Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 9th September 2017, 16:08   #26
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
 
Theo98's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: SE La
Posts: 723
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
I have the 8.5X42 and the 10X50 SV's. The 8.5 was the "right" choice for a superb all-purpose bin. The 10X is heavier and produces more handshake but...

There's a group of high flying raptors unseen by naked eye. You scan, find them and the 8.5 tells you they are probably small accipiters (Sharp-shinned) and perhaps one or more American Kestrels mixed in. You can't tell for sure; they are too distant. The 10X50 reveals a handful of sharpies along with two adult male kestrels. The 10X makes a difference but not as often as one would imagine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgraider View Post
And if we are "picking nits", the 10x50 has that special "wow" factor that the 8.5x doesn't have. IMHO of course.
Agree!

The 8.5X42 SV is a Great multi-purpose bino and the 10X50 SV is a Great specialized higher power instrument that if you are "comfortable hand holding", takes the 8.5 view to a higher level of refined glassing!

One day, my choice will be to own Both!!

Ted
__________________
Seeing is Believing ...Believing without Seeing is...FAITH!

Last edited by Theo98 : Saturday 9th September 2017 at 16:10.
Theo98 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 9th September 2017, 16:50   #27
Jack Speer
Registered User
 
Jack Speer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
I have the 8.5X42 and the 10X50 SV's. The 8.5 was the "right" choice for a superb all-purpose bin. The 10X is heavier and produces more handshake but...

There's a group of high flying raptors unseen by naked eye. You scan, find them and the 8.5 tells you they are probably small accipiters (Sharp-shinned) and perhaps one or more American Kestrels mixed in. You can't tell for sure; they are too distant. The 10X50 reveals a handful of sharpies along with two adult male kestrels. The 10X makes a difference but not as often as one would imagine.
Thank you for the example, Pileatus. It has helped put things into perspective and made me feel even more at ease with my decision.

Jack
Jack Speer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 10th September 2017, 00:35   #28
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
Thank you for the example, Pileatus. It has helped put things into perspective and made me feel even more at ease with my decision.

Jack
I forgot to mention that the 8.5 has greater depth of field, something I increasingly value as my eyes age.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th September 2017, 00:43   #29
razor6
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 20
I just got the 8.5x42SV Field Pro recently to compliment my 10x50SV (my lower power mainstay had been an Ultravid HD+ 7x42). View is incredible in both, but in my normal birding situations, I'm finding the 10x50 isnt giving me much more than the 8.5x42.
I'm thinking about the 12x50SV as a compliment to the 8.5 instead. For the larger bin (my 10x50SV) I'm about 50/50 astronomy vs. terrestrial use, and about half the time for terrestrial use I'm using a finnstick or monopod. I have access to a friend's 12x50SV tomorrow and am going to makes some comparisons with the 10x50SV.

However, back to the original topic, I'm probably going to be selling my Ultravid HD + 7x42 as much as I love it, because the 8.5 Field Pro is getting all my viewing time.

Last edited by razor6 : Sunday 17th September 2017 at 00:46. Reason: Spelling
razor6 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th September 2017, 09:27   #30
Torview
Registered User
 
Torview's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Dartmoor.
Posts: 2,009
Hi razor, let us know your thoughts on the comparison, I like the idea of the 12x50 on a tripod.
Torview is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th September 2017, 10:34   #31
breydon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: norfolk
Posts: 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilmore Girl View Post
Torview,

You've abandoned your 7x42 leaving me the only oddball left

Glad you like your 8.5 so much and getting good usage. The SV's are all wonderful. I particularly
like the little 8x32 SV.
I had the original 8.5x42 SV model and sold it on. Replaced it with the Lieca 7x42 Ultravid HD Makes me smile every time I look through it. Love it
breydon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th September 2017, 15:25   #32
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor6 View Post
I just got the 8.5x42SV Field Pro recently to compliment my 10x50SV (my lower power mainstay had been an Ultravid HD+ 7x42). View is incredible in both, but in my normal birding situations, I'm finding the 10x50 isnt giving me much more than the 8.5x42.
I'm thinking about the 12x50SV as a compliment to the 8.5 instead. For the larger bin (my 10x50SV) I'm about 50/50 astronomy vs. terrestrial use, and about half the time for terrestrial use I'm using a finnstick or monopod. I have access to a friend's 12x50SV tomorrow and am going to makes some comparisons with the 10x50SV.

