The new 8x30 CLl's (1 Viewer)

[[email protected]]

Jerry, thanks for the thoughtful (and for you, verbose) review and comparisons.
Ron

Isn't about time to bring the Conquest 8x30 into the mix? That would appear to be the obvious competition.

I have had the Zeiss Conquest 8x30 and it is not in the same league as the Swarovski 8x30 CL. I would say this new Swarovski CL competes well with the top 32mm's.

 

[gulf1263]

Swarovski CL 8x30's

Hello all:
Went to the Sportsman Warehouse and the they had just gotten in the CL's.
They let me give them a informal test which was positive and my lady friend went: wow! when she tried them. She appreciates good glass since I have encouraged her to use some of my glass and gave her a pair of Kowa 8x25BD's.
Do not have the SLC neu's to compare them to but do have the EL's and the Genisis.
IMHO a short comparison with the Genisis under cloudy and rainy conditions, they have a narrower field of view, long close focus (over seven feet) very good contrast and give an excellent image.
The SLC neu's are still superb glasses...mine are in New Mexico so I did not compare them side by side, only from my faltering memory.
They are smaller than the SLC's or the Genisis, feel very solid and give the impression of quality.
The will fit in your pants pocket "Say are those binoculars or are you just happy to see me?". DO NOT try to sit down if you are of the male gender.
IMHO people with normal to small hands will find the handling very comfortable but folks with larger hands may not like them.
I liked them, bought them and will take them out to the range tomorrow to compare them against the EL's.
Everyone's eyes and perceptions are different but IMHO believe that they will serve someone new to birding/nature viewing very well who want a quality compact fog and waterproof glass and even a "old hand" who is looking for a lightweight, compact glass.
Thanks
Art

 

[John Barber]

So you finally took the plunge ! Well done. I hope you enjoy them.

 

[brocknroller]

Stephen:

I have been using the CL 8x30 for several days now and still getting used to them.
I had the SLC Neu and was very happy with them but I did sell them to make
room for the new CL.
So far I really do like the new CL. I like the focuser position up top where it belongs, and I cannot compare them optically along side the SLC but I find them very bright and I find them to be much the same as the SLC. I have been comparing these to the Nikon SE 8x32, and the 8x30 EII and also the SV 8.5x42, so they are set up to some tough competition. The CL is a bit behind these in FOV, but is better than the 8x32 SE, in brightness, and an equal to the EII.

When comparing these to the SLC Neu, I find them to be very similar optically. The CL does have an advantage in being a bit lighter, and I find
I really like the up top focuser better than the SLC, and the design allows
my fingers to easily grasp the barrels. Just better ergonomics. Swarovski
has provided a new ocular cover for these, and the older strap which is better for this binocular.

Some here have been wondering about CA with the new CL, and I have tested
them. I have found the Swarovski SLC Neu and the CL 8x30 handle CA very
well, when tested against a typical high contrast background. I can find
a similar result when pushing a 8.5x42 SV in the same conditions. That means no CA in the center, and some CA when going out from center. I do think the smaller apertures in quality optics do better here.

I have found that I really do like the light weight of these, you can carry these all day and do not notice them.
I do have some nice 42's to compare with, and find these light weight Swaros. a nice alternative. They are
a full 13 oz. less weight than the SV 8.5x42. Fully loaded with strap and covers, CL - 20.8 oz, SV 33.8.

Your comments from the salesperson are expected, he wants you to upgrade, to the SV. These are not Swarovskis best, but very good. I see they have sold out of the CL, and are on backorder.
I am thinking they would like to be selling more of the SV model, and now with the economy, some budgets have changed.

I suppose they would like to have more in stock, as I am sure they are getting calls.

I think value wise these are a very nice binocular.

Jerry

"So far I really do like the new CL. I like the focuser position up top where it belongs."

Amen, brother! You must have a high forehead like me.

One clarification. At the beginning you say that "I had the SLC Neu and was very happy with them but I did sell them to make room for the new CL." To me, this sounded like you sold the SLC before you bought the CL, but then you go on to compare the two.

