The Education of a New Alpha Shopper (1 Viewer)

Man you guys have been helpful and gracious to me in understanding what I need to know, particularly with the African safaris I have been attending.

Went to Gander Mountain today in Tuscaloosa and Bass Pro in Bessemer to buy either the 8x or 10x42 Zeiss HT. Pretty exciting. In T Town I was able to have multiple Alphas out at once and go outside, their HT's, their pair of top end 10x42 Swarovision's, and my own Zeiss 7x50 Marine's.

First, the Swaro's were excellent to view but did not have the solid smooth focus movement of the Zeiss HT's. Focus was even gritty at one small spot point of the rotation on one pair of Swaro's. Easy to see why Zeiss Victory won an 8x42 endurance test over at allbinos.com involving 23 pair. I may prefer, but just barely, the Swaro's resolution but the Zeiss HT's brightness.

But I bought neither one as I had fully expected the superiority of these new Zeiss HT binoculars to be more significant over my trusty 7x50 Zeiss Marines. In other words, I thought I'd see a bigger difference between my current Zeiss 7x50 Marine's and the new HT's. I had previously experienced a dramatic difference when I replaced my Steiner 7x50's with the Zeiss 7x50 Marine's. Not this time. While the HT's were awesome, I found the difference of the new HT's over my big Zeiss Marines in some ways not that significant (focusing aside for the moment). Maybe I am spoiled by the 50mm. Maybe I needed to be out at dusk. Maybe I dont't know what to look for and am too new to high end binoculars to see what is obvious to a trained eye. But no sale today until perhaps the future roll out of a 8 or 10x56 HT.

To paraphrase John Draconian on this web site, the current Zeiss 7x50 Marine is really an alpha binocular in its own class , viz., an individual focus, rubber covered, water proof, porro designed for use with or without eye glasses. It has a very good FOV for a 7x50,(390 feet/1,000 yards) and probably is as rugged as any binocular made today. On a quality basis it is comparable to any alpha roof. Optically, it is really state of the art, with individual focus it is usually set at infinity. And I like the the heft and view.

I guess you're right John, even though I looked just silly last month birding in Swaziland and focusing down just one side of the big Zeiss Marine's. Ultimately, I do think some future 56mm HT's will be what I'm looking for.

Endurance test: http://www.allbinos.com/182-news-Endurance_test_of_8x42_binoculars_-_results.html

dwever said:

Man you guys have been helpful and gracious to me in understanding what I need to know, particularly with the African safaris I have been attending.

Went to Gander Mountain today in Tuscaloosa and Bass Pro in Bessemer to buy either the 8x or 10x42 Zeiss HT. Pretty exciting. In T Town I was able to have multiple Alphas out at once and go outside, their HT's, their pair of top end 10x42 Swarovision's, and my own Zeiss 7x50 Marine's.

First, the Swaro's were excellent to view but did not have the solid smooth focus movement of the Zeiss HT's. Focus was even gritty at one small spot point of the rotation on one pair of Swaro's. Easy to see why Zeiss Victory won an 8x42 endurance test over at allbinos.com involving 23 pair. I may prefer, but just barely, the Swaro's resolution but the Zeiss HT's brightness.

But I bought neither one as I had fully expected the superiority of these new Zeiss HT binoculars to be more significant over my trusty 7x50 Zeiss Marines. In other words, I thought I'd see a bigger difference between my current Zeiss 7x50 Marine's and the new HT's. I had previously experienced a dramatic difference when I replaced my Steiner 7x50's with the Zeiss 7x50 Marine's. Not this time. While the HT's were awesome, I found the difference of the new HT's over my big Zeiss Marines in some ways not that significant (focusing aside for the moment). Maybe I am spoiled by the 50mm. Maybe I needed to be out at dusk. Maybe I dont't know what to look for and am too new to high end binoculars to see what is obvious to a trained eye. But no sale today until perhaps the future roll out of a 8 or 10x56 HT.