However, back to the original topic, I'm probably going to be selling my Ultravid HD + 7x42 as much as I love it, because the 8.5 Field Pro is getting all my viewing time.
Let's us know what you think when you compare the 12X/10X 50mm SV's. When I compared them I just didn't see any advantage at all to the 12X. I was viewing at distances in the 200-1000m range. The 12X50 handles the same as the 10X50 SV but, at some point, I suppose handshake ends the debate...at least for me it did.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 17th September 2017, 16:03   #33
pbjosh
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
I also wanted to say that I wrestled with getting the 8.5x42 or the 10x50. I've seen a common opinion that if a bird cannot be identified with an 8x, then it cannot be identified with a 10x. But surely there is a range that is too far for 8x, but not too far for 10x right?

Jack
Of course 10x can help ID birds that are at the limit of 8x, assuming you can hold it still enough. I use 8x more than 10x as I mostly bird in the tropics. As soon as I'm in open country or on the coast though, 10x are certainly superior for me. Occasionally 10x show some value with challenging birds in the canopy but largely you are going to ID by ear and then look for confirming field marks, such that 8x vs 10x magnification isn't as critical as good contrast on backlit birds.

8x or even 7x are generally better for pelagics, it is much harder to use a 10x on a pelagic unless you're on a larger/more stable boat.

Cheers,
Josh
pbjosh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 18th September 2017, 14:20   #34
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor6 View Post
I just got the 8.5x42SV Field Pro recently to compliment my 10x50SV (my lower power mainstay had been an Ultravid HD+ 7x42). View is incredible in both, but in my normal birding situations, I'm finding the 10x50 isnt giving me much more than the 8.5x42.
I'm thinking about the 12x50SV as a compliment to the 8.5 instead. For the larger bin (my 10x50SV) I'm about 50/50 astronomy vs. terrestrial use, and about half the time for terrestrial use I'm using a finnstick or monopod. I have access to a friend's 12x50SV tomorrow and am going to makes some comparisons with the 10x50SV.

However, back to the original topic, I'm probably going to be selling my Ultravid HD + 7x42 as much as I love it, because the 8.5 Field Pro is getting all my viewing time.
IMO one of the reasons to own a SV 8.5X42 is that it bridges the 8X/10X gap a little.

I actually use the SV 12X50 more now than I did previously. IMO a perfect compliment to a nice 7X/8X. You'd be surprised how often there is something close to lean on or to use for a prop.

I think I'd wait on selling that 7X42 Leica!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th September 2017, 03:04   #35
razor6
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
IMO one of the reasons to own a SV 8.5X42 is that it bridges the 8X/10X gap a little.

I actually use the SV 12X50 more now than I did previously. IMO a perfect compliment to a nice 7X/8X. You'd be surprised how often there is something close to lean on or to use for a prop.

I think I'd wait on selling that 7X42 Leica!

In response to Torview and Pileatus, I had the chance to compare the 10x50SV vs. it's 12x50 counterpart over the last two days. Spent all day Sunday on Galveston Bay and High Island. Lots of time with birds in flight and long distance views out across the water with both a finnstick and a binocular harness. Spent last night for several hours on the night sky comparing as well.

Chuck makes a great point that the 8.5x42 bridges the gap between 8x/10x very nicely. It's a very slight, but noticeable increase in magnification over an 8x roof. When going back and forth between the 8.5x and 10x, there just was not that much difference. Of course, the 10x is only a 17.6% increase in magnification over the 8.5x. The 12x is a 41% increase over the 8.5x. Very noticeable difference.

Another comparison I made was on the night sky comparing the 12x50SV to what has long been my favorite astronomy bin, my Nikon 12x50SE. The increase in FOV of the 12x SV over the SE was very apparent. Such a great view (although the 10x50SV with its wider FOV is pretty incredible on the night sky as well).

As far as ease of view as well as ease of use, here are my observations. The 10x has an incredible WOW factor (I've seen that stated many times here, and it's true). The 12x is not quite as impressive at first glance, but the 12x is just as sharp, and has essentially the same AFOV.
By themselves, I would probably gravitate more toward the 10x50SV. Having said that however, I didn't notice a great difference in my ability to hold the 10x any more steady than the 12x. For handheld use, I use a Rick Young Outdoors binocular harness, which gives me just enough support to easily use either power for extended views. And for terrestrial use neither one of these will serve as my primary bin. On the night sky I will have it mounted next to my Lafuma zero gravity chair, and I find ALL handheld 10x bins a little difficult to hold steady on stars for any length of time. For quick handheld use at night, the ease of use is equal in both bins.