Is the comparison from memory or did you have them side by side? I just want to make sure you don't become a "marked man" by our resident Alpha Cop, because he's a stickler for stuff like that, with his "hands-on comments only" policy. You saw the way Ed praised and then backed off on Stephen B's excellent armchair analysis (which echoed my own earlier comments) after our alpha cop posted his dictum absolutum.

What hard-nosed empiricists seem to always lose sight of is that there's more to a buyer's decision than "just the facts, mam". Except for Joe Friday, of course.

The marketing of the bin, the company's past history of design changes and model introductions, and the prestige of its "badge" -- all those things play an important role in most buyers purchase decisions at this price point, and Stephen's post did a good job at explaining those.

The only way he could be "off the mark" was if Swaro was thinking "out of the box" with the CL design, which in some regards, it was. As the promo video made mention, the CL's were made to give buyers who can't afford their top of the line SV EL and SLC-HD a way to enter the "Swarovski family of optics".

Accordingly, Swaro may be making a thinner profit on the CLs than the SV EL and SLC-HD, hoping to later recoup when the entry level CL buyer moves up the socio-economic ladder or his kids get jobs and he can afford the higher ticket optics.

However, the fact that most buyers on this forum who bought the CLs already own an SV EL or another alpha, shows that perhaps that strategy was a bit ill-timed for today's economy. Once the economy picks up and demand for the 'latest and greatest' NOW decreases, and we start seeing the CL for a bit over $800, the CL might see more penetration of that alpha entry level target market.

From reading Optics Talk and 24hrcampfire, more fiscally conservative hunters seem to be waiting for reviews from the birders who are more quick to respond to new market trends before they decide to trade or sell their old SLCs. In fact, one thread from 24hrcampfire has links to two discussions of the CL on BF!

Overall, I think Swaro has developed a smart strategy with the CL. Let's say a young birder or hunter buys a 8x30 CL who has to put food on the table for his kids has a chance at high end optics, and if he likes what he sees, he may become a lifelong customer and be back to purchase optics at the high end later when his nest egg is grown and one or two "birds" have flown out on the nest (as long as they aren't in college!).

That's admirable long term thinking on Swaro's part. Something you don't find as much of in the US, where the next quarter's profits are at the top of the agenda. "Sell them trinkets from Malaysia if you have to, but just make sure the shareholder's profits don't drop next quarter".

So this company which started out serving hunters, is trying to market more and more product to birders, who are willing for fork out more money since they don't have to also by the guns, ammo, tree stands, rangefinders, turkey callers, etc., etc.

I think it might go even deeper. Perhaps Swaro came to the same conclusion that that I did a while ago, which is when alpha prices hit some benchmark ($3,000?), and wages don't keep pace with inflation, even loyal Swaro birders are going to start holding onto their old Swaros like hunters.

Thus, the CL gives them a new market segment to help offset the potential "drop outs" from the top. If this does happen, we might see the CL line expanded to full sized bins, or another under $1K line added.

While the "Ghost of Christmas Future" remains to be seen, my armchair speculation about the SLC and CL being "very similar optically" turned out to be true, despite someone's hyperbole about the CL's being mini-me SV ELs.

They might have changed the package and the size, but for under $1,000, I wasn't expecting them to "reinvent the wheel" since the SLCNeu was already very good and showed less CA than any midsized roof I've tried, although I didn't have the 8x32 EL in my hands long enough to test it properly in that regard. But compared to the 8x32 HG, the SLCNeu does a very good job with CA control.

Here's one hunter's armchair comments (he owns an old 7x30 SLC and would have preferred a 7x30 CL - me too) on this same subject.

"That does make sense as far as the repackaging; as it looks like this new offering from Swarovski has the same glass, and all the same coatings as the SLC NEU and the EL's. Even the body material is the same as the SLC NEU. They were not going to come up with something new and special and then sell it for less than the full retail price of the old SLC's."

Here's the full thread:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/5196845/2

Got a question for you about the CLs but I will PM you.

Ron's going to get on me for being "verbose" so I'll stop here.

