• 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.

My Review of a 8x32 EL; 8x30 SLC NEU and a 8x30 CL (all brand new bino's) (1 Viewer)

Dave,










As far as the diopter adjustment, I am sure the diopter design will be fine. I guess I was just surprised. But the good thing about having a Swaro- if you ever have a problem- just send it in and they will fix it. I, like you, had a problem with a used 8x32 EL a # of years ago. When I bought it, it had the diopter setting geared all the way to only being able to adjust it in the (+) settings-would not go at all into the (-) ones. Sent them in the SONA and of course they came back perfect.

Enjoy your CL's

:eek!:

And I was thinking you'd need a click-stop arrangement on the center diopter to keep it firmly locked at all times! You mean even the EL's diopter design isn't to be trusted?!

Had the same thing with Zeiss 7x42 FL, and with cheap Chinese roofs 8x42 as well: diopter under, resp. at rear, of the focuswheel went berzerk.

I choose separated focuswheel/diopter rings from now on. Never ever had a problem with diopter rings even on cheap porro's! Diopter adjustment should be on the ocular!

Nikon f***ed up by putting the diopter adjustment under the central focus wheel in the EDG's, instead of copying the trustworthy design of the L XL's, and what happened? People having to send back their expensive bins to have them fixed. Buy a Rolls/Royce and go back to the garage to have new gears installed because the old ones have left you stranded on the freeway?!

And even IF you haved them fixed - how long will they last?
Something to think about, I reckon.

My heavy 2 cts.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
[QUOTE: denco on 21 September 2010] "I had a Swarovski 8x32 EL and I hated it."--stated at the time that the Zeiss FL was the world's greatest binocular.

The EL is better than the FL in a few regards, including--in my experience--resolution (by a hair), ergonomics, and focus speed. The FL focuses too fast, but it does display less CA than the EL. My EL is more than four years old and has a superior focus action. There have been no changes to the bin since mine was made (except for Swaroclean), the focus action was the same when I bought it as it is now, and mine is not an exceptional example.

The only roof-prism bin I have owned that has a smoother focus mechanism is the SLC 7x30, which I have said here repeatedly is a fine overall bin, despite its limitations. I am glad to see Stephen B. give it some coverage.

Surprised they didn't make any improvements. Are you sure about that? I don't remember my EL being that good. it seemed like the sweet spot was bigger on the EL also. Just sometimes different binoculars work better for different people.
 
Surprised they didn't make any improvements. Are you sure about that? I don't remember my EL being that good. it seemed like the sweet spot was bigger on the EL also. Just sometimes different binoculars work better for different people.

Well, I do have to be completely honest. I did not always think my EL was as sharp as it is. I had it for well over a year, and possibly over two years, before I finally struck on the perfect diopter setting, which on my sample is +1/3 from zero (one click stop positive from zero). Since then I have had a very hard time telling its resolving power from my SE. In fact I think they are equal. The SE is brighter and has more contrast, so I still consider it superior, and its 3-D view is unmatchable by any roof-prism bin. But as a birding and even butterflying bin, and as a lightweight and compact bin on long treks, the EL is quite versatile. I did not compare the size of the sweet spots between the EL and FL on the occasions when I was able to A-B for a long time, because I was concentrating on other things. I think the FL has very fine optics, but its fast focus is a turnoff for me. Of all the bins I have used, the focus on the SE is my favorite, because I can dial in a perfect focus.
 
I have a couple of comments/ clarifications regarding the diopter ADJ. of the 8x32 EL and the 8x30 CL.

** first to answer or clarify to Ronald comment below:

:eek!:

And I was thinking you'd need a click-stop arrangement on the center diopter to keep it firmly locked at all times! You mean even the EL's diopter design isn't to be trusted?!


......I choose separated focuswheel/diopter rings from now on. Never ever had a problem with diopter rings even on cheap porro's! Diopter adjustment should be on the ocular!........


My heavy 2 cts.

Best regards,

Ronald

Ronald,

The diopter adj. on the 8x32 EL (like all EL's) is under the center focus ring-> you pull the ring cover out (toward the obj. end) and then turn the focus wheel to adjust the diopter setting. It does have click stops and is a fairly fine tuned adjuster; there are numbers from 1-3 (+) and (-) and between each # there are three separate click stops. So between the #1 and #2 there are 3 click stop settings. So you can fine tune it pretty well.

The problem that I have and I agree with you- I do not like having the diopter setting system under the focus wheel. When I had a problem with the EL that I had at one time- the focus knob would not turn the diopter at all in one direction; it would go to 0 (mid-line) but would not go further into the (-) settings- which I needed for that set. I much prefer how the SLC's are- where you push in the focus knob and then turn it and release- sturdy and fairly fool proof.

