[trealawboy]

Has anyone out there read the review of the Nikon 8x32 HG DCF versus Swarovski EL 8x32 by Kimmo Absetz in Alula, 2003 part 4 and is willing to offer a synopsis of the conclusion.

Thanks

TB

[dogfish]

Originally Posted by trealawboy

Has anyone out there read the review of the Nikon 8x32 HG DCF versus Swarovski EL 8x32 by Kimmo Absetz in Alula, 2003 part 4 and is willing to offer a synopsis of the conclusion.

Thanks
TB

The Nikon wins, basically. 10 to 9 points on sharpness; 5 to 4 on contrast; equal on brightness; 5 to 4.5 on colour rendition; loses by a point on field of view. There are other categories but the overall points score is 75 to 73.5 to the Nikon.

Kimmo says: 'The Swav EL 8x32 offers unprecendentedly good handling and usability with a very good image quality but is resolution and contrast are not quite at the level of the best'. He says the Nikon 8x32s 'take their place alongside Swav's 8.5x 42s as the best all-round birding binocular'.

I've only had a brief try of the Swav and Nikon 8x32s at the Bird Fair, but on a brief impression, I'd agree with Kimmo. I like the bigger Swavs but found the 32s a bit disappointing.

Sean

[Leif]

Originally Posted by dogfish

The Nikon wins, basically. 10 to 9 points on sharpness; 5 to 4 on contrast; equal on brightness; 5 to 4.5 on colour rendition; loses by a point on field of view. There are other categories but the overall points score is 75 to 73.5 to the Nikon.

Kimmo says: 'The Swav EL 8x32 offers unprecendentedly good handling and usability with a very good image quality but is resolution and contrast are not quite at the level of the best'. He says the Nikon 8x32s 'take their place alongside Swav's 8.5x 42s as the best all-round birding binocular'.

I've only had a brief try of the Swav and Nikon 8x32s at the Bird Fair, but on a brief impression, I'd agree with Kimmo. I like the bigger Swavs but found the 32s a bit disappointing.

Sean

I got a quick try of the Swaro 8x32 EL on a dull grey day, and they gave a signficantly less bright and contrasty image than my Nikon 8x32 SE. I'm in no hurry to swap.

[pduxon]

and the Swaro's cost how much more than the Nikon SE and HG???

[scampo]

Good old Nikon! I do like the 8x42 when compared to my own Swaro 8.5ELs. I can't put my finger on why exactly - must spend more time comparing one day!

[mike60]

I havent read the article but compared these 2 models myself recently. Found my nikon hg much better in brightness and contrast, and very marginally better in resolution ...to my eyes anyway. Without looking at the weights, the swaros feel lighter and are great to hold. I havent tested in low light conditions....seems it may have a weakness there.

[scampo]

I can't think that the Nikons would suffer at all in low light. The fov is slightly less than the Swaro, too, and they are heavier. My brother has them so I look forward to a closer look when we next meet. It's certain that Nikon know a thing or two about optics as their scopes are top notch, too - the EDIII + 30xW is a real little stunner.

[trealawboy]

Originally Posted by dogfish

The Nikon wins, basically. 10 to 9 points on sharpness; 5 to 4 on contrast; equal on brightness; 5 to 4.5 on colour rendition; loses by a point on field of view. There are other categories but the overall points score is 75 to 73.5 to the Nikon.

Kimmo says: 'The Swav EL 8x32 offers unprecendentedly good handling and usability with a very good image quality but is resolution and contrast are not quite at the level of the best'. He says the Nikon 8x32s 'take their place alongside Swav's 8.5x 42s as the best all-round birding binocular'.

I've only had a brief try of the Swav and Nikon 8x32s at the Bird Fair, but on a brief impression, I'd agree with Kimmo. I like the bigger Swavs but found the 32s a bit disappointing.

Sean

I had a chance to compare these at length on Saturday. The Swarovksi's are more comfortable in the hand and lighter. They have a wider field of view. The Nikon's feel more substantial and the build quality is terrific. They also focus faster which I found very useful during testing. Eyecups are better on the Nikon's. Optically, I would also say the Nikon's just shade it, but it is very close.

