• 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.

Optical Performance 8x56 FL vs 8.5x42 SV (1 Viewer)

Hello All,
I started this thread as I was preparing to order a new pair of 8x bins, and I wanted the best optics I could find. I've been following it along and have been enjoying the read. I still haven't had an opportunity to look through a pair of 8x56 FL's or for that matter the 8x56 SLC's, now I have two to put on my must see list. As this thread evolved I did manage to find time to order and receive a new pair of Swarovision 8.5x42's at the same time I also ordered a pair of 8.5x50 Vortex Viper's for my son. I hope to have an opportunity this weekend for my son and I to take these in the field and run them throuh their paces. I doubt I'll run into anyone sporting either an FL or SLC 8x56 this weekend, if I do I'll have to turn and walk away rather than risk trying either pair. For at least six months my budget relies on ignorance being bliss with respect to which 8x bin provides the best view :t:
 
I was told by my dealer that the 8x56 SLC is the only model in the SLC range to have experienced significant optical updates since the introduction of Swarobright dielectric prism coatings.
Apparently the lens coatings of the 8x56 are specific to the refractive indices of the individual lens elements. The updates were necessary to stay competitive with the 8x56 Zeiss FL in the hunters' market.

John
 
Personally I don't see how an 8.5x42 ANYTHING can compete with the Zeiss 8x56, based upon my limited experience with the 10X56 model. BTW this is one of the most awesome threads in a long time. That link to Henry's old post was amazing!
 
John Russell said:
I was told by my dealer that the 8x56 SLC is the only model in the SLC range to have experienced significant optical updates since the introduction of Swarobright dielectric prism coatings.
Apparently the lens coatings of the 8x56 are specific to the refractive indices of the individual lens elements. The updates were necessary to stay competitive with the 8x56 Zeiss FL in the hunters' market.

John
Click to expand...

John,

This is veeery interesting insider information, but has it been confirmed with swaro, and if it is true, why the heck aren't they advertising the coatings upgrades in their ads and on their Website?

If nobody knows about it (except you, the dealer, and those reading this thread), how does that help swaro better compete against Zeiss?

It also contradicts what Dale Forbes, our resident Swaro rep, said about Swaro continually updating the coatings on its bins, not just on only one of them.

And can the slc really compete head to head w/ Zeiss w/out adding HD glass?

Isn't that what it's all about or is it that only true of the hokey pokey? :)

Brock
 
Last edited:
An awed tip of the hat to you 56mm enthusiasts who won't give a inch on optical performance. I hope one day they'll make an 8x60 fluorite triplet binocular with Ethos eyepieces for you guys. Let it all hang out!

But for my favorite thing in the world, spending all day out in rough terrain, usually with 10+ lbs on my back, I am ready to compromise, and already feel slightly over on the optically far-out side of things with an 8x42mm FL. Come on, that is pretty big. I have eyes too, and I can see that even my 7x50 Fujinon gives a more impressive view, but Jeez Louise! It is, for me, kind of hard to believe a 56mm, even the elegant FL, would be better enough to justify carrying an extra pound, and an even bulkier piece. For me I mean, not for you obviously!

I tried a SV and it was "totally awesome". But, I'd be happy enough if my 42mm FL was a little bit smaller, cheaper, and worse, to tell the truth.
Ron
 
brocknroller said:
John,

This is veeery interesting insider information, but has it been confirmed with swaro, and if it is true, why the heck aren't they advertising the coatings upgrades in their ads and on their Website?

If nobody knows about it (except you, the dealer, and those reading this thread), how does that help swaro better compete against Zeiss?

It also contradicts what Dale Forbes, our resident Swaro rep, said about Swaro continually updating the coatings on its bins, not just on only one of them.

And can the slc really compete head to head w/ Zeiss w/out adding HD glass?

Isn't that what it's all about or is it that only true of the hokey pokey? :)

Brock
Click to expand...

Brock,

I can't vouch for the truth of this assertion but my dealer does have close contacts to the manufacturers and it all seems a little too complex to have been dreamed up out of the blue.

Advertising doesn't play much of a role with bins. Everyone knows that if they want the best it is to be found with Leissovski or possibly Nikon and purchasing decisions are often made on the basis of comparisons. Also advertising exclusive treatment of one model would reflect negatively on the others.

There have no doubt been improvements to coatings on the SLC range in the past few years (e.g. Swaroclean) but putting the same multicoating on each air/glass surface would be cheaper and less effective than tailoring the multicoating to the refractive index of each lens element. The SLC is, after all, not Swaro's premium product but the 8x56 format is very popular with hunters in Europe, who go after wild boar in twilight and hunters, not birders were traditionally Swaro's main clientelle.

I am still doubtful about the benefits of HD glass in an 8x binocular and believe that most of the CA we percieve is lateral CA from the eyepieces and not from the objectives. Take a look at D & G Optical's website. They make Fraunhofer telescopes (admittedly with focal ratios of 12 or 15) from traditional crown and flint glasses suitable for several hundred times magnifications.

Regards,

John
 
John Russell said:
Brock,

I can't vouch for the truth of this assertion but my dealer does have close contacts to the manufacturers and it all seems a little too complex to have been dreamed up out of the blue.

Advertising doesn't play much of a role with bins. Everyone knows that if they want the best it is to be found with Leissovski or possibly Nikon and purchasing decisions are often made on the basis of comparisons. Also advertising exclusive treatment of one model would reflect negatively on the others.

