James/Bruce, could you please excuse my memory and further explain "1st gen. SLC HD 8x42"? Roughly when was it introduced? Or a photo would be perfect. Could you/anyone also please remind me, what was the first* Swaro roof-prism model called, which was introduced in the 1990s*, and was being made* when they added the double-hinge model? *As I remember. While we are at it, what was that first double-hinge model (forerunner to the present Swarovision) called? Thank you!
James/Bruce, could you please excuse my memory and further explain "1st gen. SLC HD 8x42"? Roughly when was it introduced? Or a photo would be perfect. Could .......
Here are what I consider high end lens flattener design binoculars:
...Canon 10x42 is L ( I seem to recall is has lens flatteners)...
Thank you, Bruce, for the lengthy and thorough response. Pretty much everything I was wondering about is now clarified. Still, surprisingly, few people assess the SLC at the very best level which usually includes the Swarovision together with the best from Leica, Nikon and Zeiss.
Bruce, Lee, it is not the long close focus that makes some reviewers rate the SLC well below the Swarovision. Allbinos in their 10x42 rankings place the Swarovision 2nd, scoring 90%, the current SLC (with long close focus) 18th with 82%, and the SLC HD (with good close focus) 19th with 82%. The pre-2010 EL is 11th scoring 84%, and the SLC 'Neu' is 5th with 86%! Tobias Menle in his Greatest Binoculars states in 2015: "I suspect the SLC has been downgraded a bit compared to its predecessor to conquer a new niche below the premium model Swarovision. The SLC looks a bit softer than the others, especially below 10 meters, and does not quite achieve the wowing view of an alpha bin. ... The focuser is squeaky and rough, and the industrial design looks strange and old fashioned, lacking appeal. Swarovski should really let the SLC be a premium alternative to the Swarovision for those prefering curved fields. In Europe, street price is way to close to the superior Ultravid and HT to make the SLC a good buy ..." I personally find that in nature observation the SLC HD 8x42 conveys more detail (very slightly more) than the Swarovision 8.5x42 (note, despite the latter's greater x). My visual acuity is better than 20/20. Something subjective is going on here that I have not seen explained.
I've compared the 8x42 SLC WB to the SLC WB HD in hand and could find no discernible differences aside from close focus and the feel of the armor. Both are great buys at the $1300-1400 price mark you can sometimes find them.
I've also compared the SLC WB to the EL SV I've got and think that the SV has the amazing edge performance whereas the WB had better glare/flare resistance. Apart from that the images were so similar to my eyes that any differences, perceived or measurable, were inconsequential.