I also like the diopter setting on the oculars; my Pentax ED is like that- just pull it up and turn it to desired setting and then push back down--> easy and secure.

__________________________________

Now on to the Swaro CL diopter. I pulled it out and had another look at it before typing this. Here is the rub with the CL's diopter- not only does not have a locking mechanism- it does not even have any click stops, as in none, nada! It only has a pressure plate type system to keep it in place. So with out a locking diopter, over time that pressure system could possibly loosen up. Maybe a locking system was going to add a 1/2 oz and they axed it ;) -Now I am aware that was a bit of sarcasm

It seems fairly tight pressure; but....and I only tried this just now after reading your post and before typing this--> I can hold them in my hands like you would hold them to look through them and with the side of my index finger (just distally from the first joint, where the finger joins the hand), I can apply pressure and move the diopter. And it is not too hard to do so. So I think the possibility of the diopter to move is greater than I originally thought.
 
Last edited:
Stephan:

Just read your post about the diopter on the CL. I am wondering, do you need to fiddle
with the diopter much when using your binoculars? For me, I set them once and forget it.
The CL diopter on the right ocular, is very firm, and I do not think it will move on its own.

I am thinking you are worrying much about nothing.

Jerry
 
If there is one good thing to say about diopter adjustments on the focus wheel it is that they are usually such a pain in the butt to set that once you get it right you don't fiddle with it any more! That isn't necessarily so for those on the ocular.

Bob
 
Stephan:

Just read your post about the diopter on the CL. I am wondering, do you need to fiddle
with the diopter much when using your binoculars? For me, I set them once and forget it.
The CL diopter on the right ocular, is very firm, and I do not think it will move on its own.

I am thinking you are worrying much about nothing.

Jerry


Jerry,

No worries at all- I was just pointing it how the mechanism was designed.

I am not trying to overly alarm people; but, I think others are aware that if something is not locked- it can move. Since I will not be keeping the CL's, I personally will not have any problems with the diopter.

-Stephen
 
good review, that is needed since Swaro is confusing us with releasing something so similar, that is not moving the ball down the field optically. unfortunately the CL will be all that is available for purchase soon.

Amen to your comment, " Imagine a 7x32 Swaro SLC HD- now that would be a dream " I share that dream too, maybe someday

You also mention how important the smoothness of the focus wheel is and I could not agree more on how that affects the ease of use
 
Stephen,

Thanks for explaining. I knew though the EL's have clickstops on the diopter adjustment, I guess I failed in my attempt to say what I really meant. Which is, that even when there's clickstops the locking mechanism isn't fail-safe. This surprised me, because, what can you do if it happens, other than turn them in for repair.

Ocular ring diopters that are not kept firmly in place ( the unlocking kind on most bins) can be fixed in an instant with a small rubber band wrapped around them. That's how I like to do it, anyhow, when it occurs. And it don't move a bit anymore, as sure as eggs is eggs! Hahaha!

Best regards,

Ronald
 
Well, I do have to be completely honest. I did not always think my EL was as sharp as it is. I had it for well over a year, and possibly over two years, before I finally struck on the perfect diopter setting, which on my sample is +1/3 from zero (one click stop positive from zero). Since then I have had a very hard time telling its resolving power from my SE. In fact I think they are equal. The SE is brighter and has more contrast, so I still consider it superior, and its 3-D view is unmatchable by any roof-prism bin. But as a birding and even butterflying bin, and as a lightweight and compact bin on long treks, the EL is quite versatile. I did not compare the size of the sweet spots between the EL and FL on the occasions when I was able to A-B for a long time, because I was concentrating on other things. I think the FL has very fine optics, but its fast focus is a turnoff for me. Of all the bins I have used, the focus on the SE is my favorite, because I can dial in a perfect focus.

Equal resolving power to the SE. Impressive indeed! The SE would be brighter being a porro. It sounds like you have a very fine EL and your right in that it sometimes it is difficult to get the diopter just right and it can make a big difference in resolution. It just surprised me when I A-B the FL and EL in Cabellas. I always thought the FL was better but it wasn't on those two binoculars.
 
I had it for well over a year, and possibly over two years, before I finally struck on the perfect diopter setting, which on my sample is +1/3 from zero (one click stop positive from zero).
So you need two more years before find the perfect diopter setting of the new CL 8-P

I can tell you that there is not a perfect diopter setting because if you had for example 3 weeks of hard job and you use the binocular, maybe the response of an eye is different from the other because of fatigue, so my advice is always check the diopter setting.
Maybe you know that alredy, but is very important to keep both eyes open while you are setting, so you must use the lens cover over the other eye.