Another consideration in my decision is the fact that I also own the unbelievable Swaro 10x40 Habicht GA. It's smaller, lighter and in many ways easier to use than the 10x50SV. However, I don't use it much as it is my son's primary bin. But, it is redundant with two great 10x bins. The other kicker for me is that the 12x SV is so much nicer on the night sky than my 12x SE, a bin I thought could never be beat for astronomy.

If my primary bin was a 7x42 (which was the case for me until recently) or a 8x32, it would be a "no brainer" to choose the incredible 10x50SV, but I am leaning heavily on buying the 12x50SV and selling the 10x50SV, for three main reasons:

1.) I feel the 12x is a better compliment to the 8.5x with a greater spread of magnification over 10x/8.5x combo (And yes Chuck, I'm keeping a 7x, however it will be my Zeiss FL over the UV+ due to wider FOV and Abbe Koenig brightness).

2.) For astronomy, 12x SV really impressed me over my long-time favorite 12x SE. Very noticeably wider FOV and even flatter field than the SE, which is great on the night sky.

3.) The 12x SV is the same size and weight as the 10x, and it is just as easy to use. For longer range birds in flight, there is no difference in shake when panning, but the magnification is just enough to make a difference. For times that I use a finnstick or monopod, the problems of higher magnification are negated.

Torview started this thread to highlight his experience after a year with the 8.5x42SV. I share his conclusions. More importantly for me, using the 8.5x42 as my primary bin has shaped how I put together the rest of my collection as well. I don't usually like to have redundant bins (although I can appreciate the characteristics of different, but similar mag optics).

My collection will now be:

7x42 Zeiss FL (Great for low light and sporting events with wide FOV)
8x30 Habicht (Love it for hummingbirds in the backyard and as a travel bin)
8.5x42SV (Primary bin, nothing better AFAIK)
10x40 Habicht (Makes the 12x50 decision easier, and my son loves it!)
12x50SV (Beautiful SV view and compliments the 8.5 perfectly. Great Astro bin)
18x70 Nikon Astroluxe (incredible high power Astro bin)

Last edited by razor6 : Tuesday 19th September 2017 at 03:29.
razor6 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th September 2017, 06:17   #36
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by razor6 View Post
...........
I didn't notice a great difference in my ability to hold the 10x any more steady than the 12x. ...........
I also can hold my 12X50 SV as steady as my 10X50.......but just not as long!
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 19th September 2017, 13:09   #37
razor6
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
I also can hold my 12X50 SV as steady as my 10X50.......but just not as long!
Agreed, Bruce. I would never use the 12x50 as my primary bin (nor would I use the 10x50 as primary), but used appropriately (for me) it's incredible.
razor6 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th September 2017, 18:12   #38
Stephen Mark
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: New Bern NC
Posts: 299
Just to chime in. I have handled Swaro's 12X50 several times at shows and also a couple of my friends have them. It sounds unbelievable but they are one of the easiest bins to hold steady I have ever tried.
Steve
Stephen Mark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th September 2017, 20:44   #39
Jack Speer
Registered User
 
Jack Speer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 43
Out of curiosity for the 50mm models, I went to my local Cabela's last night (or is it Bass Pro now?) and tried both the 10x and 12x. It has been a long while since I tried a 10x. From my 20 minutes of viewing I noted a couple things:

1. Objects seen through the 10x were not much larger than through my 8.5x, though the shakes were surprisingly much higher. Much shakier than I thought it would be from a mere 1.5x difference. Depth of field was also much lower than I would have anticipated.

2. Objects through the 12x were shockingly bigger. If there were some [live] birds around to watch I bet the experience would have been stunning. Going back and forth between the 10x and 12x, I could not detect a difference in the amount of shake, but then again, the longest I held them to my eyes was only 3 or 4 minutes at a time. The 10x would probably be stabler overall in a longer viewing session.
Depth of field in the 12x was shallower of course, but it also seemed easier to get things in focus. Getting things in focus with the 10x seemed more finicky; it wasn't clear what was in focus and what wasn't. With the thinner depth of field of the 12x I could tell easily when something was exactly in focus.

