• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

swarovski 8x32 vs 8.5x42 (2 Viewers)

batvenci

Member
I am very curious about the differences in clarity, wow and 3D image between the two binoculars. I read that swaro 8.5x42 is not very three dimensional, is the same true for 8x32? What is the difference in resolution and brightness? Thanks!
 
If only because of its higher magnification, the 8.5x will reveal more detail. Brightness wise, I think you will find the 8.5x brighter as soon as the light is low enough that your pupil dilation makes its larger exit pupil relevant. The 8x32 SV is said to have more issues with contrast against the light, but I've had little experience with it. The older 8x32 EL, which I have, performs extremely well in tricky back-lit, patchily-lit etc situations.

I've not met a roof-prism bin that shows much 3D, since the objectives tend to be close together compared to most porros, and these Swarovski models are no exception to that. They do have superb resolution (very little astigmatism, coma, etc) center to edge along with very little field curvature, so if those qualities make you interpret the view as flat, then they'll be very flat. I experience no such effect.

I don't know how to measure or to subjectively assess "wow", so I'll not comment on that.

--AP
 
I am very curious about the differences in clarity, wow and 3D image between the two binoculars. I read that swaro 8.5x42 is not very three dimensional, is the same true for 8x32? What is the difference in resolution and brightness? Thanks!
Both are great bins...we have these models in the SV format.
The 8X32 has slightly more eye relief than the 8.5X42 resulting in a true walk-in-view for anyone encumbered by eyeglasses. The wow effect is immediately obvious. The 8X32 SV FOV is also expansive.

The relatively small, lightweight 8X32 SV is a very impressive binocular. The one we have is deadly sharp across the field of view and every bit as good as its larger siblings. Color, contrast and DOF are all pleasing to the eye.

I use an 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV, a 7X42 Ultravid and an 8X32 SE and caution against dismissing the 8X32 SV because of its stature. For some reason, I find my 8X32 SE and the 8X32 SV have the most comfortable views of all the bins I've owned and/or used.

The 8.5X42 has a little more magnification reach and better light gathering capability for low light conditions due to the 42mm objective. The 8X32 SV, however, is quite good in low light and many would never notice the difference.
 
I had them both and one big difference that wasn't mentioned is the bigger exit pupil in the 8.5x42 SV makes for easier eye placement than the 8x32 SV. For me that was a huge difference between the two. The bigger aperture binocular is less finicky to use.
 
I find eye placement on the 8X32 SV to be better than most bins I've used, including our other SV's. And, the focus is silky smooooooth. Generalizations based on aperture, objective, FOV, etc. can be very misleading. The 8X32 SV is a real masterpiece...not perfect but pretty close.
 
I have never had a Swarovski with a silky smooth focus and I think I have had at least 6 or 7 of them. I think you got lucky. ;)The 8x32 SV does have good eye placement for an 8x32 owing to the fact it uses less baffling than some other alpha's but it does show more flare because of it. The 8.5x42 SV with it's bigger 5mm exit pupil is even better though as our most 42mm's. For me that is one big advantage of a 42mm.
 
Last edited:
With the fieldpro model Swarovski fixed the old focuser problem. On the three fieldpro units i've tried the focuser is smooth with same resistance in booth directions. Much better than my older swarovision 10x50.
 
I have never had a Swarovski with a silky smooth focus and I think I have had at least 6 or 7 of them. I think you got lucky. ;)The 8x32 SV does have good eye placement for an 8x32 owing to the fact it uses less baffling than some other alpha's but it does show more flare because of it. The 8.5x42 SV with it's bigger 5mm exit pupil is even better though as our most 42mm's. For me that is one big advantage of a 42mm.

Dennis,

Have you tried the 8.5x42 field pro yet? Based on reports here ever since the FP version came out the focus seems to be greatly improved. Also, based on reports the 8.5 doesn't have the glare issues of your old 8x32 SV. It's a nice compromise between your current 8x and 9x and could be the ultimate all around bino for you knowing how much you used to love the SV.
 
Dennis,

Have you tried the 8.5x42 field pro yet? Based on reports here ever since the FP version came out the focus seems to be greatly improved. Also, based on reports the 8.5 doesn't have the glare issues of your old 8x32 SV. It's a nice compromise between your current 8x and 9x and could be the ultimate all around bino for you knowing how much you used to love the SV.

Based on my experiences, I think Swarovski made improvements to the EL focus somewhere along the line even before FP came out. I don't think Dennis has tried an EL since those improvements were implemented.

--AP
 
Based on my experiences, I think Swarovski made improvements to the EL focus somewhere along the line even before FP came out. I don't think Dennis has tried an EL since those improvements were implemented.

--AP

I`d agree, my 32mm SV was one of the very last pre Field Pro and was buttery smooth, there was a difference in tension but not in smoothness, my FP has all but imperceptible tension difference.
 
Based on my experiences, I think Swarovski made improvements to the EL focus somewhere along the line even before FP came out. I don't think Dennis has tried an EL since those improvements were implemented.

--AP

Alexis .... I agree. I purchased two pre Profield EL models during the close out sale that was the result of the introduction of the Profield change during the fall of 2015. Both were made in 2015 and the focus mechanisms show the same smoothness in the Profield models I have tried. I still feel some small amount of stiction even in new models, but they are a vast improvement over what was available for years in the EL and also the SLC. I also noticed the improvement in store and show demos during the last year of the pre Profield models.

