• 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.

Swarovision Zeiss SF side by side (1 Viewer)

Troubador said:
The difference in effort needed to turn the wheel in each direction is small, and for me, it is no problem at all. <snip> However, I can imagine that someone, sitting at home and more concerned with 'looking at the binocular' rather than 'looking with the binocular' and who did not know about the spring, might worry that something was wrong.
Click to expand...

Are you thinking of anyone around here in particular?

I certainly do.

Troubador said:
But Swaro focusers continue to have issues from time to time. The SLCs I tried at the Bird Fair in 2013 had beautiful focus actions, those in 2014 were horrible.
Click to expand...

That's the more worrying part. They still seem to find getting the focuser just right every time difficult in Absam. And I've seen a few pairs that developed problems after a few years of hard use, so they had to go back to Absam for a service.

Troubador said:
If I was in the market for a Swaro I wouldn't worry too much about the focuser but the advice to try before you buy is always good advice no matter which make and model you are considering.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The only exception I'd make from that rule are the traditional porros with their simple focusers.

Hermann
 
brocknroller said:
Amen! brother.

Also, the degree at which the focuser is harder to turn one way than another VARIES from sample to sample, it's NOT that the focuser turns HARD one way and SMOOTH the other way on EVERY sample. In some cases, surprisingly, the focuser turns smoothly in both directions!

When somebody reports it's a "non-issue," I need to Pete and Repeat my examples, because either they haven't tried a bad sample, or the type of birding they do doesn't require fast or fine focus movements, or they have fingers like Arnold has biceps, or they were sloggered at the time they tried the bins. B :)

Examples:

2001 8.5x EL (somewhat hard to turn in one direction, very hard to turn in the other direction, took two fingers to turn).

2009 8x30 SLCnew (smooth in one direction, a bit harder to turn in the other, more of an issue with this bin, because of the location of the focuser on the objective side, requiring you to use your ring finger to focus). Steve doesn't have any problem using it this way, but he uses his SLC for hunting, not birding. For close-in birding, the pulling and pushing with my ring finger got tiresome after an hour, and I stopped using them for close-in birding and used them for looking at birds a distance the way I would a 10x bin.

2012? 10x42 SLC-HD (smooth in one direction, slightly harder to turn in the other). I could live with this, particularly on a 10x bin where I'm not going to do a lot of focusing, but it would be nicer to use if the focuser turned smoothly in both directions. Plus, like the 2001 EL, it might get worse as time goes by.

2001? 10x42 SLCAlt (smooth in one direction, medium hard to turn in the other). I didn't spend a lot of time with this sample, and being it's a 10x, it might not as bothersome as it would with an 8x where I'm working more close-in where depth of field and speed is more of an issue.

2009 8x32 EL WB (smooth in both directions). Huh? You mean they can actually make focusers this way? I wonder if it's still turning smooth in both directions today?

1989? 7x30 SLC (smooth in both direction)

So there you see, sample variation runs rampart with Swaro focusers.

Denials to follow immediately after.....
Click to expand...
As I've repeated many times...as an owner and birder I've owned and used several binoculars, including owning and using three Swarovski models. Well, four actually, if you count the early EL I returned. I sampled numerous Swarovski bins over the years, borrowed a few and watched as innumerable birders used them in the field. The worst focus mechanisms I've actually EXPERIENCED were, in order, several pre-FL Zeiss, loads of Chinese bins, more than a few porros and an Ultravid that was never "smoooooth". Next, now wait for the drum roll, one of the truly worst was a refurbished Nikon 8X42 HG I saw in an optics store. There were three of them and all were different. Apparently, Nikon can adjust the focus from sloppy to "I ain't going nowhere until you flex a bicep". There goes your Nikon is perfect mantra. Sorry, Brock, the Swarovski focus is not even close to bad. It's fully functional, stays put when set and does what it's supposed to.:flyaway:
 
Dear all,
I hope this will go well, if it does you can find some cutaways from the SF and an SV. It took me about three Swiss army knives to cut them, but here they are. In case somebody wants to draw far reaching conclusions about differences in focussing mechanism, that is not possible with these pictures, you need another type of open construction to show that.
Gijs
 
Second attempt,
Gijs
 

Attachments

  • Doorsnede ocular Zeiss SF gecomprimeerd.jpg
    Doorsnede ocular Zeiss SF gecomprimeerd.jpg
    34.8 KB · Views: 428
  • Doorsnede Zeiss SF gecomprimeerd.jpg
    Doorsnede Zeiss SF gecomprimeerd.jpg
    31.7 KB · Views: 369
  • Doorsneden van Swarovski 8x42 SV boven en Zeiss SF 8x42 onder gecomprimeerd.jpg
    Doorsneden van Swarovski 8x42 SV boven en Zeiss SF 8x42 onder gecomprimeerd.jpg
    37.1 KB · Views: 431
Dear all for your information:
In post 26: the picture to the left is the eypiece part of the SF, the middle one is the SF and the right one is the Swar. SV on top and the Zeiss SF on the bottom.
Happy looking,
Gijs
 
Excellent work Gijs! For those who remained skeptical about how Zeiss moved the weight to the eyepiece those cutaways should be proof enough. The SF also has a very clean, uncluttered look to it.