Brock

 

[CliveP]

I don't have a CL either

Hi Brock

Thanks for ditching Ringo! Apparently the fab 4 are all the rage in Cuba or somewhere now as they weren't allowed to be played there before or somit.

I noticed you where thinking of getting a reduced el 32. I'd highly recommend it. I've now discovered a better doipter setting with mine that gives less CA and once my right eyeball has woken up to the fact I'm more impressed with them than ever so I do not need any more bins but I would love to do some comparison with something "better" as it must be truly amazing to be better than these EL. My 2008 mind you not the 2010 super contrast version which I sold.

Guess thats why I'm bidding on another Swaro now dooh. Not a CL. Don't think I could live with the narrow fov but they are tempting. Just a pity none available locally to try and I'm not ordering.

Appologies to the forum cops, not really.

When will the chosen ones with the trial CL's be reporting. Are Swaro currently editing their submissions?

I'm sure they are brilliant as is everything Swaro.

 

[stephen b]

Here's one hunter's armchair comments (he owns an old 7x30 SLC and would have preferred a 7x30 CL - me too) on this same subject.

"That does make sense as far as the repackaging; as it looks like this new offering from Swarovski has the same glass, and all the same coatings as the SLC NEU and the EL's. Even the body material is the same as the SLC NEU. They were not going to come up with something new and special and then sell it for less than the full retail price of the old SLC's."

Here's the full thread:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/5196845/2

That same "armchair" hunter over on 24 hr campfire is me- yours truly- I am llama2 over there.

Even though you have nicely labeled me as an armchair type of guy here and there (24 hr) -I promise I really do get out of the armchair and use these bino's and put them through their paces in the woods and around my house.

Plus,- I am going to have 3 new Swaro-s in about 10 days to review using my amateur "empirical" -evidence based testing (my own 2/ 4 eyes)

So hopefully that will satisfy some people regarding the "hands-on comments only" policy- that you alluded to above.

 

[Kammerdiner]

"So far I really do like the new CL. I like the focuser position up top where it belongs."

Amen, brother! You must have a high forehead like me.

One clarification. At the beginning you say that "I had the SLC Neu and was very happy with them but I did sell them to make room for the new CL." To me, this sounded like you sold the SLC before you bought the CL, but then you go on to compare the two.

Is the comparison from memory or did you have them side by side? I just want to make sure you don't become a "marked man" by our resident Alpha Cop, because he's a stickler for stuff like that, with his "hands-on comments only" policy. You saw the way Ed praised and then backed off on Stephen B's excellent armchair analysis (which echoed my own earlier comments) after our alpha cop posted his dictum absolutum.

What hard-nosed empiricists seem to always lose sight of is that there's more to a buyer's decision than "just the facts, mam". Except for Joe Friday, of course.

The marketing of the bin, the company's past history of design changes and model introductions, and the prestige of its "badge" -- all those things play an important role in most buyers purchase decisions at this price point, and Stephen's post did a good job at explaining those.

The only way he could be "off the mark" was if Swaro was thinking "out of the box" with the CL design, which in some regards, it was. As the promo video made mention, the CL's were made to give buyers who can't afford their top of the line SV EL and SLC-HD a way to enter the "Swarovski family of optics".

Accordingly, Swaro may be making a thinner profit on the CLs than the SV EL and SLC-HD, hoping to later recoup when the entry level CL buyer moves up the socio-economic ladder or his kids get jobs and he can afford the higher ticket optics.

However, the fact that most buyers on this forum who bought the CLs already own an SV EL or another alpha, shows that perhaps that strategy was a bit ill-timed for today's economy. Once the economy picks up and demand for the 'latest and greatest' NOW decreases, and we start seeing the CL for a bit over $800, the CL might see more penetration of that alpha entry level target market.

From reading Optics Talk and 24hrcampfire, more fiscally conservative hunters seem to be waiting for reviews from the birders who are more quick to respond to new market trends before they decide to trade or sell their old SLCs. In fact, one thread from 24hrcampfire has links to two discussions of the CL on BF!

