[henry link]

I occasionally check this German dealer's website for new stuff. They have a history of jumping the gun with product announcements.

http://www.orniwelt.de/products/Fern...-Traveler.html

edit: They're on the Swarovski website too, apparently since Jan 17.

http://www.swarovskioptik.com/en/pre...32-swarovision

More stuff. Click on the menu at the upper right for details, including a light transmission curve.

http://el.swarovskioptik.com/en/natu...2-swarovision/

[brocknroller]

I only have two questions.

One, does the 8x32 SV EL have the same level of distortion as the full sized model or enough pincushion to keep the ball from rolling?

Two, how steep is the interest on a $2,000 Western Sky Native American loan?

Brock

[james holdsworth]

The curve shows the old EL peaking at about 83%..........were they really this poor?

[brocknroller]

Allbinos measured the old 8x32 EL's light transmission at 91.1+/- 1.5%. I guess they were pretty confident about it since they usually allow for an error of 3%. Very flat light curve.

http://www.allbinos.com/189-binocula...L_8x32_WB.html

Brock

[Matt_RTH]

Originally Posted by brocknroller

Allbinos measured the old 8x32 EL's light transmission at 91.1+/- 1.5%. I guess they were pretty confident about it since they usually allow for an error of 3%. Very flat light curve.

http://www.allbinos.com/189-binocula...L_8x32_WB.html

Brock

I thought I had seen something along those lines. I don't know what those curves on the Swaro site really are saying but it seems dubious that the former flagship product would have that much of a disparity. I wonder if these are "marketing curves".

I'd love to hear more analysis of those curves and the practical implication in use.

The video was an interesting production concept - very different than what I would have expected in a video showcasing their product.

[steve@37n84w]

Great looking roof and nice wide fov. Like Brock I wonder about "rolling ball" in this model in comparison to other EL models. Maybe when Brock makes it down to Honey Creek Bill and Beak to check out the Habichts they may have the new 32mm EL in stock.

Anyone know when they're going to start getting the new model out to dealers??? Are you reading this thread by any chance proudpapa?????

Steve

[henry link]

I think the spectral transmission curve shown for early EL's is probably about right. I had a pair from 2000. It certainly didn't have very impressive light transmission or contrast and the color bias was slightly but visibly yellow. Later EL's were considerably improved.

Even the 2012 curve doesn't look good enough for any light transmission bragging rights. If it's a "marketing curve" they should have goosed it up a few percent.

[elkcub]

Henry,

Have you (or anyone) come across transmission curves for the 8x42 SLC HD?

Thanks,
Ed

PS. Allbinos posted a curve for the 10x42 HD, but I don't trust it at all.

[proudpapa56]

for the new EL 32s. I have to call SONA on Monday and will ask for update. I know we were really close to being one of the first dealers to order so hopefully we're included in the first shipment. Once they're on backorder (and they will be) it could be months before another shipment.
The SLC 15x56s we ordered in Nov got here Monday, sold yesterday, and are now on backorder until the end of April. We're still waiting for the Range 10x42s we ordered in Sept. The hot items are just hard to keep in stock.

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Henry,

Have you (or anyone) come across transmission curves for the 8x42 SLC HD?

Thanks,
Ed

PS. Allbinos posted a curve for the 10x42 HD, but I don't trust it at all.

Hi Ed,

see here, beginning at p. 18: http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Gin...binoculars.pdf

Steve

[David Swain]

Great video. It exudes Teutonic precision and a definite "this-can't-be-done-in-China" confidence.

David

[brocknroller]

Originally Posted by henry link

I think the spectral transmission curve shown for early EL's is probably about right. I had a pair from 2000. It certainly didn't have very impressive light transmission or contrast and the color bias was slightly but visibly yellow. Later EL's were considerably improved.

Even the 2012 curve doesn't look good enough for any light transmission bragging rights. If it's a "marketing curve" they should have goosed it up a few percent.

Don't worry, allbinos will "goose" it up for them. -:)

Allbinos curve for the 8x32 WB EL (w/Swarobright) is already higher than the Swaro's Website's SV EL version. For example, it has the LT already above 90% at 450nm while Swaro has the SV EL at 85% at 450, and for most of the "flat" curve the percentage is over 90% whereas the SV EL on Swaro's Website is just hugging the line.

