[engineer]

While searching for new binoculars, I became enamoured with the Swarovski SLC's. Specifically, I am choosing between the 8x30's, the 7x42's and the 10x42's. Low light viewing will be a consideration from time to time, but weight is always a concern with something that hangs around my neck.

Before I jumped to the twilight / exit pupil based decision I wanted to ask a question of experienced viewers. Does the better low light performance of the 42mm's significantly offset normal hand vibration (I don't shake any more than average)? In other words, will human limitations negate the larger lenses?

Thanks!

[Katy Penland]

Hi, engineer! A warm welcome to you from all of us on staff here at BirdForum!

I've had my B&L's 10x42 Elites for years and used them under all kinds of conditions, including on pelagic trips. Love 'em. Can't say I've ever noticed more shake with them over other powers, even on a heaving boat deck with engine vibration, but I could be particularly oblivious.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by engineer

While searching for new binoculars, I became enamoured with the Swarovski SLC's. Specifically, I am choosing between the 8x30's, the 7x42's and the 10x42's. Low light viewing will be a consideration from time to time, but weight is always a concern with something that hangs around my neck.

Before I jumped to the twilight / exit pupil based decision I wanted to ask a question of experienced viewers. Does the better low light performance of the 42mm's significantly offset normal hand vibration (I don't shake any more than average)? In other words, will human limitations negate the larger lenses?

Thanks!

Hello engineer,

I guess this question is designed for me, since I use several SLC binoculars, particularly the mid-sized 8x30 and the full-sized 10x42. I put "and" in italics because there is no way for me to get around that each is best suited for a different purpose. The 8x30 (mine is an older Mk II) is arguably the most versatile and presents the least burden to carry. My problem with it is not so much the brightness, since it works well in the mornings and into the evenings, but the distance it can cover. The 10x42 does that job much better, but it weights more. It is also better for situations when retinal size compensates for lack of light, such as hawk watching. Personally, I've never found a need for a 7x42, which provides a small image and actually weighs more that the 10x42.

From an engineering point of view the weight and balance of both instruments are well suited to hand held use. The 10x42 is noted to be outstanding in this respect, and high frequency angular motions are well damped (also see the BVD review by Steve Ingraham). To address your question specifically, however, human endurance for supporting that much weight for a long period of time does have limits, and so I've taken to using a monopod for extended viewing (see my FISMO equipment review). For the full-sized binocular I would emphasize the importance of the weight and balance of the 10x42, because 10x binoculars of lower weight, and not as well balanced, have mistakenly lead many to the conclusion they are difficult to hand hold. This one is not.

I'm sure there will no shortage of opinions.
Enjoy the view whatever you do,

Elkcub

[kabsetz]

I'll mainly second what Elk says above, with a couple of points added/emphasized.

Firstly, assuming that you are of average or better physical strength, the 10x42 might even be more stable in a sense, since its higher weight also increases its inertia. The "New" SLC 10x42 weighs under 900g and is a very nice fit in the hands. Secondly, unlike the 8x30, the 42mm SLC's have a threaded 1/4" hole in the front of the hinge, under a plastic thread-out cap. Thus, you can easily equip it with a finnstick or a "fismo" with a very simple and inexpensive L-type binocular adaptor available from many sources. Here, I'm familiar with the Opticron adapters, but I'm sure you'll find many others.

For seeing detail, both in daylight and in dusk and near darkness, the 10x will be your best bet. The 7x will work better for boating and viewing sports and such, since lower magnification/wider true field will help in these areas.

Kimmo

[engineer]

Thanks, everyone! The binoculars will be used for both work and play. In my work, binoculars allow me to examine difficult to reach features. Aside from work, they will allow me to observe butterflies, bluebirds, owls and the various four-legged critters come around my yard as the sun sets.

Based on your thoughts and my reading of other threads, I've narrowed my choice to the 8x30 SLCnew and 10x42 SLCnew.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by engineer

... In my work, binoculars allow me to examine difficult to reach features. Aside from work, they will allow me to observe butterflies, bluebirds, owls and the various four-legged critters come around my yard as the sun sets...

Engineer,

Based on what you said, I really think you'd be best served by the 10x42 SLC. In addition to what Kimmo mentioned, the Swaro tripod adapter has a quick disconnect feature that really works. Later on a 2x adapter could also be purchased to convert one side into a 20x scope if you want it, and then you'd need the tripod. It's a matter of how far away those features are you need to see. I find the short focus of the 10x42 to be quite reasonable at 12-13 ft., and owl viewing is probably better with the 42mm objectives.

