• 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.

Once you have Alpha you can never Backa? (1 Viewer)

...And I don't think SV owners are being "defensive." ...Mark

Mark,

What seems to surface, at least to me, among SV owners is that there seems to be some denial going on out there that there is a problem, however large or small it may be, with rolling ball. It seems beyond the ken of some to think their baby isn't perfect. For me, when I mention this it is not to denegrate the SV, just to point it out. If you are going to fork over that kind of money and get a binocular and rolling ball gets to you, dissapointment is the end result. I will easily say the SLC-HD is the best binocular I have ever looked through, mostly because the RB dosen't get to me. I'd say the same thing about the SV, except for the fact RB does get me with it.

At any rate, whatever you have that performs at the level you need it to perform at, is something you need to just use it and enjoy it. It really does not matter what it is or what it cost. It is the end result with the user that counts. I am glad you have found your binocular. I guess we'll see if Dennis has really found his or not.
 
Does any other company have the customer service they have? I told them I didn't like the strap that came with the Swarovision. You know what they did? They sent me a brand new older style strap and their binocular harness FREE! I didn't even have to pay the shipping. They sent me a harness because they thought I would like it! Now some of you have had experiences like that with Swarovski. How much is that kind of customer service worth? Would Zeiss or Nikon do that? Some of you come forward and relate the customer service experience you have had...


Charles of Zen Ray gave me a digiscoping adapter after I returned my ED2 twice due to focus wheel issues. I didn't ask for anything, he just offered it. Also, he hand picked a replacement that he thought I would like.
 
With all do respect I think that anybody reading any thread on Birdforum about Swarovision or Nikon LX will find lots of information about and know that some people can have problem with a rolling ball effect/globe effect etc. I counted 70 times in 2 or 3 Swarovision threads that rolling ball was mentioned. It is a known problem. I don't think Mark [Kammerdiner] would still be using his if bothered by it. The rolling ball issue is "talked" to death. If you see it then don't buy a Swarovision, to me it seems that some people are picking on the ones that do have these binoculars. Let them be happy with what they bought. Some people have ten or more binoculars at a cost of maybe $3000 , some have high end Kowa scopes, I am glad for them. Do you think I would love to have a Swarovision, I sure would.
 
Let them be happy with what they bought.

True. And hopefully all of us on here have nothing more serious to fret about than whether our binoculars are best for us or not. Because it really doesn't matter a whole hill of beans in this crazy world....(and we'll always have Paris;))
 
Mark,

What seems to surface, at least to me, among SV owners is that there seems to be some denial going on out there that there is a problem, however large or small it may be, with rolling ball. It seems beyond the ken of some to think their baby isn't perfect.
QUOTE]

Well, if RB isn't an issue for me then I guess I will deny it. It isn't an issue for me--at all. What else can I say? Am I supposed to pretend I see it? I'll say this though: I much prefer the SV to something like the Zen, which has a friggin boatload of pincushion. Put the two side by side and suddenly you realize how unnatural pincushion can be.

Ah well, this issue will never be resolved. Try 'em yourself.
 
Ease up Mark. No you are not supposed to pretend you you see it. Not any more than I supposed to pretend I don't see it. Moreorless has it right, the issue as a existing phenoenma is all over the place. If you prefer less pincushion, then that is all well and good. If you do see RB, you might realize how unnatural a true flat field can seem and some pincushion might not seem such a bad thing. I agree the ZEN ED2 has more pincushion than it needs too.

You are right, the issue won't be resolved as some will always see RB and some never will, simple as that. And by the way, I have tried them, several times, mostly to satisfy my own curiosity to see if I could acclimate to the RB in the SV.

Again, I am really glad you have found a binocular you can truly appreciate.
 
James I haven't tried to count the posts of FL " fuzzy edges" "astigmatism" on threads yet.;) BTW I really liked both the 8x32 & 8x42 FL binoculars and would be happy with either one, well unless I looked through the Swarovision.;) or the Swarovski HD etc. etc.
 
I wear glasses so the cups are all the way in. My previous glasses must have fit a bit closer because I turned the cups out 2mm or so. They held that intermediate position quite well.

What the SV's do better than anything I've ever used is disappear. The view is just there, easy and sharp and forgiving. I'm looking at birds after all, so the less I notice the bins the better.

