10/25 swaro compacts always 4th place (1 Viewer)

I have been watching this website for 3 1/2 years. Everytime someone posts the question as to what is the best 10/25 compact, the little swaro comes in last. I was wondering what features put it in 4th place when compared to the leica, zeiss, and nikon?

The Swarovski pocket models have been around for a very long time. In that time, it is my understanding that they have been gradually improved with better coatings etc, but their basic optical design is unchanged. Long ago (10+ years ago) I might have considered them the best as they were among the first phase-coated pocket roofs, were perhaps the only waterproof premium model, and they had better close focus than other premium pocket roofs (their close-focus was much better than the official spec). I can't speak for the very latest production, but whenever I've tried the Swarovski versus the best from other manufacturers (especially Zeiss Victory and Leica Ultravid), they have had inferior brightness, muted color, sometimes inferior contrast, inferior close focus, and inferior ergonomics.

--AP

AP: Do you see the same color and contrast flaws viewing animals vs. viewing birds at greater distances?

chinadill said:

AP: Do you see the same color and contrast flaws viewing animals vs. viewing birds at greater distances?

Click to expand...

Color and contrast issues apply to the optic, not the subject, so my assessment goes for everything. A yellow bias may filter out scattered blue light and so reduce effects of haze (thereby improving apparent contrast and the overall view), so if you are watching large mammals at great distance you might enjoy the view provided by such a color-biased optic. I'm not sure how much this applies to past or present Swarovski pocket models, but pre-Swarobright SLC models had considerable yellow bias.

--AP

I haven't seen any head-to-head detailed review on those alpha compact binoculars. Are they on this forum?

AP: I wish I could have gotten more posts on this, but I do thank you for your input

chinadill said:

AP: I wish I could have gotten more posts on this, but I do thank you for your input

Click to expand...

I'll contribute one more post, having owned both the 10x25 and 8x20SLCs for 16 and 13 yrs. respectively. My (1993) 10x25 SLC has the original rubber eyecups, and the (1996) 8x20 the twist-up kind. Over the years I've compared them with offerings from Leica, Zeiss, and most recently, Nikon. Overall, I'd say that Leica and Zeiss are in the same league, Nikon definitely not (just my opinion, of course). The newest Swaro compacts have upgraded SWAROBRIGHT coatings and, in fairness, should be the only ones compared to the modern Ultravid and Zeiss for brightness or color rendition.

1. In my view the Swaros got a bad rap a while back based on certain "resolution" tests, which found them slightly inferior to Leica and Zeiss (and possibly Nikon). As I recall, these were 8x20 comparisons (since most evaluators are also oriented to the 8x20 configuration), so I believe the 10x25 probably inherited a bad rap from the 8x20. In any event, the resolution tests amounted to instrument-aided visual acuity assessments, the validity and reliability of which depend upon (in part): (a) precise knowledge of instrument power, viewing distances and lighting conditions, (b) experimental control of observer bias and sequence effects, and (c) estimates of experimental error and interpersonal differences. Absent these conditions and statistical measurements, I've never put a great deal of credence in small reported acuity differences, and would have much preferred all comparisons to have been made by instrumented optical means.

2. There is also a tendency to dislike the forward focus control location of the Swaro compacts, a feature and criticism that is also shared with its cousin the 8x30SLC. In the end this is a matter of personal preference, altho I've always found it to be an asset under real-life conditions.

3. Historically, Swaro binoculars had a warm color bias, supportive of hunting application, but this has been eliminated in recent times as overall transmission has improved (i.e., necessarily yielding flatter transmission curves). Nonetheless, I suspect that there is somewhat of a 'conditioned response' among binocular experts to see and comment on color bias in Swaro products, —which at this point may be more of an 'observer bias' than an optical one. Again, optical transmission curves would tell the story much better than testimonials.

I'll just conclude by saying that these are some of the reasons Swaro compacts appear to trail in the ranking, however small the real differences may be. In my opinion they are up to the competition optically, although it's a matter of personal preference as to which feature set one would rather invest in. I'll stick with my trusty and reliable 10x25 SLCs. New buyers should keep an open mind. :t:

Ed

Ed: Thanks for the reply. Like you I had a 15 year old pair of 10x25 swaros that I gave to my son 3 years ago. I repaced them with another pair of 10x 25 swaros. At the same time my hunting partner bought a pair of leica 10x25 ultravids. We have been comparing them for 3 yr. now. Neither of us can see any advantage over the other. In fact my partner prefers mine over his.

chinadill said:

Ed: Thanks for the reply. Like you I had a 15 year old pair of 10x25 swaros that I gave to my son 3 years ago. I repaced them with another pair of 10x 25 swaros. At the same time my hunting partner bought a pair of leica 10x25 ultravids. We have been comparing them for 3 yr. now. Neither of us can see any advantage over the other. In fact my partner prefers mine over his.

Click to expand...

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to vent.