New bin, EL10x50SV (1 Viewer)

[[email protected]]

No Im not friends with Elton John unfortunately :-C
But if you are reading this by any chance Elton feel free to send me a PM.
But joking aside, i will be saving every £££ in the next few weeks, before i go to a store to test out the 10x50 el SV's.
And thanks for your thoughts on them Denco, and the link to those 10x50's. They sound an awesome binocular.
One finally thing, compared to the Conquest 10x42 HD, would you say the 10x50 SV's definitely have the wow factor..?
Or as close to it as you can get to that feeling..?

Neil

The 10x50 SV's have the most WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW FACTOR I have ever seen in any binocular! Every time I use them I am WOWED! The thing about them is I have never seen a 10x with that big of a AFOV and sharp edges and DOF combined with a lot of 3D all together in one package in a roof prism binocular. The 50mm aperture just makes them easier to use with the big 5mm exit pupil versus a 42mm. There is a lot of high grade glass in those things with like 10 lenses per side. Yet you use them and they are magical.

 

[Lord Muck]

The 10x50 SV's have the most WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW FACTOR I have ever seen in any binocular! Every time I use them I am WOWED! The thing about them is I have never seen a 10x with that big of a AFOV and sharp edges and DOF combined with a lot of 3D all together in one package in a roof prism binocular. The 50mm aperture just makes them easier to use with the big 5mm exit pupil versus a 42mm. There is a lot of high grade glass in those things with like 10 lenses per side. Yet you use them and they are magical.

They do sound awesome Denco, and something to look forward to, whilst saving up for them in the coming weeks.
As they sound just what ive been looking for in an "Alpha" binocular :eat:

Thanks Again,

Neil

 

[Theo98]

They do sound awesome Denco, and something to look forward to saving up for in the coming weeks, as they sound just what Im looking for in an Alpha binocular :eat:

LM,

The view through the EL 10x50 SV is really special for many birders (as you've already read here). However, you really need to get them in your hands and see for Yourself if their additional size (ergonomics) and weight (balance) would be issues for you. If possible, bring your Conquest and directly compare them indoors and outside in various light conditions.

For my eyes, there's been No 10x42 I've glassed with (SV's, Habicht porros, SF's, HT's, UVHD+, etc.) that give me the clarity and ease of view that my 10x50 SV does. Not guaranteed you'll see it that way, but take the time comparing and be sure the extra investment would be worth your purchase!

Good Luck, :t:

Ted

 

[BruceH]

Lord Muck ..... You may also want to consider the new Leica Ultravid Plus 10X50. Just as some members who preferred the Swaro 10X50 EL SV compared to the Swaro 10X42 EL SV, here is a review from a member that compared the new Leica to the 10X42 Swaro and likewise, indicated that he preferred the 10X50 Leica.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=310510

These two are top of the line for these two companies and are similar in their specs. Each are about the same weight and have about the same FOV. It would be an interesting comparison.

You indicated in another post that you are looking for substantial difference/improvement over your current Conquest. In that case, you might want to also include the Zeiss SF 10X42 in your review. The 360 ft FOV / 120 meter FOV may be a more noticeable change for you compared to the more subtle optical differences.

Keep in mind you are already at a high level with the Conquest. Some have described it as near alpha. I find the improvements of the three models mentioned more incremental rather than a night and day type change. However, unlike a more expensive bottle of wine that can be enjoyed for just one meal, the optical improvement is there for as long as you use it. I look at the improvement as being accumulative and I get the value over time. Considering the cost of all the trips and outings, the additional cost for the incremental improvement in the view (which I appreciate and enjoy) is very small. Also keep in mind that alpha binoculars hold their value well, so if you buy right, you can get back a good amount of your original expenditure.

I own an SF 10X42 (along with a Swaro 12X50 EL SV). I have only looked at the Swaro 10X50 EL SV in the store a couple of times, directly comparing it to the SF. Both are excellent but have different qualities. I have not used the Leica 10X50 so I only know what I read and have seen in other Leica HD Plus models.

The advantage of the Swaro over the SF is that larger exit pupil and objective lens that some prefer. The advantage of the SF is the wider FOV and the lighter weight and balance. Excluding the FOV, I did not find that much of a difference in brightness, contrast, color balance, etc, where I would choose one over the other based on just that criteria. There were small differences but I thought overall equivalent. However that was inside a store, so my opinion might be different out in the field. Both are a double hinge design and use lens flatteners. Ultimately, the wider FOV, more rearward balance and lighter weight of the SF is the better choice for my personal preferences. Obviously, not everyone feels the same way!

