New Product Introduction Today From Swarovski ? (1 Viewer)

[Torview]

Just wondering if a binocular with a 159m fov can really be sharp to the edge the way the 8.5x SV is, maybe Swarovski talks about "invisible edges" hoping as you can`t see them you won`t see their not sharp.

Although much cheaper and with a smaller afov my 175m Kowa 6.5 did`nt have invisible edges.

Maybe Bill, Henry, Holger or Frank can answer whether a sharp edge at such an extreme fov is possible.

John.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Temmie, post 457 and post 460,
In your post 460 you formulate a lot of statements without any solid example. Which historical models with open bridge by other binocular producers were in your opinion made before the EL?
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Chosun Juan]

Just wondering if a binocular with a 159m fov can really be sharp to the edge the way the 8.5x SV is, maybe Swarovski talks about "invisible edges" hoping as you can`t see them you won`t see their not sharp.

Although much cheaper and with a smaller afov my 175m Kowa 6.5 did`nt have invisible edges.

Maybe Bill, Henry, Holger or Frank can answer whether a sharp edge at such an extreme fov is possible.

John.

Yes. ...... even wider AFov - Nikon 10x50 WX. (though at considerable weight and cost drawbacks).






Chosun :gh:

 

[Torview]

Yes. ...... even wider AFov - Nikon 10x50 WX. (though at considerable weight and cost drawbacks).






Chosun :gh:

Thanks Chosun, I`d forgotten about the WX, can the complexity of the eyepieces in those be achieved in a body the size of the NL ?

I could well be interested in them if it is possible, I`m reluctant to mention my SF`s too much on these pages as Zeiss are hopefully sorting their issue, 2nd visit now, first time 6 weeks, problem not sorted, this time they`v been gone 3+ months and counting, from my experience owning 6 Swarovski products the problem would`nt have existed in the first place and I reckon they would have just replaced them by now.

John.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi temmie (post #460),

Of course you’re right, the individual component technologies weren't first introduced by Swarovski
But that’s not what I was trying to say, and I don’t think that most would read my post in that way

I thought that the preamble had made the context clear: premium roof prism binoculars, since the introduction of the EL in 1999
And it was in that context that I was talking about the combinations of the technologies used

So bearing that it mind, in relation to your particular points:
1. Yes you’re correct, if you ignore the context of the axle-less design of the EL SV

2. I can’t see that I made any claim as to the quality of the FOV, as opposed to the diameter

3. Yes I do - in combination with the increased height through the bridge/ focuser area

4. If you consider it a gimmick that’s fine. In contrast others don’t

5. And yes you’re correct, if you ignore the context of roof prism binoculars


So does the above get us into any sort of agreement - or at least an understanding of each other’s perspective?


John

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Well, Temmie's remarks made me curious so I dived into the historical literature and came across many "open bridge"designs, but none with central focussing.
To name a few models: Leitz Binom 8x (1911), Leitz Binocle 10x (1912), many producers made a model 08 approx 5x produced as a military binoculars in WW-1, Leitz Aviosept 7x50(1919), Goerz Marine Trieder 7x52,5 (1914), Zeiss Delfort 18x50 (1930), Zeiss Noctar 7x50 (1914).
Some of the Swarovski coworkers were undoubtedly known with these models and it may have inspired them to construct the EL, but the EL construction was patented If I remember well, so if that is the case it was something very new.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Essex Tern]

Well, Temmie's remarks made me curious so I dived into the historical literature and came across many "open bridge"designs, but none with central focussing.
To name a few models: Leitz Binom 8x (1911), Leitz Binocle 10x (1912), many producers made a model 08 approx 5x produced as a military binoculars in WW-1, Leitz Aviosept 7x50(1919), Goerz Marine Trieder 7x52,5 (1914), Zeiss Delfort 18x50 (1930), Zeiss Noctar 7x50 (1914).
Some of the Swarovski coworkers were undoubtedly known with these models and it may have inspired them to construct the EL, but the EL construction was patented If I remember well, so if that is the case it was something very new.
Gijs van Ginkel

Per https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=1501818&postcount=16 not sure the design was novel enough to warrant it’s own patent.

 

[Ries]

1907:
https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/BINOCLE

 

[dries1]

For those who think the NL is too heavy at 800 grams go buy a Zeiss 8X25 Victory and be done with it, or go lift some weights.

Andy W.

 

[[email protected]]

Sounds like a plan. If it is the 10x NL, then it would be possible to do a 4 way test with a proper IS bin like the Canon 10x42L IS.

