Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 20:45   #51
Pinewood
New York correspondent
 
Pinewood's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 3,332
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
...

But Zeiss is still making FL 32mm, absolutely definitely, and it is still a terrific instrument.

Lee
Hello,

I have one but I prefer lower power for greater stability. I did find that I could hold the FL more steadily than its renowned predecessor the 10x40 Dialyt. It appears to have very good eye relief for a 10x32.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
__________________
Bread is not enough. Give us circuses!
Pinewood is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 09:30   #52
14Goudvink
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Hague
Posts: 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
My requirements are really more for raptors and viewing waders along the shoreline. The 8x are OK but I often feel I could do with that extra reach without having to get the scope out.
More often than not the extra shake of 10X bins will cancel out the benefits of the extra power, compared to 8X bins.

For your kind of use I would consider the Canon 12x36. More power than 10X bins and a significant increase in magnification compared to your 8X bins, especially with the image stabilisation added, yet still reasonably compact and lightweight.


George

Last edited by 14Goudvink : Tuesday 11th July 2017 at 09:32.
14Goudvink is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 15:19   #53
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Hi George,

Canon might make SLR's but they're not on my binocular list. IS is not for me......even in cameras!

I'm pretty much on the trail of 10x32 EL, 10x32 T*FL and EDG 10x32 which I think are the main players with respect to this model size.

I was so disappointed with the Leica ultravids...just couldn't handle the eye cups or get a clear image because of peripheral intrusion.

Anyhow my next job is to check whether the CA on the Swaro is really an issue....I forgot to look for it last time but now that i'm more educated in these things I might find it next time....!!

Hopefully going to try the Zeiss FL's out shortly so should be interesting. My local dealer doesn't stock the Nikon so I may be forced to avoid that test.

The Doctor has advised that there is no immediate cure and the only way to relieve symptoms might to be part with some cash....which of course depending on the amount could cause sleepless nights and feelings of guilt....which would of course mean a return to said Doctor. Catch 22.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 16:57   #54
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
Hi George,

I'm pretty much on the trail of 10x32 EL, 10x32 T*FL and EDG 10x32 which I think are the main players with respect to this model size.

Anyhow my next job is to check whether the CA on the Swaro is really an issue....I forgot to look for it last time but now that i'm more educated in these things I might find it next time....!!
Sollas

Some folks say that glare (milky view when looking anywhere near the sun : but you never ever look at the sun ok?) is a problem with the EL so you might want to check for that.

BTW is your pen-name on here anything to do with the village called Sollas on North Uist?

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 11th July 2017, 21:46   #55
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,228
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
S
Some folks say that glare (milky view when looking anywhere near the sun : but you never ever look at the sun ok?) is a problem with the EL so you might want to check for that.
Hm, glare on the EL too? Can't say - the day when I got to compare the EL 10x32 vs my SE 10x was a gray winter day, so no sun for glare but many barren trees against gray sky for CA - it was not terrible, but my SE controlled it better - even without Swarovision...

Joachim
jring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 29th August 2017, 06:37   #56
sbb
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Singapore
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
Hi George,

Canon might make SLR's but they're not on my binocular list. IS is not for me......even in cameras!

I'm pretty much on the trail of 10x32 EL, 10x32 T*FL and EDG 10x32 which I think are the main players with respect to this model size.

I was so disappointed with the Leica ultravids...just couldn't handle the eye cups or get a clear image because of peripheral intrusion.

Anyhow my next job is to check whether the CA on the Swaro is really an issue....I forgot to look for it last time but now that i'm more educated in these things I might find it next time....!!

Hopefully going to try the Zeiss FL's out shortly so should be interesting. My local dealer doesn't stock the Nikon so I may be forced to avoid that test.