Overall, I think Swaro has developed a smart strategy with the CL. Let's say a young birder or hunter buys a 8x30 CL who has to put food on the table for his kids has a chance at high end optics, and if he likes what he sees, he may become a lifelong customer and be back to purchase optics at the high end later when his nest egg is grown and one or two "birds" have flown out on the nest (as long as they aren't in college!).

That's admirable long term thinking on Swaro's part. Something you don't find as much of in the US, where the next quarter's profits are at the top of the agenda. "Sell them trinkets from Malaysia if you have to, but just make sure the shareholder's profits don't drop next quarter".

So this company which started out serving hunters, is trying to market more and more product to birders, who are willing for fork out more money since they don't have to also by the guns, ammo, tree stands, rangefinders, turkey callers, etc., etc.

I think it might go even deeper. Perhaps Swaro came to the same conclusion that that I did a while ago, which is when alpha prices hit some benchmark ($3,000?), and wages don't keep pace with inflation, even loyal Swaro birders are going to start holding onto their old Swaros like hunters.

Thus, the CL gives them a new market segment to help offset the potential "drop outs" from the top. If this does happen, we might see the CL line expanded to full sized bins, or another under $1K line added.

While the "Ghost of Christmas Future" remains to be seen, my armchair speculation about the SLC and CL being "very similar optically" turned out to be true, despite someone's hyperbole about the CL's being mini-me SV ELs.

They might have changed the package and the size, but for under $1,000, I wasn't expecting them to "reinvent the wheel" since the SLCNeu was already very good and showed less CA than any midsized roof I've tried, although I didn't have the 8x32 EL in my hands long enough to test it properly in that regard. But compared to the 8x32 HG, the SLCNeu does a very good job with CA control.

Here's one hunter's armchair comments (he owns an old 7x30 SLC and would have preferred a 7x30 CL - me too) on this same subject.

"That does make sense as far as the repackaging; as it looks like this new offering from Swarovski has the same glass, and all the same coatings as the SLC NEU and the EL's. Even the body material is the same as the SLC NEU. They were not going to come up with something new and special and then sell it for less than the full retail price of the old SLC's."

Here's the full thread:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/5196845/2

Got a question for you about the CLs but I will PM you.

Ron's going to get on me for being "verbose" so I'll stop here.

Brock

Yoiks!

Didn't know I was an "Alpha cop." All I ask is that you look through the dumb things before telling me how good (or bad, or strategic, or marketable, or misfired, or backfired, or overpriced, or whatever) they are. Sounds reasonable.

You'll notice I've said squat about the CL's. That's cuz' I haven't seen them.

Some folks have, and they seem quite pleased. I might try them myself, based on that.

On the other hand, whether Brock's nose fits (hypothetically) or not is pretty low on my list of priorities.

That's all,

Mark

 

[NDhunter]

Brock:

I did sell my 8x30 SLC shortly before receiving the CL.
And so yes my impressions are not from a side by side comparision. I have not done resolution testing, so cannot be as detailed as a few are here.
My recommendation is after using the CL for a few days, and comparing directly with the Nikons.

I do not give them the high praise as being equal to or better optically than the top ones out there, but these do offer the smallish, light weight size. Great for travel, and the
narrowish FOV does not bother me.

Jerry

 

[mooreorless]

Jerry, Quote:"I cannot compare them optically along side the SLC but I find them very bright and I find them to be much the same as the SLC."end of Quote from Jerry's post. I understood that you did not compare the CL directly with the 8x30 SLCneu. You did compare it to some very high end binoculars. Thanks Jerry!

 

[ceasar]

Brock,
Good analysis of Swarovski's reasoning but I think it is simpler than that. I think Swarovski reasoned that they had to make something like the new 8x and 10x CL's to compete with Nikon who had downgraded their LXL/HGL line with a corresponding price decrease. They didn't want Nikon to dominate in that particular niche.

Nikon made a brand new EDG Alpha from the ground up and lowered the prices on their old alphas and Swarovski made a brand new Beta from the ground up to compete with them.