You'll also notice that while allbinos' curve is fairly flat above 90%, there are little dips and bumps along the way while Swaro's is smooth throughout. I suspect Swaro did this for appearances. A smooth curved line looks better than one with little bumps.

Though as allbinos points out at the end of the 8x32 EL review:

"In this range the transmission amounts to 90 to 92% so rather high for a roof-prism Schmidt-Pechan instrument. The problem is that nowadays such a transmission level can be had buying even much cheaper binoculars, produced not only in Japan but also in China."

So there's a push from the bottom. Hence, Zeiss' announcement about its new FL's 95% LT to get above the masses. Of course, the new FLs probably have A/K prisms. Allbinos already has the 8x32 FL at 94.6+/- 1.5%.

I remember reading your review of the 2000 EL and it saying that you weren't very impressed.

I tried the 2001 version, and while I was impressed with the resolution, when compared side by side with the 8x30 SLCnew from 2009, the SLC blew away the EL in terms contrast and color saturation. The EL had a slight yellow bias and the image looked washed out in comparison to the SLC with the newer prism and AR coatings. With modern roofs, coatings is the name of the game.

Maybe it's because spending $2K for me is like spending $10K for others, but I expect Big Things from the Big Three.

Not only do I expect the image to be as sharp as my eyes will allow me to see for a given magnification, but I also want the colors to "SNAP," the contrast to be excellent, the edges to be reasonable sharp (they don't have to be sharp to the very edge since the trade-offs are not worth it for me), the distortion level the same as the hotness/coolness of Baby Bear's soup, and.... is it really too much to ask for a focuser that turns smoothly in both directions at this price point?

I also expect at reasonable amount of 3-D Effect even from an 8x32 roof, which unlike most other 8x30/32 roofs I've tried, the 8x32 WB EL did have.

Because field flatteners kill field curvature, and some field curvature enhances the 3-D effect, views through my 8x32 SE did not appear to be as 3-D as my 8x30 EII or 7x35 WF. However, all being porros, the difference wasn't dramatic.

I will also be checking to see how the flat field affects the 3-D perception in the new 8x32 SV EL. The ED glass will cut down on CA and improve contrast and color a bit, but for penny pinchers (be they misers or those of meager means), the question is going to be just how much better is the 8x32 SV EL than the WB, and am I getting my money's worth?

For some deep pockets, well, the 8x32 SV EL is the latest Xbox 360, so it's a "must have". Play with it for a little while and then sell it when the next Big Thing comes along.

Hopefully for some, it will be the "bong" like the full sized SV EL was for the Last Bino Buyers Club members, and they will have reached bino nirvana. For over $2K, nirvana should be attainable. The Buddhist equivalent of Catholic Indulgences. :-)

Brock

[John Russell]

The transmission curve for the Swarovision (presumably 42 mm) correlates quite closely with that published in last year's Vögel test of 10x42s. These measurements were carried out in Leica's laboratory.

John

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by hinnark

Hi Ed,

see here, beginning at p. 18: http://home.europa.com/~telscope/Gin...binoculars.pdf

Steve

Steve,

GREAT!! Just what I would have expected based on my own two eyes. The HD has slightly higher transmission than the SV (not that it matters much), with somewhat less blue and somewhat more red, which was Swarovski's "deliberate choice."

Now, there's a review that makes sense.

Many thanks,
Ed

[RJM]

Originally Posted by james holdsworth

The curve shows the old EL peaking at about 83%..........were they really this poor?

Yes, with typically 8-element and 16 air-to-glass surfaces it had been nearly impossible for a modern SP roof bin to cross over the 90% total transmission threshold. It took dielectric mirror prisms and tweaks to the AR coatings and perhaps the glass chemistry to reduce absorption (like from 99% transmission to 99.5%!) to finally break thru.

[RJM]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Steve,

GREAT!! Just what I would have expected based on my own two eyes. The HD has slightly higher transmission than the SV (not that it matters much), with somewhat less blue and somewhat more red, which was Swarovski's "deliberate choice."

Now, there's a review that makes sense.