If I had to choose one to complement my 8.5x, it would be the 12x. The amount of power added was impressive. In reality though, I came to the conclusion I came to a few years ago: I like 8x binoculars much more. The extra power is nice, but the shake would really take some enjoyment out of birding. For my style of birding, I would always just grab the 8.5.
__________________
Jack
Jack Speer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th September 2017, 22:34   #40
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
Out of curiosity for the 50mm models, I went to my local Cabela's last night (or is it Bass Pro now?) and tried both the 10x and 12x. ........

1. Objects seen through the 10x were not much larger than through my 8.5x, though the shakes were surprisingly much higher. Much shakier than I thought it would be from a mere 1.5x difference. ......
The much more notciable shake may be partly due to the much greater size, weight and forward balance of the 50 mm compared to a 42 mm. The 10X50 mm is a heavy beast and I find it harder to hold steady free hand compared to a 10X42. It is also more front heavy with the 50 mm of glass up front.

It would interesting if you notice the same amount of additional shake comparing your 8.5X42 with a Swaro EL SV 10X42. I suspect you will find some due to the additional magnification but not as much of a difference that you found comparing to the 10X50.

I was out yesterday evening using a recently acquired Opticron 10X42 BGA VHD iMagic. It is relatively light for a 42 mm weighing only 24.6 oz (no strap or caps) and is relatively small in size. The place was an area of large open water reclaim ponds with no place to brace. I found the iMagic to be easier to hold steady than most other 10X binoculars I have used. I attribute a lot of that to the lighter weight and the smaller size putting the balance in the hands. It is a very nice binocular.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
....

2. Objects through the 12x were shockingly bigger. If there were some [live] birds around to watch I bet the experience would have been stunning. .......

Depth of field in the 12x was shallower of course, but it also seemed easier to get things in focus. Getting things in focus with the 10x seemed more finicky; ......

...... For my style of birding, I would always just grab the 8.5.
One of the Swaro reps uses the 12X50 EL SV as his primary binocular, even for warblers. He said he likes the detail.

I was able to pick up a 12X50 EL SV on close out and shortly there after took it out for a couple of hours at the local riparian. It was a much different viewing experience from even a 10X42 and some of the detail was stunning. However it is not something I would want to do on a regular basis. It takes much more effort and concentration in holding the 12X steady and finding a subject. In other words, using the 12X50 for general viewing is a lot more work.

I have not noticed any difference in my ability to get a subject in focus between using my 10X50 EL SV and the 12X50. I will have to watch for that in the future. Did you find it more difficult to achieve a quick focus with your 8.5X compared to the 12X?

The 10X50 and the 12X50 are more special purpose binoculars for my use. Your 8.5X42 does sound like a great all round general purpose choice. If I wanted just one binocular, then I can see the case for the 8.5X as a compromise for the advantages for both. However in my case, going with both a 8X and 10X, then I would go with an 8X over a 8.5X to get more of the advantages of the lower magnification (less shake, more depth of field, larger exit pupil).
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 28th September 2017, 00:31   #41
Jack Speer
Registered User
 
Jack Speer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 43
Hi Bruce,

Just wanted to say I enjoy reading your posts whenever I see them. They always provide good information and are easily read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
The much more notciable shake may be partly due to the much greater size, weight and forward balance of the 50 mm compared to a 42 mm. The 10X50 mm is a heavy beast and I find it harder to hold steady free hand compared to a 10X42. It is also more front heavy with the 50 mm of glass up front.

