• 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.

Which one do you like better, the SLC or the SV. (1 Viewer)

henry link said:
The right photo shows the internals of a Zeiss HT and FL. You can see a baffle of similar design in the cross section of the HT, but not in the FL. Several observers here have reported improved glare resistance in the HT compared to the FL.

Henry
Click to expand...

Henry

Nice work sewing up these two sectional drawings of HT and FL. :t:

I don't recognise the HT drawing at all. Would you mind revealing where you sourced it?

Lee
 
Last edited:
Lee,

Here's the original download, from a German dealer I think. I did a Google search yesterday for a higher quality version, but couldn't find any image of this cutaway at all.

BTW, the eyepiece close-up is not the HT eyepiece. It was lifted straight from an 8x56 FL cutaway.

Henry
 

Attachments

  • Fernglas-ZEISS-Victory-HT-8x42_b2.jpg
    Fernglas-ZEISS-Victory-HT-8x42_b2.jpg
    76 KB · Views: 68
What has better resolution in 8x42? HT or SLC or EDG II? What will you buy from these if the prices are
/EDG II 1350, SLC 1600, HT 1650/ Is the HT best bino in CA correction? EDG II has sale in one dealer, but it lacks hydrophobic coating which I think is crucial for coatings long life...
 
pesto said:
When I bought my first SV 8x32 and saw the amount of glare that it had under special lighting conditions I called Swarovski and discussed with one of their knowledgeable engineers. I mentioned the strong internal reflections of the old EL, referred him to Allbinos photos, and expressed surprise that nothing has been done to correct that issue when designing the SV. He was well aware of the issue and told me that "the baffling is optimized for the current model". I took that to simply mean this: if we reduce the glare, that exists only under special circumstances and can be easily reduced by using additional baffling, then we degrade the quality of other features that we believe are more important. That's multi-criterion optimization under constraints! When you test the SVs the glare is there, but when you use them in the field it is not that disturbing as it exists only in special cases. In my opinion the multi-criterion optimization used by Swaro works---the SV 8x32 is very likely to come on top when the Allbinos is going to test them, and they also sell well.

Peter.
Click to expand...

I have to say, Peter, this has the distinct aroma of a company spin master at work. A customer comes in complaining about a flaw and leaves believing the flaw is not a flaw at all. It's an essential part of a "multi-criterion optimization". Everybody's happy.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Hermann said:
A quick thought: Is it not possible that the attempt to achieve ever closer focusing distances makes effective baffling more and more difficult?

Doesn't sound unreasonable to me, given that the space inside the binoculars is severely limited with focusing elements having to travel a long way to achieve such close focusing distances.

Hermann
Click to expand...

Brillant idea!
 
pesto said:
When I bought my first SV 8x32 and saw the amount of glare that it had under special lighting conditions I called Swarovski and discussed with one of their knowledgeable engineers. I mentioned the strong internal reflections of the old EL, referred him to Allbinos photos, and expressed surprise that nothing has been done to correct that issue when designing the SV. He was well aware of the issue and told me that "the baffling is optimized for the current model". I took that to simply mean this: if we reduce the glare, that exists only under special circumstances and can be easily reduced by using additional baffling, then we degrade the quality of other features that we believe are more important.
Click to expand...

Translation: The glare is not a problem, it's a feature. So stop complaining, we know what we're doing.

Interestingly there are quite a few binoculars that are quite a lot better than the SV 8x32 with regard to glare. However, they're either porros of have longer focusing distances.

pesto said:
In my opinion the multi-criterion optimization used by Swaro works---the SV 8x32 is very likely to come on top when the Allbinos is going to test them, and they also sell well.
Click to expand...

And that proves what? Given some of "test results" they published over the years coming out on top in an Allbinos "test" doesn't necessarily mean all that much.

Hermann
 
I agree Hermann's idea about close focus insofar as baffles or baffling cones can't be positioned in places that interfere with the travel of internal focusing lenses, but I don't see why a baffle hard against the back of a focusing lens that travels with it or a baffle close to the back of the objective lens are necessarily precluded by very close focus.
 
Last edited:
I have to say, Peter, this has the distinct aroma of a company spin master at work. A customer comes in complaining about a flaw and leaves believing the flaw is not a flaw at all. It's an essential part of a "multi-criterion optimization". Everybody's happy.
Click to expand...

Henry:

I still believe this is a flaw of the SV, in fact the only one that I can and do complain about. However I also believe that other optical parameters, such as the close focus mentioned in the previous post and possibly others too, prevented them from improving the glare control to satisfy the more picky customers---SV's visible false pupils will make Allbinos deduct a few points for that aspect but I am sure that for all other metrics the SV 8x32 will get very close to the perfect scores---What else can you ask for? As we know there are always compromises in designing optics, and there is no perfect instrument. I would imagine that the design process is a long one combining science and trial and error, and I am pretty sure that Swaro's engineers have tried many combinations---why they ended up with choosing the current model is anybody's guess.
Like you I found some comments on this thread to be misplaced, and wish they were not made at all---we are rarely nice to one another, which is a pity. It's so easy to begin a post, as Jerry did above for one of mine, by using a few kind words. In this spirit I would like to say that, as many others on this forum, I also appreciate your insights and discussions.

