bh46118
Well-known member
Make sure EMT's are there and at the ready for the catastrophic rolling ball induced medical event that will surely take place if Brock dares to bring Swarovision in front of his eyes. :-O Just kidding Brock.
-
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.
I wanted to love the EL 8x32 SV (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Six Point Five
- Start date
proudpapa56
Where'd you go, stay put!
Well, the digiscoping demo outside our shop has come and gone. We had all our binos out also.
No one threw up, so I'm going to assume Brock couldn't make it.
No one threw up, so I'm going to assume Brock couldn't make it.
It's amazing how different eyes perceive things. I can't see the slightest amount of rolling ball in my 8x32 SV's. I did notice a small amount on the extreme edges of the 10x32 SV's I tried.
Mac308
Well-known member
When I pick up an SV it's dizzying... 8x42, 10x42 and now 8x32.
It's a shame to me Swarovski elected to go with an unnaturally sharp FOV... the optical triangle demands sacrifice and there is no free lunch. The SV just doesn't provide a "relaxed" FOV for my, and many others, eyes.
Pity.
It's a shame to me Swarovski elected to go with an unnaturally sharp FOV... the optical triangle demands sacrifice and there is no free lunch. The SV just doesn't provide a "relaxed" FOV for my, and many others, eyes.
Pity.
brocknroller
porromaniac
If you check out Holger's distortion chart at the middle of the Webpage below, you will find that the first two SV EL models Swaro released, the 8.5x and 10x42s, have the least distortion in the series. If you are susceptible to RB, you will see it in the 8.5x, probably in the 10x42, possibly in the 10x32, but maybe not in the 8x32, 10x50 and 12x50, depending on your k-value, because they have more distortion.
Distortion of the new Zeiss Victory SF: A paradigmatic shift on the binocular market?
Holger has a test on this Webpage, which will give you your "k-value," i.e., how much distortion your eyes naturally have. When you derive that number, you can go back to the chart and see which binoculars fall within the range you can tolerate and which you cannot.
Distortion and globe effect in binoculars
I wouldn't rule out a bin that falls slightly below your distortion level. Your brain might be able to adjust to it in minutes, days, or weeks (two seems to be the maximum). If you really like the SV EL but are bothered by RB and your k-value is close to that model's distortion level, you might give yourself some time to adjust by either borrowing one from someone or buying one from a store with a generous return period.
Or, as the article's title suggests, try one of new Zeiss SFs, which have more pincushion than any SV EL, but otherwise have similar optical and ergonomic characteristics as the SV ELs (field flatteners and open bridge designs), and they cost the same as the 8.5x and 10x42 SV ELs.
You could also try the Swaro SLCs, which have even more pincushion than either the SV ELs or SFs. I tried the 10x42 SLC-HD and thought it was superb. The sweet spot is so large, it doesn't need field flatteners. While I prefer the open bridge design of the ELs and SFs, the "open hinge" design of the SLCs, where the bridge is pushed back towards the EPs and there is no second bridge near the objectives, allows plenty of room to wrap your fingers around the barrels. I have large hands and found it comfortable to hold.
So you might be able to adjust the SV ELs in time, but if not, you have some good options.
Distortion of the new Zeiss Victory SF: A paradigmatic shift on the binocular market?
Holger has a test on this Webpage, which will give you your "k-value," i.e., how much distortion your eyes naturally have. When you derive that number, you can go back to the chart and see which binoculars fall within the range you can tolerate and which you cannot.
Distortion and globe effect in binoculars
I wouldn't rule out a bin that falls slightly below your distortion level. Your brain might be able to adjust to it in minutes, days, or weeks (two seems to be the maximum). If you really like the SV EL but are bothered by RB and your k-value is close to that model's distortion level, you might give yourself some time to adjust by either borrowing one from someone or buying one from a store with a generous return period.
Or, as the article's title suggests, try one of new Zeiss SFs, which have more pincushion than any SV EL, but otherwise have similar optical and ergonomic characteristics as the SV ELs (field flatteners and open bridge designs), and they cost the same as the 8.5x and 10x42 SV ELs.
You could also try the Swaro SLCs, which have even more pincushion than either the SV ELs or SFs. I tried the 10x42 SLC-HD and thought it was superb. The sweet spot is so large, it doesn't need field flatteners. While I prefer the open bridge design of the ELs and SFs, the "open hinge" design of the SLCs, where the bridge is pushed back towards the EPs and there is no second bridge near the objectives, allows plenty of room to wrap your fingers around the barrels. I have large hands and found it comfortable to hold.
So you might be able to adjust the SV ELs in time, but if not, you have some good options.
Last edited:
Six Point Five
Well-known member
I took the sv 8x32 el on a long trip to the south. I saw over 300 species of birds in 10 days, on many days i observed more than 100 species. The SV has a very nice focuser now, after adjustment by the company. I no longer notice the difference in tension required to focus near or far. Some of it due to excellent re-adjustment, some due to mine getting used, some due to the instrument braking in.
The optics are very sharp and bright, clear, color neutral, beautiful. I got used the the view by the 2nd day of the trip and i was no longer bothered by the edge distortion.
As far as this distortion goes, it appears more evident when scanning sideways at images about 50-100 meters away. It seems to disappear when scanning wide open spaces, or closer, at birds 10 meters away.
The superior sharpness, contrast, and color rendition were evident. I also noticed much ease following flying birds and easily identifying them based on small details. Perhaps due to the SV effect.
I am glad that i did not sell the SV binoculars. I like them very much. I still think that the objective and ocular lens caps are poorly designed and that i would have had an equally pleasant birding trip with the old EL.