Swarovki's were GBP779, Nikon's were GBP519.

[POP]

my twopenny worth is that if youhave Swaro 8x42 el stay with them and dont change to 8x32,gave them a good test the other week at Rutland Water and found that one of the problems with the 32 is that their focussing is far to critical,and after 3hrs could not wait to get back to my 8x42.The more I use these bins the more I amazed at the quality of them.In my book the kings of optics.

John

[Edward woodwood]

8 x32 Hgs are the dogs (after Zeiss 7 x 42 dialyts of course!)

brighter in forest than swarovs with much quicker focussing and i've heard of several swarov fogging probs in tropics. They replaced my mates three times and all fogged....then they sent him a broken pair with one lens component moving inside so when he was watching mega rares in Peru two weeks back they kept dropping in n out of focus....nice!

can't be the old Zeiss tho....

[michaelboustead]

Originally Posted by Tim Allwood

8 x32 Hgs are the dogs (after Zeiss 7 x 42 dialyts of course!)

brighter in forest than swarovs with much quicker focussing and i've heard of several swarov fogging probs in tropics. They replaced my mates three times and all fogged....then they sent him a broken pair with one lens component moving inside so when he was watching mega rares in Peru two weeks back they kept dropping in n out of focus....nice!

can't be the old Zeiss tho....

I know that this will sound silly, but I need help understanding what you just wrote. In the United States saying that the "8x32 Hgs are the dogs" mean that they are horrible. Is that what you meant?


Mike

[Edward woodwood]

sorry for confusion Michael: in UK dog's is a reference to dog's bollocks which means dogs testicles which for some reason has come to mean 'excellent' Don't ask me why but you can perhaps see now why we just say dog's sometimes!

[Jane Turner]

I think it might because dogs are often well endowed in the testicular department, especially Airedale terriers

[mpedris]

Now we're getting somewhere with the dogs!

[POP]

It also means a load of.

John

[Leif]

Originally Posted by Tim Allwood

sorry for confusion Michael: in UK dog's is a reference to dog's bollocks which means dogs testicles which for some reason has come to mean 'excellent' Don't ask me why but you can perhaps see now why we just say dog's sometimes!

I think it's because dogs love to lick their bits, and hence they must be really tasty.

It's the dogs ****s = tasty = really good.

[scampo]

Originally Posted by michaelboustead

I know that this will sound silly, but I need help understanding what you just wrote. In the United States saying that the "8x32 Hgs are the dogs" mean that they are horrible. Is that what you meant?


Mike

Well - I'm with you. A "dog" is a negative description here, too. I've never heard of "dogs" used that way.

[pduxon]

Must be an age thing. The Dog's is defintely a sign of approval.

[Grousemore]

Apropos of nothing,I seem to recall that it was the Donkey's before becoming the Dog's.

[scampo]

Yes - donkey's it is up here, too. "Dog's dinner" is the negative phrase I hear a good deal.

[marcus]

Originally Posted by scampo

Yes - donkey's it is up here, too. "Dog's dinner" is the negative phrase I hear a good deal.

C'mon Steve. I don't want a schoolteacher to start with this too.

[Grousemore]

Originally Posted by scampo

Yes - donkey's it is up here, too. "Dog's dinner" is the negative phrase I hear a good deal.

Is that the same as 'Dog's breakfast'?

[Leif]

Originally Posted by scampo

Yes - donkey's it is up here, too. "Dog's dinner" is the negative phrase I hear a good deal.

Steve: And there's me hoping that you of all people would give us all a learned discourse on the phrases etymology. So how do your pupils express approval of your lessons, if they don't tell you they are the dog's bollocks?

I believe there is a beer called "Dog's Bollocks". I seem to recall buying some.

[scampo]

Must be a regional idiom, Leif - 'dog's dinner' it is here. lessons? "That was a truly splendid learning experience I just experienced, sir!" or something like that.

(-;

[POP]

Those of you not aware of the term "dogs",it is the language of the "chavs",who will be in full display in Portugal in June.Those of a more genteel nature would be more incloned to call their favourite bins "wicked".

John