And I don't think SV owners are being "defensive." When you finally find a binocular that does what this does you just relax and go birding. If anything, the more I use them the less interested I am in defending them. I suspect that's what happens to most users. Let the folks who don't have them argue about rolling ball and price. I'm going birding.

Mark

Exactly everything works so good on them they just become transparent. You don't have to mess around with them. Like you say just look at the bird and forget about the binoculars. They give you a great view and as I said at the start of this thread it is hard to go backa.
 
James I haven't tried to count the posts of FL " fuzzy edges" "astigmatism" on threads yet.;) BTW I really liked both the 8x32 & 8x42 FL binoculars and would be happy with either one, well unless I looked through the Swarovision.;) or the Swarovski HD etc. etc.

Funny I just don't see the RB your talking about or it just doesn't bother me if I do. To my eyes the SV's are the best binoculars I have seen. The Zeiss 8x32 FL's are second best for me then follows the Nikon SE and EII. The SV is better than the FL with the sharp edges and also other areas like contrast, 3D image and transparency of the image it is superior. I think it is the best binocular on the market right now.
 
I was up in Montana the other day at Bob Ward's and had a chance to look at the vaunted SV's. The short of it is, I was not impressed. Compared to the 8x42 Zeiss FL's I thought the FL's were significantly better. I saw the rippling effect of the SV's every time I panned them and thought the edges on the FL's were sharper, the color rendition more natural, and ergonomics better.
 
I was up in Montana the other day at Bob Ward's and had a chance to look at the vaunted SV's. The short of it is, I was not impressed. Compared to the 8x42 Zeiss FL's I thought the FL's were significantly better. I saw the rippling effect of the SV's every time I panned them and thought the edges on the FL's were sharper, the color rendition more natural, and ergonomics better.

"Thought the edges on the FL's were sharper" You sure it was the Swarovision? That's really strange that you would find edges sharper on the FL but I guess everybodies eyes are different. Color rendition and ergonomics maybe because that's a personal thing. Sharper edges on the FL than the SV. I don't think so.
 
They were the SV's and the edges were definitely sharper on the Zeiss. So I think so.

Sorry, but in spite of your love this week for the SV's, they aren't all that IMO. And for what they retail for they should be. I tried them and can easily not go back to them.
 
They were the SV's and the edges were definitely sharper on the Zeiss. So I think so.

Sorry, but in spite of your love this week for the SV's, they aren't all that IMO. And for what they retail for they should be. I tried them and can easily not go back to them.

The SV's are not everybodies cup of tea. Alot of the alpha's are excellent binoculars and many people may prefer the Zeiss FL or some other brand. The Zeiss 8x32 FL is my second favorite.
 
I was up in Montana the other day at Bob Ward's and had a chance to look at the vaunted SV's. The short of it is, I was not impressed. Compared to the 8x42 Zeiss FL's I thought the FL's were significantly better. I saw the rippling effect of the SV's every time I panned them and thought the edges on the FL's were sharper, the color rendition more natural, and ergonomics better.

C:
I am also wondering about the binoculars you looked through, and your take.
The Zeiss is well known to have a nice center view, but falls off quite a bit on the
edges.
The Swarovision is now well known to have a great view to the very edge, and
I am wondering if you have just posted for a joke, or just to agitate.

I am thinking agitate. 8-P
 
No agitation, jerry, just how I saw it. Really no comparison, the Zeiss were significantly better. Also looked at the EDG's and they were very good but I still preferred the Zeiss. I liked the EDG's over the SV's.
 
Dennis:

I am not sure about your post, but I have had both the Zeiss 8x42 FL and the Swaro. SV.

The Zeiss is not even close to the Swarovski EL. The Zeiss falls flat with poor
edges, and plastic armor. And we have not even talked about the Nikon EDG.

Jerry

I just compared the Zeiss 10x42 FL to the Swarovision 10x50 at Cabella's in Grand Junction Colorado and I couldn't believe how much better tha big Swarovision was. It made the Zeiss look poor and the Zeiss is a good binocular! I still prefer the Swarovision 8.5x42 for it's bigger fov though but for more magnification the Swarovski is the way to go. There was NO question it was much better.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 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