Since then I have had a very hard time telling its resolving power from my SE. In fact I think they are equal.
Which EL you own ? the new Swarovision ? Because for me the EL is noticeable better.

greets

Ivan
 
I can tell you that there is not a perfect diopter setting because if you had for example 3 weeks of hard job and you use the binocular, maybe the response of an eye is different from the other because of fatigue, so my advice is always check the diopter setting. Maybe you know that alredy, but is very important to keep both eyes open while you are setting, so you must use the lens cover over the other eye.

Which EL you own ? the new Swarovision ? Because for me the EL is noticeable better.

greets

Ivan


Hi Ivan,

My EL is 8x32. I have not changed the diopter in a long time, though I have rechecked it occasionally. I never change the diopter setting while I am in the field, though I get the impression that some forum contributors do that. I use this binocular heavily, and during spring migration this year I used it up to twelve hours a day, every day for two weeks. I experienced no eye strain.


And Dennis:

As I recall, several forum contributors dissed the EL 8x32 when it came out, claiming it had a small sweet spot, wasn't all that sharp, etc. I am sure I remember Leif panning it. Their opinions influenced me, and of course I saw the same problems when I finally got my hands on one. Then one day in 2007 I spent hours in a shop comparing it to other alpha 8x32s. I bought it that day. Obviously we are splitting hairs when we find differences between the SE and the alpha 8x32s, but I wouldn't trade my EL for another 8x32.
 
If there is one good thing to say about diopter adjustments on the focus wheel it is that they are usually such a pain in the butt to set that once you get it right you don't fiddle with it any more! That isn't necessarily so for those on the ocular.

Bob

Unfortunately, that doesn't hold true if your focus accommodation is poor, particularly with higher power binoculars.

I need to set and reset the diopter for different distances on most 8x midsized roofs and most 10x bins (the 10x42 SE is the sole exception, not sure why?).

So with pull out knob focusers, I have to keep pulling them out and readjusting the diopter and pushing them back in. It is a pain. Don't like that set up and it's one of my concerns about purchasing an 8x32 EL after my winning numbers come in. :)

Actually, the 8x32 EL seemed to do fine at the setting I put it for close and far away, which surprised me, because with the big EL, it was almost as tedious to use as a 10x bin since I had to change the diopter setting for different distances - close, medium, and far away.

The 8x32 HG had a right diopter ring that pulled up and pushed down to lock, but I always kept it in the "up" position so I could quickly make adjustments. That set up worked better for me.

However, best diopter is the SLC's - push and turn with my index finger w/out taking my hands off the bin. I think replacing the SLC's easy set up with a pull out knob on the SLC-HD was a case of "change for change sake". Shoulda kept the original design. As my old boss used to say, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!".

I would have kept the SLCNeu body, improved the focuser so every sample turned smoothly in both directions, not just some, made the close focus a more birdworthy 7 ft. on the 8x30 and 7x42 models, and added ED glass and raised the price of the SLC's $200, which is more than the difference in cost btwn the non-ED and ED 820 Audubons, but they don't use Schott glass).

Not that the CA is bad at all in the 8x30 and probably isn't noticeably @ 7x but the ED glass gives better contrast and color saturation and is worth the extra $200. Schott ED that's probably $400.

IOW, do something like the Meopta HDs (or Euro HD). Just a tweak, not a major redesign to keep down costs and just change what needed changing rather than change for change sake.

I think that's how Alt Swarovski would have approached matters, looking at their history of design changes up to now, but now that Neu Swarovski is competing in the übscale birding market, not just hunting market, where they were already king of the forest, they apparently felt like they needed to make some radical changes to get the birding community's attention and to compete with Leica and Zeiss.

Plus, with an all new SV EL, the SLCNeu would have looked like yesterday's news. NOTE: If you haven't read the paper, it's still fresh news!

Cough! Cough! Cough! I think I just swallowed my chew. :)

Brock
 
Last edited:
Note:- Advance notice- this is a long review-


This is a review of the 3 binoculars that Swarovski makes in the 30 and 32 mm size- The 8x32 EL, the 8x30 SLC NEU and the new 8x30 CL. This is not the highest level of binocular that Swarovski makes. That category is reserved for the recently released, just this year- the Swarovision and the SLC HD. But these are the best that Swarovski offers in 30 and 32 mm at this time.

