• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

New Swaro Pockets (1 Viewer)

pompadour said:
Cjfrbw, do you mean Zeiss Conquest or Victory? (If you do mean Conq. the Victory should compare even better with those models.) Thinking of a Z. Vict. to replace a Leica Ultravid in 10x25, assuming that the Z. will provide more "overrun past infinity" in focusing than the L., as Z. is generally better than L. in this regard. (Matters when a short sighted user doesn't use specs.) Appreciate if you are able comment on this also. Update You have corrected that just before I posted! Are you able to respond to the second point? Thanks. PS Also perhaps with regard to the new Swaro so this won't be off topic!
Click to expand...

Sorry, Pomp, I did not examine that feature in either model. Yes, I corrected my post, the one I saw was the Victory model, very nice indeed.

The Conquest is the double hinged model with the more traditional appearance, I saw the single hinged model.
 
Cjfrbw, actually, the extent of the overrun past infinity can be noted only if one were that short-sighted - I wrote on the chance that you were! Swaro. is said to be even better than Zeiss (generally) in that regard, and I hope this is carried on in the new CL, which looks like it'll become another best-seller.

Dalat, the Leica 8x32 (shown), which is even smaller than the renowned Zeiss Victory in that config., would I think be esteemed, and have sold, much more if it had better eye relief. The Swaro CL 8x25 is lighter, though, ~ 345 g /12 oz. vs 535 /19, and, of course, folds up smaller. Interesting that the Sw. CL 10x25 though much heavier than the L. Ultravid and Z. Victory in that config. seems to be optically not much better if at all. Must translate that review via Google and wade through!
 
Last edited:
Bob, I left out the Swaro. pre-CL 10x25 because it's not being made; seems only few bins remain at major retailers (like the ones linked there). I'd guess Swaro. reckon the CL 8x25 will sell far more than the pre-CL 8x20, and they had to change the 10x to match (with the obj. diam. still 25).
 
pompadour said:
Bob, I left out the Swaro. pre-CL 10x25 because it's not being made; seems only few bins remain at major retailers (like the ones linked there). I'd guess Swaro. reckon the CL 8x25 will sell far more than the pre-CL 8x20, and they had to change the 10x to match (with the obj. diam. still 25).
Click to expand...

I threw that in to compare it's changes with the old versions after reading the comments in threads 98 and 99 about how the new 10 x 25 compared to rivals of that old Swarovski 10 x 25: Specifically the Nikon 10 x 25 LX/L and the Zeiss Victory 10 x 25.

I have the new Swarovski 8 x 25 and I find it optically much better than my Zeiss 8 x 20 Victory and Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid.

I also have the Nikon 10 x 25 LX/L and although it is comparing apples to oranges I think the optics in my new Swarovski 8 x 25 are better than those in the 10 x 25 Nikon. The Swarovski has much better glare control. I also made some comments about their respective ergonomics and costs because they are the same size. For those see thread #89 above.

Bob
 
Kammerdiner said:
Excellent review, Starfish! Thanks for the info, and it's a pleasure to read.

It sounds like loose hinges are pretty common on these Pocket CL's, and since I'll probably end up with one soon, and would likewise not like loose hinges (kind of a pet peeve of mine actually) could you explain the process of adjustment? Also, I assume you used a low-strength thread lock? Do you think the thread lock was necessary or added assurance?

Ah, those field bags. I don't think anyone has posted that they use them. And for a dual-hinge compact, an oversized case is particularly odd. I'd look for a small case designed for compact digital cameras. All shapes and sizes are available.

Mark
Click to expand...

Viewing from the eyepiece end it is obvious where the hinge-pins are and these are covered by two circular caps made of a material similar to the body armour. These caps are simply stuck down with what appears to be a non-setting adhesive and they are physically easy to remove. That said, to get them off without any trace of interference is a delicate operation, I did it using a magnifying glass to guide a pin carefully underneath one edge and gradually working the pin under the covers until they came off; handily they both stuck to the pin.

One the caps are off, the hinge pin fittings are visible and comprise two nicely machined threaded components, one inside the other. The inner fitting is the actual adjuster whilst the outer (collar) is simply a locking device that prevents the inner fitting from moving once set.

Both have a slot machined into them so all that is needed to remove / adjust them is two suitably sized flat-bladed screwdrivers – these must fit the slots precisely though otherwise the fittings could be burred. The outer locking collar should be slackened off first and then the inner fitting can be carefully screwed in (clockwise) to increase resistance on the hinge or out (anti-clockwise) to reduce resistance on the hinge. Once happy with the amount of resistance achieved, the outer locking collar can then be screwed back in until fully tight to prevent the action of the hinges being folded in / out from turning the adjuster. A couple of goes may be required to make them just-so.