It would interesting if you notice the same amount of additional shake comparing your 8.5X42 with a Swaro EL SV 10X42. I suspect you will find some due to the additional magnification but not as much of a difference that you found comparing to the 10X50.
You know, I neglected to try the 10x42 even though it was sitting there. It did not cross my mind since I was more interested in the bigger exit pupil and bigger field of view of the 10x50. I will keep a note to try the 10x42 next time I stop by there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
I was out yesterday evening using a recently acquired Opticron 10X42 BGA VHD iMagic. It is relatively light for a 42 mm weighing only 24.6 oz (no strap or caps) and is relatively small in size. The place was an area of large open water reclaim ponds with no place to brace. I found the iMagic to be easier to hold steady than most other 10X binoculars I have used. I attribute a lot of that to the lighter weight and the smaller size putting the balance in the hands. It is a very nice binocular.
That is interesting. I will have to try that model as well when I am tempted by higher power again. The price is nice as well. I wonder though, as an owner of some nice high end binoculars, do you find going to a "lower class" binocular lacking at all? Not to sound like a snob; a real concern of mine when buying my Swarovski was not being able to satisfyingly bird with cheaper optics again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
I have not noticed any difference in my ability to get a subject in focus between using my 10X50 EL SV and the 12X50. I will have to watch for that in the future. Did you find it more difficult to achieve a quick focus with your 8.5X compared to the 12X?
I found with the greater depth of field of the 8.5x, it was easier to get things in focus than both the 10x and 12x. I know this somewhat contradicts my reasoning for why the 12x was easier to focus with than the 10x, but I'm having trouble putting it into words.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BruceH View Post
The 10X50 and the 12X50 are more special purpose binoculars for my use. Your 8.5X42 does sound like a great all round general purpose choice. If I wanted just one binocular, then I can see the case for the 8.5X as a compromise for the advantages for both. However in my case, going with both a 8X and 10X, then I would go with an 8X over a 8.5X to get more of the advantages of the lower magnification (less shake, more depth of field, larger exit pupil).
Yes I planned on only having one binocular, but the more time I spend here the more I am tempted to try others. They are fun to read about.
__________________
Jack
Jack Speer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th September 2017, 10:20   #42
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,165
Jack ..... Thanks for the kind words. I appreciate it. I have also been enjoying your posts, especially the one in another forum on the different types of birders.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=350500

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
......
You know, I neglected to try the 10x42 even though it was sitting there. It did not cross my mind since I was more interested in the bigger exit pupil and bigger field of view of the 10x50. I will keep a note to try the 10x42 next time I stop by there.
........
If you do get a chance to compare the 10X42 and 10X50, then please let us know if you find any difference in shake. There is a good chance you will find the 10X42 easier to hold. It should be about the same as your 8.5X Swaro expect for the small magnification difference. I thought the 8.5X has a comfortable design with good balance.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
..........
That is interesting. I will have to try that model as well when I am tempted by higher power again. The price is nice as well. I wonder though, as an owner of some nice high end binoculars, do you find going to a "lower class" binocular lacking at all? Not to sound like a snob; a real concern of mine when buying my Swarovski was not being able to satisfyingly bird with cheaper optics again.
..........
I am not sure where you are at but Opticron does have local dealers, mainly in Audubon Society shops and specialty stores. The iMagic BGA VHD is a recent model so it may not be at all dealers. Opticron is probably the most active manufacturer in attending birding festivals around the country so those are a great place to see most of their products.

http://www.opticronusa.com/Pages/dealers.html
http://www.opticronusa.com/Pages/festivals.html

As to the question of do I find the less expensive binoculars lacking compared to the high end, generally the answer is no. Obviously a Swaro 8.5X42 EL SV or a Zeiss SF will provide a noticeably better view than a Zeiss Terra and sometimes I have come across a viewing situation where I wished I had a higher end binocular, but most of the time I am satisfied with what I am using. That is because I try to match the binocular to the type of viewing I am going to do. The truth is, much of the time, the quality of the view or the requirements of the view, are not up to the capabilities of the higher end binoculars.

A good example is the use of the 10X42 iMagic the other day mentioned above. The location was the Glendale Rechaarge Ponds that consist of six large shallow basins that are alternately filled with about a foot or so of water to percolate into the ground and recharge the ground water. This is a bare open environment. Here are some Google image links to give an idea of what it is like.

http://www.birderfrommaricopa.com/us...view-gop9g.jpg
http://www.birderfrommaricopa.com/user/cimage/108.JPG
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/O_..._rWq=w800-h533
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MRV7wG2-Q4...0/DSC08966.jpg

It is just west of the Arizona Cardinals Football Statium.
http://www.birderfrommaricopa.com/user/cimage/118.JPG

The photos show that there is nothing scenic, it is bare without any supports for bracing and the views can be quite far as there is no way you can sneak up on the birds. The great features of the Swaro 10X50 would not really come into play here. Even though it has better contrast, there is really nothing in the view to take advantage of it. The place is ugly and the birds are usually to far to get a close view of the feather detail or other features.