Many thanks,
Ed

Perhaps any transmission differences between these two could be attributed to the lack of a field flattener lens in the SLC? Obviously the 8x SLC HD would be brighter than the 8.5x SV due to the larger exit pupil.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by RJM

Perhaps any transmission differences between these two could be attributed to the lack of a field flattener lens in the SLC? Obviously the 8x SLC HD would be brighter than the 8.5x SV due to the larger exit pupil.

Transmission measures the percentage of light that comes out relative to what was put in. So, yes on the field flattener, and no on the EP. The field flattener adds more glass, which absorbs a small amount of light and reflects at two additional surfaces. The EP would have no effect, however, because the collimated test beam is smaller (typically about 1mm) than the EP.

If you mean the larger EP (of the SLC) can produce a brighter image on the retina, I certainly agree IF the observer's pupil doesn't restrict it. In my case, I doubt that my pupil ever gets much larger than 4.25 mm. However, I do love the extra room for it to move around in.

I'm not worried, I'M HAPPY!!
Ed

[RJM]

Originally Posted by elkcub

If you mean the larger EP (of the SLC) can produce a brighter image on the retina, I certainly agree IF the observer's pupil doesn't restrict it. In my case, I doubt that my pupil ever gets much larger than 4.25 mm. However, I do love the extra room for it to move around in.

I'm not worried, I'M HAPPY!!
Ed

Yes, that was exactly what I meant Ed. But I assumed you meant you saw a brightness difference in your 8x SLC due to the slightly higher transmission curve while I would attribute it to the larger exit pupil having the greater impact.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by RJM

Yes, that was exactly what I meant Ed. But I assumed you meant you saw a brightness difference in your 8x SLC due to the slightly higher transmission curve while I would attribute it to the larger exit pupil having the greater impact.

Gotcha. Actually, my original statement was misleading. I didn't see a brightness difference between the SLC and SV, but was aware of a slightly warmer color balance. That's what I meant by "based on my own two eyes." The fact that there is slightly higher overall transmission for the SLC is agreeably consistent with it having fewer lenses.

Regards,
Ed

[ronh]

Henry,
I wonder how you stood it. My wife had a 2005 EL, which crushed my Trinovid BA, brightness wise. RonW has shown transmissions of the BA averaging 83%, that from a lab he trusts and apparently hired to make the measurement. That is slightly better even than those first ELs.

The SV still isn't as bright as a Zeiss FL though. It looks about the same as a Leica BR to me.
Ron

[JabaliHunter]

Originally Posted by ronh

The SV still isn't as bright as a Zeiss FL though.

ay, there's the rub... (as Hamlet might have said)

[henry link]

Originally Posted by ronh

Henry,
I wonder how you stood it. My wife had a 2005 EL, which crushed my Trinovid BA, brightness wise. RonW has shown transmissions of the BA averaging 83%, that from a lab he trusts and apparently hired to make the measurement. That is slightly better even than those first ELs.

The SV still isn't as bright as a Zeiss FL though. It looks about the same as a Leica BR to me.
Ron

Ron,

I knew the EL's were dimmer than the Nikon SE I used for comparison the day I bought them, but I would have given my EL a subjective score a bit higher than that.

As it happens I have some Swarovski and Leica test results for the very same pairs of the Swarovski SLC binoculars from 2000 (unfortunately the EL wasn't included). They don't quite agree and, oddly enough, the Leica measurements of Swarovski binoculars are higher than Swarovski's measurements, and they're both higher than the Swarovski spectral transmission curve for the 1999 EL even though the SLC didn't use Swarobright at that time. One more reason to take these things with a grain of salt.

SLC 8x50, Leica lab 86.6 - Day, 83 - Night
SLC 8x50, Swarovski lab 84.9 - Day, 81.4 - Night

SLC 8x56, Leica lab 89.5 - Day, 86.9 - Night
SLC 8x56, Swarovski lab 86.7 - Day, 84.5 - Night

Henry

[AlanM]

At least 2 US retailers are advertising them, one, Eagle Optics, seems to indicate they are in stock. But this is probably an omission since all other sources indicate a May availability date.

[proudpapa56]

now indicates that they are out of stock.

[proudpapa56]

Swarovski Optik North America is sticking to their story with the early May release.