The major differences between the Swaro and Leica are double hinge vs a single hinge and a flat field of the Swaro vs a classic system for the Leica. I suspect there would also be more of difference in the final view due to differences in color balance. It would be great to get some some opinions from members who have compared the new Leica Plus to the Swaro. Ultimately, these are personal preference differences.

I doubt if any of these can be labeled "best". All are excellent. It comes down to with attributes are the best match for the buyers personal preferences. Hopefully one will stand out for you. Please continue to keep us updated as your search progresses.

Also keep in mind that Lords should not want to seen wandering among the masses with less an alpha hanging form their neck.

 

[[email protected]]

Lord Muck ..... You may also want to consider the new Leica Ultravid Plus 10X50. Just as some members who preferred the Swaro 10X50 EL SV compared to the Swaro 10X42 EL SV, here is a review from a member that compared the new Leica to the 10X42 Swaro and likewise, indicated that he preferred the 10X50 Leica.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=310510

These two are top of the line for these two companies and are similar in their specs. Each are about the same weight and have about the same FOV. It would be an interesting comparison.

You indicated in another post that you are looking for substantial difference/improvement over your current Conquest. In that case, you might want to also include the Zeiss SF 10X42 in your review. The 360 ft FOV / 120 meter FOV may be a more noticeable change for you compared to the more subtle optical differences.

Keep in mind you are already at a high level with the Conquest. Some have described it as near alpha. I find the improvements of the three models mentioned more incremental rather than a night and day type change. However, unlike a more expensive bottle of wine that can be enjoyed for just one meal, the optical improvement is there for as long as you use it. I look at the improvement as being accumulative and I get the value over time. Considering the cost of all the trips and outings, the additional cost for the incremental improvement in the view (which I appreciate and enjoy) is very small. Also keep in mind that alpha binoculars hold their value well, so if you buy right, you can get back a good amount of your original expenditure.

I own an SF 10X42 (along with a Swaro 12X50 EL SV). I have only looked at the Swaro 10X50 EL SV in the store a couple of times, directly comparing it to the SF. Both are excellent but have different qualities. I have not used the Leica 10X50 so I only know what I read and have seen in other Leica HD Plus models.

The advantage of the Swaro over the SF is that larger exit pupil and objective lens that some prefer. The advantage of the SF is the wider FOV and the lighter weight and balance. Excluding the FOV, I did not find that much of a difference in brightness, contrast, color balance, etc, where I would choose one over the other based on just that criteria. There were small differences but I thought overall equivalent. However that was inside a store, so my opinion might be different out in the field. Both are a double hinge design and use lens flatteners. Ultimately, the wider FOV, more rearward balance and lighter weight of the SF is the better choice for my personal preferences. Obviously, not everyone feels the same way!

The major differences between the Swaro and Leica are double hinge vs a single hinge and a flat field of the Swaro vs a classic system for the Leica. I suspect there would also be more of difference in the final view due to differences in color balance. It would be great to get some some opinions from members who have compared the new Leica Plus to the Swaro. Ultimately, these are personal preference differences.

I doubt if any of these can be labeled "best". All are excellent. It comes down to with attributes are the best match for the buyers personal preferences. Hopefully one will stand out for you. Please continue to keep us updated as your search progresses.

Also keep in mind that Lords should not want to seen wandering among the masses with less an alpha hanging form their neck.

The biggest difference between the SV 10x50 and all the competiton including the Zeiss 10x42 SF and Leica 10x50 Ultravid Plus is the Swarovision's are tack sharp right to the edge. NO other binocular is sharp right to the edge like the SV's. That to me is a big reason the 10x50 SV's are so outstanding. You may have a slightly bigger FOV in the Zeiss 10x42 SF but it is only sharp to about 70% of the FOV , whereas, the SV is sharp to 100%. Now which one really has the bigger FOV when you consider what % of that FOV is in focus? You notice it too. To see this huge FOV that is sharp right to the edge at 10x is what makes the 10x50 SV awesome. Also, the comfort of having a 5mm exit pupil can not be underestimated. It makes a huge difference. It is just like going from an 8x32 to 8x42. It is another big reason the 10x50 SV has such an easy comfortable view. I personally would never buy a 10x again with less than a 50mm aperture seeing the difference it makes. Going from my 8x32 SV to the 10x50 SV is like going from the 8x25 Swarovski CL-P to the 8x32 SV. Almost the same step up in comfort. And I know because I have both the 8x32 SV and the 10x50 SV. Another factor to consider is Eye Relief. The Leica 10x50 Ultravid Plus has 15mm, the Zeiss 10x42 SF has 18mm and the Swarovski 10x50 SV has 20mm. Now which one do you think is going to be more comfortable to use?

