Habicht: 8x30 or 10x40? (1 Viewer)

Rathaus said:

Sorry mate, I was referring to the thick GA coating itself....the protective rubber coating of the binocular. It's thick and chunky. Doesn't it stand for Gummi Armor or gummy bear or something in German?

As for the lense coatings, well, I have no idea what they are but they're bloody good. The light transmission is right up there at the top of any bino ever made. Perhaps, from memory, only the fujinon 7x50 equals or slightly betters it. So, apart from being a porro, they're obviously doing something right with the lens coatings. Without going into detail, The 10x has very few optical weaknesses from what I can see. The occasional glare of the 8x is completely absent. I will say it's a ruthlessly revealing glass. The contrast and on axis clarity are monstrous. In quick direct comparison, The excellent Nikon Ell looks washed out...lacking in contrast and clarity.

Last week i was viewing a funnel webbed spider's lair in the hole of a tree trunk. I was about thirty yards away(close enough). Half way between myself and the tree was a post with a single spiders web thread swaying in the breeze. I had four binoculars with me -

The 8x30 Habicht
The 8x30 Habicht Swedish military with reticle
The 8x30 Nikon Ell
The 7x42 zeiss bgatp

The zeiss had the easiest and most relaxing view of the spiders lair.
The Nikon was also easy. Slightly dull but sharp and good. And Easy quick eye placement.

Both Habichts however required eyes to be properly placed, then kept locked in place. Easy once practiced. Then the differences became clear. Firstly, while focused on the funnel webb nest tree, I suddenly spotted the single thread of spiders web blowing horizontally (15 yards away, half way to the tree), invisible in the other bins. They just couldn't pick it up, even when focusing directly on it. It was just too fine for them. Not enough contrast.

Using both the little Habichts (optically identical) it stood out..really stood out. I realised this was optical superiority plain and simple.
Then I focused on the beautiful thin peeling bark of this big gum tree with all binos...arms rested on car window sill. It looked so sharp and pleasant in the zeiss and Nikon. I was totally satisfied. but then I got out the Habichts, and I could further resolve which way the tiny pieces of shedding bark were actually twisting due to the tiny shadows cast by them. Unbelievable.

This acuity stuff can get a bit silly...fortunately I've still got good eyes, but maybe in ten years I won't be able to resolve all of these differences, and hopefully I won't care obout or know what I'm missing :-O

Having said all that, if I had to sit there all day waiting for that spider to appear, I'd choose the zeiss because of its lovely relaxed and forgiving view. It lets your eyeballs and head loll about just a bit and still see everything looking lovely and lush....and in isolation, not wanting for any more detail whatsoever.

Just some recent observations,
Rathaus

Click to expand...

[email protected] said:

I understand your appreciation of the Habicht's. I have had many. But have you ever compared them to a top alpha roof prism binocular. In Allbino's objective testing the 10x40 Habicht came in 16th place with a score of 132.9 ,whereas, a top roof like the Swarovision 10x42 SV came in 2nd place with a score of 153.6. The Swarovision beat the Habicht in almost every objective test they did including transmission, astigmatism, coma, blurring at the edge of the field, internal reflections, close focus, and especially vignetting. I realize the Habicht's do have classic charm being such an old design but they really can't compare in performance to the new alpha roofs. It is a bit like comparing a 1972 Mustang to a new Corvette. Yes, the Mustang runs pretty good but the modern Corvette will leave it in the dust. The Swarovski SV or Zeiss SF leaves a Habicht pretty much in the dust also. Also, the newer alpha's are much more comfortable to use with better smoother focusers, more eye relief and much more comfortable eye cups. You should compare the Habicht sometime to one and you might change your mind about the Habicht. It is a fine old classic but more of a collectors item than a high performance birding binocular.





http://www.allbinos.com/223-binoculars_review-Swarovski_EL_10x42_Swarovision.html
http://www.allbinos.com/index.html?test=lornetki&test_l=112

Click to expand...

ceasar said:

How many Habicts have you had?

I recall that you got your 1st one from Proud Papa not too long ago and sent it back to him after one day because the focus was too stiff.

Bob

Click to expand...

stephen b said:

Dennis- we get that you did not care for the Habichts and now love your SV's. So just be happy with what you have and stop wailing against them in threads that people are interested in them. You may think you are helping, but IMO, it seems to be beating the same drum and disruptive.

As far as resolution and clarity, I am in agreement with Rathaus with how unbelievably sharp the Habichts can be. I owned the 8x30 Habicht along with a 8x32 Swaro SV together for over 18 months and spent a load of time comparing them. In my opinion the pure optics of the Habicht did not sit in the back seat with regards to the SV. And on center axis the Habicht may be the sharper bin. Do they come in different outside packaging and optical formulas- yes. And because of that one may be more appealing to different people. And I am sure most would pick the SV for obvious reasons.

But a current Habicht with all the latest coatings is a superb optical instrument. It may be a different fiddle in the Swaro lineup; but I do not think it plays 2nd fiddle- just different. For example, I do not think the Habicht is like a Zeiss Terra compared to their lineup. I feel even though the Habicht is a Porro, and old school at that; it is still a first class optical instrument. Certainly in the discussion of the best Porro's ever made. To me the 8x30 Habicht was superior optically to the 8x32 Nikon SE's that I also owned.

But different strokes..... And we should be thankful that we have many good binos to choose from. It would be boring to all use the same instrument. But even if we did, there would probably still be people on here saying that their same instrument was better than the next fella's

Click to expand...

[email protected] said:

I agree with you. I really liked the optics on the Habicht's. I really WANTED to keep them but they irritated me that the focus was so tight. That is the way they are. I also thought the Habicht 8x30 was superior optically to Nikon 8x32 SE. I just don't think they are as good of an all around binocular as an alpha roof.

Click to expand...

angelo225544 said:

I think one of the reasons Swarovski's Porros receive such mixed reviews is that they were made over such a long period of time, during which Swarovski made significant improvements in their coatings. Both the Habicht SL and Traditional really came into their own (optically at least) when the newer Swarotop coatings were introduced. Unfortunately, the SL's are hopelessly outdated mechanically, with a slow, stiff focuser which doesn't focus nearly close enough (the SL's are also unusable by eyeglass wearers). Also, the eyecups on the non armored Traditional Series are uncomfortably (for me) small. The Nikon SE's and E ll's are, without question, the most evolved center focus Porro prism binocular yet created. But I absolutely love the very high contrast image my Swaro 10x50 SL provides!

Click to expand...

Swarovski Man said:

Don't know if this is any use, but I tried the 8x30s a while back and was underwhelmed by them. They look attractive and are well built, but they had no sparkle to their view. They are an old product, playing on the Swarovski name. If they had another makers name on them, they wouldn't sell.

Click to expand...