Bob

 

[[email protected]]

Hello all:
Went to the Sportsman Warehouse and the they had just gotten in the CL's.
They let me give them a informal test which was positive and my lady friend went: wow! when she tried them. She appreciates good glass since I have encouraged her to use some of my glass and gave her a pair of Kowa 8x25BD's.
Do not have the SLC neu's to compare them to but do have the EL's and the Genisis.
IMHO a short comparison with the Genisis under cloudy and rainy conditions, they have a narrower field of view, long close focus (over seven feet) very good contrast and give an excellent image.
The SLC neu's are still superb glasses...mine are in New Mexico so I did not compare them side by side, only from my faltering memory.
They are smaller than the SLC's or the Genisis, feel very solid and give the impression of quality.
The will fit in your pants pocket "Say are those binoculars or are you just happy to see me?". DO NOT try to sit down if you are of the male gender.
IMHO people with normal to small hands will find the handling very comfortable but folks with larger hands may not like them.
I liked them, bought them and will take them out to the range tomorrow to compare them against the EL's.
Everyone's eyes and perceptions are different but IMHO believe that they will serve someone new to birding/nature viewing very well who want a quality compact fog and waterproof glass and even a "old hand" who is looking for a lightweight, compact glass.
Thanks
Art

Welcome to the club. What color did you get? Did they have green?

 

[gulf1263]

Swarovski CL 8x30's

Hello all:
Had a chance to compare the CL's to the EL's and Genisis today.
Skies were cloudy, air was clear and stable and chilly..less than 45 degrees.
Comparison was done by four old guys (myself and three friends).
The differences between the three different glasses was evident but not a really big difference.
The group liked all three glasses but ranked the EL's first, followed by the Genisis and then the CL's.
The EL's wider FOV and the way it made colors more vivid and vibrant, greater depth of field and easier focusing made it the top choice.
The Genisis did well but it just wasn't as good a glass as the EL's, the colors everyone agreed seemed flat compared to the EL's and the depth of field was not as good nor was ease of focusing.
The CL's were very, very good however they had a narrower field of view and the colors were not as vibrant as the EL's but were as good if not better than the Genisis.
We all agreed that the CL's were easy to handle, worked well for eyeglass wearers and had decent depth of field and were easy to focus.
We had a nature moment when a large bald eagle came flying over from the river with a salmon in it's talons...I had the CL's and was able to get an excellent view.
No tests were run in formal sense so take this for what it is, four guys comparing three different glasses under field conditions.
Each glass represented a field of one.
I have decided to make the Genisis my range glasses and use the EL's and CL's in the field along with the SLC neu's.
The CL's will work well for the kind of use I intend for them.
They sure are compact and easy to use and give a very good view.
Thanks
Art

 

[gulf1263]

Swarovski CL 8x30's

Hello Moreorless:
Happy Wednesday!
I had to buy my CL's...like them a lot even though the cost came out of my own pocket.
Hope you get a chance to try a pair, I see Cabela's and Sportsman's Warehouse carry them.
I got mine at Sportsman's.
Good birding.
Art

 

[brocknroller]

That same "armchair" hunter over on 24 hr campfire is me- yours truly- I am llama2 over there.

Even though you have nicely labeled me as an armchair type of guy here and there (24 hr) -I promise I really do get out of the armchair and use these bino's and put them through their paces in the woods and around my house.

Plus,- I am going to have 3 new Swaro-s in about 10 days to review using my amateur "empirical" -evidence based testing (my own 2/ 4 eyes)

So hopefully that will satisfy some people regarding the "hands-on comments only" policy- that you alluded to above.

Stephen,

I suspected as much! I saw you were "both" from Oregon and saying "mooreorless" the same thing as you did here about the CLs, but more tersely, which is more typical on the hunting forums.

I was busting someone else's chops, not yours, about the "armchair" comments. I thought your marketing analysis was very good earlier on this thread, you know Swaro and their products and how hunters respond to change.

As I said earlier, marketing and public perception are important to note. Don't think for a minute that Swaro reps are not reading the posts about the CL on hunting forums to see what hunters are saying.