 

[Hermann]

The Leica 10x50 Ultravid Plus has 15mm, the Zeiss 10x42 SF has 18mm and the Swarovski 10x50 SV has 20mm. Now which one do you think is going to be more comfortable to use?

Once you get above 12mm eye relief or so you won't see a significant difference anymore, unless you're an eyeglass wearer.

Hermann

 

[Vespobuteo]

Another factor to consider is Eye Relief. The Leica 10x50 Ultravid Plus has 15mm, the Zeiss 10x42 SF has 18mm and the Swarovski 10x50 SV has 20mm. Now which one do you think is going to be more comfortable to use?

I wouldn't look to much on simple ER figures,
eye cups design are quite different, and the SV eye cups are deep, and
effective ER with glasses is less, eye cups on the UVID is on the other hand quite shallow, I think all three can work fine with glasses.

 

[[email protected]]

I wouldn't look to much on simple ER figures,
eye cups design are quite different, and the SV eye cups are deep, and
effective ER with glasses is less, eye cups on the UVID is on the other hand quite shallow, I think all three can work fine with glasses.

There are a lot of eyeglass wearers that need more than 15mm. There are a few eyeglass wearers on Bird Forum who can't use the UVID Plus because of it's minimal ER and instead have the SV. It all depends on how deep your eye sockets are if you don't wear eyeglasses. I can't get by with 13mm myself and consider 16mm the absolute minimum. I personally found 18mm and above ER to be more comfortable and it allows more adjustment range with the eyecups.

 

[Lord Muck]

LM,

The view through the EL 10x50 SV is really special for many birders (as you've already read here). However, you really need to get them in your hands and see for Yourself if their additional size (ergonomics) and weight (balance) would be issues for you. If possible, bring your Conquest and directly compare them indoors and outside in various light conditions.

For my eyes, there's been No 10x42 I've glassed with (SV's, Habicht porros, SF's, HT's, UVHD+, etc.) that give me the clarity and ease of view that my 10x50 SV does. Not guaranteed you'll see it that way, but take the time comparing and be sure the extra investment would be worth your purchase!

Good Luck, :t:

Ted

Many thanks for your thoughts Ted.
You're right,..... I do need to get the 10x50 sv's in my hands to see the difference in them, compared to the Conquest 10x42's.

Neil

 

[Lord Muck]

Lord Muck ..... You may also want to consider the new Leica Ultravid Plus 10X50. Just as some members who preferred the Swaro 10X50 EL SV compared to the Swaro 10X42 EL SV, here is a review from a member that compared the new Leica to the 10X42 Swaro and likewise, indicated that he preferred the 10X50 Leica.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=310510

These two are top of the line for these two companies and are similar in their specs. Each are about the same weight and have about the same FOV. It would be an interesting comparison.

You indicated in another post that you are looking for substantial difference/improvement over your current Conquest. In that case, you might want to also include the Zeiss SF 10X42 in your review. The 360 ft FOV / 120 meter FOV may be a more noticeable change for you compared to the more subtle optical differences.

Keep in mind you are already at a high level with the Conquest. Some have described it as near alpha. I find the improvements of the three models mentioned more incremental rather than a night and day type change. However, unlike a more expensive bottle of wine that can be enjoyed for just one meal, the optical improvement is there for as long as you use it. I look at the improvement as being accumulative and I get the value over time. Considering the cost of all the trips and outings, the additional cost for the incremental improvement in the view (which I appreciate and enjoy) is very small. Also keep in mind that alpha binoculars hold their value well, so if you buy right, you can get back a good amount of your original expenditure.

I own an SF 10X42 (along with a Swaro 12X50 EL SV). I have only looked at the Swaro 10X50 EL SV in the store a couple of times, directly comparing it to the SF. Both are excellent but have different qualities. I have not used the Leica 10X50 so I only know what I read and have seen in other Leica HD Plus models.

The advantage of the Swaro over the SF is that larger exit pupil and objective lens that some prefer. The advantage of the SF is the wider FOV and the lighter weight and balance. Excluding the FOV, I did not find that much of a difference in brightness, contrast, color balance, etc, where I would choose one over the other based on just that criteria. There were small differences but I thought overall equivalent. However that was inside a store, so my opinion might be different out in the field. Both are a double hinge design and use lens flatteners. Ultimately, the wider FOV, more rearward balance and lighter weight of the SF is the better choice for my personal preferences. Obviously, not everyone feels the same way!

The major differences between the Swaro and Leica are double hinge vs a single hinge and a flat field of the Swaro vs a classic system for the Leica. I suspect there would also be more of difference in the final view due to differences in color balance. It would be great to get some some opinions from members who have compared the new Leica Plus to the Swaro. Ultimately, these are personal preference differences.

I doubt if any of these can be labeled "best". All are excellent. It comes down to with attributes are the best match for the buyers personal preferences. Hopefully one will stand out for you. Please continue to keep us updated as your search progresses.

Also keep in mind that Lords should not want to seen wandering among the masses with less an alpha hanging form their neck.

Hey Bruce,

Thank you for a very interesting post regarding the subtle differences between Leica, and Zeiss Victory SF binoculars. It has give me more food for thought, and Im going to have to get some hands on experiences of those you mentioned, by visiting a store or two before i make a final decision.

And your absolutely correct,...Her Majesty's Lords should never been seen amongst the "Lower Orders" as we refer to them in the U.K, with anything less than "Alpha" binoculars. I had to give my butler a damn good thrashing over Christmas when he suggested i should try his grandfather's 50 year Zeiss binoculars that looked like they had been buried in cow dung for even longer.
You'll no doubt be pleased to know, he won't be able to sit down for a week, for his ridiculous suggestion :t:

The Rt Hon Lord Muck, O.B.E

 

[NDhunter]

Hey Bruce,

Thank you for a very interesting post regarding the subtle differences between Leica, and Zeiss Victory SF binoculars. It has give me more food for thought, and Im going to have to get some hands on experiences of those you mentioned, by visiting a store or two before i make a final decision.

And your absolutely correct,...Her Majesty's Lords should never been seen amongst the "Lower Orders" as we refer to them in the U.K, with anything less than "Alpha" binoculars. I had to give my butler a damn good thrashing over Christmas when he suggested i should try his grandfather's 50 year Zeiss binoculars that looked like they had been buried in cow dung for even longer.
You'll no doubt be pleased to know, he won't be able to sit down for a week, for his ridiculous suggestion :t:

The Rt Hon Lord Muck, O.B.E

I agree with Bruce's advice above. If looking at a new 10X binocular
check all of the models available. The 50mm objectives are nice, but
the heavier weight may be an objection to you if birding all day.

I agree that the new Zeiss SF 10x42 is one that you need to check out.
There is a very good reason 42mm binoculars are the most popular
sellers, and the wide FOV of the SF, will give you that extra view comfort
of a 10x50.

Good luck as you find what works for you.

Jerry

 

[etudiant]

And your absolutely correct,...Her Majesty's Lords should never been seen amongst the "Lower Orders" as we refer to them in the U.K, with anything less than "Alpha" binoculars. I had to give my butler a damn good thrashing over Christmas when he suggested i should try his grandfather's 50 year Zeiss binoculars...
The Rt Hon Lord Muck, O.B.E

Probably 8x60s, a little big but offering the best view ever.
Certainly fit for a Lord.

 

[[email protected]]

I agree with Bruce's advice above. If looking at a new 10X binocular
check all of the models available. The 50mm objectives are nice, but
the heavier weight may be an objection to you if birding all day.

I agree that the new Zeiss SF 10x42 is one that you need to check out.
There is a very good reason 42mm binoculars are the most popular
sellers, and the wide FOV of the SF, will give you that extra view comfort
of a 10x50.

Good luck as you find what works for you.

Jerry

"There is a very good reason 42mm binoculars are the most popular
sellers, and the wide FOV of the SF, will give you that extra view comfort
of a 10x50."

It is true the 10x42 SF has a wider FOV but the comfort comes mostly from the bigger exit pupil of the 10x50. A lot more room to move your eyes around.

 

[Lord Muck]

I agree with Bruce's advice above. If looking at a new 10X binocular
check all of the models available. The 50mm objectives are nice, but
the heavier weight may be an objection to you if birding all day.

I agree that the new Zeiss SF 10x42 is one that you need to check out.
There is a very good reason 42mm binoculars are the most popular
sellers, and the wide FOV of the SF, will give you that extra view comfort
of a 10x50.

Good luck as you find what works for you.

Jerry

Hi Jerry,

Im getting lots of good advice in here, and i will be checking out all the latest 10x Alpha's over the next few weeks, before i decide on one particular binocular.

As you know, I have the Conquest 10x42 HD, which gives very nice views, but i want to see which of the Alpha's gives even better views.
And the extra weight is not a problem for me. Plus i have a good harness and Monopod, and Manfrotto tripod if i need them, etc

Neil M

 

[Lord Muck]

Probably 8x60s, a little big but offering the best view ever.
Certainly fit for a Lord.

I keep telling my butler that only 21st century "Alpha's" are fit for a Lord, but he is as deaf as a barn door.

 

[NDhunter]

Hi Jerry,

Im getting lots of good advice in here, and i will be checking out all the latest 10x Alpha's over the next few weeks, before i decide on one particular binocular.

As you know, I have the Conquest 10x42 HD, which gives very nice views, but i want to see which of the Alpha's gives even better views.
And the extra weight is not a problem for me. Plus i have a good harness and Monopod, and Manfrotto tripod if i need them, etc

Neil M

Neil:

I also have the 10x42 Conquest HD, and the SF. Both are very good
and the SF is better. No surprise there, it should be.

Only you can measure that difference. I have tried the 10x50 SV, and
it is also at the top level.

Jerry

 

[Lord Muck]

"There is a very good reason 42mm binoculars are the most popular
sellers, and the wide FOV of the SF, will give you that extra view comfort
of a 10x50."

It is true the 10x42 SF has a wider FOV but the comfort comes mostly from the bigger exit pupil of the 10x50. A lot more room to move your eyes around.

I will be looking at all the latest 10x Alpha's Denco, over the next few weeks.

Neil M

 

[[email protected]]

"Lord Muck ..... You may also want to consider the new Leica Ultravid Plus 10X50. Just as some members who preferred the Swaro 10X50 EL SV compared to the Swaro 10X42 EL SV, here is a review from a member that compared the new Leica to the 10X42 Swaro and likewise, indicated that he preferred the 10X50 Leica.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=310510"

I read Globetrotter's thread on the Leica 10x50 UVD Plus compared to the Swaro 10x42 Swarovision and I don't see where he said he preferred the Leica over the Swaro. In fact he said the Swaro's controlled CA better and had better transparency than the Leica's. To conclude he quoted not at all saying he preferred the Leica.

"Who is the best ?????
For me a direct competition among the Zeiss, leicas and Swaros has no sense at all because they have different designs.
Leica is Leica is you like it take it if not leave it. Leica view microcontrast and ultra Sharp view with a studied distortion to make the view alive.
Zeiss……all about light transmission…..to bright for me during daytime..amazing in low light or cloudy days
Swaro SV the best balanced one with flat field Sharp to the edge and neutral view maybe a Little bit flat view due to the lack of field cuvature….just a perfect view in front of you."

Anyway, you can't compare a 10x50 to a 10x42. The 10x50 is going to have a big advantage in aperture. The 10x50 SV is a totally different animal than it's smaller brother the 10x42 SV. The better detail Globetrotter noticed on the wall could be attributed to the bigger aperture of the Leica also

 

[ceasar]

There are a lot of eyeglass wearers that need more than 15mm. There are a few eyeglass wearers on Bird Forum who can't use the UVID Plus because of it's minimal ER and instead have the SV. It all depends on how deep your eye sockets are if you don't wear eyeglasses. I can't get by with 13mm myself and consider 16mm the absolute minimum. I personally found 18mm and above ER to be more comfortable and it allows more adjustment range with the eyecups.

There is another way to hold a binocular up to one's eyes other than putting it into ones eye sockets for an on axis view.

That is by bracing the eye cups up against the brow ridge just under ones eye brows. Slight adjustments on the point where it is braced will affect the eye relief. This is why comfortable eye cups are good to have on a binocular. Slight movements of the binocular up and down, on and off axis, can also clear up some types of veiling glare which can crop up when looking at a portion of the sky in the general direction of the sun.

Bob

 

[Lord Muck]

Neil:

I also have the 10x42 Conquest HD, and the SF. Both are very good
and the SF is better. No surprise there, it should be.

Only you can measure that difference. I have tried the 10x50 SV, and
it is also at the top level.

Jerry

Jerry,

In your humble opinion, what differences did you find when looking through the conquest 10x42 and the Swarovision 10x50 - between say 500 and 1,000 meters..?

Neil