I used a light thread locking compound to minimise the risk of the outer collars from slackening in normal use but it was probably unnecessary. Swarovski themselves appear to have assembled the fittings dry.

Once all was sorted the caps simply stuck back on and there was no external trace of consumer interference. Had I not used thread lock no-one would know I’d been in there.

I accept it shouldn’t be necessary to faff around like this with a brand new highly priced instrument but I was impressed enough by the whole package to go the extra mile.

Thanks to all for the positive comments too, it makes taking the time to write up experiences worthwhile.
 
crinklystarfish said:
Viewing from the eyepiece end it is obvious where the hinge-pins are and these are covered by two circular caps made of a material similar to the body armour. These caps are simply stuck down with what appears to be a non-setting adhesive and they are physically easy to remove. That said, to get them off without any trace of interference is a delicate operation, I did it using a magnifying glass to guide a pin carefully underneath one edge and gradually working the pin under the covers until they came off; handily they both stuck to the pin.

One the caps are off, the hinge pin fittings are visible and comprise two nicely machined threaded components, one inside the other. The inner fitting is the actual adjuster whilst the outer (collar) is simply a locking device that prevents the inner fitting from moving once set.

Both have a slot machined into them so all that is needed to remove / adjust them is two suitably sized flat-bladed screwdrivers – these must fit the slots precisely though otherwise the fittings could be burred. The outer locking collar should be slackened off first and then the inner fitting can be carefully screwed in (clockwise) to increase resistance on the hinge or out (anti-clockwise) to reduce resistance on the hinge. Once happy with the amount of resistance achieved, the outer locking collar can then be screwed back in until fully tight to prevent the action of the hinges being folded in / out from turning the adjuster. A couple of goes may be required to make them just-so.

I used a light thread locking compound to minimise the risk of the outer collars from slackening in normal use but it was probably unnecessary. Swarovski themselves appear to have assembled the fittings dry.

Once all was sorted the caps simply stuck back on and there was no external trace of consumer interference. Had I not used thread lock no-one would know I’d been in there.

I accept it shouldn’t be necessary to faff around like this with a brand new highly priced instrument but I was impressed enough by the whole package to go the extra mile.

Thanks to all for the positive comments too, it makes taking the time to write up experiences worthwhile.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, Starfish. I assume Swaro has two tools for this adjustment, a pin wrench kind of thing and then a regular screw driver, but a bit of trial and error should do the trick as well.

The review Florian linked to in #102 above has yet another reviewer noting the hinge tension is less than desired. It seems to be a trend, so these instructions may come in handy for many, like me, who don't like loose hinges.

Mark
 
This is very interesting!

I don't have any problem with loose hinges on my 8x25CL but in the event that I do I took a good look at those "caps" and then decided that I would send it back to SONA to be fixed rather than try to do it myself. I've been carrying it around with me almost every day since I got it on September 14 but I think I could go a couple of weeks without it to get it fixed by SONA.

I notice that the front edge of the hinges also have these "caps" on them. Does anybody here want to volunteer to take them off to see what is under them?:h?:

Bob
 
Well, I am happy I did not wait for the new compacts to come out. I am very please with the CL 8x30 I bought a few months back. For those that got the new compacts, enjoy.
 
I am still happy with my 8x25 CL binoculars several months after purchase

However the case for these binos is absurdly large !! I would like to but a small case that would fit on a belt to carry these binoculars when traveling. Perhaps a case intended for a small camera would fit the bill.

Any suggestions ?
 
Craig Thayer said:
I am still happy with my 8x25 CL binoculars several months after purchase

However the case for these binos is absurdly large !! I would like to but a small case that would fit on a belt to carry these binoculars when traveling. Perhaps a case intended for a small camera would fit the bill.

Any suggestions ?
Click to expand...

Look at the camera cases from Lowe. The cases are usually labled LowePro, which I think is the overall name of their camera case line. I carry my 10x25 Ultravid HD's in one.

Most of the Swaro cases I've seen have been larger than what is needed to carry the binoculars alone. I believe this design is intended to let the owner carry other items at the same time, such as notebooks, pens, cleaning gear, etc.. I like the size of our CL Pocket case, but I could easily see why someone would not want to carry it on the belt.......
 
Some brief impressions:

Very nice image, sharp, neutral colours, flat field. Bit large and heavy for a compact. The hinges of the demo unit were a bit loose (just acceptable) and the focus wheel had a very light (loose) action. This detracted from the quality feel.

Focussing is slowish, but I like that. Plenty of eye-relief, worked well with glasses. More comfortable to look through than for instance an Opticron 8x24 BGA T PC Oasis, but less so than a Bushnell Custom/Elite 7x26.