The survival of the 8x30 SLCNeu might depend on how well the 8x30 CL is received in the hunting community. Hunters may all wear orange hats, but not all have short foreheads and can't reach an EP side focuser w/out having to push back their hats

The SLC series is well established in the hunting community, and although there are "gear heads" among hunters as there are among birders, who always like to have the "latest and greatest," on the whole, birders seem to jump on market trends quicker whereas most hunters seem to hold on to what they've got for a long time (like your 7x30 SLC) and give new models a long, good "chew" before buying the latest bin out there.

I tried Steve's (mooreorless) 7x30 SLC, which after 20 years, he traded in on an anniversary edition 8x30 SLCNeu (and got a very good price for it, I might add!). For a roof that was not phase coated, the images were noticeably sharper than the Nikon 8x36 Sporter I, which also had no phase coatings. Still not a fan of the "pinky focuser," but the 7x30 seemed to provide better depth perception and 3-D effect than the 8x30.

7x35 porros are my favorite configuration, but you can't find good quality 7x35s these days. You can find good quality 7x35 porros in the the used market, but even lower priced Chinese-made bins beat them in terms of color saturation and contrast due to their newer coatings technology.

I recently tried an 8x42 Monarch ATB and an 8x42 Hawk Frontier at Sportsman's Liquidation Outlet, and I was impressed with how sharp, bright, color saturated, and contrasty they both were for the price they were asking ($249, $199).

I was tempted to buy one, but didn't for fear of setting off a "global bonfire"! The riots in England, Greece, and the Middle East are creating enough "smoke".

So I will "settle" for my EIIs and SEs for now, which, other than not having waterproofing or large focuser wheels, don't give up much to the latest alphas in terms of image quality.

If I ever do buy an alpha, I hope it would be a heavily discounted 8x32 EL after the SV EL comes out. It's the only roof I've tried that seemed to rival my porros. I compared it with the 8x32 SE, and though I may be deposed as president of the Ignatius Porro Society, I must say that I liked the EL better.

I'm looking forward to reading your field tests on the three new Swaros, as I'm sure are the guys on 24hrcampfire.

Brock

 

[mooreorless]

Hello Moreorless:
Happy Wednesday!
I had to buy my CL's...like them a lot even though the cost came out of my own pocket.
Hope you get a chance to try a pair, I see Cabela's and Sportsman's Warehouse carry them.
I got mine at Sportsman's.
Good birding.
Art

Hi Art, I "saw" you and a few other people on here this morning as I was eating breakfast and looking on the computer, getting ready for work. I noticed Dale Forbes the Swarovski representative on here and tried to put in a plea for a sample CL. I did delete my howdy before I left for work. You could sign up on Facebook to be inline for one of these CL binoculars from Swaro, but you have to let them have access to other friends on there.

I will have to try this Swaro 8x30 CL at the Lost Creek Shoe Shop, about 45 min. away. After mentioning this Amish shoe shop. I have to post a link to it or some people with think I am not my usual self.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=99221

Brock I think Stephen B's Swaro 7x30 SLC is phase coated. I do have a picture of you that shows a slightly higher forehead with you wearing a hat I could post.

 

[stephen b]

Stephen,

I suspected as much! I saw you were "both" from Oregon and saying "mooreorless" the same thing as you did here about the CLs, but more tersely, which is more typical on the hunting forums.

I was busting someone else's chops, not yours, about the "armchair" comments. I thought your marketing analysis was very good earlier on this thread, you know Swaro and their products and how hunters respond to change.

........................... I'm looking forward to reading your field tests on the three new Swaros, as I'm sure are the guys on 24hrcampfire.

Brock

I didn't think that you were "busting my chops"- that is why I said that you "nicely" referred to me as a "armchair" type of observer. I thought it was used in a affectionate manner.

Yes, over on the 24 hr Campfire- the discussion is done a little bit, or a lot more colorfully. The response are not as refined as around here, over there it is rougher around the edges. Around the campfire over there, there is more direct in your face responses- where sometimes people are told what they are full of and where they can go. Hunters around their campfires may be more prone to drinking beer B , whiskey, chewing and spitting and a bit of cussing. I would imagine the campfires (if they have them) that birders have- there is more drinking a fine Chardonnay, or Merlot (I could not find a smile face with wine glass with a pinky finger stuck out) and if there is tobacco - it may be in a pipe, or a fine cigar. And the prose will be a little less salty.