To paraphrase John Draconian on this web site, the current Zeiss 7x50 Marine is really an alpha binocular in its own class , viz., an individual focus, rubber covered, water proof, porro designed for use with or without eye glasses. It has a very good FOV for a 7x50,(390 feet/1,000 yards) and probably is as rugged as any binocular made today. On a quality basis it is comparable to any alpha roof. Optically, it is really state of the art, with individual focus it is usually set at infinity. And I like the the heft and view.

I guess you're right John, even though I looked just silly last month birding in Swaziland and focusing down just one side of the big Zeiss Marine's. Ultimately, I do think some future 56mm HT's will be what I'm looking for.

Click to expand...

Sweet Home Alabama! Welcome to the forums. You'll find no shortage of opinions here on various binoculars from experts, those who think they're experts, and even from us plebeians who have learned a thing or two along the way.

Too bad you didn't get a chance to compare your 7x50 B/GA with a 7x42 FL. I'm sure the 8.6* FOV in the FL would have been impressive, and the FL series had the highest light transmission among the alphas before the HTs barely edged them out.

If you thought the Swarovski SV EL was excellent and had the best resolution, but didn't like it because of the gritty focuser, you should ask Pileatus which bird festivals he attends, because all the focusers on the Swaro samples at those festivals always turn smoothly. Unfortunately, this doesn't happen at any other place on earth.

Being a porro fan with large hands, I've always been intrigued by the Zeiss 7x50 B/GA, but never seriously considered buying one because the price is up there in the Zeissosphere with Zeiss roofs except the new Terra ED, and because of the IF EPs. Also, while 7.4* in and of itself is a decent FOV, when paired with 7x, it produces a rather moderate 52* apparent field of view, which can feel a bit cramped to me, particularly compared to the Celestron 7x50 Nova, which has a whopping 70* AFOV (10* TFOV) and my Nikon 7x35 WF's 65* AFOV (9.3* TFOV).

As one BF member wrote before his religious conversion to roofs, "It's hard to beat a good porro." Your comparison shows the wisdom in that adage.

Soon the new SLC (not to be confused with the SLCneu) series will be out. They feature HD (ED) glass and are world famous for their ruggedness, which is why they are the darlings of hunters, and they have the advantage of center focus.

The series will have an 8x56 model (unfortunately, only available by special order, so you won't be able to try before you buy) and a 10x56 model, which will be available in the U.S.

If there's any roof that can give your Zeiss a run for the money (the SLCs cost less), it might be the 8x and the 10x56 new SLCs. You could use them for safaris or for birding or for hunting. As to whether or not the focusers will turn smoothly, try as many samples as you can get your hands on, you're bound to find one eventually with a smooth focuser. Or go to Pileatus' bird festivals where the company only puts out perfect samples.

You could grow too old for safaris waiting for an 8x or 10x56 HT.

Thanks for your post, I don't often read top porro vs. alpha comparisons except with the Nikon SE series.

Brock

Brock,

For the last time and please pay attention...
Swarovski builds the focus mechanism without fat (grease, lube, etc.). This is to protect the optics from offgassing and to ensure it functions in very cold weather. Leica has also done this for many generations.

New Swarovski bins often require a break-in period. That means someone has to repeatedly use the binocular. It won't be done by a casual observer in a store or in the first few days of ownership. I found about twenty hours of actual use sufficed...on a couple of models.

I understand exactly what the "complaint" is and I think it's one more example of focusing on the absurd. If people need an excuse not to purchase a Swarovski binocular I guess this topic will suffice. As it is, Swarovski sells the pants off the competition, a facts that speaks for itself.

Will all the unhappy Swarovski owners please stand up!
Thank you and goodnight.

Pileatus said:

Brock,

For the last time and please pay attention...
Swarovski builds the focus mechanism without fat (grease, lube, etc.). This is to protect the optics from offgassing and to ensure it functions in very cold weather. Leica has also done this for many generations.

New Swarovski bins often require a break-in period. That means someone has to repeatedly use the binocular. It won't be done by a casual observer in a store or in the first few days of ownership. I found about twenty hours of actual use sufficed...on a couple of models.

I understand exactly what the "complaint" is and I think it's one more example of focusing on the absurd. If people need an excuse not to purchase a Swarovski binocular I guess this topic will suffice. As it is, Swarovski sells the pants off the competition, a facts that speaks for itself.