Peter.
 
I know this thread isn't directly related to the 8X32 SV but I have to ask people to explain exactly what they are complaining about in the 8X32 SV. My wife has never once complained about her 8X32 SV and I stopped seeing deliberately induced aberrations as soon as I backed off the eyepiece. Interestingly, my wife never complained about her 8X32 SE (after 10 years of use) and I stopped having problems my 8X32 SE when I...backed off the eyepiece a bit.

I find the 8X32 SV quite exceptional and I think I'm picky.
 
Thanks Peter. I actually agree that the 8x32SV is an extraordinarily good binocular, flaws and all. Unfortunately, it seems to be the duty of loyal company employees to explain flaws away rather than admitting to them. At least they get paid to do that, fanboys do it for free. ;)

Henry
 
Last edited:
Given some of "test results" they published over the years coming out on top in an Allbinos "test" doesn't necessarily mean all that much.

Hermann
Click to expand...

Hermann:

I agree with you that Allbinos tests are not "perfect", as there are so many features of binos that they do not even consider, and they have been often criticized on this forum and elsewhere, but IMO their website is among the very few that provide technical measurements and critical comments. Of course if you know of a better place to get info about this topic please do let us know.

Peter.
 
Pileatus said:
I know this thread isn't directly related to the 8X32 SV but I have to ask people to explain exactly what they are complaining about in the 8X32 SV. My wife has never once complained about her 8X32 SV and I stopped seeing deliberately induced aberrations as soon as I backed off the eyepiece. Interestingly, my wife never complained about her 8X32 SE (after 10 years of use) and I stopped having problems my 8X32 SE when I...backed off the eyepiece a bit.

I find the 8X32 SV quite exceptional and I think I'm picky.
Click to expand...
Pileatus. What do you mean by backing off the eyepiece?
 
At least they get paid to do that, fanboys do it for free
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself---you'll never know how many on this forum are agents in disguise.....and note that I am not saying "we'll never know"......
 
pesto said:
I agree with you that Allbinos tests are not "perfect", as there are so many features of binos that they do not even consider, and they have been often criticized on this forum and elsewhere, but IMO their website is among the very few that provide technical measurements and critical comments. Of course if you know of a better place to get info about this topic please do let us know.
Click to expand...

There is no better website. There are a few published tests where people had the testing done by the laboratories of some of the alpha manufacturers, but that's it.

But the trouble is that I find Allbinos hard to trust when it comes to the nitty gritty. Not when they, for instance, publish transmission figures for the Docter 8x56 that are plainly untrue. 98% +/- 3%? Goodness me. BTW, I've seen pulished transmission figures of about 86% for that binocular.

I generally find the tests on the Twentse Vogelwerkgroep site more reliable, and of course the measurements done by Gijs van Ginkel. And Kimmos tests on the Lintuvaruste site and his and Henry Link's posts on this forum.

Hermann
 
Last edited:
pesto said:
Speak for yourself---you'll never know how many on this forum are agents in disguise.....and note that I am not saying "we'll never know"......
Click to expand...

Uh-oh...sounds like you know something the rest of us don't. I think even if I knew someone here was a paid shill I'd just go along with the ruse in hopes that, with a little prodding, he (or she) would slip up and tell us something interesting.

BTW, where do I sign up? does it come with a paid vacation?
 
Last edited:
Henry: I am sure you know that I was joking (which of course does not exclude the possibility....). Seriously now, it's amazing how many people on this forum, yourself included, dedicate their unpaid services and a lot of their time to the benefit of others, which is why we should be more appreciative of their efforts. Peter.
 
BTW, where do I sign up? does it come with a paid vacation?
Click to expand...

I thought you were untouchable....

But the trouble is that I find Allbinos hard to trust when it comes to the nitty gritty. Not when they, for instance, publish transmission figures for the Docter 8x56 that are plainly untrue. 98% +/- 3%?
Click to expand...

There are many typos on all these websites, and the above must be one of them; in particular they should know that "something" cannot be larger than 100%....

Now back to the main topic of this thread......
 
[email protected] said:
Pileatus. What do you mean by backing off the eyepiece?
Click to expand...
Increasing the distance from the eyepiece glass to my eye. If I get too close all sorts of interesting things happen. My SE taught me there's an eye relief sweet spot I should not ignore. On the SV's I could just unscrew the eyecups but I'd rather simply "back off" a tad.

PS
A "tad" is whatever works for you.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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

B
S.O.N.A. Repair 8x32 EL
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
bungart
B
T
First Love Rekindled
Replies
8
Views
833
Tringa45
T
W
SLC 8x42: Keep or Sell?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
4K
w.travis
W
R
8x20 in possession. Which one to add?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
mwhogue
M
G
Kahles Helia S 42 close focusing distance vs Swarovski SLC HD 8x42
Replies
6
Views
2K
gecko18000
G

Users who are viewing this thread

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