Swarovski EL questions (1 Viewer)

[[email protected]]

In terms of CA control I don't think you'll find better than EL/NL/SF - personally I found all three pretty good and I would say I seem more susceptible to CA than most. SLCs are very good too if you can live with a less flat field.

I don't find the thin yellow edge to ELs noticeable in use - I have to consciously look at the field stop to see it, unlike with the SFs where the blue circle jumps out at me.

I've not tried Noctvid - the highest grade of Leica I've tried is Ultravid where CA is noticeably present compared to the three above (I could live with it, but it's clearly there to my eyes).

Only other possibility I can think of trying is the top end Meoptas.

Glare control is something that has been endlessly discussed on these forums. I'm one of those who don't find glare to be a problem with ELs or NLs - I can only see it if I decentre my pupils rather than moving binoculars or mis-set the eyecup stop or IPD but some others report problems. I think it's a case of try and see - no one seems to have an answer as to why different people see different things.

"In terms of CA control I don't think you'll find better than EL/NL/SF - personally I found all three pretty good, and I would say I seem more susceptible to CA than most."

Try a Zeiss FL. An oldie but goodie, especially at controlling CA.

 

[[email protected]]

On cloudy days the glare is no problem unless you are looking in dense bushes far away with a modest
(but complete) overcast. It on sunny days with lots of bright white clouds that I'm bothered. Most
birding days are like that.

The lateral chromatic shows best on the edges of a white picket fence near the field edge: brilliant
purple and green when seen in direct sunlight. Also on cloud edges. A 420 nm cutoff yellow
removes the violet, but the green remains.

That is exactly what I observed with the NL 8x42.

 

[[email protected]]

No direct comparisons. From what I remember the EDG was excellent as well. The Habicht 7x42 (and the Canon) are the two most glare resistant binoculars I've got.

Well, I switched to glasses a month ago or so, after using contact lenses for more than 40 years. And the 7x42 works pretty well for me, I get the full field of view. I made sure my glasses are close-fitting though, optimized for use with binoculars and scopes.

And yes, the AFOV of the Habicht isn't exactly large ... 😀

Hermann

"The Habicht 7x42 (and the Canon) are the two most glare resistant binoculars I've got."

I agree. I no longer have the Habicht 7x42 because the narrow FOV eventually got to me, though. The big 8x56 SLC and FL are also very good at controlling glare. The glare passes the field stop due to their huge EP and never reaches your eyes.

 

[[email protected]]

The NL hasn’t improved much on stray light baffling over EL. See photo (worst glare position i could get, affecting lower part of image). There is also lateral CA. Of course I’m being picky here (too).View attachment 1458286

Exactly why I sold my NL 8x42.

 

[kimmik]

Exactly why I sold my NL 8x42.

What do you use in its place? Not selling but curious. Lots of good things with nl that are irreplaceable for me.

 

[Richard D]

If you're including discontinued models like the FL the SLC HD 7x50 is extremely glare free and only the minutist amount of CA at the field stop. Not the widest FoV, a little heavy and not the closest focusing, but superb in exceptionally low light.

 

[lilcrazy2]

On cloudy days the glare is no problem unless you are looking in dense bushes far away with a modest
(but complete) overcast. It on sunny days with lots of bright white clouds that I'm bothered. Most
birding days are like that.

The lateral chromatic shows best on the edges of a white picket fence near the field edge: brilliant
purple and green when seen in direct sunlight. Also on cloud edges. A 420 nm cutoff yellow
removes the violet, but the green remains.

I'm wondering what it is that you consider glare? Is it like a bright crescent, or acr of light at the bottom of the FOV, or more like a very light fog around the outer edges?
Even among all the members who have the binos mentioned, many see glare where others don't, many see CA where others don't. Almost any bino named some people can induce CA on the outer edges if looked for. I doubt you could find any review of any binocular that doesn't mention some degree of CA on the outer edges. Even differing size binos in any line seems to produce different results for many users. The advice to try before you buy seems like sage advice.
Your comment about looking into bushes far away with overcast sky is what is puzzling me the most. And even on sunny days unless you are looking with the sun somewhere in front of you, I wouldn't expect to see glare. Do you see both types of glare you describe no matter where the sun is?

 

[Canip]

Even among all the members who have the binos mentioned, many see glare where others don't, many see CA where others don't.

Yes, that is so. That‘s why I consider glare and CA, in contrast to things like distortion or field curvature or astigmatism, „partially self-inflicted“, meaning that the way you handle a bino and position it before your eyes can make a big difference ( I am still tempted to training offer courses how to handle binoculars).

Canip

 

[Canip]

….. which of course makes it difficult to rely on accounts of other users when it comes to glare and CA (and perhaps a fee other things). So I would more easily trust the description of certain distortion characteristics in a bino than the account about the prominence of CA, unless I know how the poster tends to handle his bino.

 

[Richard D]

….. which of course makes it difficult to rely on accounts of other users when it comes to glare and CA (and perhaps a fee other things). So I would more easily trust the description of certain distortion characteristics in a bino than the account about the prominence of CA, unless I know how the poster tends to handle his bino.