Will all the unhappy Swarovski owners please stand up!
Thank you and goodnight.

Click to expand...

Pileatus:

Re Swarovski's sales: Facts do speak for themselves, but you have to lay them out first.

You never did get back to me when I asked you if you had figures to show that Swarovski leads all the Alphas in sales as you stated in the thread on the new 15 x 56 SLC this past Thursday.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2812269&postcount=70

On the matter of the feeling of the SLCs focus wheel: FWIW I notice the difference in the back and forth movement in my 7x42 SLC but it doesn't bother me at all. I'm concentrating on other things when I am using it.

Bob

ceasar said:

Pileatus:

Re Swarovski's sales: Facts do speak for themselves, but you have to lay them out first.

You never did get back to me when I asked you if you had figures to show that Swarovski leads all the Alphas in sales as you stated in the thread on the new 15 x 56 SLC this past Thursday.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2812269&postcount=70

On the matter of the feeling of the SLCs focus wheel: FWIW I notice the difference in the back and forth movement in my 7x42 SLC but it doesn't bother me at all. I'm concentrating on other things when I am using it.

Bob

Click to expand...

It's proprietary research I'm not at liberty to share. They hold the high-end birding market, but I'm sure you already knew that.

ceasar said:

Pileatus:

Re Swarovski's sales: Facts do speak for themselves, but you have to lay them out first.

You never did get back to me when I asked you if you had figures to show that Swarovski leads all the Alphas in sales as you stated in the thread on the new 15 x 56 SLC this past Thursday.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2812269&postcount=70

On the matter of the feeling of the SLCs focus wheel: FWIW I notice the difference in the back and forth movement in my 7x42 SLC but it doesn't bother me at all. I'm concentrating on other things when I am using it.

Bob

Click to expand...

It's proprietary research I'm not at liberty to share. They hold the high-end birding market, but I'm sure you already knew that.

See, you're another happy Swaro owner. How many alphas do you have now?

Pileatus said:

It's proprietary research I'm not at liberty to share. They hold the high-end birding market, but I'm sure you already knew that.

Click to expand...

Com on your sounding like Dennis now! One is enough!!! Bryce...

Well, Pileatus' arrogance obviously shines throughout these threads, but I do have to agree with him on the Swaro's. In my very unscientific research of over 12 years of guiding (I hate to say it amongst the PC crowd around here) app 120 big game hunters, approximately 75% of them show up in camp with Swaro binoculars, and the other 25% is divided amongst Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, etc. I see fewer and fewer Leica's in camp every year. Swaro's marketing and customer service kick azz, and they have a damnn fine product. Leica is going backwards.

jgraider said:

Well, Pileatus' arrogance obviously shines throughout these threads, but I do have to agree with him on the Swaro's. In my very unscientific research of over 12 years of guiding (I hate to say it amongst the PC crowd around here) app 120 big game hunters, approximately 75% of them show up in camp with Swaro binoculars, and the other 25% is divided amongst Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, etc. I see fewer and fewer Leica's in camp every year. Swaro's marketing and customer service kick azz, and they have a damnn fine product. Leica is going backwards.

Click to expand...

It's the same for birders. Go to a place like Point Pelee in May, when there may be hundreds of birders in the park, and it's a total Swaro-fest.

Now, most of the users may have no idea what makes their bin of choice so good, but they know they are using what the are supposed to have - because they see so many others with them.

Pileatus said:

Brock,

For the last time and please pay attention...
Swarovski builds the focus mechanism without fat (grease, lube, etc.). This is to protect the optics from offgassing and to ensure it functions in very cold weather. Leica has also done this for many generations.

New Swarovski bins often require a break-in period. That means someone has to repeatedly use the binocular. It won't be done by a casual observer in a store or in the first few days of ownership. I found about twenty hours of actual use sufficed...on a couple of models.

I understand exactly what the "complaint" is and I think it's one more example of focusing on the absurd. If people need an excuse not to purchase a Swarovski binocular I guess this topic will suffice. As it is, Swarovski sells the pants off the competition, a facts that speaks for itself.