Different stokes for different folks. Not to generalize, but the hunters like fine optics also, but many do not collect them or have a # of them like a lot of birders- at least on here. Most are satisfied with one bino and maybe a spotter. Most have a # of guns and bows and will also put a scope on each gun- so they do have to put out some $$ on optics. But for most- if it (the optics) works for their needs they are happy.

 

[stephen b]

Brock I think Stephen B's Swaro 7x30 SLC is phase coated.

Yes mine is a "phase coated" / corrected 7x30 SLC (either 1999 or 2000)

 

[brocknroller]

I didn't think that you were "busting my chops"- that is why I said that you "nicely" referred to me as a "armchair" type of observer. I thought it was used in a affectionate manner.

It was, and I thought you probably understood my subtext, but I wanted to be clear since most hunters don't get me unless I write literally.

Yes, over on the 24 hr Campfire- the discussion is done a little bit, or a lot more colorfully. The response are not as refined as around here, over there it is rougher around the edges. Around the campfire over there, there is more direct in your face responses- where sometimes people are told what they are full of and where they can go. Hunters around their campfires may be more prone to drinking beer B , whiskey, chewing and spitting and a bit of cussing. I would imagine the campfires (if they have them) that birders have- there is more drinking a fine Chardonnay, or Merlot (I could not find a smile face with wine glass with a pinky finger stuck out) and if there is tobacco - it may be in a pipe, or a fine cigar. And the prose will be a little less salty.

Not to generalize, but we birders are very eco-conscious, we don't smoke (except for Sancho , not only for health reasons but also so we don't start forest fires. Bottled wine is too bulky and fragile to carry on birding trips, so refined birders carry four packs of French wine spritzers such as "Blanc Pression" (the "fizz" keeps us from getting soused and helps us stay hydrated), or we drink imported beers from Germany and Austria (I'm a Stiegl man, myself) while sitting around the electric fireplace plugged into our hybrid's batteries.

Different stokes for different folks. Not to generalize, but the hunters like fine optics also, but many do not collect them or have a # of them like a lot of birders- at least on here. Most are satisfied with one bino and maybe a spotter. Most have a # of guns and bows and will also put a scope on each gun- so they do have to put out some $$ on optics. But for most- if it (the optics) works for their needs they are happy.

That might be why most hunters I know have cheap bins, camo Monarchs, Bushnells, or Leupolds, since they have a lot of $$$ invested in the rest of their gear. Those who do buy high end optics see them as a long-term investment they expect to last for 20 years, not something they are going to "flip" for "Next Year's Model".

So while I read birding optics forums to find out about the "latest and greatest" optics, I read hunting optics forums to see which bins can be dragged through the "the mud, the blood, and the beer" and keep on "glassing" for decades.

Big Horn Brock

 

[henry link]

I spent some time with an 8x30 CL at a store today. I was able to measure the eye relief, get a good look at distortion, do a quick star test at 64x and compare the view through the CL to some other binoculars, including the 8x32 EL, 8.5x42SV, 8x42 SLC HD and Nikon 8x32 SE.

The light transmission of the CL made the most positive impression. All the Swarovskis appear to use very similar coatings, so in sunlight it was impossible for me to decide for certain if one was any brighter than the others. This is the one area in which the CL appears to be fully as good as the best Swarovskis. Of the binoculars handy in the store only the Zeiss 8x42 FL looked brighter than the Swarovskis (but with the slight gray/green color bias I see in current FLs).

The CL produced an "average" sort of high magnification star test. There was plenty of longitudinal CA and spherical aberration, about what I expect from a typical binocular with a fast achromat. I use the Nikon 8x32 SE as a reference standard for star tests. It shows about the same amount of longitudinal chromatic aberration as the CL but considerably less spherical aberration. The only other noteworthy defect was coma in the left barrel (most likely caused when the binocular was collimated), which displaced the bright central spot about 1/3 of the distance from the center to the edge in an out of focus diffraction disk. None of this should have much effect on the 8x axial image.

