CL 8x25 due an upgrade? (1 Viewer)

[Cavendish]

After consuming a lot of great info on BirdForum over the past few years I thought it was time I registered and posed a question that I thought someone might have a view on

My partner has a pair of CL 8x25s that we bought about 9 years ago, eg about 3 years after they were first released. I really like them and indeed often borrow them for hiking and other times when I don't want to lug my 8x42s around. I've been wanting to get my own pair for a few years now but I've kind of been holding off in the hope that Swaro will upgrade the model. Now I know they released some cosmetic improvements a few years ago but sadly the glass remained the same (ideally I'd like a wider field of view). I was hoping the impressive* Zeiss 8x25 model might have provoked a response from Swaro but nothing so far. Does anyone know or could hazard a guess whether it's a fool's errand playing this waiting game? Also, is there a set time of year or event when Swaro typically release new models?

[* In case anyone wonders, I did try a pair of the Zeiss but I really didn't like the single hinge plus they felt slightly plasticky in some ill-defined way]

 

[tenex]

Welcome to Birdforum! Swarovski has already announced their new product for the year, AX Visio. The merely cosmetic update they did of the 8x25 suggests that they have no intention of going further, so waiting for them to will be no fun. If you want a wider FOV in a small package you can take VP 8x25, or perhaps even the old Docter 8x21. Or consider an 8x30 (like SFL) which would be more to my own taste.

 

[Cavendish]

Thanks for the welcome Tenex and your advice re whether to wait or not!

Funnily enough I have indeed been looking at options in the 8x30 bracket. I really struggled with kidney beaning on the 8x30 SFL (although I loved the 8x40 version). I also couldn't quite bring myself to love the 2nd gen Swaro 8x30 on account of the dioptre adjustment being so poorly designed. Am half hoping that model is also upgraded but I suspect that would require a lot of re-engineering and thus also rather unlikely any time soon.

 

[grackle314]

Unless you hear a manufacturer announcement, new binocular products typically are many years until next iteration. And some, like the Leica Ultravid 8x20, are so good for their niche that change is not warranted. Waiting until next Swarovski CL 8x25 will save you the cost of a new purchase, perhaps for a long time.

If you desire to get something similar to the Swarovski CL 8x25, your choices have many variations to consider. A second CL 8x25 is an option. You indicate fondness for the CL 8x25, which shows your are comfortable with a 3 mm exit pupil. Other small binoculars with 3 mm, or larger, exit pupil include Swarovski CL Curio 7x21, CL Companion 8x30 and 10x30, and Zeiss SFL 8x30 and 10x30. There are many others that are quite good and even lower pricing than these ideas. But these ideas will show you that how you wish to carry the binocular might matter, some are easier than others to carry or stow. And maybe weight matters for some reason to you as well.

You mention kidney beaning difficulty with the Zeiss SFL 8x30. Individual eyes and eyeglasses make the best fit a process of trying out the binocular for some period of time. Hopefully you can go to a store where comfortable testing of the binoculars would allow you to work through differences in fit and eliminate those which are problematic for you but not eliminate those with initial awkward fit but can be found comfortable with a little more time.

 

[PatR]

Welcome!

I suspect that the CL 8x25 will remain as is for some time and as @tenex has alluded, the AX is very much the product (and financial investment) of the year for Swarovski. Its a great bino but I do see where you are coming from.

Fully agree on the awful dioptre adjustment on the CL 8x30B. I have one and find it to be a PIA, but, once set I must admit that it is a cracking bino.

If you haven't tried one may I suggest a look at the Curio. It never ceases to amaze me just how good it is and it is brighter and sharper than my CL 8x25 with a greater FOV. The difference in magnification is negligible.

Like you I couldn't get on with the Victory 8x25 and my very recent foray into the 8x20 Ultravid and Trinovid world of compacts merely confirmed my view (and I emphasise my) that the Curio is the master of all the little 'uns.

Unless you are a committed big three fan it would remiss of me not to mention the excellent GPO Passion ED 8x32 which truly punches well above its weight and price point.

Best of luck in your search!

 

[mwhogue]

Cavendish,

I second the input here. Don't wait except for the purpose of comparing in hand candidate models with the SW 8x25. Based on what you say, my first recommendation would be the Curio. If you like it, then you will have an even smaller bin with a much wider FoV and two different but complementary magnifications as opposed to two identical 8x. While the smaller FoV may rule out any of the 10x25 options, you might try one as the larger AFoV can be really impressive and again a nice complement to the CL 8x. If you don't mind going larger, there are several highly regarded 30mm models.

Good luck with the Quest.

Mike

 

[Cavendish]

Thanks very much for all the input - much appreciated!

The conclusion does seem to be that waiting for an updated 8x25 is pointless. So in that case I think I will indeed look to try the Curio. Will keep you posted

 

[sudsdetailing]

It’s always a personal thing - I recently bought the CL (before the price increase in the UK) after trying it alongside the curio because I preferred the brighter view. I wear spectacles if that made any difference ?

 

[ReinierB]

It’s always a personal thing - I recently bought the CL (before the price increase in the UK) after trying it alongside the curio because I preferred the brighter view. I wear spectacles if that made any difference ?

So your experience is that the CL 8x25 is brighter than the Curio 7x21?

Some people on this forum think the Curio is actually brighter. I couldn't see any difference in brightness.

 

[mwhogue]

It’s always a personal thing - I recently bought the CL (before the price increase in the UK) after trying it alongside the curio because I preferred the brighter view. I wear spectacles if that made any difference ?

So your experience is that the CL 8x25 is brighter than the Curio 7x21?

Some people on this forum think the Curio is actually brighter. I couldn't see any difference in brightness.

I regularly use both but have never before compared them directly. Just now in side by side comparison in bright favorable lighting conditions, the Curio is noticeably brighter to my eyes.