Will all the unhappy Swarovski owners please stand up!
Thank you and goodnight.

Click to expand...

Pileatus, if we can be entirely serious for one minute here .....

If the "New Swarovski bins often require a break-in period" as you claim, in order for the focuser "grittiness" to "smooth" out .... then - How much does this loosen tolerances, and lessen precision of the mechanism? What becomes of all the unwanted freed residue of this dry-lapping, and honing process?

Just where exactly does this speckly detritus go?

It cannot remain constrained in any "fat (grease, lube, etc.)", as there is none ....

Does it just harmlessly evaporate into the air via osmosis?

Or do these superfluous micro-groundings undesirably permeate into every nook and cranny to insidiously leak out and degrade coatings and view over time? Similar to a slow boiled frog - would pundits even notice their now 2nd-rate equipment?


Just exactly how many, and how much "casual observer" twiddling "in a store" is required to cumulatively amount to "about twenty hours of actual use" ??


Also, how does the "break-in period" alleviate the uneven tension of different focusing directions? Does the spring weaken to the point where it has no resultant effect?

Or is it merely the "will" of the user that is broken? The involuntary relenquishing of the expectation of perfection befitting a $2K+ instrument? The inevitable blinding caused by the need to support the ego's decision to foist such large sunk costs upon one's personage - and the strong denial of reality that such psychological attachment brings?


We await the true facts .....



Chosun :gh:

I don't have a dog in this fight guys. Just trying to find the best product for regular Africa safaris and an emerging interest in birding. I would love to try a Swarovision's 10x50, but they like Zeiss Victory 10x56 are never in stores around here. Do I need to go to B&H next time I'm changing planes in NYC? Or the Midwest birding symposium in Ohio?

I own a Zeiss Marine because it was a demo marked down to $1,180 from $1,799 at midwayusa.com as I had mistakenly left my Steiners on a range near Eglin AFB after precision rifle school. Not exactly a research based purchase. The Zeiss showed me some of what a binocular could be, i was thrilled, and I've been trying to learn more ever since towards eventually buying the best glass out there regardless of manufacturer.

Using these Zeiss In Swaziland five weeks ago I laid in the grass on a mountain range and in the total darkness of no ambient light, I saw stars clustered in globs in that darkness, unlike anything I've ever imagined. Could see the milk of the galaxy. Saw the Southern Cross every night in the July/Aug. Swazi Winter. Saw a Kudu in the moonlight one night. Then of course there were the guided safari trips in South Arica that left at 4:50 a.m. I am convinced that the very best birders and animal watchers with their gear were certainly the ones having the most fun.

I've gravitated towards Zeiss binos because Zeiss and Schmidt and Bender have been the German money-is- no-object precision (sniper) glass on the world-class competitive rifle rigs I've been around and used. Aso, my understanding is the Zeiss HT is tops in light transmission. But I am new. I have no allegiance past the next fact or data set I learn. As I learn what else is out there, I look forward to trying them.

dwever said:

Wow, you guys sound like a muscle car forum between a Chevy and a Ford guy. I start this thread thanking you guys for being so informative and gracious to a new alpha shopper and I'm promptly indirectly accused of focusing on the absurd and the same gentlman perhaps suggests I'm searching for an excuse not to buy a Swaro.

I don't have a dog in this fight guys. Just trying to find the best product for regular Africa safaris and an emerging interest in birding. I would love to try a Swarovision's 10x50, but they like Zeiss 10x56 are never in stores around here. Do I need to go to B&H next time I'm changing planes in NYC? Or the Midwest birding symposium in Ohio?

I own a Zeiss because it was a demo marked down to $1,180 from $1,799 at midwayusa.com as I had mistakenly left my Steiners on a range near Eglin AFB after precision rifle school. The Zeiss showed me some of what a binocular could be, i was thrilled, and I've been trying to learn more ever since towards buying the best glass out there regardless of manufacturer.

I've gravitated towards Zeiss binos because Zeiss and Schmidt and Bender have been on the money-is-no-object precision (sniper) and competitive rigs I've been around and used. But I have no allegiance.

Click to expand...