In theory, the Swaro should make it easier to get an id but in reality, the birds are so far that it does not make a material difference. Other factors such as shape, behavior and general color patterns come more into play rather than picking up micro contrast detail. I think it is actually easier to pick up more detail in this situation with the iMagic because I can hold it steadier longer when I have to do it free hand. That is important because there were hundreds of birds in the ponds and it takes time to pick out the different species. So in this situation, I thought the iMagic was an excellent tool for the situation and I was not let down at all. I have been out there just before dark and in that situation I used the 10X50 and it was the best choice.

It is amazing how good the less expensive models are getting. I do not have any that would be a disappointment. However when the light, the subject and the surrounding environment are right, then the high end is spectacular. If I think I will have a chance for those types of views then I will take the more expensive stuff. I will also go with them when doing more difficult viewing and looking to pick out fine detail. Game spotting is an example where you are trying to find a nose, an ear, a tail or distinguish between an antler or a tree limb.

I think the 8.5X42 Swaro EL SV is a great choice for a single binocular because it can do it all with not a lot of compromises. It may lack a little in magnification for the long views but even that may not be an issue if someone has trouble holding a 10X steady. The only caution (other than the high price) on the 8.5X Swaro is some folks (such as me) pick up rolling ball and can not adjust.

All of that being said, I think there are some very good quality less expensive models out there and I doubt you would have issues switching between one of those and the 8.5X Swaro in most cases.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
.......
I found with the greater depth of field of the 8.5x, it was easier to get things in focus than both the 10x and 12x. I know this somewhat contradicts my reasoning for why the 12x was easier to focus with than the 10x, but I'm having trouble putting it into words.
.........
It may be that since you were able to hold the 12X as steady as the 10X, it was easier to see the detail with the 12X and that allowed you to focus faster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Speer View Post
.........
Yes I planned on only having one binocular, but the more time I spend here the more I am tempted to try others. They are fun to read about.
There is nothing wrong with just staying with one binocular but then again, there is nothing wrong with having more. The 12X you mentioned earlier may be better suited for different viewing situations so I can see a potential for getting a second model. Also, if you are a binocular enthusiast, then it is a lot of fun evaluating and using the different models. Each provides a different experience. Either way, I hope you stay with us.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 28th September 2017, 11:47   #43
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,185
Excellent points Bruce and a really nice dialogue.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th September 2017, 12:34   #44
Patudo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: London
Posts: 112
Seconded! A superb explanation of your insights and experiences - thank you sir!
Patudo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 29th September 2017, 17:41   #45
Jack Speer
Registered User
 
Jack Speer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 43
Bruce, that was an excellent explanation. Thank you for taking the time to put that all into words and providing pictures for context. Bravo, truly.

You have given me much to think about. I have always tried to gravitate towards just owning one binocular that can do it all, but as you have explained, there is merit in having multiple binoculars, even multiple of the same magnification. Hmmm tradeoffs...

You have also helped quell my fear of dissatisfaction when moving down a rung to "mid class" binoculars. I will approach all models with an open mind. Your opinion that the mid class being close to the top tier optics is mirrored by others in the forum. I admit, when I was considering a new binocular, I was overwhelmed by the myriad of options. I decided not to wade too deeply and stick with the model I had tried and liked in the past: the 8.5x42. Perhaps I could have been just as happy with a cheaper model, but the buying-trying-returning cycle of shopping over the internet did not appeal to me.

I would like to go to a birding festival sometime, but it looks like there are none in my area in the near future. No opticron dealers around me either, though I do plan on going to the bay area in a couple months and I see at least one dealer there. Depending on her schedule, Mrs. Speer may be able to come and try out some optics too (busy one she is). Opticron seems like a nice birding focused company, and that is something she values.
__________________
Jack
Jack Speer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th September 2017, 00:27   #46
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,494
Bruce:

A well done review, and I agree with your thoughts. I have been a 8.5x42 EL user for well over 10 years,
and recall Swarovski promoted this model as the "universal distance viewer".

That holds true today, and is why this model is very popular.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 30th September 2017, 02:41   #47
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,165
Thanks Lee, Patudo, Jack and Jerry for the positive feedback!

