Testing the Ultravids HD, Zeiss FL & Swaro ELs............. (1 Viewer)

My wife and I went to a demo day at a local reserve and tried out a few models over the weekend. (Sadly the weather was very sunny and clear, so no real challenge for any of the bins)

The bins I wanted to try were:

Ultravids 8x32
Swaro EL 8x32
Zeiss FL 8x32

I tried all of these and the 10x32 models.

A couple of questions please.

Are my eyes poor? I found no real difference between the Ultravids and the ELs where as my wife said the Ultravids were far superior. (The Ultravids fitted in my hands better)

Secondly I couldn't really tell much difference between the 10x32 and 8x32 so would the x10 be a better option for general birding and wildlife watching? (I have a Swaro HD scope)

When I tried the x42 in each model I hardly noticed a difference and the weight/size trade off wasn't worth it for me.

Before the day I had thought the Swaro and Zeiss would be for me but the Zeiss didn't suit me at all.

JamieG said:

Secondly I couldn't really tell much difference between the 10x32 and 8x32 so would the x10 be a better option for general birding and wildlife watching? (I have a Swaro HD scope)
When I tried the x42 in each model I hardly noticed a difference and the weight/size trade off wasn't worth it for me.

Click to expand...

I have steady hands and I like the extra little bit of zoom, so I would always tend to reach for a 10x first. If you don't have steady hands or - as with many bird buffs - you want the extra field of view then rather go for a smaller magnification.

as for objective lens size, well, the 42mm will likely let through more light but they are also heavier. When I got my Swaros, I was trying to read bird rings in forests and so the 42s made sense. For my needs now, I would rather a pair of lighter 32s to sling over my shoulder and take on longer hikes. At least for me, the difference in light transmission has only really been important under rather dark conditions (twilight, dark forests...)

Dale
http://alpinebirds.blogspot.com

JamieG said:

Secondly I couldn't really tell much difference between the 10x32 and 8x32 so would the x10 be a better option for general birding and wildlife watching? (I have a Swaro HD scope)

When I tried the x42 in each model I hardly noticed a difference and the weight/size trade off wasn't worth it for me.

Click to expand...

Dale answered with good points. I would add that if you regularly take the scope then there is less demand on the binos having more mag. I birded for 12 years with 10s and frankly I don't know why as the advantages of (especially) 8x32s far outweigh the two points of mag, for me.

As Dale also mentions, the advantages of a 42 over a 32 won't be noticeable until dusk or in the woods, where they DO make a difference.

JamieG said:

Before the day I had thought the Swaro and Zeiss would be for me but the Zeiss didn't suit me at all.

Click to expand...

Last week I had my first opportunity to audition the "Big Three". For some reason, I didn't even look at the Ultravid HD even though it was right there, which I regret.
I was extremely underwhelmed by everything that said Zeiss on it. I compared a small group of Swarovskis and Zeiss side by side, along with the Pentax DCF SP 8x32 I'd brought along. Didn't have much choice of viewing options, but did have naturally and artificially lit indoor scenes, some bright, some very dim, stuffed animals and the like from contact distance to maybe 60yds.(I was in the Bass Pro Shop Outdoor World in Prattville, AL), along with a brightly sunlit hillside and construction site outside with lots of dull colors and glare. That last actually made a great test for contrast.
Also compared how well they worked from a set focus point, bringing them up to my eyes from waist high, and refocusing at a different distance.
I preferred my Pentax to the Zeiss Victory FL 8x42, and thought it was much better than the Conquest 8x30, or the Swarovski SLC 8x30.
The 42mm Swarovskis were the only models that I preferred to my 8x32s, and they were simply incredible. I got the "Wow" feeling every time I put them up to my eyes. Handling and focusing required no thought or effort. Incredibly well-made. It was a pleasure just to hold them. They were obviously and significantly better than anything I've looked through before.
I wish I could afford the 10x42 EL which was my favorite of all of them. The 10x42 SLC was probably just as good except that the eyecups didn't extend far enough, and there were all kinds of weird reflections outside the FOV. Really strange, and not what I expected from $1500 binos. I would have liked to compare 7x42s, but all they had were 8 and 10x models.
I left with a sense of deep satisfaction in my SPs, a great appreciation for Swarovski's construction quality(everything else feels like a cheap toy, in comparison), and a serious lust for those ELs. Maybe next year...

OwenM said:

.....I preferred my Pentax to the Zeiss Victory FL 8x42, and thought it was much better than the Conquest 8x30, or the Swarovski SLC 8x30.
The 42mm Swarovskis were the only models that I preferred to my 8x32s, and they were simply incredible. I got the "Wow" feeling every time I put them up to my eyes. Handling and focusing required no thought or effort. Incredibly well-made. It was a pleasure just to hold them. .....
I left with a sense of deep satisfaction in my SPs, a great appreciation for Swarovski's construction quality(everything else feels like a cheap toy, in comparison), and a serious lust for those ELs. Maybe next year...

Click to expand...

I can't get over the impression that you judged the models more for their "feel" and looks. Though, if that has a particularly high value for you, why did you "overlook" the fine Ultravids? Personally, I prefer the bright views from my Zeiss FL, but I agree that it can be a bit too bright when there is a lot of glare. As for the fact that you are putting your Pentax above them all, except for the EL, just shows how much we get used to the model we have. All the other ones, unless the differences are great, have a hard stand under these conditions.

