-
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.
New bin, EL10x50SV (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Uhu74
- Start date
SuperDuty
Well-known member
bockos
Well-known member
My old friend told me that for one binocular is important what detail can you see on the horizont when the atmospheric conditions are excellent in a sunny winter day, for example tree, building or tower on the horizont 10 miles away and what can you read from an inscription 50-100 feet away for example. When a tripod is used how Swarovski 10x50 SV will be compared to Swarovski 10x56 SLC HD, Leica 10x50 Ultravid HD Plus (and maybe Swarovski SV12x50 because the high magnification on tripod)?
Maybe Swarovski 10x50 SV will be the best according to what you are written in this forum that Swarovski 10x50 is the best bino made by Swarovski for all times. But is there any rivals for SV 10x50 between the other binos(Nikon, Leica, Zeiss) with magnifiation 10-12 for this specific purposes.
Thank you very much!
Maybe Swarovski 10x50 SV will be the best according to what you are written in this forum that Swarovski 10x50 is the best bino made by Swarovski for all times. But is there any rivals for SV 10x50 between the other binos(Nikon, Leica, Zeiss) with magnifiation 10-12 for this specific purposes.
Thank you very much!
Last edited:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Bockos,
Welcome to BF! |=)|
Rivals with 50mm+ objectives...sure. You already mentioned the SV 12x50, the Leica UVHD+ 10x50, then there is the Zeiss HT 10x54, and a host of These.
Maybe others can chime in with comparative creditable and unbiased internet reviews (I know of none), or Might even have vast experience and knowledge of other competitive 50mm+ glass.
I'd suggest you re-post your question on the general BF Binocular page (below the sub-forums) where you might attract input and comments from other BF members.
Good Luck,
Ted
Here is a report on the Opticron 10x50 Discovery WP PC:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=272204
ER: 22mm. FOV: 345'@1000yds. Wt: 28.7oz. Magnesium body. Waterproof. Fully Multi Coated. 6' close focus. (Info above from Opticron Catalog)
There are also 8x42; 10x42 and 8x50 Versions. List prices from $289.00 to $319.00 US funds.
bockos
Well-known member
Thank you, Theo98 and ceasar. At the moment I have the new Swarovski 15x56HD, I sold Pentax 20x60 and Docter 8x56 BGA before buying Swarovski 15x56 and I am happy with the details that my bino gives me. I want to buy the new Swarovski 10x50 SV fieldpro. I think that 10 and 15 will be very good combination, but a friend told me that Swarovski 12x50 SV will be enough and I can sell 15x56. Question to those, who have Swaro 10x50 SV what do you recommend me?
Last edited:
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
1000 metres is a greater distance than 1000 yds, actually it's 1093 yards, thats why the FOV in metric metres @ 1000m is larger,
the FOV imperial should be 91% of the FOV metric,
so it seems to be correct: 1000/1093 = 105/115 = 0.91
Last edited:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Yep, just realized that VP...thus retracted my error-ed post! However, I believe my measured 15.1" @ 10ft still translates into 377' @ 1000yds of usable FOV!?
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
Yep, just realized that VP...thus retracted my error-ed post! However, I believe my measured 15.1" @ 10ft still translates into 377' @ 1000yds of usable FOV!?
thought it was an educational post you did,
it's from the errors we can learn something,
I had to think it through,
and errors in manufacturers bino specs on the internet is not unusual,
we have seen it before, and it will happen again,
but in that case with 377', I think you should call Swaro and tell them the good news, it might be one of those samples where they forgot to mount the internal
aperture,
so good for you!
:t:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Looks, sounds good to me...wait, do I Hear a High Bidder! :-O
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Josika, (and Theo) that first part is spot on! :t: Those units and conventions are all important as the folks on the SF thread just discovered ..... :cat:
The second part is likely? measurement error? ........ a 378ft @1000yd 10x50 SV would be a mighty mighty bin --- equivalent to a whopping 126m @1000m FOV! (~72* AFov) ...... Sign me up! :king:
The listed spec is 115m @1000m, and after I, and 100's or 1000's of others have looked through them with no reports to the contrary, I have no reason to doubt that. This would equate to 13.8" @ 10'
~72* AFov with that ER, and quality of view would be mind blowing! Get the weight down to 850gr and we could shut the forum down! Everyone would be out happily viewing for the rest of their lives without a 2nd thought of anything else ........ :smoke:
Chosun :gh:
Last edited:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
CJ,
Does this mean "Your the Highest Bidder", 3
:-OCall it my new-found 20\13 vision with superb peripheral vision (cataract surgery) :eek!:, or a defect (could happen) in the pair I own. Measurement error, yes, always a suspect...pick the best out of three! However, by locking down the SV on a tripod at exactly 10ft and maintaining a constant and sharp centered focus, I was able to confirm a 15.1" FOV of the outer viewable edges on a wall mounted tape measure, with white tabs bordering the 15.1" spacing for visual confirmation. Tried at 15.25"...no go...15.1" was the charm for me. Is it representative of the 100's or so that don't see this bino wider than the rated 345ft@ 1000yds...apparently not. Maybe, that's why I'm sensitive to the slight RB effect that they still present when I pan Horz. and Vert.