Lol - it's middle of winter here .... Temps ranging from low single digits to a sneak over 20 if we're lucky (that's proper °C - none of this 18th Century layers of beaver pelts or whatever you folks use ! :-O )






Chosun :gh:

I forgot your season's are opposite since you are on the bottom of the globe! I should have remembered since I have been to New Zealand but never Australia. What do your temperatures run in the summer where you live? Are you at any elevation?

 

[[email protected]]

Thanks Chosun, I`d forgotten about the WX, can the complexity of the eyepieces in those be achieved in a body the size of the NL ?

I could well be interested in them if it is possible, I`m reluctant to mention my SF`s too much on these pages as Zeiss are hopefully sorting their issue, 2nd visit now, first time 6 weeks, problem not sorted, this time they`v been gone 3+ months and counting, from my experience owning 6 Swarovski products the problem would`nt have existed in the first place and I reckon they would have just replaced them by now.

John.

"Thanks Chosun, I`d forgotten about the WX, can the complexity of the eyepieces in those be achieved in a body the size of the NL ?"

No, that is why the WX's are so big. They have very big complex eyepieces to achieve those extremely wide FOV's. If you are into astronomy think Nagler eyepieces. That is why Nagler eyepieces look like a hand grenade to achieve the wide FOV and sharp edges. it take's a LOT of glass to achieve a corrected huge FOV.

 

[[email protected]]

For those who think the NL is too heavy at 800 grams go buy a Zeiss 8X25 Victory and be done with it, or go lift some weights.

Andy W.

I would but all the gym's are closed! Lol.

 

[temmie]

Hi temmie (post #460),
...
...So does the above get us into any sort of agreement - or at least an understanding of each other’s perspective?


John

Hi John, yes, I largely agree with your perspective, I just found it stretched some of the crediting for Swarovski a little, but as said, they deserve credit where it’s due, and I believe, just based on the specs (until I see one, that is!) they fully deserve it with the NL.

 

[[email protected]]

Just wondering if a binocular with a 159m fov can really be sharp to the edge the way the 8.5x SV is, maybe Swarovski talks about "invisible edges" hoping as you can`t see them you won`t see their not sharp.

Although much cheaper and with a smaller afov my 175m Kowa 6.5 did`nt have invisible edges.

Maybe Bill, Henry, Holger or Frank can answer whether a sharp edge at such an extreme fov is possible.

John.

"Just wondering if a binocular with a 159m fov can really be sharp to the edge the way the 8.5x SV is, maybe Swarovski talks about "invisible edges" hoping as you can`t see them you won`t see their not sharp."

That is going to be the deciding factor for me if I buy the new NL's or not if Swarovski achieves a 159m FOV WITH sharp edges. If they do I will have to buy one because that is going to be awesome. The new Zeiss 8x32 SF even though it has nearly as big of a FOV probably won't have sharp edges.

 

[Chosun Juan]

I forgot your season's are opposite since you are on the bottom of the globe! I should have remembered since I have been to New Zealand but never Australia. What do your temperatures run in the summer where you live? Are you at any elevation?

We have a pretty standard response whenever anyone asks what the temperature is in summer ..... mostly the answer comes back as - it's f**kn hot !!! ......... in numbers you could relate to, how does 120°F grab ya ?! :eek!:





Chosun :gh:

 

[Torview]

That is going to be the deciding factor for me if I buy the new NL's or not if Swarovski achieves a 159m FOV WITH sharp edges. If they do I will have to buy one because that is going to be awesome. The new Zeiss 8x32 SF even though it has nearly as big of a FOV probably won't have sharp edges.

If the edges are "invisible" how will you assess their sharpness ?

 

[CharleyBird]

Regarding the NL 12x42, just to state what is glaringly obvious, the exit pupil is only 3.5 and therefore unlikely to be an easy view.

 

[[email protected]]

If the edges are "invisible" how will you assess their sharpness ?

They will still be visible. You will just have to look for them.

 

[[email protected]]

Regarding the NL 12x42, just to state what is glaringly obvious, the exit pupil is only 3.5 and therefore unlikely to be an easy view.

It is better than a 10x32 or an 8x25. I really think a 3.5mm exit pupil will be fine at 12x. Swarovski could use some of the trick's they used on the CL 8x30 B to make eye placement easier also.

 

[normjackson]

It is better than a 10x32 or an 8x25. I really think a 3.5mm exit pupil will be fine at 12x. Swarovski could use some of the trick's they used on the CL 8x30 B to make eye placement easier also.

We eagerly anticipate the "optional head rest" developing into an item designed to engage mechanically with a frontal lobe implant.