P1020003.jpg


P1020004.jpg


I am reviewing newly purchased binoculars. The 8x32 EL and the 8x30 SLC had a manufactured date of 2010 and the CL was manufactured in 2011. This a personal review that is based on my personal empirical observations using my eyes and my hands. No specialized instruments were used -other than a tripod/-viewing platform.

I tested the binoculars by viewing from the second floor and my back deck of my house. From this point, I have a view across the Mckenzie River Valley here in Oregon. I can look across the valley and see the hillside across at about 2.5 miles in distance. So I can see from 1 ft to 2.5 miles +. I have a wide variety of items to focus on to test a binocular for- FOV, image sharpness, clarity, image color saturation and rendition and also contrast. These include tree trunks, bare branches and foliage on evergreens and deciduous trees and grasslands and rock formations across the valley. There is an active logging operation going on across the valley. I can view the river down below with a beaver den along one bank. I can observe a # of different birds from small song birds to Osprey's, Turkey Vultures, Blue Herons, ducks, geese, etc.

Here is a couple pics:

P1020001.jpg


P1020002.jpg


All of this gives me a wide variety of color and contrast to test the image quality of a binocular. Along with this, I have a # of different specific focal points that I use in this setting to regularly focus on to use as reference points. I looked at the binoculars during all times of day and different lighting conditions including bright and low light and cloudy and sunny conditions.

Some Basic specs on the binoculars:

8x32 EL

Price: $1639 (on sale from reg. price of $1929
FOV 420 ft. at 1000 yds.
Weight 21.9 oz
Eye Relief 15mm
close focus 7 ft.

8x30 SLC NEU

Price: $849 (on sale from reg. price of $1149
FOV 408 ft. at 1000 yds.
Weight 20.8 oz
Eye Relief 15mm
close focus 13 ft.

8x30 CL

Price: $929
FOV 372 ft. at 1000 yds.
Weight 17.6 oz
Eye Relief 15mm
close focus 9.8 ft.

Observations and review:

I will first give a summary of where I ranked these in a few basic categories and then will give a discussion and summary.

Ergonomics (fit and overall handling)

Rank order- 1. EL 2. CL 3. SLC

Build "Sturdiness "robustness" if you will

Rank order- 1. SLC 2. I would say tie with the EL and CL

Focus (Knob and use)

Rank order- 1. EL 2. CL 3. SLC

Diopter (position, build ,use)

Rank order- 1. SLC 2. EL 3. CL

Eye relief

Rank Order- All Equal- all listed at 15mm and all was adequate for me and my glasses

FOV

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

Optic Image Quality:

A. Sharpness/ clarity

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

B. Resolution of detail (using my eyes)

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

C. Brightness (summary of all times day- so includes low light)

Rank order- All were pretty good in this test-
1. EL 2. a tie- SLC and CL

D. Image Colors- (True Rendition and Saturation)

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

E. Image Contrast

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

F. Image "Sweet Spot" size

Rank order- 1. EL 2. SLC 3. CL

G. Edge to edge sharpness/ performance

Rank order- 1. SLC 2. EL 3. CL

H. CA (Chromatic Aberration) ** Footnote- I do not have a problem with CA myself and I did look for this and found a little here- minor. The EL was a little worse at the edge compared to the other 2, but this very well might be due to its large FOV. In the cent none of them were a big problem. The SLC NEU seemed to control CA very well and the CL did a good job also.

Rank order- To me- All 3 binoculars overall tie as far as the center axis with the SLC and the CL having a slight edge over the EL in regards to edge CA.


My Final overall Ranking of these 30 and 32 MM Swarovski binoculars. This is in regards to my overall Optical and Mechanical summary review.

1. 8x32 EL

2. 8x30 SLC NEU

3. 8x30 CL

Discussion and summary opinion:

This discussion will mostly focus on the new 8x30 CL binocular; as the 8x30 SLC NEU and the 8x32 EL have been out for a while and have been used & reviewed quite a bit. They (the SLC and EL) are about at the end of their run as models. In fact the SLC NEU in any configuration has stopped production and IMO it is only a mater of time that the same can be said about the 8x32 EL- since all other EL's are no longer made and have been upgraded by the Swarovision. Hopefully in a matter of time there will be a 8x30 SLC HD and a 8x32 SV- but who knows.

So to get started with my opinion and explanation of my rankings above- first of all it was my opinion that the EL was quite a bit better than the other 2 and to me that makes sense. I have tested the SLC and the EL in this size before and that was my conclusion then and it is the same thing I found with these samples. I know that Swarovski has said in the past (and I have had their techs tell me the same thing) that the glass and the coatings are the same- only difference is the housing. But, that is just not what testing bears out. I have had a rep from one of the big optic sellers (who does and has had a # of Swarovski's) tell me that there was a definite difference in the resolution between the EL and the SLC. That is what I also found to be true over the last few days with these samples.