Actually, my "perceived" wide static FOV may help explain the reason I feel such an immersive sight picture while glassing with the 10x50's. The deep in-focus foreground and background and the pleasing out-of-focus optical bokeh also seems to greatly contribute to "as-if-you-are-there" visual experience. Or, a more acceptable explanation could be, "it's just all-in-my head"!
Anyway, thought what I discovered might be interesting to a few. Certainly not scientific, but interesting! :t:
Ted
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
CJ,
Does this mean "Your the Highest Bidder", 3
Call it my new-found 20\13 vision with superb peripheral vision (cataract surgery) :eek!:, or a defect (could happen) in the pair I own. Measurement error, yes, always a suspect...pick the best out of three! However, by locking down the SV on a tripod at exactly 10ft and maintaining a constant and sharp centered focus, I was able to confirm a 15.1" FOV of the outer viewable edges on a wall mounted tape measure, with white tabs bordering the 15.1" spacing for visual confirmation. Tried at 15.25"...no go...15.1" was the charm for me. Is it representative of the 100's or so that don't see this bino wider than the rated 345ft@ 1000yds...apparently not. Maybe, that's why I'm sensitive to the slight RB effect that they still present when I pan Horz. and Vert.
Actually, my "perceived" wide static FOV may help explain the reason I feel such an immersive sight picture while glassing with the 10x50's. The deep in-focus foreground and background and the pleasing out-of-focus optical bokeh also seems to greatly contribute to "as-if-you-are-there" visual experience. Or, a more acceptable explanation could be, "it's just all-in-my head"!
Anyway, thought what I discovered might be interesting to a few. Certainly not scientific, but interesting! :t:
Ted
Ted, perhaps you have the mythical "cherry" unit! :t:
Yes - certainly welcome and interesting. My initial thoughts were perhaps some measurement error (a few % can make a big difference at that short distance) and /or combined with some parallax errors in eye placement ...... the SV's do seem to have a particularly luxurious EP designed in - hence the often heard ease of view comments. :king:
I would think measuring at the 100m mark (or 100yds for the imperially inclined) should reduce the error % if you are able to perform such a feat ..... and of course the ultimate arbiter would be an actual 1000m (or 1000yd) measurement, although some of the mavens, propeller heads, and lab rats, would be able to give a better idea of the relative merits of such extravagance! :cat:
Chosun :gh:
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Thanks for your comments, CJ. Certainly, a 100yd measurement (doable at next "zero scope shooting range" activity) will greatly reduce any magnified error marks at short range...will keep all informed! :t:
Ted
Steve C
Well-known member
Ted,
You can if you wish, but my SV 10x50 has the same fov as yours, 377'. Be careful about going too far out. While distance is better, errors can be magnified when going too far. Also your indicators of distance need to be clearly visible at the distance you are using. Mirage can wipe you out.
I never have found any change from a careful 10 yard determination.
You can if you wish, but my SV 10x50 has the same fov as yours, 377'. Be careful about going too far out. While distance is better, errors can be magnified when going too far. Also your indicators of distance need to be clearly visible at the distance you are using. Mirage can wipe you out.
I never have found any change from a careful 10 yard determination.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Gates and Buffet own Nikon 10x42 SEs, they didn't make all that money by throwing it away on marketing mumbo jumbo....
<B>
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Steve,
377ft? Is that fair dinkum? Are you talking about the field at 1000m? ie. 115m (or 377ft) which is the quoted spec :t:
OR ........ :cat:
As with Ted's 15.1" @10' ..... Is that 377ft @1000yds which is an entirely different animal? :eek!: :news:
It is very confusing for us Metric folk when y'all Imperial folk talk ft ..... we assume that it relates to the Binocular Field Convention for Measurement ie. @1000yds ....... :h?:
BUT, I've got a sneaky suspicion that folks around here are just doing a a straight m to ft conversion of the 1000m figure ...... and then talking about it without reference to the distance. The assumption of the Metric world is that everytime we see a ft figure quoted that it correlates to the 1000yd convention, which is only 3000ft (914m). :cat:
Here's hoping that we can all begin comparing apples :-@ with apples :-@ on the same page :scribe:
Chosun :gh:
Last edited:
Gates and Buffet don't bird! :eek!:Gates and Buffet own Nikon 10x42 SEs, they didn't make all that money by throwing it away on marketing mumbo jumbo....
<B>
henry link
Well-known member
Theo98,
Were your 10' FOV measurements done with one eye or both eyes?
Henry
Were your 10' FOV measurements done with one eye or both eyes?
Henry
