticed the same when comparing my 2014 swarovision 10x42 with the field pro. It seamed to have better contrast, less glare, and even more saturated colors. The field pro is really fantastic.

 

D

Davt

New member

• Apr 2, 2017

• #5

When I purchased my 10x42 EL Swarovision Field Pro I was told by Swarovski USA that the changes were to the rubber armor, strap and lens covers improving function. No changes to glass or coatings. Differences people see may very well slight variance between different bins.

 

A

AGPank

Well-known member

• Jun 7, 2017

• #6

I have a pair of 2010 10x42 EL SV. Specs I found were that FOV was around 330-336' at 1000 yards.

The website now lists the field pro at 399' FOV. Is that correct on the field pro?

 

P

PhilR.

Well-known member

• Jun 7, 2017

• #7

AGPank said:

I have a pair of 2010 10x42 EL SV. Specs I found were that FOV was around 330-336' at 1000 yards.

The website now lists the field pro at 399' FOV. Is that correct on the field pro?

Click to expand...

It is for the 8.5x42.....

 

Theo98

Eurasian Goldfinch

• Jun 7, 2017

• #8

Arran,

I recently had the opportunity to compare my 2012 10X50 SV with an update and recent production of the 10X50 SV FP...see HERE.

I've been told several times by SONA Techs, and last year by Dale Forbes in Absam, that Swarovski is continually improving and applying new coatings and arrangements to garner the best optical viewing that their glass can produce. Each incremental improvement can only be measured and proven through their very sophisticated and detailed precision optic performance analysis. Even their techs\engineers typically are not able to Visually identify the minute measurable improvements made.

These micro step improvements do not warrant public announcements for each step along the way (like the FP ergonomic changes), but probably what you've seen as have others, and what I feel I've seen are the cumulative total successes that are part of their on going R&D advancements to their high end optics.

I've no doubt they will continue their progressive developmental strategy in optics and make the needed changes to compete in the world optics market place.

Ted

 

Last edited: Jun 7, 2017

S

sako

Well-known member

• Jun 7, 2017

• #9

I noticed an increase in contrast too with my 10x42 EL Range Field Pro to a friends three year old 10x42 EL Range. Not a huge amount, but noticeable. Didn't think to compare the colour of the lenses at the time.

 

BruceH

Avatar: Harris Hawk

• Jun 7, 2017

• #10

AGPank said:

I have a pair of 2010 10x42 EL SV. Specs I found were that FOV was around 330-336' at 1000 yards.

The website now lists the field pro at 399' FOV. Is that correct on the field pro?

Click to expand...

As pointed out by Phil, it appears you picked up the specs for the 8.5X42. That is the default model that comes up when first viewing the USA web page. The 10X42 needs to be selected on the right side of the page to display specs for it. I get trapped by that every so often and find I am looking at specs from a model than what I intended.



Your original observation of a 336 FOV for the 10X is correct.

 

Last edited: Jun 7, 2017

J

Jay Gamble

Active member

• Jul 17, 2017

• #11

I recently received my new 8.5x42 Field Pro bins. They are amazingly good, and to my eyes, clearly better than my 2015 8.5x42 Swarovision model. I would have not believed the difference could be this noticeable.

Colors are more saturated, contrast is better and the sense of image "clarity" is stunning.I had assumed a minimal improvement, but was wrong. They offer a very noticeable improvement, and for me, it was immediate and clearly a "wow!" moment.

Eye relief also appears to be improved regardless of the fact that the specs for both models say 20mm. I wear glasses, and with both my 2009 8.5x42 WB and 2015 8.5x42 SV models, I had the eyecups screwed all the way in. With the new FP model, I am using them with the eyecups at the first clickstop out from the flush position.

My 2013 8x32 Swarovision bins compared favorably to my 8.5x42 SVs in most ways, except glare which affects them quite a bit at low sun angles. In comparing them to my new 8x42 FPs, my 8x32s are simply no longer in the same league. I plan to go and compare them to the latest 8x32 FP model soon, and hope for a similarly remarkable improvement since I like their size and weight.

Jay

 

james holdsworth

Consulting Biologist

• Jul 24, 2017

• #12

I wonder if Swarovski are now using Schott [Zeiss] HT glass in the Field Pro? The reported differences do seem to square with what is seen in the HT and Noctivid.