No perfect bins, all compromises... :-( :)
 
Last edited:
Craig Thayer said:
I am still happy with my 8x25 CL binoculars several months after purchase

However the case for these binos is absurdly large !! I would like to but a small case that would fit on a belt to carry these binoculars when traveling. Perhaps a case intended for a small camera would fit the bill.

Any suggestions ?
Click to expand...

I keep mine in a Nikon 10x25 Premier case when I'm not using it. It has a belt loop but I don't carry it on my belt. If you fold the strap properly around the binocular it will fit into the case but I usually keep the strap outside the case. Putting a wrist strap on it like the one that comes with the Swarovski 8x30 CL Companion could remedy the problem of folding up the neck strap to fit it in the case.

It should fit into most 10x25 cases so look them over to see which one is best.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Having Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42 & Conquest HD 8x32 already, I really wanted to add a pair of great quality bins that are small and light enough to take with me on a daily basis. Being unhappy with the 8x20 offerings, I decided to look slightly larger.

I wanted the best quality optics in a reasonably small size... considerably smaller than my Conquest HD 8x32's (which are awesome bins!)

Recently, I picked up a pair of Swaro 8x25 CL Pocket and find that they are
small enough, light weight enough, and most wonderfully bright and sharp enough to tag along in my bag wherever I go.

From my use today I found the Swaros to be on par sharpness-wise with the stellar Conquest HD's, possibly even a hair sharper? With no CA to be found. DOF is deeper than with the Conquests. Eye relief is excellent and the bins are easy to use one-handed if necessary. Hinges are suitably stiff. Focus wheel is fairly light and equally smooth in both directions. Overall, I'm really happy with these Swaros!

For sitting on the back porch watching the desert critters, my first choice is still the Conquest HD 10x42. Fantastic bins!!!

My Conquest HD 8x32 bins are a close second choice.

But when it comes to being out and about, traveling relatively lightly, the Swaro 8x25CL Pockets are just the ticket.

I love these 8x25's but now find myself wondering if I might like the 10x25's even more....


Swaro 8x25 CL Pocket, Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32, & Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42:
 

Attachments

  • P1020057.jpg
    P1020057.jpg
    792.3 KB · Views: 190
  • P1020076.jpg
    P1020076.jpg
    765.4 KB · Views: 216
Last edited:
ZDHart;29 I love these 8x25's but now find myself wondering if I might like the 10x25's even more.... [/QUOTE said:
But then you lose the edge of having a bigger objective than every other alpha mini. You owe it to yourself to check out Zeiss, Leica and Nikon if you're looking for a 10x25. Especially since the are lighter and smaller, and usually cheaper too.
Click to expand...
 
Nessus said:
But then you lose the edge of having a bigger objective than every other alpha mini. You owe it to yourself to check out Zeiss, Leica and Nikon if you're looking for a 10x25. Especially since the are lighter and smaller, and usually cheaper too.
Click to expand...

I also bought the 10x25 Swaro CL Pockets and love them. Having both the 8x25 and the 10x25 CL P's, my wife and I can each have a compact, lightweight pair to travel with. Funny, I find myself using the CL Pockets (10x25's mostly) around the house, where I intended to mostly use my larger 8x32 and 10x42 Zeiss Conquest HD's. Those little Swaros are great and very convenient.

I may have a look at the Zeiss 10x25, but I'm not so much a fan of the Leicas and the Nikons. Actually, I'm really content with these two CL Pockets, so I'll probably just stick with them.
 
Last edited:
ZDHart said:
Auxiliary (larger) eye pieces as optional accessories is a great idea.
Click to expand...

I got the CL 10x25's and I find the eyecups come up a little short. My eyelash blacks out and I find myself holding the top of the eyepeice against my eyesocket while the bottom is out and exposed to stray light.

I already did my practice run for how to mod the eyecups a little longer with no damage to the binocular. I'm modding them for sure. I had that perfect circle with black around it and my whole eye in the cup comfortably. I 'm getting sick of holding glass a half inch from my face and wish these very expensive manufacturers would get their acts together, this happens constantly to my bins except the FL10x42 and 8x32. Wouldn't surprise me if Zeiss made their new conquest line a bit too short.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

R
8x20 in possession. Which one to add?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
mwhogue
M
G
Uncomfortable Pocket CL 8x25..really?
Replies
16
Views
2K
Elkhornsun
E
R
Curio 7x21 vs Leica trinovid 8x20
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
Swedpat
S
laurencejackson
RFI: most suitable bins for on the water, Alaska and Vancouver Island?
Replies
5
Views
890
grackle314
G
truculenter aspicientis
I've got some new pocket bins NOT Curios.
Replies
7
Views
2K
Captain Dave
C

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top