Great review CLosefocus! I agree with the whole thing.
Coincidentally, I was about to post an update myself. So here goes:
OK, for me the 8x25 Pocket CL is a keeper. Took me awhile to decide because the Bushnell 7x26 Elite is so darn good that sometimes I hardly saw the point in keeping the Swaro. What follows mostly compares the Swaro and the Elite.
Where the Bushnell excels is ease of view and brightness in low light. The exit pupil makes a big difference here (3.7mm v. 3.1mm) and the lower magnification makes for a significantly more stable view. In low light the Bushnell pulls ahead by a surprising margin, but again the exit pupil is the main cause.
The Swaro betters the Bushnell in most categories though: brighter in good light, flatter field (
really impressive edges here), more detail with 8x, lighter weight (12.2 ounces v. 13.5 ounces), more compact when folded, waterproof, more neutral color (the Bushnell is warmer, a bit yellow in comparison). The Swaro also has a minimal field stop ring so the view looks much bigger even though the FOV is nearly identical. The Bushnell, along with many other compacts, has some "tunnel vision." The Bushnell also has an atrocious hang angle, tipping way out at the ocular.
The Swaro also is brighter and has a significantly easier view than 8x20’s. Exit pupil again. On a 5 mile walk the other day, I was repeatedly reminded how much quicker the view settles with the Swaro than it does with my 8x20 Ultravid. But the Bushnell’s view is easier still. All this with my glasses, so YMMV.
Gripes about the Swaro? The edges and corners of the bridge and hinges are sharp. Since there's only room for three (of my) fingers on the bridge, my pinky goes off the front and wraps around the barrels by the objectives. Not a problem except it rides over those sharp edges. After a while you may notice it. Depends on how you end up holding them I guess.
In cold weather, the unarmored hinge and barrel feel cold. Swaro could have saved weight with magnesium instead of aluminum and then armored the whole thing. The Pocket is so little and costs so much I can’t believe going with aluminum was a cost issue. Maybe it is.
It could use a rainguard of some sort, even if you have to remove it before folding and storing. Most compacts lack this, but I was out in a drizzle the other day and really missed having one. Has anybody seen a rainguard small enough for the CL? The eyecups are about 32mm across. I'll try to improvise something and if it's any good I'll post about it.
Hinge tension is lower than I would like, but during a 5 mile walk it held the IPD just fine. I think I’m just used to my 8x20 Leica which has
much tighter hinges.
The strap lugs have sharp edges. I suspect they will wear through the narrow (5mm) strap fairly quickly. If you own a Pocket, keep an eye on that.
Is it the “best” compact? Unless you want something smaller/lighter like an 8x20mm, or are willing to call something bigger like an 8x30 “compact,” I’d say yes. It’s the best I’ve used and it’s a keeper for me. Oh, and if you want to save $569 just get the Bushnell. I could probably live with that one too.
Mark
PS: a comment in response to Closefocus. The 8x25 "field bag" is indeed the only one I'll probably use. Even so it could be a bit trimmer. The bags supplied with the 32mm and 42mm SV's are just too big and I use neither. The 8x30 CL comes with the 32mm SV bag, so it's even more too bigger.