The Doctor has advised that there is no immediate cure and the only way to relieve symptoms might to be part with some cash....which of course depending on the amount could cause sleepless nights and feelings of guilt....which would of course mean a return to said Doctor. Catch 22.
Sollas,
any updates to where you ended up with the 8x32's?
sbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 31st August 2017, 15:51   #57
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Hi SBB

Well it's fair to say I've done the circuit on this one and after much deliberation and contemplation it's now between the SV 8x32 EL field pro and the Zeiss 8x42 HT.

The SV 8x32's are actually quite fabulous and I'm not sure if I can find a reason NOT to by them :-) I tried them on a reserve and against trees and certainly could see the infamous rolling ball. The eyecups and focusing is just so easy and relaxing with a crystal clear large field of view......very pleasing.

The Zeiss 8x42 HT is also a lovely bin. Obviously a bit bigger and heavier but a beautiful crisp field of view. The eyecups are a little bit tighter than the EL's but pretty much extend the same distance so I do get a nice complete field of view. The HT objective lens covers are a bit of a faff and a strange solution by Zeiss. Not quite sure they've got that right. Tried the SF out of curiosity and in my opinion the HT is better in every way.

The Leica bins don't work for me at all, strange I know. Eyecups just don't extend enough so can't get decent field of view. Even the 8x42 Noctovids I tried didn't work either although they're very nicely made.

So to sum up, if money was no option and I had any 8x to choose from I'd probably go with the EL 8x32 field pro. The design, caps, neck strap and view are just 5*. I do like the design, shape and view of the HT's and of course they're cheaper.

It's a nice problem to have. Just trying to figure what the HT would give me that the EL doesn't.

Some on here will immediately launch and say they're completely different bins. However to me that's irrelevant as they probably both work for me needs.

Lastly .....I realised that after testing 10x options on many of the above and going away and thinking about it all that 8x was always going to accommodate 90% of my needs and the view just generally felt better.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 31st August 2017, 17:29   #58
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Addendum to above.....could NOT see any rolling by ball!!
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 31st August 2017, 22:12   #59
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,648
The 8x42 HT:s would be better during difficult light conditions, low sun close to the FOV and in low light/winter/deep forest etc. The HT:s will never let you down, in any light conditions, but you have to carry a bit more weight.
On the other hand, the 8x32 SV might work perfectly fine in 95% of normal usage, and many people might not even use them in difficult light and notice things like glare, the lower light transmission and smaller exit pupil.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 1st September 2017, 05:47   #60
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,664
Viewing e.g. the edge of a wood under a bright but overcast day=Veiling glare. Not immediately visible but it does kill the contrast. Such light conditions aren't that rare.

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 06:49   #61
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Hi Vesp
Yes i probably do agree with most of that. It is splitting hairs at times. In my heart I would like to go for the HT but my head is telling me the 8x32SV is the better option. The view somehow just appears slightly more relaxing and unfussy.
I would also say the full field pro package on the SV is better than the HT, the end cap design and strap being very clever. Decisions decisions.......
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 12:13   #62
14Goudvink
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: The Hague
Posts: 348
Why not go for the Swaro 8.5x42? All the advantages of the SV 8x32 and less glare/flare. And when you need smaller and lighter bins you can always use your Nikon 8x32 SE.

If price is an issue you can go for a second hand SV. No risk with Swaro's warranty reputation.

Just a thought.


George
14Goudvink is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 13:10   #63
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Hi George
But the disadvantages of the 8x42SV is weight, price and smaller field of view. The 8x42SV really doesn't offer me any benefit over the 8x32SV. I've not seen any glare or flare so not an issue. The 8x32SV under normal conditions is just a perfect binocular.

The HT's work because they are lighter, nicely designed, crystal clear and cheaper than both the SV's
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 13:11   #64
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
An extra 400 for the 8x42SV is difficult to justify
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 13:46   #65
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
The 8x42SV really doesn't offer me any benefit over the 8x32SV. I've not seen any glare or flare so not an issue. The 8x32SV under normal conditions is just a perfect binocular.
If you don't see any veiling glare and if the weight is important to you, the SV 8x32 may well be ideal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
The HT's work because they are lighter, nicely designed, crystal clear and cheaper than both the SV's.
I really like the HT, however, I'm after somewhat lighter binoculars nowadays. Carrying an 800 gr binocular around my neck all day isn't that much fun anymore.