I thought the off-axis sharpness was no better than adequate, certainly not close to the SV or other binoculars with field flatteners like the Nikon SE. There is both field curvature and astigmatism. And the field itself is not very wide. Swarovski's spec for an apparent field of 55 degrees appears to be an accurate measurement rather than a calculation.

Rectilinear distortion is very mild, possibly all pincushion or there may be a reversal near the edge. The distortion is so low it's hard to tell, but in any case the pincushion is not enough to completely eliminate angular magnification distortion at the very edge, so objects slightly compress as they approach the edge. This is very similar to the mild rectilinear and angular magnification distortions in the Nikon SE, so it's not likely to disturb anyone, even Brock.

Lateral CA falls into the "normal" average range where most binoculars fit. It's not unusually bad or good.

I measured eye relief at 13mm from the rim of the eyecup in its collapsed position and around 15mm from the glass. Swarovski's spec of 15mm is optically correct, but since clearance behind the eyecup is only 13 mm some eyeglass wearers may have trouble seeing the entire field.

Overall I would rate the CL as a fairly average performer except in the area of light transmission, where it's excellent. I would add, however, that reports of this particular 8x30 having some sort of special low light mo-jo are highly exaggerated. Any 8x32 with modern coatings will be at least a little brighter in low light because the extra aperture by itself delivers about 13% more photons to the retina.

 

[james holdsworth]

I spent some time with an 8x30 CL at a store today. I was able to measure the eye relief, get a good look at distortion, do a quick star test at 64x and compare the view through the CL to some other binoculars, including the 8x32 EL, 8.5x42SV, 8x42 SLC HD and Nikon 8x32 SE.

The light transmission of the CL made the most positive impression. All the Swarovskis appear to use very similar coatings, so in sunlight it was impossible for me to decide for certain if one was any brighter than the others. This is the one area in which the CL appears to be fully as good as the best Swarovskis. Of the binoculars handy in the store only the Zeiss 8x42 FL looked brighter than the Swarovskis.

The CL produced an "average" sort of high magnification star test. There was plenty of longitudinal CA and spherical aberration, about what I expect from a typical binocular with a fast achromat. I use the Nikon 8x32 SE as a reference standard for star tests. It shows about the same amount of longitudinal chromatic aberration as the CL but considerably less spherical aberration. The only other noteworthy defect was coma in the left barrel (most likely caused when the binocular was collimated), which displaced the bright central spot about 1/3 of the distance from the center to the edge in an out of focus diffraction disk. None of this should have much effect on the 8x axial image.

I thought the off-axis sharpness was no better than adequate, certainly not close to the SV or other binoculars with field flatteners like the Nikon SE. There is both field curvature and astigmatism. And the field itself is not very wide. Swarovski's spec for an apparent field of 55 degrees appears to be an accurate measurement rather than a calculation.

Rectilinear distortion is very mild, possibly all pincushion or there may be a reversal near the edge. The distortion is so low it's hard to tell, but in any case the pincushion is not enough to completely eliminate angular magnification distortion at the very edge, so objects slightly compress as they approach the edge. This is very similar to the mild rectilinear and angular magnification distortions in the Nikon SE, so it's not likely to disturb anyone, even Brock.

Lateral CA falls into the "normal" average range where most binoculars fit. It's not unusually bad or good.

I measured eye relief at 13mm from the rim of the eyecup in its collapsed position and around 15mm from the glass. Swarovski's spec of 15mm is optically correct, but since clearance behind the eyecup is only 13 mm some eyeglass wearers may have trouble seeing the entire field.

Overall I would rate the CL as a fairly average performer except in the area of light transmission, where it's excellent. I would add, however, that reports of this particular 8x30 having some sort of special low light mo-jo are highly exaggerated. Any 8x32 with modern coatings will be at least a little brighter in low light because the extra aperture by itself delivers about 13% more photons to the retina.

Dennis, please cancel my order.