Enjoy the view whatever you do,

-elk

[Jonathan B.]

Originally Posted by engineer

Based on your thoughts and my reading of other threads, I've narrowed my choice to the 8x30 SLCnew and 10x42 SLCnew.

Others of us here would offer different opinions than those stated.

I have owned and used 10x binoculars and I learned the hard (read "expensive") way that the image movement for me is bad enough that I get much more information out of an 8x or 7x binocular. I use 8x32 Nikon SE and 7x42 Leica Ultravid. I am routinely able to see more with my 8x32 than many fellow birders see with their 10x bins. I suggest that you compare binoculars hands-on and really study the image before making a choice. You might very well be able to use a 10x binocular successfully, but be sure before you buy. I spent the better part of a year trying to convince myself that 10x worked for me, before I finally admitted that I had made a mistake.

Some people never use a 7x binocular, but I find it to be incredibly useful and forgiving for eight or ten hours of birding. The greater field of view and greater depth of focus are ideal for birding in the woods and easy on the eyes, but I use 7x in all situations; in my case it is also my foul weather binocular, used in heavy rain on several occasions.

As for brightness, an 8x30 SLC will probably deliver as much brightness as you need in almost any situation. A 42mm binocular, including a 7x42, will only allow you to bird at dusk for about five minutes longer than the 8x30. The brightness of my 8x32 SE is practically equal to my 7x42, right down to nightfall.

There is something you should keep in mind if you are set on Swarovski SLC, which I consider very fine even if I don't own it: none of the models in that line focus closely, so none is well suited to butterfly-watching. If you want something that is truly the all-around performer that you describe, and you are willing to pay the price, you might consider some other brands/models, or even the Swarovski 8x32 EL, which focuses much closer.

[kabsetz]

Out of curiosity, what kind of difficult to reach objects do you need to see at work, how large, and what distances? Two things come to mind here. Firstly, for something like checking out structural detail on construction sites or studying artwork high in the ceilings of ancient cathedrals, nothing beats image-stabilized binoculars. So, something like the Canon 10x30 or 12x36 II might very well be the best choice here. Secondly, if the main use in nature watching is at predominantly shorter distances such as most backyards are, then a 7x42 might be very nice. These are two conflicting requirements, and what is good for one is not ideal for the other. Finally, as Jonathan points out, for butterflies you need very short focusing distances. In addition, for butterflies it helps to have low magnification, since their movement in the air tends to be rather erratic and following the flight is much easier with lower magnification. For this use, but not for the other uses you describe, the Pentax Papilio 6.5x (which is not particularly expensive) would be better than any you are considering.

So, it looks to me like you need three binoculars, not one.

Kimmo

[engineer]

Originally Posted by kabsetz

Out of curiosity, what kind of difficult to reach objects do you need to see at work, how large, and what distances?

I am a consulting engineer. A significant portion of my work involves determining what happened in vehicle accidents. Binoculars allow me to examine marks left on roads by vehicles post impact, safely from the side of the road.

Originally Posted by kabsetz

So, something like the Canon 10x30 or 12x36 II might very well be the best choice here.

I have a Canon 12x36 and it is marvelous. Unfortunately, it is also heavy and, more importantly, not water resistant. I do use it on occasions. It's wonderful for observing nature...if there is enough daylight.

Originally Posted by kabsetz

Finally, as Jonathan points out, for butterflies you need very short focusing distances. In addition, for butterflies it helps to have low magnification, since their movement in the air tends to be rather erratic and following the flight is much easier with lower magnification. For this use, but not for the other uses you describe, the Pentax Papilio 6.5x (which is not particularly expensive) would be better than any you are considering.

So, it looks to me like you need three binoculars, not one.

Kimmo

I'm planning on adding a butterfly bush (along with a palm and some bushes) to my back yard in a couple of weeks. My thinking is to position them to be in view of my deck and a large back window. The deck railing can then provide a stable feature upon which I can occasionally brace my binoculars. I'm still going to check out the Papilio.

Hmmm, three binoculars. Well, there goes my lunch money!

[engineer]

Why Swaro's:

I had a pair of Leica 8x32 BA's. They were a good compromise. What bothered me about them was that they had tiny black specks visible when I looked through them.
Since I had bought them as a dealer sample, I had no warranty.