• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

SV purchase and a bit of gossip (1 Viewer)

John Russell

Well-known member
Over the past few months I have had several opportunities to look through the Swarovski EL 10x42 SV and had become a little dissatisfied with my 10x42 FL. With its enormous 26 mm eye lenses it has excellent eye relief for glasses wearers and an ease of view that one would suspect 5 mm or 6 mm exit pupils instead of 4,2 mm. I also find the edge sharpness and lack of distortion very appealing and have no problems with "rolling ball."

I have just taken the plunge and am extremely satisfied. My example has pleasantly smooth focussing, which requires somewhat more torque in the clockwise direction than anti-clockwise. I assume that there is some pre-loading, which works the other way on my old 7x42 SLC. Perhaps this is due to to the change from a positive focussing element in the SLC to a negative one in the EL SV. Both, of course, focus clockwise to infinity and the SV requires about 200° rotation from 5 m to infinity, not too fast and not too slow. Swarovski allegedly are still having problems with the focussing mechanism on the 50 mm ELs and are selecting and reworking.

I half expected to be offered a Nikon EDG for comparison but after the tsunami Nikon are having production problems and the 10x42 is not expected for a while. Instead I was shown a 10x42 SLC HD but it was not to my taste, having poorer eye relief than the EL SV, pincussion and a fall-off in sharpnees at the edges.

The new field case is quite OK, perhaps a little slower to open with its zippers but has just enough room for a field guide in addition to the bins. The rain guard is still horrid hinged hard plastic and will be replaced by an oval rubber one (old Zeiss-type) and the neck strap has an ingenious but IMO useless means of rapidly changing its length. I prefer the neck strap so short that it just passes over my head but the new version cannot be shortened sufficiently without compromising security or having long loose ends. I have asked my dealer to send me an old-type neck strap.

I did note some CA toward the field edges of the SV but of a similar magnitude to the FLs. My dealer said that Kowa was the only manufacturer to have largely eliminated CA, but at a price. The glasses used in the objectives and focussing elements have a high Abbe no. but also a very high density forcing compromises in prism size and FOV to keep the weight down on the 44 mm Prominar XDs. In addition, the low dispersion glasses have higher absorption leading to poorer transmission values.

I was told that there are no plans for Ultravid replacements in the forseeable future and that the Victory FL replacements will be radically different but will not appear until next year. Zeiss will continue to update the Conquest range and the 8x30 successor will be an 8x32 weighing less than 500 g!

Now I'm looking forward to getting out in the field with my SVs and doing my monthly water bird count at the weekend.

John
 
Hi John, I am glad you like the 10x42 Swarovision. The 8.5x42 Swarovision I tried had a super ease of view, I just loved it. I liked it a lot better than the Swaro 8x42 HD model. No problem with the 8.5 Swarovision, just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned. I will have one some day. It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that.
 
"Swarovski allegedly are still having problems with the focussing mechanism on the 50 mm ELs and are selecting and reworking."

The "Achilles Heel" again! Why can't Swarovski manufacture focusers consistently so that they turn smoothly in both directions?????

Negative or positive lens elements, it shouldn't matter, Nikon can do it, Zeiss can do it, Leica chooses not to because of its greaseless pig design, but Swaro still has this same problem with focusers even at the $2,649 price point!!!!!!

My advice for the Wizards of Absam is to take apart an EDG II and a Premier HGL, study the focuser design, and then reverse engineer it. I think it might be their only hope.

Neoptolemus
 
"Swarovski allegedly are still having problems with the focussing mechanism on the 50 mm ELs and are selecting and reworking."

The "Achilles Heel" again! Why can't Swarovski manufacture focusers consistently so that they turn smoothly in both directions?????

Negative or positive lens elements, it shouldn't matter, Nikon can do it, Zeiss can do it, Leica chooses not to because of its greaseless pig design, but Swaro still has this same problem with focusers even at the $2,649 price point!!!!!!

My advice for the Wizards of Absam is to take apart an EDG II and a Premier HGL, study the focuser design, and then reverse engineer it. I think it might be their only hope.

Neoptolemus

Yes, it is weird they haven't solved that problem. My SV had it and I don't care what anybody says it should not be that way and it is irritating!
 
John,
Thanks for the gossip. Having spent a little field time with my wife's 8.5, it's no surprise to hear the 10 is good too. Some people complain of the rolling ball while panning, but it's strange that nobody ever praises the whole reason for having it: the field edge is "distortionless for telephone poles". Is birding more popular than telephone pole spotting? Anyhow, put a telephone pole at the edge of the field if you get a chance, and be happy it looks arrow straight. There really is something nice about that.