I will use the SV as my primary instrument this spring and summer and will go back to the old EL occasionally, to see how it feels. I already notice that the old EL has slightly less contrast, less vivid colors, a bit more color fringing, etc. Minute differences, perhaps, but visible.
Both are wonderful, as is my wife's Zeiss FL 8x32.
The optics are very sharp and bright, clear, color neutral, beautiful. I got used the the view by the 2nd day of the trip and i was no longer bothered by the edge distortion.
As far as this distortion goes, it appears more evident when scanning sideways at images about 50-100 meters away. It seems to disappear when scanning wide open spaces, or closer, at birds 10 meters away.
The superior sharpness, contrast, and color rendition were evident. I also noticed much ease following flying birds and easily identifying them based on small details. Perhaps due to the SV effect.
I am glad that i did not sell the SV binoculars. I like them very much. I still think that the objective and ocular lens caps are poorly designed and that i would have had an equally pleasant birding trip with the old EL.
I will use the SV as my primary instrument this spring and summer and will go back to the old EL occasionally, to see how it feels. I already notice that the old EL has slightly less contrast, less vivid colors, a bit more color fringing, etc. Minute differences, perhaps, but visible.
Both are wonderful, as is my wife's Zeiss FL 8x32.
Last edited:
The following 44mm caps will fit your 8X32 SV objectives...
http://www.telescope.com/Accessorie...-Lens-Cap-for-Binoculars/c/3/sc/43/p/7610.uts
They're cheap enough so buy a few replacements. They're on my wife's 8X32 and they've remained snug for almost two years. An inexpensive solution to a simple problem.
The Swaro eyepiece cover works but there are plenty of options. The Vortex cover works pretty well but my old Ultravid cover is on the 8X32 SV and it works perfectly.
How about a wide comfortable strap? The Vero Vellini Extra Wide Binocular Strap (Black, 55mm) is on all our bins and it's also inexpensive ($16.83 at Amazon). It wraps around the bin and goes in the case.
Put the whole kit in a Vortex 42mm case ($18.95 at EO) and you're good to go. Our 8.5X42 and 10X50 go in 50mm Vortex cases.
Enjoy!
Six Point Five
Well-known member
Pileatus, thank you for advice.
I already am using a very good padded case meant for Vortex 42mm binoculars, a nice soft wide, slightly elastic neck strap sold by Optech, earth or tan colored, and i am using the ocular covers from some Bushnells. I like the case and the neck strap, but will try the lens covers suggested.
Warbler migration and rapidly changing weather are almost upon us here, so will figure something out quickly.
I already am using a very good padded case meant for Vortex 42mm binoculars, a nice soft wide, slightly elastic neck strap sold by Optech, earth or tan colored, and i am using the ocular covers from some Bushnells. I like the case and the neck strap, but will try the lens covers suggested.
Warbler migration and rapidly changing weather are almost upon us here, so will figure something out quickly.
Hello Swedpat, I know how you feel about all this as I used to misunderstand this physical notions too, here's how it works:
Field flatness is the relative flatness of the transversal image given by the instrument, it useally is spherical which means that the plane of focus is actually not a plane but a portion of a sphere, therefore you cannot have simultaneously perfect focus in the centre and in the edge of the FOV (think of a tangential plane to a sphere), you need "to bring" the edge to your focal plane. Flat field instruments fix this problem, all the areas of the FOV are sharp because the field is closer to being a plane, BUT it doesn't mean that the field is not distorded (think of a distorded picture in a flat frame), distortion is actually a deformation of the image, flat does not mean without distortion, I know it can be misleading.
You can have a flat field with distortion and a curved field without it.
FLATNESS IS NOT ABOUT THE CURVATURE OF THE IMAGE, BUT ABOUT THE CURVATURE OF THE FIELD!
Now the rolling ball effect of the SV (barrel distortion "amplified" through scanning) has been GREATLY exagerated in this forum, it has become a fashion talk by snobs who don't know what to say to stand out from the crowd.
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
I agree with the first part. Regarding the "exaggeration" I shall add: It is well known that the way the globe effect is perceived differs significantly with the individual observer. It may additionally be the case that Swarovski may have modified the layout of their distortion curves sometime in between production runs, without public announcement. Every individual observer can only report about what he/she has seen with his/her particular sample. It is not helpful then calling such an observation "fashion talk by snobs" whenever these observations happen to disagree with your own experience.
Cheers,
Holger
For what it's worth, I wasn't surprised to learn from Gijs' cutaways that there have been design changes. It's something I've commented on before. I guess it was 4 or 5 years ago that I first tried the ELSV 8.5x42. The centre was very sharp but there were subtle rings of distortion and variable sharpness that I found unpleasant. I did see evidence of some sort of rolling ball effect but it didn't have the uniformity of Holger's illustrations. When I've tried them more recently I've thought the profile more uniform and any distortion appeared confined to the periphery. However the more significant change for me is that the effective resolution in the centre of the field was obviously worse than the SLCs I compared them to and I believe worse than those early examples I tried. I've also suspect that there have been quite significant differences in the blue transmission in the samples I've seen, but I guess that could be batch variation rather than a design change.
David
David
Six Point Five
Well-known member
Perhaps some of you would remember that i started this particular discussion. After the focusing mechanism has been adjusted and broken in and after spending some quality time with the EL SV 8x32, i can honestly report that i love them now. I assume that my perception of the edge distortion was low and that i got used to it.
The instrument may not be for everyone, but it is my favorite now. I do notice an increased ease of observing or noticing tiny details at greater distance on small moving birds; the designers and builders did their job very well.
The instrument may not be for everyone, but it is my favorite now. I do notice an increased ease of observing or noticing tiny details at greater distance on small moving birds; the designers and builders did their job very well.
Another happy SV owner. Enjoy!:t:
Similar threads
