-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Classic Porro Comparision: Swarovski Habicht 8x30 vs. Nikon 8x30 E2? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Dantanamo
- Start date
What REALLY shows flare in Habicht's is looking up a steep mountain at an extreme angle on a sunny day. I was trying to see those Bighorn Sheep high up on these craggy cliffs from a canyon and the Habicht's flared so bad it clouded the whole FOV. I couldn't believe it. That is a good way to test binoculars for flare because the sun enters the prisms at an odd angle. Try it with yours. For backyard birding they are fine unless you look at a bird high up in the tree.
iveljay
Well-known member
EIIs in summer on the occasions when the weather is good and Habicht in classic British murk and sogginess when flare is the least of my concerns and the Habicht image works better for me. I am also less concerned about them getting a good soaking.
Horses for courses really, also because I like the small eye pieces and handling of the non-armoured Habichts they tend to get used quite a bit anyway. I may be in a minority of one, but thats the way it is.
Horses for courses really, also because I like the small eye pieces and handling of the non-armoured Habichts they tend to get used quite a bit anyway. I may be in a minority of one, but thats the way it is.
Rathaus
Well-known member
I suppose I should add something to this thread since I own both of these binoculars. My EII is about 10 years old and my 8x30 W Habicht was made in March of this year (I also have a 30 year old Habicht 8x30 "standard field").
I've gathered a great deal of information about the Habicht 8x30 W in the last few months, but I've nearly lost all interest in writing what would be a very long review of a binocular I don't like very much. So, here are the basic pros and cons as I see them.
Pros:
State of the art light transmission and color accuracy.
Moderate pincushion, enough to avoid the globe effect without calling attention to itself.
Waterproof
Cons:
Too much spherical and longitudinal chromatic aberrations in the field center. As a result the center field image is not quite completely sharp for my 20/15 eyesight acuity. This is most evident when I compare the Habicht to a very low aberration reference binocular like the Zeiss 8x56 FL
Off-axis astigmatism and field curvature are not very well corrected due to the use of an old modified Erfle eyepiece design with well known deficiencies.
Prisms are so undersized that a prism edge actually cuts into the exit pupil. That makes already poor resistance to glare from inadequate baffling of the objective cell even worse when bright side light arrives at an angle that reflects off the prism glass back to the eyepiece.
I could move on to nitpicks, but inadequacy in the optical basics is enough for me. I've asked myself repeatedly in the last few months how this binocular could have gathered such a cult following? My tentative answer is that nostalgia for the Golden Age of the Porro, and admittedly a superbly bright and color neutral image thanks to the latest Swarovski coatings, are enough to carry the day for its enthusiasts. Everything else is forgiven.
My Nikon 8x30 EII has lower axial aberrations, better off-axis corrections and better glare resistance than the Habicht. However, it is visibly dimmer with an obvious red color cast. Choose your poison.
Henry
I suppose I should add something to this thread since I own both of these binoculars. My EII is about 10 years old and my 8x30 W Habicht was made in March of this year (I also have a 30 year old Habicht 8x30 "standard field").
I've gathered a great deal of information about the Habicht 8x30 W in the last few months, but I've nearly lost all interest in writing what would be a very long review of a binocular I don't like very much. So, here are the basic pros and cons as I see them.
Pros:
State of the art light transmission and color accuracy.
Moderate pincushion, enough to avoid the globe effect without calling attention to itself.
Waterproof
Cons:
Too much spherical and longitudinal chromatic aberrations in the field center. As a result the center field image is not quite completely sharp for my 20/15 eyesight acuity. This is most evident when I compare the Habicht to a very low aberration reference binocular like the Zeiss 8x56 FL
Off-axis astigmatism and field curvature are not very well corrected due to the use of an old modified Erfle eyepiece design with well known deficiencies.
Prisms are so undersized that a prism edge actually cuts into the exit pupil. That makes already poor resistance to glare from inadequate baffling of the objective cell even worse when bright side light arrives at an angle that reflects off the prism glass back to the eyepiece.
I could move on to nitpicks, but inadequacy in the optical basics is enough for me. I've asked myself repeatedly in the last few months how this binocular could have gathered such a cult following? My tentative answer is that nostalgia for the Golden Age of the Porro, and admittedly a superbly bright and color neutral image thanks to the latest Swarovski coatings, are enough to carry the day for its enthusiasts. Everything else is forgiven.
My Nikon 8x30 EII has lower axial aberrations, better off-axis corrections and better glare resistance than the Habicht. However, it is visibly dimmer with an obvious red color cast. Choose your poison.
Henry
Re acquity and on axis resolving power, My Experience is the opposite from yours. I wonder if you could have one of the few Habicht duds ever made? I'd Send it back...it has a 30yr warranty, and Swarovski are almost obsessed with indulging any customer concern like no other manufacturer of anything. Also, How does your Habicht compare to various other alphas in your tests?
I have better than 20/20 natural vision and have spent endless hours doing nothing but devising ruthless tests to compare absolute on axis acuity between Habicht and various alpha binoculars including the Nikon e2. If your eyes and brain are up to it, 5-10 seconds viewing will easily differentiate the superiority of habicht acquity against Nikon e2. I have found The Habicht is virtually unequalled in resolving the most challenging objects such as silk from a worm or ultra fine single spiders thread in shade or mottled light at a distance of thirty to fourty feet. It's easily the most ruthless test I've ever come up with and almost translucent thin thread can remain disturbingly invisible to some of the worlds greatest binoculars.
I have also utilised my children who are blessed with young perfect eyesight, and they can differentiate within seconds. This is a great standardising test.