Side notes: both work equally well with or without glasses for me and I was somewhat surprised by the noticeably larger AFoV of the CL in direct comparison.

Mike

 

[PatR]

I regularly use both but have never before compared them directly. Just now in side by side comparison in bright favorable lighting conditions, the Curio is noticeably brighter to my eyes.

Side notes: both work equally well with or without glasses for me and I was somewhat surprised by the noticeably larger AFoV of the CL in direct comparison.

Mike

I thought it was just me!

The Curio is fantastic and the reason why one of my sons now has my CL 8x25's, excellent though they are. I much prefer the size, FOV and brightness of the little 'uns.

 

[sudsdetailing]

So your experience is that the CL 8x25 is brighter than the Curio 7x21?

Some people on this forum think the Curio is actually brighter. I couldn't see any difference in brightness.

Yes, maybe I’m using the wrong word (brightness) but the curio made me feel like I was looking through a pinhole security spy hole in a hotel room door. The binos were purchased to keep in my car so pocket size wasn’t an issue, and maybe I hadn’t adjusted the curio’s properly but I found them too small for my comfort. The CL fit my hands much much better and the view was much clearer and perhaps therefore brighter to my eyes. Whatever the reason, I found the CL perfect for me and was completely underwhelmed by the curio. I did think the fov was much bigger/better with the CL - which reminds me, I haven’t even used them yet…

 

[mwhogue]

Yes, maybe I’m using the wrong word (brightness) but the curio made me feel like I was looking through a pinhole security spy hole in a hotel room door.

You are probably describing the narrow Apparent Field of View of the Curio which is less than the CL even though the Curio has a much wider Field of view 405' vs. 357' for the CL.

Mike

 

[Swedpat]

So your experience is that the CL 8x25 is brighter than the Curio 7x21?

Some people on this forum think the Curio is actually brighter. I couldn't see any difference in brightness.

I read that CL 8x25 has 88% light transmission and Curio 90%. But 3,125mm exit pupil results in ~8,5% higher brightness than 3mm with same transmission. So this should mean CL 8x25 is slightly brighter as long as the eye pupil is at least 3,125mm. In bright conditions when eye pupil is 3mm or smaller, Curio should be brighter.

 

[Cavendish]

The CL fit my hands much much better

I've not had the chance to try the Curios as yet, but I do very much like how the CLs feel like a small but still 'proper' binocular rather than a toy. So it will be interesting to see whether Swaro have managed to keep the Curio as useable for those of us with big hands.

 

[grackle314]

I read that CL 8x25 has 88% light transmission and Curio 90%. But 3,125mm exit pupil results in ~8,5% higher brightness than 3mm with same transmission. So this should mean CL 8x25 is slightly brighter as long as the eye pupil is at least 3,125mm. In bright conditions when eye pupil is 3mm or smaller, Curio should be brighter.

If one considers the light coming out the exit pupil, a rough estimate can be had by considering the light entering the objective. A 25 mm objective will gather more light than a 21 mm objective roughly by the ratio of the objective collection areas which is (25/21) squared. The 25 mm objective will collect 1.39 times the light of the 21 mm objective. The light transmitted out the exit pupil is diminished by the light transmission coefficient and some other possible loss factors. A light transmission difference of 88% versus 90% is not detectable by my eye even with side-by-side viewing, even though I have the laboratory equipment to see that difference readily.

If the human eye pupil is over 3.125 mm in diameter, then the total light power delivered by the 25 mm objective into the eye will be greater than the 21 mm objective roughly by one third. Even though ~8.5% of the exit pupil light from an 8x25 is outside the 3 mm exit pupil of the 7x21, even with eye pupil at 3 mm the total light power delivered by the 8x25 to the eye will be greater. But again, I caution about whether a given person will discern even a 30% change in light intensity. And the complexity of objective size, exit pupil, human eye pupil, and the rods and cones detecting within the eye makes the judgement of brightness hard for people to compare without optical measuring tools. Yet each person may have their own standards and opinions, separate from the science of individual optical elements.

 

[Swedpat]

If one considers the light coming out the exit pupil, a rough estimate can be had by considering the light entering the objective. A 25 mm objective will gather more light than a 21 mm objective roughly by the ratio of the objective collection areas which is (25/21) squared. The 25 mm objective will collect 1.39 times the light of the 21 mm objective. The light transmitted out the exit pupil is diminished by the light transmission coefficient and some other possible loss factors. A light transmission difference of 88% versus 90% is not detectable by my eye even with side-by-side viewing, even though I have the laboratory equipment to see that difference readily.

If the human eye pupil is over 3.125 mm in diameter, then the total light power delivered by the 25 mm objective into the eye will be greater than the 21 mm objective roughly by one third. Even though ~8.5% of the exit pupil light from an 8x25 is outside the 3 mm exit pupil of the 7x21, even with eye pupil at 3 mm the total light power delivered by the 8x25 to the eye will be greater. But again, I caution about whether a given person will discern even a 30% change in light intensity. And the complexity of objective size, exit pupil, human eye pupil, and the rods and cones detecting within the eye makes the judgement of brightness hard for people to compare without optical measuring tools. Yet each person may have their own standards and opinions, separate from the science of individual optical elements.

I am with you about the transmission difference of 88 vs 90%. It is hardly detecteable for the eye.
And even 8,5% higher relative brightness with same transmission is very subtle. If you choose 8x25 instead of 7x21 the reason is the higher magnification, not the brightness. And the difference between 7 and 8x is small as well. So the choice between 7x21 and 8x25 can also be based on whether one prioritize compactness or hold comfortability.

When it comes to light gathering power difference, in this case (25/21) raised to the power of 2, it has importance only for astronomy.