If you can give the Swarovski 10x50 sv's a look. They are bright, contrasty and deadly sharp! Out of the sv's I think these are real sleepers. Don't get much hype? But, for me they are the pick of the litter!!! I've yet to try the Zeiss HT's but would have a hard time believing they could top the view through the big sv. I have tried the Leica HD 10x50 many times and while it is a supreme binocular the new Swarovski pretty much trumps it in all optical categories! Bryce...

dewver,

Sounds like you are seeing about what I do. I think there are some good reasons for the curiously good performance of a quality marine 7x50.

Low powers are easy to make to a quality that looks very sharp. Big objectives are more aberration free in daytime conditions because of the greater effective focal ratio with reduced eye pupil aperture, and also give the brightest possible view in low light. Simple cemented doublet objectives work fine in such a design, and absorb less light than the complex designs necessitated by compact roofs. A heavyweight individual focus chassis is simple--easy to make strong and precise. Porro prisms don't need fancy coatings, so are easy to make good. A large exit pupil is the best defense against light scattered inside the barrel near the objective lens because although the scattering may be large, it cannot reach the eye which, safely within the confines of the exit pupil, sees only light focused by the objective. Eyepieces with narrow apparent fields are easy to make free from blackout and other annoying effects. Low powered eyepieces with long focal length have long eye relief, for a spacious feeling and easy use with sunglasses. Gasp, whew!

A well made 42mm roof is a good binocular indeed in all conditions, and supremely handy, but its view quality is not going to beat a well made Marine 7x50 Porro, no way, I don't care if it's an HT or the next thing AFTER the HT in 2025. Wads of money and believing will only get you so far.

I have spent thousands looking for a light and handy roof whose view beats my 7x50 Fujinon FMT, $300 used. No luck. I reckon a Zeiss would only be better. I really know what you are saying.

But sad to say, for me the cumbersome IF focusing just does not make it for typical birdwatching, undoubtedly the fastest optical pursuit (oh how I tried to make it work), and along the way I have become addicted to higher magnifications. So, my 7x50 sits on the table for occasional use and stargazing, leaving an unrequited love in my damaged heart. The 10x56 FL works better for me.

Ron

dee-dubya .... don't take too seriously, or read too much into some posters ..... they're just died-in-the-wool, one-eyed, rose-coloured-glasses-wearing, blinkered, grumbleb*m fanboi's! ..... and an essential counter to those die-hard fans of other brands that clearly don't know what they are talking about !! 8-P

A 10x56 Zeiss Victory T*FL v's (new announced ABK design) Swarovski SLC shootout should be high on your agenda upon its release. Also tantalizing is the prospect of a rumoured 10x56 Zeiss Victory to throw into the mix some time in 2014?



Chosun :gh:

Welcome Dwever,

I`m going out on a limb here but as you clearly love your Zeiss Porro, how about a Nikon 10x42SE ?

If you can try one, maybe it`d be the perfect choice.

http://scopeviews.co.uk/BinoReviews.htm#_Nikon_10x42_SE

jgraider said:

Well, Pileatus' arrogance obviously shines throughout these threads, but I do have to agree with him on the Swaro's. In my very unscientific research of over 12 years of guiding (I hate to say it amongst the PC crowd around here) app 120 big game hunters, approximately 75% of them show up in camp with Swaro binoculars, and the other 25% is divided amongst Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, etc. I see fewer and fewer Leica's in camp every year. Swaro's marketing and customer service kick azz, and they have a damnn fine product. Leica is going backwards.

Click to expand...

Arrogance or confidence in one's crafted opinions?
Thanks for the valuable, field-based observational data which supports my contention (based on others work, of course) that Swarovski dominates the alpha market.

PS
Why do people resort to ad-hominems without any underlying citations? I suppose it's easier to generalize than offer reasoned argument.

Chosun Juan said:

Pileatus, if we can be entirely serious for one minute here .....

If the "New Swarovski bins often require a break-in period" as you claim, in order for the focuser "grittiness" to "smooth" out .... then - How much does this loosen tolerances, and lessen precision of the mechanism? What becomes of all the unwanted freed residue of this dry-lapping, and honing process?

Just where exactly does this speckly detritus go?