Having said all that, the Nikon e2 is easier to just shove up to your face and have an 'instant gratification' easy view. I'd recommend it for most...if I had a family gathering at a scenic location, I wouldn't bother handing them Habichts,,,they'd prefer the initially easier view if the nikons.
Also, the 10x in Habicht and 10x Nikon e2 are superb. The 10x 40 Habicht might be better than the 8x Habicht in some ways such as glare control. I also find that the acuity and resolution of the Habicht is so astonishing that it is almost wasted on the 8x, and more fully appreciated and realised at 10x.
To conclude with some rationality....If all my bins were confiscated excepting the Nikon e2, I would soon forget my thread and micro bark tests and just enjoy the splendid e2 views on offer which in all honesty is plenty for anybody. IMO.
Last edited:
"Prisms are so undersized that a prism edge actually cuts into the exit pupil. That makes already poor resistance to glare from inadequate baffling of the objective cell even worse when bright side light arrives at an angle that reflects off the prism glass back to the eyepiece."
I was a big fan of the Habicht 8x30 W myself until I experienced this phenomena myself while observing Mountain Goats on high craggy peaks in Rocky Mountain National Park from a low observation point. The glare totally blocked the view and I couldn't see anything. I had to get my Swarovski 8x32 SV's out to see the goats. Totally unacceptable in a binocular. Henry is correct. My observations support his observations. My Habicht's are gone.:-C
Rathaus
Well-known member
Denco,
I edited my post....somewhat clumsily 8-P
One of the first mentioned and main concerns was on axis resolution for eyes of 20/15, the viewer noting that Nikon e2 out resolved the Habicht...the viewer noted the Habicht was not sharp. This definitely does not ad up to me. When something obvious (a given) doesn't ad up, something is amiss. Everybody on earth knows about the various Habicht shortcomings...and that's not one of them! Their otherworldly on axis resolution and contrast is what has made them so legendary.
If you want to strictly talk flare and glare, viewing in challenging light, then none of the modern swarovisions are great. My 10x Habicht are at least as good in this area. Alpha Canon and Fujinon will destroy any modern Swarovski in this area. I've extensively tested them all side by side. Viewing scenery and wildlife under superb Clear skies, pre, and then post sunset for the next half hour to hour - the swarovisions offer up their typical 'milky and murky' view which renders them almost useless to me at this superb viewing time. Roll out the canon and Fujinon under the same conditions and their capacity to slice through glare is so devastating that I've wondered if their twilight performance isn't better than their daytime performance. I'm talking about an optical difference that a complete layperson can detect and then articulate, unprompted, in a couple of seconds. The not insignificant downside of the canon and Fujinon?...for agile and proper extended use, the user will require the physical size and strength of ex-Soviet weightlifters such as Anatoly Pisarenko or Vasily Alexiev.
All bins have their strengths and flaws. It's half the fun
Rat
Last edited:
The modern Swarovision's are much better than the Habicht 8x30 W at glare control. The Habicht glare wasn't a milky film over the FOV. It was complete blockage. I will admit the Swarovison's are not the best binocular when controlling glare but they are acceptable and they are much better than the other binoculars you mention in ease of view and edge sharpness. I found the Swarovski Habicht 8x30 W unacceptable in my field uses and I agree with Henry. I really liked the Habicht for most uses but let me tell you this and it isn't no BS don't try to use them looking up at a steep angle in the sun. Anyway mine sold fast on Ebay. In less than 15 hours for $100 more than I paid for them. I had no intention of selling them until I saw the glare. Take heed.
Last edited:
henry link
Well-known member
Rathaus,
If you read my post again I think you will find that I did not claim that the EII "out resolved" the Habicht. I said the EII had lower axial aberrations (spherical and chromatic). High aberrations seem to affect how clean and sharp an image looks well before a loss of resolution can be seen, especially at low magnification.
To see what I mean try comparing the images in the post below:
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3424981&postcount=17
At the proper distance from the computer you can see that both binoculars easily resolve line pairs smaller than anyone's eyesight acuity, and yet even the largest element on the chart looks clearer and sharper in the Zeiss image, because its aberrations are lower. That's why I use the Zeiss as a universal reference for binocular image quality. It's just too hard to judge the absolute image quality of any "good" binocular without a reference image of known high quality for comparison.
Henry
Rathaus
Well-known member
You stated that the centre field image is not quite completely sharp for your 20/15 acuity. I've read a lot of things but I've never read or heard this about the Habicht. Very odd.
Rathaus
Well-known member
I never stated that I was comparing my Habicht 8x30 to my S'vs re glare.
My first ever viewing through the 8x habicht was in challenging light and was disappointing and fraught with glare....I persevered and then realised that under most viewing conditions the little habicht possessed outrageous levels of resolution and contrast. It may well be the case that within Ten years from now my own visual acuity will no longer utilise the ultra refinement of the little habicht...and if I need coke bottle, or most any specs they'll be useless to me too.
So, re glare control, the SVs are indeed better than the 8x30, but my SVs are on par or inferior to my 10x40 Habicht. Also My canon 10x42 can out resolve various SVs at absolute edge. Plus, there is virtually no pincushion or feeling of oddball field flatteners, which the user does eventually become accustomed to in the SVs.
As for SVs having a much 'easier' view than the canon and Fujinon? Honestly? You must be joking.
Canons with tripod like IS? and Fujinon with the most light efficient optics ever installed into a binocular, with larger eye pieces than many objectives?
Once again, the SVs are great but don't get carried away.
Do you have all of these binoculars on a table infront of you now with clear or challenging skies for immediate reference?
Last edited:
Similar threads
