EL Replacements? (1 Viewer)

[Andy Bright]

I'm not going to talk about specific companies nor go into any detail, but suffice to say different companies have different marketing strategies, some companies wish long term commitment, others just want short term exposure and some fall foul of our rigid rule about independance. There's all sorts of ups and downs in the world of internet advertsing, some just aren't interested in that approach.

If you remember, another major optics company was advertising with us last year.

Ideally, we don't really want a bun-fight amongst manufacturers here at BF, we prefer a settled group of advertisers with long term and genuine support for the site... and sensitive to our independance.

 

[Andy Bright]

Actually, we've gone way off course on this thread... so it's better if we stick to the original topic.
Thanks

 

[postcardcv]

Personally I've never noticed any bias on the site. In other threads I have clealy stated my dislike of Zeiss scopes (and reasons for this) and have never been censored.
warehouseexpess are another advertiser, but that doesn't stop people recommending other retailers.

 

[Andy Bright]

And I thought the Victory I & II series were awful... that's why I can't abide hearing the Victory name with the new FL's.

Back to Swarovski EL, in the short term i'd expect a revision model of the 42mm versions rather than a radically new bino, though they do improve them by stealth as it is.

 

[postcardcv]

Actually, we've gone way off course on this thread... so it's better if we stick to the original topic.
Thanks

ooops - sorry

back on topic - I think that replacing ELs could be a problem for Swaro. If they were to replace them, they'd have to remove a very popular bino from the market and replace it with an unkonwn. So they could launch a new model along side the ELs, but this would create another problem. They would have to either significatly reduce the price of the ELs (can't see that happening in a hurry) or launch the new model at a higher price which would put them back at the top as 'most expensive'.

 

[pduxon]

And I thought the Victory I & II series were awful... that's why I can't abide hearing the Victory name with the new FL's.

to be fair to Swarovski they do listen to feedbck apparently they've speeded up the focus which was most peoples big bugbear.

The SLC's have had a few revisions over the year even if superficially they look the same.

 

[henry link]

A Swarovski dealer told me recently that Swarovski says new binoculars are about two years away.

IMO the 32mm EL's are not as successful optically as the the 42mm's and the 42mm's could use improvement in light transmission, contrast, color accuracy, center sharpness and control of CA. None of these areas are exactly bad as they are, but none are truly state-of-the-art either.

 

[Leif]

Leica sponsor Alula and that doesn't stop Kimmo writing very well balanced reviews now does it?

Well I never. There certainly is no pro-Leica bias as far as I can see.

Leif

 

[John Cantelo]

Actually I'd be a bit dubious about some new Swaro bins. I'm not aware of any really significant improvements being made in binocular design, glass quality, coatings, etc. and suspect that any such 'new' design would be more a matter of a marketing than anything. If folks want to fall for the old 'new must be better ploy' that's up to them! John

 

[Curtis Croulet]

I'd imagine Swarovski will have to jump on the FL/ED/APO bandwagon. What I find absolutely fascinating is how precipitously this brand has fallen from favor, at least in this forum.

 

[Marley]

Not all feel that way about the Swaro line. I have tried Swaros, Leicas, Nikons and Zeiss and the two pair that I own are Swarovski (I also own a pair of 8x32 LX-Ls that IMHO pale in comparison).

Wouldn't change for the world. It just so happens that the entire Swaro package fits my needs, including excellent ergonomics, balance and build quality along with outstanding optics.

Is there room to complain about Swarovski? You bet. $1700 is really too much for a pair of binoculars (ELs), especially when the competition is $300-$400 less and optically every bit as good. There is room for compliments as well, as many of the SLC line is very competitive with respect to price and the optical equivalent of the competition.

Do I like the Leicas and the Zeiss? Emphatically yes. I would own offerings from each company if I could keep from experiencing blackouts with them. I also appreciate the brightness of the new FL line, but if I have to fidget around to get a good view, that is where I draw the line.

As so many have stated, the best binocular is NOT the one everyone is talking about. The best binocular is the one that fits you the best, including balance, ergonomics, optics, build quality and customer service. If I only listened to what others said about optics, I would own a pair of Ultravids or FLs and never use them. Are they both world-class bins? Absolutely. Would I own a pair of either one? Absolutely not. It has nothing to do with the bins and everything to do with what I need in a pair of glasses.

How can this be, you ask? How could anyone turn down a chance to own the latest Ultravid, for instance? All of the Leicafiles out there must be in disbelief, right? Not really. Ask Leif if he would own a Leica binocular. From what he has said in several posts, he is too sensitive to Leica's propensity for CA. Does that make Leif right and all of the Leica owners wrong? Not at all. It makes the current Leica line not right for Leif, and that is all.

The best piece of advice I have seen on this forum is to try the bins yourself before buying. I am thankful I did so. I ended up with two pair of really outstanding bins and none that I have to resell later because they did not fulfill my optical needs (well, I am still mulling over the LX-L purchase )

Best Regards,

Steffan

 

[iporali]

Swarovski ...42mm's could use improvement in light transmission, contrast, color accuracy, center sharpness and control of CA. None of these areas are exactly bad as they are, but none are truly state-of-the-art either.

A relatively simple way to address the three first areas would be to concentrate on optical properties of Swarodur coating. The scratch resistant outer surfaces seem to reflect more light than the coatings used by their competitors (and they already have the dielectrics etc.). On the other hand, the present solution may be invaluable for all those who clean the bins with a hem of t-shirt.

Ilkka


BTW, It would be interesting to see a comparison on scratch resistance of coatings used by different manufacturers.

 

[kabsetz]

I disagree a bit with Henry on post #27 quoted by Ilkka above. The center field sharpness of the 42mm EL's I have measured (3 samples of 8.5x and one of 10x) have definitely been right up there with the best, although neither has been THE sharpest in the 8x or 10x class respectively. On the other hand, as Henry suggests, the 32mm EL's have been distinctly less sharp. However, reduced CA such as in the Zeiss FL's makes the image seem sharper to the eye, even when measurable resolution is no better or is even slightly inferior.

I agree with Ilkka on the relative merits of the Swarodur coating. It does reflect a fair amount of amber light. Personally, I would rather take the improved transmission, but knowing how some birders treat their optics perhaps this option is needed.

Kimmo

 

[henry link]

I disagree a bit with Henry on post #27 quoted by Ilkka above. The center field sharpness of the 42mm EL's I have measured (3 samples of 8.5x and one of 10x) have definitely been right up there with the best, although neither has been THE sharpest in the 8x or 10x class respectively. On the other hand, as Henry suggests, the 32mm EL's have been distinctly less sharp. However, reduced CA such as in the Zeiss FL's makes the image seem sharper to the eye, even when measurable resolution is no better or is even slightly inferior.

Kimmo

Kimmo,

Yes, I think you are right about this. I should have used a term like apparent sharpness or appearance of sharpness. My 8.5X42 EL actually has slightly better measured resolution than my 8X42 FL and shows more detail because of the higher magnification, but it is not one of those binoculars I would describe as really "tack sharp". The image in the EL looks sharp until I compare it directly to the FL or any one of a number of very sharp porros. Then the image in the EL appears a little soft. I wouldn't be surprised to see an improvement in that impression of sharpness from lower CA and higher contrast.

It's a bit of a mystery to me why the EL's don't have better light transmission and contrast. Two surfaces coated with Swarodur shouldn't cut the transmission more than maybe 2%, and the ELs appear to have the advantage of 2 fewer glass-to-air surfaces compared to the the Ultravids or FLs. I've also found the Swarovski scope eyepieces to be very high transmission even though they use Swarodur, easily brighter and higher contrast than the T* coated Zeiss eyepieces. Yet when it comes to binoculars I've found the opposite is true, even in the case of the 8X32's which use the same prism design.

Henry

 

[Otto McDiesel]

I'd imagine Swarovski will have to jump on the FL/ED/APO bandwagon. What I find absolutely fascinating is how precipitously this brand has fallen from favor, at least in this forum.

In my opinion, the perfect binocular would be a 9x35 or 9x32 EL with APO/HD/ED lenses. Well, if they put those lenses in a 10x32, i will buy one.

 

[karmantra]

Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, Nikon...to each his own!

 

[Otto McDiesel]

Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, Nikon...to each his own!

Geez, that's a lot of wisdom.

 

[Bill A]

I'd imagine Swarovski will have to jump on the FL/ED/APO bandwagon. What I find absolutely fascinating is how precipitously this brand has fallen from favor, at least in this forum.

My take on Swaro falling from favor--if such is true--is that people are angry about the ridiculously high price of the EL line. I bought mine (and couldn't be happier with them, fine focus and all) when they were 1400 bucks U.S., and even then considerably more expensive than the excellent competition (to my eyes, chiefly Leica and Nikon). They now seem to be going for about 1700. Absurd. I wouldn't buy them for that, and I'd probably be taking potshots at them too.

Bill

 

[[email protected]]

Why would you replaace a winner?

ooops - sorry

back on topic - I think that replacing ELs could be a problem for Swaro. If they were to replace them, they'd have to remove a very popular bino from the market and replace it with an unkonwn. So they could launch a new model along side the ELs, but this would create another problem. They would have to either significatly reduce the price of the ELs (can't see that happening in a hurry) or launch the new model at a higher price which would put them back at the top as 'most expensive'.

Why would Swarovski replace the EL? They are the best sellers in todays market. I don't think everybody agrees that the new Zeiss FL is really a better binocular. The EL is unique with it's twin tube design and optically it is good as anything out there. Look at E-bay sales and you will see the Swarovski EL easily outsells the Zeiss FL and it sells used at a higher price than the Zeiss FL sells new for even though there retail prices are similar. Swarovski are still recognized as the best and people will buy them for that reason.

Dennis

 

[Sandy Martin]

Why would Swarovski replace the EL? They are the best sellers in todays market. I don't think everybody agrees that the new Zeiss FL is really a better binocular. The EL is unique with it's twin tube design and optically it is good as anything out there. Look at E-bay sales and you will see the Swarovski EL easily outsells the Zeiss FL and it sells used at a higher price than the Zeiss FL sells new for even though there retail prices are similar. Swarovski are still recognized as the best and people will buy them for that reason.

Dennis

You are welcome to your opinion on what are recognised as the best but it is not everyones.

EL sales have fallen dramatically in recent months, that is a fact. Leica are selling binoculars like hot cakes at the moment.
Swarovski are not in the ascendency my friend.

Sandy