The 8x32 EL is considered by many to be one of the all time great 8x32's. I certainly would have to say that it is in that category. It may be debatable (in whose eyes and hands) as to which optic maker makes the best 8x32 (Swarovski; Zeiss; Leica: Nikon- etc.)- but the Swaro 8x32 EL is right in the thick of that discussion. It just has a wonderful ergonomic feel- great FOV and great sharpness and color rendition. It is certainly near the top of the heap. With my testing- I found it to be simply the superior one of these 3.

As far as specifics with my testing- I will start with ergos and fit- build quality. First of all- these are Swarvski's- so they are all well built. The EL has the best fit and feel. The SLC NEU the most sturdy feel and solid build. The CL is nice for its light weight and if you have small-med. hand size, you can wrap your hands around a good part of the barrel's. If your hands are large- then that might not be as much the case. Mine are (M)- but thick so I wear (L) gloves and I had no problem getting a good amount of the barrel wrapped with my hands on the CL.

Even though they are all well built there are a couple negatives. For some people they can not get use to the focus knob location of the 8x30 SLC NEU and is a real concern for some people. Some people say that the CL has put it back in the "right" place. Well I have owned a SLC in this size since 1994 and the focus knob location has never been a problem for me. In fact when wearing a hat while hunting, or in bad weather- I find the forward focus a good thing since the hat does not get in the way of the forward focus knob location. But for it to work well- the focus has to be smooth enough to be able to operate easily with the ring or little finger. I have never had a problem with 2 different 7x30 SLC's that I have owned - and it was never a problem right from the start. A friend has had a 8x30 SLC for years and it was not a problem either. But.... I do not know what the deal is with the last 3 8x30 SLC NEU's that I have examined? The focus knob on all of them have been stiff out of the box- enough so that forget about pinky finger focusing- but the ring finger is even not the easiest for fine delicate focusing. I can get it done- but it is much more of a chore than my "smooth as fine olive oil" focus on my 7x30 SLC. Maybe with time the knob on the 8x30 SLC NEU would loosen up; I know someone that sent back a brand new one to Swaro to smooth out that focus, and he said it came back better. Well enough on that.

Only problem that I have with the EL as far as build (besides that it might not be as sturdy as the SLC's IMO) is the "plastic" feeling focus knob. I much prefer the rubber type one on the SLC's. They are less slippery in wet weather. Oh, and another thing- I do not care for the diopter adjustment on the EL's being under that focus knob. I much prefer the diopter adj. on the SLC's.

CL and the build- it also has that plastic type of focus knob. And here is what I do not understand- it does not even have a locking diopter! The location on the (R) eyepiece is fine- but why could they not build a locking diopter. Swarovski has been doing that for eons and even the cheaper companies usually puts them on there bino's. It seems to stay in place well enough- but time could tell on that.

So now down to the optics of the new CL's, and "where the glass meets the sky" (similar to "where the rubber meets the road"- but tailored to optics) ;^)

In comparing all 3 of these- even though the 8x30 CL has a nice feel and are fairly bright- The first thing that you notice right away is the lacking FOV. It is especially apparent when you have all 3 of these and look at them side by side. It happens no matter what order that you look at the scale of the FOV. The EL's 420 ft. seem great and the SLC's 408 ft seems pretty good and you still notice it being less than the EL though. And then when you pick up the CL with its 372 ft FOV- you go- "Whoa- that really seems constricted and tunnel like". When you go back up the ladder so to speak from the CL to SLC and on to the EL- your eyes and mind (at least mine did) goes- "that seems much better" and on to the EL- "Oh, that is quite nice". The CL's 372 ft to me was much more of a constricting view- even when compared to my 378 ft for my 7x30 SLC. In fact I was shocked that there were only 6 ft different in the specs. The 7x30 SLC's 378 ft- does not seem in my apparent (to my eyes) FOV to be that much different than the 408 of the SLC- at least to me- but the CL's seem to be way less that the SLC NEU. With the CL's you seem to really notice the black outline of the barrel- and with the others it was not the case.

As far as edge to edge sharpness- all were not bad, but the SLC NEU had the least amount of fall off and tended to just nicely "feather" if you will to its final edge. The EL edge was maybe slightly more apparent- and this might have been because the sweet spot center is so big, I noticed a more prominent edge for it when compared to the gentle feathered edge of the SLC NEU.