By the way, I know the current Leica binoculars don't work for you, still, I think I'd look at whatever it is Leica will reveal next Monday.

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 14:10   #66
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Hi Hermann

The HT's ironically don't feel that much heavier in the hand than the SV. I guess it's the balance that works when holding them. The silly objective caps on the HT are a bit annoying. I don't understand how zeiss couldn't come up with something better.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 15:42   #67
PennineBirder
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
Hi Hermann

The HT's ironically don't feel that much heavier in the hand than the SV. I guess it's the balance that works when holding them. The silly objective caps on the HT are a bit annoying. I don't understand how zeiss couldn't come up with something better.
Sollas
I have been following your comments on this thread with interest because a few years ago I had exactly the same dilemma as you - HT 8x42 or SV 8x32. I went for the HT because of the wonderful view it gives and superb control of CA and flare. However, the weight and size of the HT started to become an issue when out for long periods.

Earlier this year, after telling myself I was being stupid (or was that the wife, I can't now remember), and one or two false starts, I bought an SV 8x32FP.

I have to say I am now very happy with my decision and in fact haven't taken the HT out since, although I will do in the future and probably over the dark winter days, once the novelty of the SV wears off.

I know the above won't be much help in your decision as I still think both bins are superb, but I do feel your pain!

Peter
PennineBirder is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 16:17   #68
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Thanks for that Peter, very interesting. It does indeed seem a very similar conundrum.

When you eventually conceded defeat (;-)) what if anything did you miss about the HT (apart from the weight) and what did you feel was better about the SV8x32FP?. You now have the experience of hindsight which hopefully will help me out.

How do you feel now about the flat view on the SV as opposed to the more traditional view on the HT? Or does it not actually differ that much?
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 16:45   #69
PennineBirder
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
Thanks for that Peter, very interesting. It does indeed seem a very similar conundrum.

When you eventually conceded defeat (;-)) what if anything did you miss about the HT (apart from the weight) and what did you feel was better about the SV8x32FP?. You now have the experience of hindsight which hopefully will help me out.

How do you feel now about the flat view on the SV as opposed to the more traditional view on the HT? Or does it not actually differ that much?
Hi
The view through the HT is easier than on the SV, possibly because of the 42mm objective, and in some respects more pleasing and immersive, although this is hard to define. I miss that, but really, so far at least, that is all. The focus wheel on the HT is slightly smoother too but this is marginal compared to the new FP version of the SV.

The main advantage for me of the SV over the HT is the smaller size and weight. To my eyes, I see no 'rolling ball' and the flare control is excellent. I do not have large hands and the SV 32s fit my hands very nicely, so overall they are more comfortable to handle.

I must say the flat field on the SV is not that noticeable to me as I use my bins for birding and I don't look at birds in detail at the edge of the field. You can see the difference when you look for it but in practical use it is of no consequence to me personally.

The objective covers aren't used by me on any bins so this is not a factor for me. On the small details I have found the new neck strap fixture on the SV-FP a joy to use, despite my initial reservations about 'novelty' straps.

Peter
PennineBirder is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 17:10   #70
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
I'm also predominantly a birder but in truth just like to have my bins with me if I'm out fishing or hill walking.

My current bins are Nikon 8x32SE porros which are very nice but time has come to move onwards and upwards as they say. I wouldn't really need them for that first and last 20 mins of light that everyone goes on about. Much of my viewing is daytime.

On the subject of dim light and brightness would you say the HT's offer a brighter view on a dull day than the SVFP's or is there not much in it?

At around 600g the SV 8x32FP are similar to my Nikons so the 800g of the HT is worth consideration.