Jack .... The festivals are a great way to see various optics. Some just have tours and workshops but many will have an exhibitor tent and many of those will have one or more optic vendors. Opticron is by far the most active in attending festivals here in the U.S. Zeiss, Swaro and Leica and sometimes Celestron are good at attending the major events. Canon will be at some majors but mainly promoting large mm camera lenses. I can not think at the moment of any birding events currently attended by Nikon. They do attend a few hunting and firearms events which are also a good place to check out optics. I suspect Tract and new comer GPO will be more active in birding events in the future. Most of the vendor exhibits are inside but the vendors are real good about letting you take models outside. It is a great way to see a lot of optics and get to meet with the factory reps. Some are contracted and others are true employees. Most all have a strong outdoor background.

Keep checking the Opticron U.S. show schedule to see if there is a festival attended by optic vendors near you. If you do go, consider taking your 8.5X42 Swaro with you. You can learn so much more about a binocular if you have another to compare against, especially if it is one you know well. Your Swaro is about as good as it gets so it is a great benchmark for comparison.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 30th September 2017, 12:35   #48
chill6x6
Registered User
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 829
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Excellent points Bruce and a really nice dialogue.

Lee
i agree!

Bruce is one of the best at truly explaining things. Much better than I can for sure. Always an accurate, well thought out response!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 2nd October 2017, 21:10   #49
Riverstalker
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Munich
Posts: 24
Wink

So many happy 8.5 user ... reading all this helps a lot !

I am having a hard time too deciding which binoculars are best for me, except I only need ONE pair Sounds like an expensive obsession to get the perfect binocular collection ...

As we need one pair that does it all it will be the 8.5x42 ! I could test it, it is a joy to use, everybody in here recommends it, customer service top notch and we live next to the Swarovski Europe Office ... easy decision right ?

Today I could compare the 8x32 FP vs the 8.5x42 FP and the glare is almost non existent with the 42 (a little bit around the edges) whereas the 32 showed a pretty ugly grey veil from time to time. Only when I tried to push it to the limit but still it was there. Just like some users reported earlier in here. I too love the 32 but the 42 sounds like the saver option. Almost glare free so to speak. No rolling ball or any kind of sea sickness with the two although the first time panning in the woods is maybe a bit much for a human brain. I am simply not used to such an effect. After half an hour no problems at all.

The weight difference was surprising, these are really two different binoculars. You forget the 32 very quick, the 42 you know what your holding in your hand all the time. No friend of hanging them around the neck, so canīt comment on that.

We have a 7x42 Dialyt at home and somehow I have trouble holding it steady. With the two ELīs I had no problem at all. So maybe the newer binoculars just have better weight balance or I had a strong day. The Field Pro Package I could live without but it is there and itīs ok. I remove all straps anyway.

The built quality seems ok though I think every binocular in this price range should offer way more perfection. No matter if Zeiss, Leica or Swarovski. They all have their weak sides and this can be done better. In terms of build quality I am a fan of Leica. They are special when you grab them, at least to me. I never owned one, they donīt fit my eyes and are not waterproof

The 32 focuser seemed broken, the 42 focuser was good by the way. I am no huge fan of the EL focuser but they work. 2300 Euros ! The focus knob needs a more premium feel to it !
The green color is nice in person, looks almost grey. Very nice.

The optical performance is well described above, just my two cents testing these wonderful binoculars, we really look forward using them.
Riverstalker is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 2nd October 2017, 22:39   #50
Torview
Registered User
 
Torview's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Dartmoor.
Posts: 2,009
Just back from another enjoyable trip to North Norfolk, finally manage to see a Yellow Browed Warbler so very pleased. The SVFP continues to impress and never put a foot wrong in varying weather and light, at times I used it tripod mounted looking out to sea, I was equally able to identify Common Scoters at distance just as easily as a friend with a 10x42, in fact when tripod mounted I really start to appreciate the whole field sharpness, its a staggering view when stabilised in this way.
Torview is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
EL 8.5X42 Non HD SuperDuty Swarovski 42 Sunday 10th April 2016 17:59
New 8.5x42 ELs Jaffnut Swarovski 20 Friday 23rd September 2011 02:51
First Look at the New 8.5x42 EL henry link Swarovski 31 Saturday 16th January 2010 13:03
41 year Old Razorbill and 31 year Old Curlew - Record Breakers rockfowl Birds & Birding 0 Saturday 12th July 2008 11:16
Good year/Bad year in the South-East paulwfromtheden Birds & Birding 11 Saturday 14th July 2007 11:31

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.27037501 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 06:39.