The CL surprised me- in that especially since it has a smaller FOV than the SLC NEU- and I would have expected because of that, that its edge to edge would be better than the SLC. But.... it was not! The edge of the CL was more noticeable than the edge of the SLC NEU.

Also concerning edge qualities- my 1999 7x30 SLC has a better edge to edge sharpness than all 3 of these. I know it has just a 378 ft FOV-, but it has a very sharp edge to edge sharpness within that FOV. I read somewhere where the eye piece design of that 7x30 SLC- had a flatter field than the 8x30 SLC of its day.

Image qualities: The El was the best here. The SLC NEU was a step behind as far as resolution- even though the colors seemed quite a bit the same. A lot has been noted in the past by others about these 2- so I am going to get right on to how the optics in the CL were.

The CL was a definite step behind the EL- that was apparent right away. It was also a step behind the SLC. The colors were not as quite as sharp and especially the clearness and resolution of detail. The contrast was not as good either.

I have some real good items to look at to test these things. One is some bare branches at the top of some Cottonwood trees along the river. There a couple of them that stick up in groups of 3-5 and it is similar to looking at antlers. With the EL esp. and with also the SLC- it was easier to distinguish the separate ones. With the CL the detail was not as fine. Same thing when looking at other foliage and bark on trees and also looking at fine contrast difference between grassy hillsides and rocks with similar colors across the valley. With this test of detail, colors and contrast- it was easily apparent that the EL- it was simply the best, no question. It was also apparent that the SLC NEU was better at this that the CL's. The color and contrast of the rocks, trees, grass etc., etc, and sharpness was better with the SLC.

**** a thing I did notice when comparing all 3- the coatings on the outside of the EL and the SLC NEU looked identical. The CL's were not as dark, or were not the same green color. What this means, I do not know- but it was apparent. Also looking down on the inside of all 3 barrels, one thing stood out. The CL's had a much different baffling rings that surrounded the inside and were prominent when looking inside the barrels. This was not the case when looking down the SLC's or the EL's. What this means, again I am not sure.

I went into this testing with an open mind and eyes. I know that I had some theories before hand and posted some of those. And I had already been told by a dealer that in his opinion- the CL was a step optically behind the SLC NEU. But.... when I tested these- I put all that behind me and had open eyes. I spent probably 3-4 hours over the course of 3 days testing these and going back and forth. And some things were just always there. I would be extremely surprised if I had 10 people testing the CL and the SLC for pure optic qualities to have any one of them tell me that the CL was better than the SLC NEU. It was that apparent. And not to mention the CL even being anywhere close to the 8x32 EL; that is just not the case!

*** side note - The CL was to me not near as good with clarity and fine detail as my 1999 7x30 SLC. Even with its (CL) 8x- it did not do as good with sharpness and fine detail as the 7x30. The CL's had nice color and were bright, but they lagged behind with the sharpness, clarity and contrast. The difference was somewhat surprising to me. I went back and forth with them over all 3 days. Also as can be imagined- the 7x30's had a better overall depth of field, but... they also to me had a much more pleasing- relaxed view. Plus on top of all that- my 7x30 SLC has a much better edge to edge sharpness when compared to the CL.

Now IMO- my 7x30 SLC's are superb? When I sent them in last year to Swaro to have the hinge tightened up and to check on the possibility of getting the EZ clean lens- this is what Melissa from SONA wrote back to me:

"...When you called you asked for the new lenses with the EZ to clean coatings , unfortunately the glass is not available for 7x30 SLC’s, they have been discontinued. According to the technician, your lenses are in almost perfect condition....."


**** also on another side note- the 8x30 CL's were not near as good optically as my 8x32 Pentax DCF ED's. But that is a whole other discussion.
______

So where does this leave the CL?- To me, exactly where Swarovski had targeted and planned for them to be. A lightweight sub-midsized, lower tier (for them) bino compared to their HD's and The SV. These allow someone to get into the Swaro line at a lower tier/ price point than their other ever increasing higher priced top tier ones. These will compete with other mid level binos and will give someone the ability to have a Swaro bino without spending close to 2K.

Here is a link to the somewhat cheesy video about the CL's on the Swarovski website (BTW- the main emphasis of the video is on the CL's lightweight and small size):

http://swarovskioptik.com/en_us/products/binoculars_cl-companion

in the website's video- one of the quotes is:

" This is a great introductory binocular for the consumer who hasn't had the chance to kind of jump into the Swarovki family, so to speak"... "so for those people who have, you know, never stepped into the Swarovski family"....