I understand how glare can be influenced by sub-optimal ipd and eyecup distance, but in what way can CA be self inflicted?

 

[Canip]

In exactly the same way as glare - suboptimal positioning of the eye behind the eyepieces, or holding the bino in a way so that the direction of vision is at an angle with the optical axis.

 

[Hermann]

That‘s why I consider glare and CA, in contrast to things like distortion or field curvature or astigmatism, „partially self-inflicted“, meaning that the way you handle a bino and position it before your eyes can make a big difference

Agreed, and that's one of the reasons why I don't trust any "evaluations" made in 10 minutes in a shop. (There are plenty of these on this forum.)

However, in some cases positioning a binocular correctly even if you set it up right can be a hassle, especially in the field when you've got to be really fast to get on a bird. One example of such a binocular is the Companion 10x30 CL that shows some annoying veiling glare if you don’t position it just right even if you got the IPD and the position of the eyecups set up right. Another is the 8x32 SE with its kidney beaning.

Of course this improves with practice (unless you switch binoculars all the time ...). But there are undoubtedly binoculars that are a lot more forgiving. And others that will always show glare ( such as the Habicht 8x30 ... ) or CA (like the Conquest 15x56), no matter how careful you are.

Hermann

 

[Richard D]

In exactly the same way as glare - suboptimal positioning of the eye behind the eyepieces, or holding the bino in a way so that the direction of vision is at an angle with the optical axis.

I presume what is optimal for minimizing glare is the same position for minimizing CA? I'm one of those people who don't see problematic glare in the EL 32's (or in any of the NLs I've tried) unless I deliberately de-centre my pupils, but I have found CA very noticeable in some binoculars when viewing at what feels like the optimal position...

 

[Canip]

I presume what is optimal for minimizing glare is the same position for minimizing CA?

I believe it is more complicated than that, but I have not studied the subject sufficiently to give you a final answer.

 

[kimmik]

I presume what is optimal for minimizing glare is the same position for minimizing CA? I'm one of those people who don't see problematic glare in the EL 32's (or in any of the NLs I've tried) unless I deliberately de-centre my pupils, but I have found CA very noticeable in some binoculars when viewing at what feels like the optimal position...

Based on my casual observation of the exit pupil, glare is worst contralateral to the direction of the source, and CA is worst contralateral to the image region being observed.

Somewhere in between is the sweet spot but usually just centering the exit pupil is adequate for me.

 

[Paultricounty]

I've had these (10x42) about a year and a half. I also own the top of the line Leica 8x42.

Question: one lens cap broke off. Where do I get a replacement? Or better ... is there
a replacement for the eyecap? I luckily found the broken cap on the walking path,
and glued it and the other onto a leather piece with shoe glue, making
a homemade cap like the lens cap, which attaches to the strap like the lens cap.

Comment: I'm an optics freak.

So ... I like comparing binocs. As I said, I own top of the line Swavorski 10x42 and Leica 8x42.

They are both infuriating! (I'm too picky).

The Leica has perfect stray light blocking, the Swavorski needs a camera-like pair of lens shields
if the sun is within 30 degrees of the field of view.

The Swavorski has better optics, in only one way (otherwise they both seem perfect).
The imperfection in both is lateral secondary chromatic aberration (violet-green fringes at the field edge).
I also tried a Zeiss and it is in-between in both stray light rejection and lateral chromatic.

A question: does anybody make a better binoc, one that has the stray light baffling of the Leica and
substantially better lack of secondary lateral chromatic aberration (violet-green fringes) than my
Swaroviki? I had hopes for the Zeiss, but it was infuriatingly in between!

Its also infuriating that all the reviews I see never discxuss the important distinction points ..
just things like field of view and where your fingers sit!

P.S. I don't need glasses.

Sorry I’m late to this discussion. What you are describing that you want, is a Nikon EDG. I have the 8x42, it’s better at CA and glare control than my EL’s, NL’s and all my Leica’s. A semi-forgotten premium (Alpha) optic.

Paul

 

[Paultricounty]

There are no binoculars that don’t have some glare at some point. I have the Habichts 7x42, Canon 10x42 and the EDG 8x42, as well as NL’s, EL’s, SF’s and Leica’s.

The Habichts, Canon and EDG’s are top of the food chain on glare control. They’re also excellent on CA control. The others are a mix of give-and-take on those two attributes. But they offer higher image qualities in other areas. As usual, it comes down to pros and cons.

Paul

 

[GrampaTom]

Phooey

 

[dorubird]

I've actually heard very good opinions about EDG and Habicht 7x42 regarding their best glare resistance and in the same time best CA control. But the SF 10x42 is one of the most immune binoculars to the glare too, and also one of the best for CA control. SF 10x42 has no obvious compromises other than a longer length.
So my top ranking for glare and CA resistance would be:
1 Nikon EDG
2 SF 10x42 and Habicht 7x42