As far as Dennis's statements on the Swaro focus, he now says he "never had a Swarovski with a silky smooth focus". However if you go back to his past posts during his 8X32 EL SV days one will find multiple posts where he said his Swarovski EL SV had a "buttery smooth" focus. I never realized till now there is s difference between silky smooth and buttery smooth. :h?:

One factor the OP should take into consideration in comparing the 8X32 and 8.5X42 EL SV models is rolling ball. In my case, I can detect a small amount in the 8X32 under certain viewing conditions but not to the point where it is an issue for me. This was with demos as I do not own one. Rolling ball was quite noticeable to me with the 8.5X42 to the point that I would not be able to adjust to it. So either try it first or make sure you can return it if there is a problem. Some members have reported to being extremely sensitive to rolling ball, some do not see it at all and then there are those like me who are in between.
 
Last edited:
I just can't believe Swarovski made a major change in the focus in the new Field Pro models. They are just too conservative of a company and I don't think they ever admitted they had a problem with the focus on the older ones. But I will try the newer models when I get a chance. None of my Swarovski's had the buttery smooth focus of my Zeiss's, Canon's, Maven's, Tract's or Nikon's. Big reason I quit buying Swarovski's. Why put up with a less than perfect focus on a $2K binocular when the other alpha's have comparable optics with a superb focus. I think most will agree Swarovski's focus is NOT as smooth as Zeiss or Nikon's.
 
Last edited:
I have an EL Range 10X42 Field Pro and the focus is smooth with maybe the very tiniest more tension in one direction than the other.
 
As far as Dennis's statements on the Swaro focus, he now says he "never had a Swarovski with a silky smooth focus". However if you go back to his past posts during his 8X32 EL SV days one will find multiple posts where he said his Swarovski EL SV had a "buttery smooth" focus. I never realized till now there is s difference between silky smooth and buttery smooth. :h?:

I do believe Dennis gave it his higher of the two ratings, calling the SV focuser buttery, since we all know woven silk, although smooth has noticeable grain to it. Great to know that it was the "best of the best" when he owned it.

My 8X32SV FP has a fantastic focus, similar in feel/quality to my 8x32FL and previously owned 8x42FL.

Back the the tread topic, Although I don't own it and never have, I think if I could only have one binocular, it might be the 8.5x42SV. Because I have many binoculars, I find the 8x32SV's overall image and viewing comfort so good that 90% of the time I can get away with its smaller exit pupil and slightly lower magnification, for most casual uses. I'll always go for the smaller, lighter glass if I don't have to give up much (if anything) in the way of image, to carry it. If I need a 10x, I do prefer a 42mm keeping that exit pupil roughly the same.
 
I was thinking that the Swarovski 8x32s were better because of the wider angle? Why do 8x32s on the whole have a wider angle than 8x42s?
 
I was thinking that the Swarovski 8x32s were better because of the wider angle? Why do 8x32s on the whole have a wider angle than 8x42s?

It is the design of the eye piece that determines the FOV. Did you notice that they also generally have shorter eye relief?

Bob
 
No, not seen enough of them to know that, re eye relief. I did notice tho that most of the 8x32s that I tried (Zeiss, Swarovski etc) have a wider fov than the 8x42s of the same series and make. I vaguely remember the same reason given that you gave for the 8x32s being wider, but they are quite often much wider. Maybe 8x32s have to be made a certain way compared to 8x42s?! My naive instinct gave me the impression that 8x42s would likely have a wider fov because they are actually physically wider and the same magnification. I tried out a few 8 degree fov 8x42s when I first started looking at roof prism binoculars a year or so ago.
I have more recently noticed that better 8x42s are not usually so wide with their fov, with the exception of the Zeiss SF 8x42. Opticron, for example, have a very good 8x42 with just 7 degrees fov - the VHD DBA. They make up for the narrow fov with their high quality image and long eye relief. I noticed that long eye relief, at about 20mm, give me no blackout problems. Swarovski are the same, better than Zeiss SFs for blackout. The Swarovskis have a wider fov than the Opticrons, so are better; but not better enough to warrant spending over a thousand pounds more.
I have a pair of Zeiss Conquest HD 8X32s, which have blackout. So I have to balance them on my eyebrow. I still haven't bothered doing the inner tube trick yet.
 
Ravis,

I have heard that you can get replacement eye cups from Zeiss for your Conquest 8x32 which have longer eye relief if you contact them.

If you look at the 7x42s (Old ones and current ones--there aren't many current ones anymore) you will find out that their FOVs are usually about 8º wide which works out to 420'@1000yds and they also had long eye relief. That was typical of 7x42s over the years. That is what the current Leica 7x42 Ultravid has. Its ER is 17mm.

Binoculars usually have objective lenses with f4 focal length or 4 times the diameter of the objective lens. To get the size of the ocular needed for an 8x42 divide 8 into 168 mm = a 21mm eye piece. A 7x42 has a 24mm eyepiece.

Opticron's new Discovery WP PC line of binoculars have wide FOVs and they sell at economical prices. I just bought the 7x42 which has 408'FOV @ 1000yds (7.8º) and a very long 25mm eye relief. It is surprisingly good for the price!

https://www.opticronusa.com/Pages/discovery_wp.html

Bob
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info Bob, very interesting. I did get replacement eye cups and it improved the blackout a bit. I think it's now 18mm, but still not enough perhaps. I still get 'some' blackout.
Other bins with 18mm were ok tho, like the Hawke Endeavor 8x42. The Hawke Sapphire 8x43s also had 18mm, but have more blackout than the Zeiss with the new eye cups.
I get blackout with Leica too.
I used to have a very compact pair of Opticron 8x32 Discovery WP. They were good with very close focus, but not as good and not as easy to use as the 8x32 Conquests. Opticrons have remarkable eye relief. I forgot how the Discovery ones were in regards to blackout, but not too bad I think. I soon started to get used to using my eyebrow for the Zeiss, but later realised that it is hard to do for extended periods.
I think the Conquest, DBA and EL are as good as each other and have their own merits. I didn't look into the Swarovision version of the 8x32 tho (?).
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top