They were not making a brand new mouse trap and have it have all the greatest features and then charge half of their upper tier. These CL's do not defy the laws of physics or economic sensibility. Would I have liked a 17 oz. non- ED/HD small FOV 30 mm glass to be as good as one with HD and one that costs twice as much? As Sarah Palin would say- "You Betcha"

They (Swarovski) will probably either upgrade the 8x30 SLC NEU or the 8x32 EL at some point in time to the next tier of HD's/ SV's and then they will certainly cost more.

Not to take anything from your excellent review but just to remind that it is based on opinion and Albino's which does one of the more objective reviews on the internet liked the Swarovski 10x42 SLC better than the 10x42 EL. Saying "What’s interesting, it fared better than the flag EL 10x42 Swarovski model, which is physically lighter, has shorter minimal focus distance but is also over 200 USD more expensive. It proves that the SLC series’ renown is fully deserved and a forced slimming down of binoculars doesn’t always do you good" In fact they really were not that impressed with the Swarovski 8x32 EL at it's price point and said it had noticeable distortion. It will be interesting to see what they think of the new CL if and when they test it.

http://www.allbinos.com/index.php?test=lornetki&test_l=189
http://www.allbinos.com/122-binoculars_review-Swarovski_SLC_New_10x42_WB.html
 
Last edited:
Oh Dennis, - I'm hurt; Has your love grown cold? Have you changed your mind about me?

First it was this in your first post on my review:

That is the best review I have ever read on Bird Forum! Nice. That is just the type of review I like.

And now this:

Not to take anything from your excellent review but just to remind that it is based on opinion and Albino's which does one of the more objective reviews on the internet liked the Swarovski 10x42 SLC better than the 10x42 EL......

No really, I understand, you have changed your love for me and want to move on, I am OK with that.

___________________________________

Now back to being somewhat serious. First of all a couple of comments on your most recent post here- which by the way when I read it last night it said:

.....excellent review but just to remind everyone that it is based on opinion

and now I have seen that you edited out the word "everyone" from your post. Well, you certainly did not have to remind me (nor should have to remind everyone else either) about my review being based on just my "opinion"-- as I clearly stated that in my beginning part of my review:

I am reviewing newly purchased binoculars. The 8x32 EL and the 8x30 SLC had a manufactured date of 2010 and the CL was manufactured in 2011. This a personal review that is based on my personal empirical observations using my eyes and my hands. No specialized instruments were used -other than a tripod/-viewing platform.

________

My review was just that- personal observations- nothing more, nothing less.

I did the review for a couple of reasons.

1- I wanted to see what these CL's were all about and

2- since I had made a few posts about what my preconceived opinions and theories were about the new CL on this forum and another (as far back as April of this year) ; I felt, and others pointed out to me here, I needed to have first hand experience with them to be able to have my opinions have any validity.

So, as I posted here before this review- I decided to put my $$ and my time where my mouth was, so to speak. So even though I personally had a lot of experience with the SLC NEU and the EL, I decided to get all of them and do a side by side personal review report of what those personal observations were.. So that is what I did.

Opinions and experiences with binoculars are very personal things, as they should be. And everyone really does to come to their own personal conclusions about what they like and what they do not like. Anyone could have done for themselves what I did- all they would have to do is get them all and do a personal side by side test.

My purpose in my review was not to change anyone's mind about these.

And it certainly was not about trying to change Dennis mind about a binocular- heaven knows, he is very capable of changing his own mind on binoculars all by himself ;)
 
Looked through a pair of the new cls. They feel cheap and have a limited field of view. If on a budget better options. If not save up and buy something better.
 
My review was just that- personal observations- nothing more, nothing less.

Sure, but it agrees perfectly with the observations of some of the more critical posters here. Your very thorough review confirms that the CL's are nice - but not really that close in optical performance to the more expensive Swarovskis. Not a totally unexpected result in my opinion, having compared the CL's to the Nikon 8x32 SE at some length.

Your review also confirms that some posters tend to get a bit carried away as soon as something new comes onto the market. That is also not totally unexpected.

Hermann
 
Oh Dennis, - I'm hurt; Has your love grown cold? Have you changed your mind about me?

First it was this in your first post on my review:

Quote inside Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post

That is the best review I have ever read on Bird Forum! Nice. That is just the type of review I like.
And now this:

Quote inside Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post

Not to take anything from your excellent review but just to remind that it is based on opinion and Albino's which does one of the more objective reviews on the internet liked the Swarovski 10x42 SLC better than the 10x42 EL......

No really, I understand, you have changed your love for me and want to move on, I am OK with that.
:-O

That's okay, Alfalfa, I still lub you....

Darla

http://sp1.fotolog.com/photo/17/34/57/paasajeraa/1208395664_f.jpg
 
Oh Dennis, - I'm hurt; Has your love grown cold? Have you changed your mind about me?