My wife's SV doesn't have any difference in the feel of the focuser one way or the other. I'll tell ya'll another good one. I have at long last tried a Leica with a butter smooth focuser! JUST LIKE AN FL! It was an 8x+12x42 Duovid of all things. I am not making this up. Miracles happen.
Ron
 
Last edited:
Interesting, so the March 2012 Zeiss launch may not be a new FL?
I wonder if/how the new focus mechanism will be rolled out on the EL50 and if existing owners will have the option to upgrade?
 
Interesting, so the March 2012 Zeiss launch may not be a new FL?
I wonder if/how the new focus mechanism will be rolled out on the EL50 and if existing owners will have the option to upgrade?

Or it could be that the new Victorys will be announced in March but won't actually hit the shelves until 2013. Time to build up the hype?
 
Interesting, so the March 2012 Zeiss launch may not be a new FL?
I wonder if/how the new focus mechanism will be rolled out on the EL50 and if existing owners will have the option to upgrade?

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2330613&postcount=43
"Focusing ease and quickness – the EL50 focus was much smoother than my old EL42, but then they are 10 years old and probably in need of some TLC. No stiffness noticeable due to the cold and no discernable difference in rotating in either direction. Very easy to focus the image. Worked well with gloves too."
 
Just to clarify, I don't think there is going to be a redesign of the EL50s. Some are OK, some less so, as I experienced at the Bird Festival in Bochum last year. It's probably all down to production tolerances and many will recall that it took about a year for the 42 mm SVs to reach the dealers after their announcement back in 2008.

Personally, I regard it as something of a mechanical miracle to be able to incorporate a focussing and diopter mechanism into a bridge of a mere 16 mm height and still attain acceptable smoothness. The Nikon EDG IIs let alone the HGLs are just not comparable here.

Smoothness is not the only focussing issue. The Nikons allegedly have very fast (too fast?) focussing and if I recall correctly the 10x42 FL only needed about 150° from 5 m to infinity, a little too fast for my taste.

There have been reports on this forum of some bins requiring frequent corrections of the diopter setting. I'm speculating here, but could this be the reason Swarovski pre-load the focussing elements? If my reasoning is correct then positve focussing elements would need to be moved in the direction of the prisms for infinity focus and negative elements in the direction of the objectives. If the focussing elements on Swarovskis are pre-loaded in the direction of the prisms then this would explain the slightly stiffer focus to infinity of the SVs and the stiffer movement to close focus on the old SLCs.

BTW, the March 2012 Zeiss launch will be the 8x42 and 10x42 Conquest HDs, as reported on the Zeiss forum.

John
 
Hi John, I am glad you like the 10x42 Swarovision. The 8.5x42 Swarovision I tried had a super ease of view, I just loved it. I liked it a lot better than the Swaro 8x42 HD model. No problem with the 8.5 Swarovision, just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned. I will have one some day. It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that.

Steve,

Just wanted to take this opportunity to express the opposite assessment of the Swaro SLC 8x42d HD, which I find outperforms the 8.5 SV. That said, "...just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned... It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that..."

I've had it in the field every day since it was purchased, and every day was a better birding experience than the day before.

Ed
 
Steve,

Just wanted to take this opportunity to express the opposite assessment of the Swaro SLC 8x42d HD, which I find outperforms the 8.5 SV. That said, "...just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned... It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that..."

I've had it in the field every day since it was purchased, and every day was a better birding experience than the day before.

Ed

Ed:

Good to hear you are happy with the new 8x42. I am thinking it is good,
but for me, I find the 8.5x42 SV, is very good, and I suppose this would come down to personal preference.
As far as outperforming the SV, I don't think so. The handling of the open
frame, and the edg performance of the SV, are both superior, and those
are both very important to me.

Jerry
 
Steve,

Just wanted to take this opportunity to express the opposite assessment of the Swaro SLC 8x42d HD, which I find outperforms the 8.5 SV. That said, "...just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned... It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that..."

I've had it in the field every day since it was purchased, and every day was a better birding experience than the day before.

Ed

I understand your Point of View. The SV's are not for everyone. After awhile the Rolling Ball started getting to me also. That is probably why they made them both. For different people. The Swaro SLC 8x42 HD is an excellent binocular.
 
John,
Thanks for the gossip. Having spent a little field time with my wife's 8.5, it's no surprise to hear the 10 is good too. Some people complain of the rolling ball while panning, but it's strange that nobody ever praises the whole reason for having it: the field edge is "distortionless for telephone poles". Is birding more popular than telephone pole spotting? Anyhow, put a telephone pole at the edge of the field if you get a chance, and be happy it looks arrow straight. There really is something nice about that.

My wife's SV doesn't have any difference in the feel of the focuser one way or the other. I'll tell ya'll another good one. I have at long last tried a Leica with a butter smooth focuser! JUST LIKE AN FL! It was an 8x+12x42 Duovid of all things. I am not making this up. Miracles happen.
Ron

I have had alot of Leica's and they have all been gritty semi-hard focusers.
 
Ed:

Good to hear you are happy with the new 8x42. I am thinking it is good,
but for me, I find the 8.5x42 SV, is very good, and I suppose this would come down to personal preference.
As far as outperforming the SV, I don't think so. The handling of the open
frame, and the edg performance of the SV, are both superior, and those
are both very important to me.

Jerry

Jerry,

Many thanks. Open frames are not to my liking at all, either for holding steady or for use with my FISMO (FInn Stick MOnopod) http://www.birdforum.net/reviews/showproduct.php?product=122
The SV's field flattener interferes with my depth perception, and produces an upsetting globe effect while scanning.

The SLC on the other hand, .... well, it's simply perfect in every way.

Seriously, enjoy your SV as much as I do the SLC. Swaro did right by both of us.

Ed
PS. I upgraded the FISMO with a Tracks monopod and 10' camera extension. Still use the same head though. Makes for quite a trekking and viewing system.
 
Last edited:
Steve,

Just wanted to take this opportunity to express the opposite assessment of the Swaro SLC 8x42d HD, which I find outperforms the 8.5 SV. That said, "...just hold it up to my eyes, no tilting out from the bottom, just view, and what a view. This binocular is in another league as far as I am concerned... It fit me perfectly. First binocular to do that..."

I've had it in the field every day since it was purchased, and every day was a better birding experience than the day before.

Ed


Hi Ed, If I understand right, you just hold the HD up to your eye, no tilting etc. If that is right I am very happy for you and it shows how different we all are. What works for one might not work for someone else. :t:
 
Hi Ed, If I understand right, you just hold the HD up to your eye, no tilting etc. If that is right I am very happy for you and it shows how different we all are. What works for one might not work for someone else. :t:

Yes, indeed, Steve. No tilting required with our without glasses.

I do wish Swaro would provide rubber rainguards. Hard plastic seems to be looking for trouble. But, they've been providing those for years so I guess it's in their DNA.

Ed
 
I do wish Swaro would provide rubber rainguards. Hard plastic seems to be looking for trouble. But, they've been providing those for years so I guess it's in their DNA.
Ed

Ed,

I find this type is on and off quicker than anything else and is a universal fit.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocular-accessories/zeiss/zeiss-classic-bga-binocular-rainguard
Instead of threading the neck strap through it, I attach it with a short length of nylon cord so it doesn't present an obstruction.

John
 
Yes, indeed, Steve. No tilting required with our without glasses.

I do wish Swaro would provide rubber rainguards. Hard plastic seems to be looking for trouble. But, they've been providing those for years so I guess it's in their DNA.

Ed

Ed:
Do you wear glasses when viewing? If you can use the new winged eyecups,
that are available, there is also a winged rainguard that comes as a set, I
believe. You would like the winged guard better than the plastic one, its a
softer rubber.
I leave mine on with the regular eyecups.

Otherwise, I suppose you could just swap another rainguard from something
else.

Jerry
 
John and Jerry,

I missed your posts until now, and thanks for the information.

John, my 7x42 BGATP uses that Zeiss eyecup. I like to keep it threaded on both sides so that it automatically covers the oculars when I lower the binoculars to chest level.

The first picture below shows my temporary rain guard, which I believe actually is an old Swaro product (not sure). Fortunately, it fits exactly right when the IPD is set to 64mm, and the color matches. Doesn't it look handsome?

But, two days ago I discovered what may be the rainguard you mentioned, Jerry. The third picture shows the version of it I have for the Swaro 8x30 SLC. The one for the 8x42 is on back order from B&H. Winged eyecups are out for me because I use glasses.

Many thanks,
Ed
 

Attachments

  • Swaro 8x42 guard off.jpg
    Swaro 8x42 guard off.jpg
    115.7 KB · Views: 60
  • Swaro 8x42 guard on.jpg
    Swaro 8x42 guard on.jpg
    98 KB · Views: 51
  • Swaro 8x30 guard off.jpg
    Swaro 8x30 guard off.jpg
    107.5 KB · Views: 59
Warning! This thread is more than 12 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top