There have no doubt been improvements to coatings on the SLC range in the past few years (e.g. Swaroclean) but putting the same multicoating on each air/glass surface would be cheaper and less effective than tailoring the multicoating to the refractive index of each lens element. The SLC is, after all, not Swaro's premium product but the 8x56 format is very popular with hunters in Europe, who go after wild boar in twilight and hunters, not birders were traditionally Swaro's main clientelle.

I am still doubtful about the benefits of HD glass in an 8x binocular and believe that most of the CA we percieve is lateral CA from the eyepieces and not from the objectives. Take a look at D & G Optical's website. They make Fraunhofer telescopes (admittedly with focal ratios of 12 or 15) from traditional crown and flint glasses suitable for several hundred times magnifications.

Regards,

John
Click to expand...

John,

Advertising plays a big role when you are promoting a new product, and there's nothing about "tailoring the multicoating to the refractive index of each lens element" in the ads for the HD.

Besides, I would have thought that matching the coatings to the glass would be SOP on all alphas. Our resident experts could probably weigh in on this.

If not, then the new $2K SLC-HD and $2.4K SV EL surely should have that upgrade since they are Swarovski's "latest and greatest".

As far as hunters vs birders, even hunters on Optics Talk and 24hrcampfire admit that birders are more "anal" about their optics than hunters. In fact, I've posted links to such comments on these forums.

The faster ratio an f/3.5 or f/4 bin is the main reason you need the HD glass in bins, plus telescopes are used to observe "faint fuzzies" in a fixed contrast situation whereas birding bins are made for terrestrial use where the background contrast can vary considerable.

I'm not sure how much difference "HD" glass makes in the FL vs. slc except perhaps in high contrast situations, particularly among users who are sensitive to CA. But the "HD glass" carries some sales cachet.

Dale, if you're out there, could you please confirm or deny the "bookmatched" coatings for the 8x56 model and tell us if they are also on the HD and SV EL?

Brock
 
Last edited:
John Russell said:
Brock,

You obviously believe (in) advertising ;-)

John
Click to expand...

Well, when it comes to truth in advertising, I think it's pretty much a dead heat between the adman and the salesman. One lies with his "pen," the other with his tongue.

That's my second original aphorism. My Uncle Toonose would have been proud. :)

Brock
 
Well I can see by looking down a Zeiss 10x42Fl barrel that most of the lenses have different color coatings so I don't think it's tio much of a stretch to assume others are doing it too.
 
BobP63 said:
Hello All,
I started this thread as I was preparing to order a new pair of 8x bins, and I wanted the best optics I could find. I've been following it along and have been enjoying the read. I still haven't had an opportunity to look through a pair of 8x56 FL's or for that matter the 8x56 SLC's, now I have two to put on my must see list. As this thread evolved I did manage to find time to order and receive a new pair of Swarovision 8.5x42's at the same time I also ordered a pair of 8.5x50 Vortex Viper's for my son. I hope to have an opportunity this weekend for my son and I to take these in the field and run them throuh their paces. I doubt I'll run into anyone sporting either an FL or SLC 8x56 this weekend, if I do I'll have to turn and walk away rather than risk trying either pair. For at least six months my budget relies on ignorance being bliss with respect to which 8x bin provides the best view :t:
Click to expand...

Update: Had high hopes for the SV's; unfortunately they just didn't meet my expectations. I tried two samples thinking I may have received a defective pair the first time out but that was not the case. So I ended up ordering a pair of 8x56 FL's, they're a bit much in the weight department but overall I'm much happier with them compared to the SV's.
 
Bob,

What didn't you like about the Swarovski SV?

I tried many straps and harnesses with the 8x56 FL. All the straps put too much weight on my neck and the elastic in most harnesses is too wimpy to handle the load. The Bino Belt below is the only harness I've found that works well with such heavy binoculars. I can carry them all day with no complaint.

http://www.coleman.com/coleman/ColemanCom/detail.asp?CategoryID=25531&product_id=COLEH652

Henry
 
Hey...!

That Bino Belt looks good for my Canon 18x50's! The Bino Manager with all-covering pouch won't cover the big 18's, as these are taller than the Zeiss 8x56 FL's.

So now I have to decide between the Bino Belt and the SunSniper camera strap, that is worn across the body and attaches into the tripod mount underneath the 18x50's.

Thanks for posting that, Henry.

Best regards,

Ronald
 
The Bino Belt and the Bino Manager are variations on the same harness. The Manager is certainly a bargain at $10. I don't like or use the Manager pouch. Fortunately, it can be removed and the sternum strap simply buckled across the chest to itself. I think these should work fine with the heavy Canon binoculars. One aspect of this design I really like is the absence of stretchy "armpit" straps, which makes raising the binoculars to your eyes unencumbered just as if you were using a neck strap.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 14 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

H
Yawn, just another SFL 40 comparison...
Replies
13
Views
3K
Romão Gomes
R
G
New March Drawing for Kowa Optics
Replies
12
Views
1K
gr8fuldoug
G
dwatsonbirder
Compact comparisons: Low end vs high end
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Rg548
R
chill6x6
A few quick thoughts, 7X35 vs. 8X32
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
John M Robinson
J
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G

Users who are viewing this thread

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