First it was this in your first post on my review:



And now this:



No really, I understand, you have changed your love for me and want to move on, I am OK with that.

___________________________________

Now back to being somewhat serious. First of all a couple of comments on your most recent post here- which by the way when I read it last night it said:



and now I have seen that you edited out the word "everyone" from your post. Well, you certainly did not have to remind me (nor should have to remind everyone else either) about my review being based on just my "opinion"-- as I clearly stated that in my beginning part of my review:



________

My review was just that- personal observations- nothing more, nothing less.

I did the review for a couple of reasons.

1- I wanted to see what these CL's were all about and

2- since I had made a few posts about what my preconceived opinions and theories were about the new CL on this forum and another (as far back as April of this year) ; I felt, and others pointed out to me here, I needed to have first hand experience with them to be able to have my opinions have any validity.

So, as I posted here before this review- I decided to put my $$ and my time where my mouth was, so to speak. So even though I personally had a lot of experience with the SLC NEU and the EL, I decided to get all of them and do a side by side personal review report of what those personal observations were.. So that is what I did.

Opinions and experiences with binoculars are very personal things, as they should be. And everyone really does to come to their own personal conclusions about what they like and what they do not like. Anyone could have done for themselves what I did- all they would have to do is get them all and do a personal side by side test.

My purpose in my review was not to change anyone's mind about these.

And it certainly was not about trying to change Dennis mind about a binocular- heaven knows, he is very capable of changing his own mind on binoculars all by himself ;)

I think some people on Bird Forum take a review as fact. You can see it in their responses. Well Henry or somebody else said the CL wasn't any good so now I don't have to try them. I think your review was well written but I disagree with your findings and I just want to remind people not to make a decision based on one or two persons reviews. I feel your review was tainted a little by the placebo effect. Because of the price differences in the binoculars you tested you had an expectation that the more expensive binoculars would be better hence they were. If it was a blind test and you didn't know which binocular was which I don't think the results would have been the same. I personally feel any review by one person is totally worthless. You should have a sampling of at least ten people trying and comparing each binocular then I would tend to believe it more.
 
Sure, but it agrees perfectly with the observations of some of the more critical posters here. Your very thorough review confirms that the CL's are nice - but not really that close in optical performance to the more expensive Swarovskis. Not a totally unexpected result in my opinion, having compared the CL's to the Nikon 8x32 SE at some length.

Your review also confirms that some posters tend to get a bit carried away as soon as something new comes onto the market. That is also not totally unexpected.

Hermann

Hermann -- Thank you for those wise observations instead of wisecracks like those from one of your fellow countrymen.

While it's true that binoculars are a personal instrument (wish I had a dollar for every time I wrote that on bin forums), I have found over the years that if you read a bunch of reviews and discard the most extreme opinions, you will usually find a consensus after enough people weigh in.

Of course, you might find that you are an exception to the rule and either really hate the bin or really love it, but I seriously doubt if my opinion of the CL would differ much from Stephen's even without a "hands on" test.

After trying the 8x30 SLCNeu and 8x32 EL, my opinions of the two bins matched his almost perfectly except for his preference for the 8x30's "pinky" focuser, though he agreed that it's a bit hard to achieve fine focus with, an issue for birding, but not for hunting.

Stephen's comparison of those two Swaros to the "CL" told me all I needed to know about the CL, and as you said above, his opinions agreed with the observations with the more "critical" posters on here (as in "critique" rather than scornful).

MOOREORLESS - I finally understand why hunters prefer the 8x30 SLC's set up - they use heavy gloves! I was going to post a link to Vortex binoculars since yesterday the graphic on their homepage showed a hunter with bulky gloves "glassing" with a Razor HD. You could see in the photo that his hat was pushed up in order to get his gloves on the EP side focuser, and the sides of the brim of his hat weren't providing adequate glare protection because they were too high. Vortex changed the graphics today so I can't show that photo. I guess they must rotate pix daily to keep it interesting.

All my baseball caps have arched brims that allow me enough room to get my hands underneath to turn EP side focusers. Even though my hands are long, they are thin. And when I do wear gloves, I wear tight fitting leather gloves that don't add much bulk.

STEPHEN- Thanks for that thorough and enjoyable comparative review. I wonder if Mark hadn't challenged you on your "armchair" comments, if you would still have gone ahead and bought them? I guess as long can return them, no problem. You saved me about a three-hour trip to my nearest Swarovski dealer. I will might visit the store anyway so I can compare the 8x32 EL to the 8x32 EDG I, if they still have any.

Brock
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top