-
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.
EL 10x42 vs SLC 10x42 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Chabi
- Start date
Chabi,
From my experience, these are both top-notch bins. I looked at both about two months ago and after just spending over $1600 on a pair of 8.5x42 ELs, my wallet did some deciding for me.
In all seriousness, I think that they are both optical equals. You will find slight differences in ER (15mm for the EL, 14mm for the SLCs), you will find that the SLCs are heavier (although in my humble opinion, built better) and the EL ergonomics are really both unique and fantastic.
If you look at both side by side and decide that you want to spend the extra $500, you will be ahead only by slightly better ergos and lighter weight. For me personally, my 10x42 SLCs are here to stay. As for my 8.5x42 ELs, I'm not so sure, as they do not fit me as well as the SLCs.
Remember, it is really up to you, as they have to fit you, and not anyone else.
Rgds,
Steffan
From my experience, these are both top-notch bins. I looked at both about two months ago and after just spending over $1600 on a pair of 8.5x42 ELs, my wallet did some deciding for me.
In all seriousness, I think that they are both optical equals. You will find slight differences in ER (15mm for the EL, 14mm for the SLCs), you will find that the SLCs are heavier (although in my humble opinion, built better) and the EL ergonomics are really both unique and fantastic.
If you look at both side by side and decide that you want to spend the extra $500, you will be ahead only by slightly better ergos and lighter weight. For me personally, my 10x42 SLCs are here to stay. As for my 8.5x42 ELs, I'm not so sure, as they do not fit me as well as the SLCs.
Remember, it is really up to you, as they have to fit you, and not anyone else.
Rgds,
Steffan
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Hi Chabi,
Sounds like you haven't tried the 10x42 SLCs yet. Do yourself a favor before you buy and make a personal comparison. I think the SLC's optics are every bit as good, and also use Swarobright coatings.
Like Steffan I've compared them at length and chose the SLC. I concluded that it is arguably the finest 10x ever made (okay, by Swarovski
) and certainly the "classic" of the SLC line. IMO it will be sought after like the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT and Leica 8x32 BNs in the future. The EL has about a 4 ft. shorter focus and weighs 3 oz. less. For some folks that would make a difference, but not for me since the balance of the SLC and exquisite focus control can't be matched; and besides I don't need a 10x for subjects closer than 12 ft. Finally, the build quality is second to none, and the use of a FISMO (see equipment review) is hardly possible with the EL design, which to my thinking is a major setback for field use. Take a look at used ELs and see how they fray at the hinges. Nah!
I'm saying this after 6 mos. of solid use under varied conditions. Mine look like new and will be passed on to my grandson when I'm looking down at birds from the great beyond.
Enjoy the view whatever you do. EL's are okay too.
Regards,
Elkcub
Sounds like you haven't tried the 10x42 SLCs yet. Do yourself a favor before you buy and make a personal comparison. I think the SLC's optics are every bit as good, and also use Swarobright coatings.
Like Steffan I've compared them at length and chose the SLC. I concluded that it is arguably the finest 10x ever made (okay, by Swarovski
) and certainly the "classic" of the SLC line. IMO it will be sought after like the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT and Leica 8x32 BNs in the future. The EL has about a 4 ft. shorter focus and weighs 3 oz. less. For some folks that would make a difference, but not for me since the balance of the SLC and exquisite focus control can't be matched; and besides I don't need a 10x for subjects closer than 12 ft. Finally, the build quality is second to none, and the use of a FISMO (see equipment review) is hardly possible with the EL design, which to my thinking is a major setback for field use. Take a look at used ELs and see how they fray at the hinges. Nah!I'm saying this after 6 mos. of solid use under varied conditions. Mine look like new and will be passed on to my grandson when I'm looking down at birds from the great beyond.
Enjoy the view whatever you do. EL's are okay too.
Regards,
Elkcub
Last edited:
I had a quick look at a "New" 10x42 SLC, getting to compare it to a 10x42 EL indoors and outdoors, but only for some 15 minutes in all. The EL is considerably lighter, but the SLC is considerably more compact, and really does give you the feeling that you could play football with it without damage (not that I would, nor would I recommend you to). The body is also armored all around, so there is no exposed cold metal to freeze your fingertips in the winter. Image quality in handheld general viewing seemed very similar, although the colour balance is warmer in the SLC. Of these two specimen (not being able to determine whether they were optically 100% samples or not) I liked the SLC better, it was slightly easier to my eye and, if anything, was a tad brighter as well.
What I really like about the SLC is that it has a 1/4" threaded hole for a tripod/finnstick adapter at the front of the hinge - no need for difficult DIY projects or clumsy breakable tripod adapters. All in all, I think the next time I'm testing full-size binoculars, I'll include an SLC in the lineup.
Kimmo
What I really like about the SLC is that it has a 1/4" threaded hole for a tripod/finnstick adapter at the front of the hinge - no need for difficult DIY projects or clumsy breakable tripod adapters. All in all, I think the next time I'm testing full-size binoculars, I'll include an SLC in the lineup.
Kimmo