It cannot remain constrained in any "fat (grease, lube, etc.)", as there is none ....

Does it just harmlessly evaporate into the air via osmosis?

Or do these superfluous micro-groundings undesirably permeate into every nook and cranny to insidiously leak out and degrade coatings and view over time? Similar to a slow boiled frog - would pundits even notice their now 2nd-rate equipment?


Just exactly how many, and how much "casual observer" twiddling "in a store" is required to cumulatively amount to "about twenty hours of actual use" ??


Also, how does the "break-in period" alleviate the uneven tension of different focusing directions? Does the spring weaken to the point where it has no resultant effect?

Or is it merely the "will" of the user that is broken? The involuntary relenquishing of the expectation of perfection befitting a $2K+ instrument? The inevitable blinding caused by the need to support the ego's decision to foist such large sunk costs upon one's personage - and the strong denial of reality that such psychological attachment brings?


We await the true facts .....



Chosun :gh:

Click to expand...

CJ,

Why don't you just get your hands on one and find out? I hate to say this but you're starting to sound like Brock, writing endlessly in a vacuum.

I have given up on these SV issues...because for me they aren't issues. I'm sure they could especially become issues for those with vivid imaginations, no actual experience, and a keyboard.

Both my SV's continue just fine. I can honestly say I never think about the focus at all. I'm looking at the birds.

And it's safe to say that the vast majority of users simply don't see any issues here either. Read the 80, 90 (I don't know the current number) reviews of the SV, SLC HD on Eagle Optics and you'll see what actual users think.

Just sayin'...
Mark

Kammerdiner said:

CJ,

Why don't you just get your hands on one and find out? I hate to say this but you're starting to sound like Brock, writing endlessly in a vacuum.

I have given up on these SV issues...because for me they aren't issues. I'm sure they could especially become issues for those with vivid imaginations, no actual experience, and a keyboard.

Both my SV's continue just fine. I can honestly say I never think about the focus at all. I'm looking at the birds.

And it's safe to say that the vast majority of users simply don't see any issues here either. Read the 80, 90 (I don't know the current number) reviews of the SV, SLC HD on Eagle Optics and you'll see what actual users think.

Just sayin'...
Mark

Click to expand...

86 Swarovision
20 All other Swaro models

Thanks, Mark, you saved me the time and effort of explaining how a simple non-lubricated, metal on metal focus mechanism works.

PS
Don't tell anyone there's a brass magnet under the focus knob to catch any loose particles from all that friction!

So where do I get to actually use a Swarovision 10x50 or Zeiss Victory 10x56? Do I need to go to B&H on 9th Ave. next time I'm changing planes in NYC? Or the Midwest birding symposium in Ohio (which I've been thinking about anyway). Or what? Because that kind of glass is not in the big outdoor boxes around here.

Friday the optics manager at Bass Pro in Leeds divulged his alpha preference of the Swaro's over the Zeiss. He explained with a smile that the Swarovision's company representative was just so pretty.

The earlier mentioned endurance test post: http://www.allbinos.com/182-news-Endurance_test_of_8x42_binoculars_-_results.html

Pileatus said:

86 Swarovision
20 All other Swaro models

Thanks, Mark, you saved me the time and effort of explaining how a simple non-lubricated, metal on metal focus mechanism works.

PS
Don't tell anyone there's a brass magnet under the focus knob to catch any loose particles from all that friction!

Click to expand...

Hahaha! A metal on metal focusing mechanism that wears-in over time, yet amazingly produces no particles of worn detritus ....

An engineering marvel !!

Not buyin' it! Wish my Eng Profs had bought such lackadaisical frippery - would have saved me a helluva lot of study!

P.S. Mark - just challenging Pilly's own assertion. FWIW out of all the Swaro's I've handled (SV's, SLC-HD's), both short, or long-term, not one focuser has WOWed! me as a mechanical jewel worthy of the c$3K prices here, or inspired me to take the mail order lucky dip. Btw - what's the temperature like in that pot? ..... and about the keyboard jockey broken record reference, *ouch*! Dirty pool ......

Now back to school for both of you - so I can get a proper answer to my question!



Chosun :gh: