SV 10X50
Eyecups and rain guard are tapered.
Rain guard inside diameter near top ~ 42mm (it tapers from there).
-
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.
New bin, EL10x50SV (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Uhu74
- Start date
Eyecups and rain guard are tapered.
Rain guard inside diameter near top ~ 42mm (it tapers from there).
stereotruckdriver
Well-known member
I have read that.
Personally I only use the 10x50 tripod mounted.
The reason for asking was you made it sound like a direct user statement.
I would venture to say the sv tripod mounted will out resolve the se as well.
I know between my se and sv in 8x32, the sv edges out the se in its ability to resolve
micro details.
Don't think you could tell in a non controlled field situation though.
Bryce...
Sanjay Naithani
Well-known member
When I had my SE 8x32 I thought it was pretty close to my SV 8x32 in resolution. The SE is a pretty sharp binocular. There are a lot of SE fans on Bird Forum. If you haven't noticed. HaHa.
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
I have always been using bins with the eye cups in the lowest position,
with or without glasses,
to me it gives a more natural view, merging near with far,
and you see less of that "black ring" surrounding the image,
it virtually can disappear
with or without glasses,
to me it gives a more natural view, merging near with far,
and you see less of that "black ring" surrounding the image,
it virtually can disappear
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
In All 6 pairs of binoculars I own (8x25's through 12x50's), I Also see a blackened peripheral circle around their overall FOV. I believe you may be describing the inner barrel tube's darkness, designed to absorb stray light from deteriorating the quality of light transmission to the exit pupils. I see this outer darkness in all of the binos I've ever glassed with, but that is just binos. Question is, how is the inner 10X50 345ft width FOV Image!?
If you observe a fluctuating darkened kidney bean effect, the eye cups are too close in, not offering enough eye relief, simply adjust them outwards. Do you wear glasses while viewing with binoculars??
I can duplicate extreme tunneling effects if I hold binos too far away from my eye sockets. If you are seeing tunneling with eye cups adjusted all the way out, simply adjust inward (4-steps of adjustment) till you obtain a full sight picture.
"Window View", as in No Framing? As stated above, you'll always see a darkened area outside of the expected FOV.
You are explaining yourself well Sanjay. Hopefully the info given from all members can help you get on the right glassing track! :t:
Ted
Steve C
Well-known member
Sanjay,
You will always see a black border around the edge of the fov. This is the edge of the field stop. A true border less picture window view is just not in the binocular view. Some are just more expansive than others.
Remember in the case of the SV EL 10x50, the fov is a cone of 6.6*. The binocular can only magnify what is within that cone. It cannot magnify outside the cone. There will always be a border between the magnified and non magnified. The appearance of the border is a topic of great debate.
You will always see a black border around the edge of the fov. This is the edge of the field stop. A true border less picture window view is just not in the binocular view. Some are just more expansive than others.
Remember in the case of the SV EL 10x50, the fov is a cone of 6.6*. The binocular can only magnify what is within that cone. It cannot magnify outside the cone. There will always be a border between the magnified and non magnified. The appearance of the border is a topic of great debate.
Last edited:
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
the tunnel effect also depends partly on the Apparent FOV,
I would say the 10x50 SV have a pretty good AFOV, well balanced,
and less tunnel effect than other swaros,
some thinks it's nice with a very high AFOV, but if it is to high, to see the periphery of the view
you have to "look around corners", perhaps not a problem with binos,
where you can pan instead
but still you loose the ease of scanning the view from edge to edge,
on the other side, a big AFOV gives you a more immersive view,
in scopes I definitely prefer a bit more tunnel-effect (less AFOV) on lowest mag,
it's easier to scan the whole image without panning or moving your head to look whats around the corner,
so it's the ease of scanning the whole view VS the wow-feeling of an immersive view,
I don't think you can have them both,
or??
I'm getting a bit tired..
I would say the 10x50 SV have a pretty good AFOV, well balanced,
and less tunnel effect than other swaros,
some thinks it's nice with a very high AFOV, but if it is to high, to see the periphery of the view
you have to "look around corners", perhaps not a problem with binos,
where you can pan instead
but still you loose the ease of scanning the view from edge to edge,
on the other side, a big AFOV gives you a more immersive view,
in scopes I definitely prefer a bit more tunnel-effect (less AFOV) on lowest mag,
it's easier to scan the whole image without panning or moving your head to look whats around the corner,
so it's the ease of scanning the whole view VS the wow-feeling of an immersive view,
I don't think you can have them both,
or??
I'm getting a bit tired..
Last edited:
Sanjay Naithani
Well-known member
Thanks Theo for explaining at length I don't wear glasses. I agree with most of your observation
1) surprisingly I feel this black peripheral circle and tunnelling effect least when the eye cups are screwed in and at its lowest position.
2) I think this dark ring will remain, just need to find position where it is least.
3) as you mentioned tunnel in effect I see the Most when cups are fully out and as I screw them in it reduces.
I will do some more trial with it today to see if I can find optimum position.
I would like to thank to all of you for sharing your inputs and experience. This will help me to resolve it to a realist level.
Sanjay
brocknroller
porromaniac
Could be Dennis, but as I use the SV50 for multiple purposes, the big SV is the better choice. Besides that, I hate electronics in optical devices. My SV will still do it's job standing butt naked on a desert island, while the Canon without batteries is just an awkward brick to use3
All kidding aside, a Canon just for astronomy use is way too specific for me, that's why I like the allround use of the SV50, it has a lot of talents.
Let's not forget that the day after the short warranty period expires if the electronics fizzle or something goes wrong mechanically with the Canon, you might have to dig deep into your pocket for repairs. One Canon 15x50 IS owner on Cloudy Nights had repairs that cost him around $800. Swaro will do the repairs for free 10 years in Europe and lifetime in the U.S.
No worries for Dennis, though, who will either return the IS before the end of the store's return period or flip them on eBay long before the electronics fizzle. Although he has often written, "This one's a keeper," that never happens. "This, too, shall pass."
Still, if you have the shakes, and enjoy stargazing, you can't beat an iS bin for the freedom it allows you, but that freedom comes at a price and you have to be prepared to pay the fiddler when the time comes.
On the bright side, when the electronic fizzle, you can break off the EP stalks and use it as a football. :smoke:
Brock
Brock,
Regarding your statement that Swarovski gives a lifetime warranty on its binoculars here in the USA, why does the manual they supply with their new binoculars specify that the warranty is for 10 years from the date of the purchase of the binocular?
Purchasers here in the USA won't quibble if Swarovski chooses to ignore the 10 year limitation but what happens if a new management takes over and decides to comply only with what they have put in writing?
Bob
Last edited:
You can buy three of the Canon 10x42 IS's on Ebay for the price of the Swarovski 10x50 SV. If one breaks you have two in reserve. In the mean time you enjoy more resolution and a tripod like view. Here is what a regular 10x view looks like compared to the Canon IS 10x42.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJG4Gnm7zrc
Last edited:
The Swaro warranty in Europe covers labour and materials for 5 years and then materials only for the next 5 years.
Lee
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Here is what Swarovsik USA states in writing on their web site:
SWAROVSKI OPTIK offers a lifetime warranty on the optical system of our products for products purchased by US residents from an authorized SWAROVSKI OPTIK North American dealer. Once examined, if it is determined that the optical system is defective we will repair or replace the instrument or defective part. SWAROVSKI OPTIK warrants all other parts of the instrument for ten years from date of purchase against defects in materials or workmanship, subject to normal use.
http://aa.swarovskioptik.com/download/pdf/en_US/Warranty_US.pdf
I suspect the warranty in the box that you describe is from the Swarovski parent company and then Swaro USA supplements that. You might give Swaro USA a call to get actual the explanation.
Sanjay Naithani
Well-known member
I did look through my binocular today. I have just few observation compared to 12*50 SV I tried. I found 12*50 colors were more saturated than 10*50 SV. I found more brightness in 10*50 and it reminded me of Victory 10*42 HT I tried. I think color,contrast & sharpness was little supressed because of brightness. Also I couldn't find view very sharp when I was viewing things almost 1 km away. There was some haze in air ( as something vaporising or mirage ) when I was looking far ( almost 1 km away). Near view was clear and sharp, although the brightness made sense of less sharpness. I have not seen any rolling ball effect while normal panning, however I didn't deliberately try to induce it. I think I missed punch that I had seen in 12*50 for both color and sharpness in 10*50 SV. This was clearly because of more brightness. will it be the same case with 8.5 SV as it has nearly same exit pupil. Is that the case that 10*42 will have more saturated color and contrast compared to 8.5* because of low exit pupil and brightness.
In short I found 12*50 view crystal clear, saturated colors and the punch. This was suppressed in 10*50 SV as I could find more whiteness in image. To me 12*50 was the view I liked.
Now I am thinking if 10*42 would have given me the same view as 12*50. Since I am located in India so seems exchange is also not an option since I got it purchased from Hamburg through my friend.
Sanjay
In short I found 12*50 view crystal clear, saturated colors and the punch. This was suppressed in 10*50 SV as I could find more whiteness in image. To me 12*50 was the view I liked.
Now I am thinking if 10*42 would have given me the same view as 12*50. Since I am located in India so seems exchange is also not an option since I got it purchased from Hamburg through my friend.
Sanjay
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
color rendition depends on the coatings,
dont mix it up with brightness,
did you compare them side by side?
are the 12x and 10x50 SV of different age?
I know that on Allbinos.com the tested samples of 10x42 SV and 8.5x42 SV have somewhat different transmission curves,
In the newer Swaro ATX scopes the colors are a bit warmer/neutral than in the older ATS scopes.
(and perhaps newer ATS scopes will get same coating..??)
Don't know if this coating change has trickled down to the binoculars
but I guess it seems reasonable. Swaro will probably try to keep the same color rendition
in all off their top of the line products.
In that case the 12x50 might could be a newer sample with the latest coatings
than your 10x50?
but now I'm speculating..
For me, color rendering in optics is somewhat complicated,
since the eyes/brain have its own "white balance" features….
as well as brightness adjustment/ND-filters...
and they are very easy to trick…
so don't ever trust your eyes, ,-)
newer understood people who think that binoculars can be too bright…
I don't want built in sunglasses in my binos...
and if you do, just use ND-filters or shades….
|8)|
:eek!:
Last edited:
Sanjay Naithani
Well-known member
color rendition depends on the coatings,
dont mix it up with brightness,
did you compare them side by side?
are the 12x and 10x50 SV of different age?
I know that on Allbinos.com the tested samples of 10x42 SV and 8.5x42 SV have somewhat different transmission curves,
In the newer Swaro ATX scopes the colors are a bit warmer/neutral than in the older ATS scopes.
(and perhaps newer ATS scopes will get same coating..??)
Don't know if this coating change has trickled down to the binoculars
but I guess it seems reasonable. Swaro will probably try to keep the same color rendition
in all off their top of the line products.
In that case the 12x50 might could be a newer sample with the latest coatings
than your 10x50?
but now I'm speculating..
For me, color rendering in optics is somewhat complicated,
since the eyes/brain have its own "white balance" features….
as well as brightness adjustment/ND-filters...
and they are very easy to trick…
so don't ever trust your eyes, ,-)
newer understood people who think that binoculars can be too bright…
I don't want built in sunglasses in my binos...
and if you do, just use ND-filters or shades….
|8)|
12*50 SV was year 2012 make and 10*50 I just purchased last week.
Sanjay
I compared a 10X50SV with a 12X50 SV side-by-side over a period of three days in daylight. The only difference was magnification. Unless two bins are compared at the same time, under the same conditions conclusions are suspect. Memory is not what we think it is. At least that's what I remember.
PS
Everyone's experience level differs but, out of the box, the 10X50 SV was one of the "easiest on the eyes" I've used. Eye placement was effortless and the FOV with eyeglasses was/is excellent.
PS
Everyone's experience level differs but, out of the box, the 10X50 SV was one of the "easiest on the eyes" I've used. Eye placement was effortless and the FOV with eyeglasses was/is excellent.
Hi Sanjay. Sorry to read about your initial reactions. I have not tried an EL 12X50. However I have tried an EL 10X50 against a 10X42 not once but on 4 separate occasions, twice at the shop and twice with other people's since. These were not hurried comparisons but done at length. I am not going to repeat in this post everything that I said at the time. However, for me personally, the 10X50 was a better binocular. Also, in percentage terms, it was not a vastly greater cost compared to the 10X42 (6.3 percent more). I think that, when you do finally have the opportunity to compare against a 10X42, you will be more than happy. I certainly hope so!!
Rolstone
Rolstone
Similar threads