Don't know where your impression came from, since I couldn't care one bit less what they look like. I consider them a tool for accomplishing a purpose, not a fashion statement.
I judged them strictly on the images they presented, as well as I could in the environment that I described. I wanted nothing more than to see how these high-end binos compared to my mid-range ones. I wanted to like them, wanted to be impressed with them, wanted to see the difference spending all that extra money made.
Regardless of the AFOV specs, the FLs I tried had a smaller overall image size than my SPs, gave a smaller object size at the same magnification, and reminded me exactly of looking through a Vortex Razor at half the price. I know they'd be brighter in low light, assume they'd handle glare and reflection in direct sunlight better, and don't doubt that they'd control CA a lot better than what I have, but the conditions I viewed them under simply did not allow consideration of those aspects. I can only base my opinions what I did see.

The SLC and Conquest 8x30s just did not perform up to or above my Pentax 8x32s in any respect that I could see, be it brightness, FOV, AFOV, etc. I liked their weight and compact size, and the way they both handled, but was not enthralled by either. The Zeiss 8x30 was like looking through a toilet roll compared to all the others.

When I say I thought my binoculars were "better" than something else I looked through, that's exactly what I meant. I felt that I could see whatever I was looking at better with them.
Besides...all those Zeiss binos were black, and didn't match my shoes.

I would have liked to have tried the Leicas, if for no other reason than to hold a binocular with a $2200 price tag in my hand(!). I wish I'd spent a little more time, but had somewhere to be. They were down in the corner, not as prominently displayed as the Swaros and Zeiss. Didn't notice them at first, and didn't bother to have the salesperson get them out when I did.

I immediately noticed the difference between my binoculars and the 42mm Swarovskis. It was obvious the instant I put them up to my eyes. They were the only bins that gave me this experience, and that is what I was there for. I paid a little over $300 for my Pentax 8x32s, and they normally sell for $500. If I'm going to pay an extra $1000-1700 to own a premium binocular, you can believe that I want to see a difference, and I shouldn't have to look for it. Unlike the others, the 42mm Swarovskis impressed me as being significantly better products than what I currently own, or have any experience with. I can now see myself some day laying down the cash necessary to own such a binocular having answered the question that I came there with, which was "are they really better, and am I willing to pay for the difference if they are?" Maybe I am.
Of course I would look at the Ultravids first, in case I like them more.
Right now I'm shopping for an engagement ring. Now that I'm judging by looks, but not to the exclusion of materials, or cut and quality of the diamond.
Dang, I could get several ELs for what a silly ring is going to cost(for my own safety, this sentence may disappear in the near future!).

JamieG said:

My wife and I went to a demo day at a local reserve and tried out a few models over the weekend. (Sadly the weather was very sunny and clear, so no real challenge for any of the bins)

The bins I wanted to try were:

Ultravids 8x32
Swaro EL 8x32
Zeiss FL 8x32

I tried all of these and the 10x32 models.

A couple of questions please.

Are my eyes poor? I found no real difference between the Ultravids and the ELs where as my wife said the Ultravids were far superior. (The Ultravids fitted in my hands better)

Secondly I couldn't really tell much difference between the 10x32 and 8x32 so would the x10 be a better option for general birding and wildlife watching? (I have a Swaro HD scope)

When I tried the x42 in each model I hardly noticed a difference and the weight/size trade off wasn't worth it for me.

Before the day I had thought the Swaro and Zeiss would be for me but the Zeiss didn't suit me at all.

Click to expand...

Jamie,

I got a kick from your post. The three 8x32 bins you tried are among the finest currently available, so it's not too surprising that differences were not readily apparent. The appreciation of fine optics is, after all, an acquired taste.

In practical terms, the 8x32 configuration has a lot going for it: — good exit pupil size, wide field of view, low weight, and nice handling. If you and your wife differ about fit, feel, and finish, — that's what aesthetics is all about.

Having evaluated all three models, my impression is that you would still not see much difference in inclement weather.

I use an 8x32 LX L, but that's just my preference. Customer service for the Swaro is probably the best of the three you evaluated.

Happy birding,
Elk

OwenM said:

Don't know where your impression came from, since I couldn't care one bit less what they look like. I consider them a tool for accomplishing a purpose, not a fashion statement

.................
Right now I'm shopping for an engagement ring. Now that I'm judging by looks, but not to the exclusion of materials, or cut and quality of the diamond.
Dang, I could get several ELs for what a silly ring is going to cost(..).

Click to expand...

It's the parts I quoted in my previous post that gave me that impression.

Congratulations to your forthcoming engagement! Just remember it's not the cost of the ring that counts. I could have got several rings for the price of an EL (just comparing price levels, of course, as there were no ELs then), and I have been extremely happily married to that same woman for over 40 years now. So why not talk things over with your partner and see whether she would not be happy with a somewhat cheaper ring plus an EL. She might let you use it every once in a while.

Swissboy said:

So why not talk things over with your partner and see whether she would not be happy with a somewhat cheaper ring plus an EL. She might let you use it every once in a while.

Click to expand...

Haha, now you're trying to get me killed!
Thanks, though:t: