Swarovski 8.5x42 EL Swarovision (5 Viewers)

[pimpelmees]

And there's the problems with the focussing widely reported on different forums - sticky focussers and focussers that are more difficult to turn in one direction than the other. That's one of my pet peeves, I simply can't work with binoculars that don't focus smoothly. The two Swarovisions I looked at so far both weren't really up to scratch in that regard.

Hermann

...you are just jealous because swarovski is not a german brand i think,

 

[JabaliHunter]

I'm sure I could fall for an 8x50 or 8x56 SV, but I hear there are no plans for such a thing.Henry

Me too!

 

[Hermann]

...you are just jealous because swarovski is not a german brand i think,

Not really ... After all, Austria is *almost* part of Germany. They even speak German, well, sort of ... o

I'm rather critical of the present Zeiss and Leica bins as well. The only one I really like is the Zeiss 8x56 FL. Perfect optics with an almost surreal image quality - but it's too darn heavy. But that's about it. It's not just the optics, it's also the mechanical quality of the modern roofs I don't really like.

Apart from that, I also happen to think the modern alpha roofs are too expensive.

Hermann

 

[pimpelmees]

Not really ... After all, Austria is *almost* part of Germany. They even speak German, well, sort of ... o

I'm rather critical of the present Zeiss and Leica bins as well. The only one I really like is the Zeiss 8x56 FL. Perfect optics with an almost surreal image quality - but it's too darn heavy. But that's about it. It's not just the optics, it's also the mechanical quality of the modern roofs I don't really like.

Apart from that, I also happen to think the modern alpha roofs are too expensive.

Hermann

off course, zeiss is not the company anymore of years ago, also the service is the worst of all the company's and one of the reasons i bought a swarovki is the service they offer, i also have a leica 10x42 BL and leica televid 65mm scope ( he service of leica is improved since a few years back).
About the build of the present binoculairs i can say and think that they are evenly strong and rugged than the old ones, new materials are been used , and they use them everywhere (airplanes ....).

 

[NDhunter]

Jerry,

Yes, the 8.5x42 SV has "very good" image quality in the center of the field, but in bright daylight I've found the 8x56 FL to be visibly better: brighter, sharper, cleaner, more transparent. True, that's my personal observation, but there are demonstrable optical reasons for it. Mostly I think it's down to the usual list of optical advantages that come from stopping down a large aperture/long focal length binocular. The aberrations and defects of binoculars like that are better corrected than smaller exit pupil binoculars of equal quality when both are stopped down to the same effective exit pupil size by the pupil of the eye in daylight.

Then there are other purely geometric advantages to large exit pupils in bright light that I like, such as increased resistance to glare since the edge of the exit pupil falls on the iris of the eye well outside the pupil, more forgiving pupil alignment and more even field illumination from a less vignetted exit pupil at the field edge.

None of this has anything to do with "resolution". When an 8x and 8.5x are both reduced to 3mm exit pupils by the eye, it's the 8.5x that retains a larger effective aperture (25.5mm vs 24mm), so the 8x56 has no aperture or resolution advantage in daylight. You can always see slightly smaller details through any decent 8.5x binocular compared to even the best possible 8x.

I'm not suggesting that there is anything wrong with the SV's optics. If I were in the market for an 8/8.5x42 or 10x50 they would be at the top of my short list, but at the current state of the art I'm finding that a large exit pupil binocular is still required to keep an image quality junkie like me happy. I'm sure I could fall for an 8x50 or 8x56 SV, but I hear there are no plans for such a thing.

Henry

Henry:
I thought you may reply about the high quality view you get from the large
56 Zeiss. I do like to hear how you explain how you view things. I did find your comment about the large exit pupil binocular, interesting.

I also wonder about any future large aperture models from any of the Alphas.
I suspect that may be few, the market dictates the offerings. I suspect that 50mm will be max, and will due to the fact that the new 50's will offer the new coatings and what most will want, as they may surpass the older 56.

It does come down to the view, and that is what counts.

The new Swaro. SV. and the Nikon EDG, offer a great view to the edges. So,
why limit yourself to the better useable 75%, found with a FL.

I suppose that is why some hopeful are waiting for the next models. I guess until
then, you need to go to 56mm, to get to the better view available, with the Zeiss.


Jerry

 

[JabaliHunter]

When you 'stop down' the x56, do the edges effectively disappear from view?

 

[henry link]

No, the exit pupil is stopped down, not the field stop of the eyepiece. In fact the field is more evenly illuminated in a stopped down large exit pupil binocular than it is in a small exit pupil binocular when both are stopped down by the eye to the same size in daylight.

 

[brocknroller]

No, the exit pupil is stopped down, not the field stop of the eyepiece. In fact the field is more evenly illuminated in a stopped down large exit pupil binocular than it is in a small exit pupil binocular when both are stopped down by the eye to the same size in daylight.

Henry,

I stated on another thread that I noticed more CA in midsized roofs than I do in the full sized model in the same series (non-ED/HD). I wondered if the reason might be due to the shorter FL.

Someone, I think it might have been Rick (can't find the thread, buried by now), said that there is a 4x rule whereby you need to increase the FL 4x to see significantly lower CA.

Given what you said about the "stopped down" longer focal length in the 8x56 FL reducing aberrations (and the 8x56 is not 4x the FL of a 8x32 FL), I thought, ergo, the converse is true, shorter FL bins in the same series of bins will show more aberrations including CA.

When you stated that the longer FL in the 8x56 reduced "aberrations," does that include chromatic aberration? Of course, both configurations have FL glass, so these might not be the best examples to use.

Elementary Penguin

 

[henry link]

When you stated that the longer FL in the 8x56 reduced "aberrations," does that include chromatic aberration? Of course, both configurations have FL glass, so these might not be the best examples to use.

Elementary Penguin

Yes, all the axial aberrations are reduced when the exit pupil is stopped down by the eye, but I doubt that what you're seeing is longitudinal CA. There is so much lateral CA in those binoculars that it's hard to miss, but they have no no special problem with longitudinal CA compared to other non-ED binoculars, so what you read about Longitudinal CA is probably not very relevant to what you are seeing.

 

[Pileatus]

Been looking at these binoculars, are they any good? I've heard good things about them. Do they warrant the heavy price tag?

I've been birding in Alberta for the past 10 days and the 8.5X42 SV has been phenomenal. Enough said!

 

[pimpelmees]

hello, my swarovsion out of the box has a white look on some spots on the outside rubber , a friend had it also but that is going away now on his bino, anybody nows what this is and anybody has this also noticed ?

 

[Kammerdiner]

I've been birding in Alberta for the past 10 days and the 8.5X42 SV has been phenomenal. Enough said!

I'll second that. Get them out of the store and off the test bench and you'll begin to see what they are all about. They may not be for everyone (I guess) but go BIRDING and you'll see what they were made for. USE them and you'll see what they were made for.

As for the white stuff, mine had a bit around the ocular end. No idea what it was but it's gone now. Enjoy.

Mark

 

[Mike Penfold]

I like the image through the 8.5x42 ELSVs, but with the eyecup relief and IPD set, there are fleeting, small blackouts in the centre. This is new, never having experienced it with the second generation 8x42 Bausch and Lomb Elite, or 10x32 EL.

Since my eyes and eyeglasses haven't changed, I'm assuming the ELSVs are more sensitive to eye placement, but perhaps I'm missing something.

Any ideas?

Mike

 

[Kammerdiner]

I like the image through the 8.5x42 ELSVs, but with the eyecup relief and IPD set, there are fleeting, small blackouts in the centre. This is new, never having experienced it with the second generation 8x42 Bausch and Lomb Elite, or 10x32 EL.

Since my eyes and eyeglasses haven't changed, I'm assuming the ELSVs are more sensitive to eye placement, but perhaps I'm missing something.

Any ideas?

Mike

I think what you're experiencing is a bit too much eye relief. Try backing the cups out a couple mm and see what happens. They hold intermediate positions much better than you'd think, considering how easily they turn.

My old glasses sat closer to my face and that's the solution I used. With my new glasses I can leave them all in.

20mm ER is really on the verge of being too much for many with glasses. I wish Swaro had put more intermediate positions on the cups for that reason.

Mark

 

[hinnark]

20mm ER is really on the verge of being too much for many with glasses. I wish Swaro had put more intermediate positions on the cups for that reason.
Mark

Best solution for the eyecups would be continuous click-stops like with the diopter setting of the EL. Than everybody could find and fix the best individual position. With the diopter setting though, I prefer free adjustment without click-stops.

Steve

 

[pimpelmees]

I think what you're experiencing is a bit too much eye relief. Try backing the cups out a couple mm and see what happens. They hold intermediate positions much better than you'd think, considering how easily they turn.

I wish Swaro had put more intermediate positions on the cups for that reason.

Mark

you can use rubber O-rings (many sizes available) to hold the position of the eye cups between the steady positions . :t:

 

[Mike Penfold]

Thanks for your suggestions.

Eye relief and IPD were ruled out, after trying alternate settings.

What I'm seeing is small, transient, centre blackouts coming and going with varied eye placement, making work out of what should be automatic.

Mike

 

[Alexis Powell]

Eye relief and IPD were ruled out, after trying alternate settings...What I'm seeing is small, transient, centre blackouts coming and going with varied eye placement, making work out of what should be automatic....

Really does sound like a too much eye-relief problem, but is it possible that you are experiencing this in the SV because you use them differently than your other bins? Because they have such a flat and sharp to the edge view, maybe you are moving your eyes around more to look around than you do when using bins with a more defined sweet spot. Moving eyes around the exit pupil can cause center blackouts at any given eyecup setting because it moves the pupil nearer/farther from the ocular, and it can cause edge blackouts through vignetting. Most discussion on the former focused on the "spherical aberration of the exit pupil" described for the Nikon SE which exacerbates this problem.

--AP

 

[Mike Penfold]

Really does sound like a too much eye-relief problem, but is it possible that you are experiencing this in the SV because you use them differently than your other bins? Because they have such a flat and sharp to the edge view, maybe you are moving your eyes around more to look around than you do when using bins with a more defined sweet spot. Moving eyes around the exit pupil can cause center blackouts at any given eyecup setting because it moves the pupil nearer/farther from the ocular, and it can cause edge blackouts through vignetting. Most discussion on the former focused on the "spherical aberration of the exit pupil" described for the Nikon SE which exacerbates this problem.

--AP

You're right, I have been looking away from the centre, and you do get blackouts then, but they seem to be a little away from the centre of the field. I thought the advantage of the ELSVs edge sharpness was to be able to more readily pick up peripheral details and movement, rather than perfect resolution, as this is outside the fovea's view.

With the eyecups flush, there are kidney-shaped blackouts at the edge of the field, which means too much eye relief.

With the eyecups at the first detent, I get a great view; however, when the binocular is scanned a short distance one way or the other, there are relatively smaller blackouts in the dead centre of the field as the binocular is moving. These are the blackouts that interfere with the enjoyment of the ELSV IMO.

With the eyecups at the second detent, the whole field can't be seen.

With the eyecup relief varied in distance between the first and second detent, there is no improvement.

Assuming you're reading this and responding, thanks for your patience. It won't take me forever to decide about the ELSV; great as it is, it does seem to provide a bit of a user challenge.

Mike

 

[Kammerdiner]

For those using SV's with glasses who want just a bit less ER than the cups give all in, this discussion finally prompted me to go to the hardware store and track down the right size o-rings for the SV. I wanted rings that fit inside the cups so that they would be invisible.

Here's what you need: 1 7/16" O.D. You can try them at 1/16" or 3/32" thick. The first backs the cups out about 1.5-2mm, the second around 3mm. I tried both and liked the 1/16" best. They probably have 1/8" too, but I didn't look. That might give you 4mm or so.

Back the cups out, pop the o-rings inside, and shazam you've got an invisible fix.

For those across the pond, a little mathematical conversion should get you what you need.

Mark