I think they both offer wow factor in many respects and are a step up from my 8x32SE's. I also kind of wonder with the visual quality and lightness of the 8x32's where this really leaves some of these top end 8x42's as I have difficulty in figuring out their benefits.

But then again I'm also thinking might be nice to have the option of 8x42's which is of course where the HT would win.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 17:10   #71
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
I'm also predominantly a birder but in truth just like to have my bins with me if I'm out fishing or hill walking.

My current bins are Nikon 8x32SE porros which are very nice but time has come to move onwards and upwards as they say. I wouldn't really need them for that first and last 20 mins of light that everyone goes on about. Much of my viewing is daytime.

On the subject of dim light and brightness would you say the HT's offer a brighter view on a dull day than the SVFP's or is there not much in it?

At around 600g the SV 8x32FP are similar to my Nikons so the 800g of the HT is worth consideration.

I think they both offer wow factor in many respects and are a step up from my 8x32SE's. I also kind of wonder with the visual quality and lightness of the 8x32's where this really leaves some of these top end 8x42's as I have difficulty in figuring out their benefits.

But then again I'm also thinking might be nice to have the option of 8x42's which is of course where the HT would win.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 17:17   #72
litebeam
Registered User
 
litebeam's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Northwest U.S.
Posts: 410
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Frink View Post
Hi Sollas,

In my opinion the Zeiss FL 10x32 will run circles around the other two. It gives a very wide (6.9*) and very bright field of view, it's very compact and has an excellent (though somewhat fast) focus action. While it's true that a 3.2mm EP will require that you set your IPD correctly and carefully align the bino's pupils with your own, it is not true that a 10x32 will seem any less bright in bright light than any other bino, say a 10x42; as long as light levels are sufficient to cause your pupils to contract to 3.2mm or less, any differences in brightness will be a function of design and construction differences between the two binos, and will have nothing to do with the relative sizes of their objective lenses.

John
Good observation, the Victory 10X32's are likely the brightest available in that configuration..
Fantastic glass that plays above it's weight. Find a demo and enjoy...
litebeam is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 17:19   #73
PennineBirder
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sollas View Post
On the subject of dim light and brightness would you say the HT's offer a brighter view on a dull day than the SVFP's or is there not much in it?
Quite honestly I'm not sure. I expect the HT to perform better in low light but I haven't actually gone out with both bins to test that one. Sorry.

Peter
PennineBirder is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 2nd September 2017, 17:55   #74
Sollas
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Scotland
Posts: 101
Thanks Litebeam, however you'll prob see from the thread that I've moved on from that position.
Optical evolution if you like.
__________________
Common sense is not so common.
Sollas is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 3rd September 2017, 19:19   #75
paddy7
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: suffolk
Posts: 378
If i may chip in - it sounds to me from the last threads that you just 'like' the Swaro 8x32 more, and that is a major part in any decision. I'm the same with the FL 8x32. I just really like it. There are brighter bins, different transmission bins and all the other things, but the truth is, i just like the FLs more, and as a result, grab them off the peg almost every time i go out, which in the end, is the critical point.
Personally, i'd love a pair of 8x42 HTs, but would still be likely to go for the FLs if i was going to be out all day. Binoculars have to be your mate, cos you're going to spend an awful long time together.
paddy7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon EDG (II) 10x32 vs. Victory 10x32 FL binocular comparison ads Binoculars 0 Friday 1st May 2015 00:01
HG L 10x32 looksharp65 Nikon 59 Monday 25th June 2012 00:26
Leupold Katmai 10X32 versus Minox BD 10X32 BR ALT? JLPritchard Leupold 10 Wednesday 28th March 2012 05:19
Sightron 10X32 SIIBL versus 10X32 SIIIMS JLPritchard Binoculars 2 Thursday 15th March 2012 16:05
Nikon 8/10x32 LXL vs. Zeiss 8/10x32 FL justin2992 Binoculars 8 Saturday 20th June 2009 23:52

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.25331807 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:48.