If you get a chance, could you try to post higher resolution versions? Offhand I don't know BF's res limit for attachments, but I don't think your pics are close to it.

And since you've cut the poor things in half already, you might as well disassemble the focus and have a look see. ;)

Thanks again,
Mark
 
Excellent job Gijs, many thanks for posting.

Its easy to see the SP prisms have been inverted compared with the EL to move a little bit more weight towards the eyepieces.

Lee
 
Gijs van Ginkel said:
Dear all,
I hope this will go well, if it does you can find some cutaways from the SF and an SV. It took me about three Swiss army knives to cut them, but here they are. In case somebody wants to draw far reaching conclusions about differences in focussing mechanism, that is not possible with these pictures, you need another type of open construction to show that.
Gijs
Click to expand...

Wow! You sawed that SF in two! Not even I would dream about getting that repaired on the warranty! ;)
 
High North,
Yes, I wanted to have two for the money of one SF, so the first thing I did was smashing it to a concrete wall and when that did not do any harm I threw it out of our window (third floor) on the concrete tiles in our garden, but that did not harm the SF at all, so I took a chain saw, but since my wife wanted to do a nap, that would make to much noise, so I had to stick to my new Swiss army knife, but that took a lot of time,so you see the smashing result. Hope you enjoy it and thank Jan van Daalen for supplying the Swiss army knives.
Gijs
 
Troubador said:
Satisfied now, you S-O-B??? ;)

Lee
Click to expand...

Why, yes indeed I am, Lee. Thanks so much for your thoughtful inquiry.

It’s interesting how dissimilar (to my largely uniformed self) the two binos look from an optical standpoint. I always marvel that people know how to design stuff like that. If you asked me to do it, I’d probably hand you two Coke bottles strapped together with duct tape and tell you to “make believe” it’s a binocular. ;)

Mark
 
Kammerdiner said:
Why, yes indeed I am, Lee. Thanks so much for your thoughtful inquiry.

It’s interesting how dissimilar (to my largely uniformed self) the two binos look from an optical standpoint. I always marvel that people know how to design stuff like that. If you asked me to do it, I’d probably hand you two Coke bottles strapped together with duct tape and tell you to “make believe” it’s a binocular. ;)

Mark
Click to expand...

Mark:

If you handed Lee those pop bottles that had a Zeiss emblem
he would soon tell us about the great view. ;)

Gijs, thank for the pics, lots of difference in the optical design there,
with those 2 binoculars.

Jerry
 
NDhunter said:
Mark:

If you handed Lee those pop bottles that had a Zeiss emblem
he would soon tell us about the great view. ;)

Jerry
Click to expand...

As long as the coke bottles were made from Schott glass you could be right and what's more I bet Mark's make-believe bins would hit the market faster than HT or SF did :-O

Anyway, can you still get those old-fashioned curvy CocaCola bottles made from glass or are they all plastic now?

Lee
 
Troubador said:
...Anyway, can you still get those old-fashioned curvy CocaCola bottles made from glass ...
Click to expand...

Yes, those glass bottles are widely available, though not standard here. Certainly, all the Coca-Cola I've seen sold as "Mexican Coke" (which is imported from Mexico) comes in a curvy glass bottle.

--AP
 
Alexis Powell said:
Yes, those glass bottles are widely available, though not standard here. Certainly, all the Coca-Cola I've seen sold as "Mexican Coke" (which is imported from Mexico) comes in a curvy glass bottle.

--AP
Click to expand...

Thanks Alex

Over here its all plastic bottles or Aly cans. Shame

Lee
 
My focuser on my Swarovski SV 8x32 has the smoothest and best focus action of any binocular I have ever had. It nails the focus first time every time and has equal tension in both directions. It was a demo unit so maybe it was already broken in. I really feel you have to use the Swaro focusers awhile to break them in a little. I love my little SV. It is the only binocular I have. I use it all the time so why have any of the less expensive binoculars. I decided I am going to use it and enjoy it.
 
Last edited:
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

G
In praise of the Zeiss SFL 10x40
Replies
2
Views
894
gweller
G
N
SF 42 & 32 Brief Comparisons
Replies
8
Views
2K
Scott98
S
J
Brief reviews about Zeiss victory SFL 8/10 x40
2 3
Replies
41
Views
5K
Declan Joseph Deasy
D
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 versus Victory SF 8x42?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
7K
Troubador
Troubador
mgp13
Zeiss Victory SF - damaged or is this normal?
Replies
4
Views
1K
Troubador
Troubador

Users who are viewing this thread

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