• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

10 x nn SV recommendations (1 Viewer)

SeldomPerched

Well-known member
I'm interested to follow up on a wish to have one pair of 10x binoculars but at present don't have much chance to try any out and so would welcome some thoughts and advice.

Some playing about with 8x in a local shop that is primarily a Swarovski agent led me to think that the hold on the EL series with open bridge was immediately very comfortable. While I regularly use other alpha marques in 7x, it struck me that a comfortable hold on 10x would be crucial in view of the magnification being at the limit of what can be held steady for prolonged viewing.

With that in mind, do you find that larger/heavier or smaller/lighter are easier to hold steady? In other words, to go for a 10x32 SV or a 10x42 SV -- assuming 10x50 SV is right inside tripod territory (.. or is it?). From the cost and storage point of view, 32 will be enough for occasional need but then again 42 might be better for added viewing times.

Any thoughts welcome both on the business of what's easier/easiest to hold and what's best optically. I did notice a bit of glare in 8x32 SV that I tried but on the other hand the sharp image from centre to edge was very impressive. I liked the slightly cooler colour compared to Zeiss and Leica and Nikon as much as I like those marques signature colour rendition - they are all something I can live with very happily, while clearly noticeable.

By all means promote the single hinge Swarovski SLCs too if you think any 10x are very good & promote a steady hold (I realize this will depend a bit on a person's build, dimensions, strength etc).

Thank you,

Tom
 
Last edited:
I just went through what you are going through finding a 10x. I tried a Swarovski 10x32 SV, Swarovski 10x42 SLC and a Nikon HG 10x42 trying to decide which one I liked. In the past I have had many other 10x42's and 10x50's so I have a lot of experience with the different brands. The SV 10x32 has sharper edges than the other two and I liked that but when I used the 10x32 SV in the mountains and in open sunny areas I got a lot of glare that was worse than my 8x32 SV or 12x50 SV. It has a lot to do with exit pupil. The bigger the exit pupil the less glare you are probably going to get. The SLC 10x42 has less glare than the SV 10x42 but again the edges are not as sharp. I like the SLC 10x42 for the fact that it has less glare but you have to be real careful with SLC's that you get one with out a sticky focuser. For some reason a lot of SLC's that I have tried have had sticky focusers, whereas, the SV's do not. The 10x binocular I finally settled on and I have now is the Nikon Monarch HG 10x42. It is very close to the SLC optically and almost half the price. It controls glare better than the SV's and as good as the SLC. The Nikon HG is very good value at $900.00. Since the EDG has been discontinued the HG is Nikon's flagship binocular and they have learned a lot from their mistakes with the EDG. The HG doesn't have as sharp of edges as the SV's but it is close and it has a bigger FOV about equal to the Zeiss SF 10x42 at 362 feet. The objective covers are attached and fit perfectly and the rainguard fits well also. The case isn't that great not having much padding and having no strap so I replaced mine with a Zeiss Conquest 42mm case and I replaced the binocular straps with Vero Vellini straps because they are smaller and lighter and fit in the Zeiss case better. The focuser on the Nikon HG is excellent being smooth and having no slack or mushy feeling and you don't HEAR grease oozing around in it and it has the perfect tension. The best thing about the HG is it is light and small. It only weighs about 24 oz. which is very light for a 42mm but Monarch's have always been known for being light and small. The eye cups work very good and they are very smooth and tight meaning they stay where you put them. The IPD tension is nice and tight and also stays where you put it. The HG is very bright and very sharp and it is an excellent overall package for the price. I highly recommend it. It complements my Habicht 10x40 porro having some of the advantages of the Habicht like light weight , small size and good light transmission. The Habicht has better 3D but the HG has a bigger FOV and sharper edges and more comfortable eye cups with an easier focuser.
 
Last edited:
Dennis,

Is this your second time around with the HG 10X42, if I remember I think you had one before. I have the 8X42 HG, never really thought about the 10X42. I still have the FL 10X42 and realize how good that particular configuration is as part of the FL line. Regarding my favorites in that format (10X42) the SE and EDG, though archived, get my vote, still great performers.
Today if I was looking for a current manufacture 10X42 Tom, I would tend to lean towards the NV, while the EL SV is an extremely capable glass, it would be my second choice.

I wonder if Nikon will come out with a new premium glass, or are they just going to say the Monarch HG is the present and future..

Andy W.
 
Last edited:
Andy,

I got rid of my first HG 10x42 because I honestly thought my SV 10x32 was better because of the sharper edges and flatter field but I slowly realized the smaller exit pupil SV's show considerable glare. The 10x42 SV would be better in that regard because my SV 8x32 and SV 12x50 are better for glare. I have not tried the Noctivid 10x42 because I have tried a lot of other Leica's and I usually don't care for them as much as the other alpha's. Maybe I should try a Noctivid though because I have heard it is excellent with glare. I had a 10x42 FL and it was very good. I also had the HG 8x42 and although it was good I prefer the HG 10x42. It is funny how binoculars in the same model line can be different isn't it? I don't think Nikon is going to come out with anything to replace the EDG because I don't think they sold that many. People just don't want to pay big bucks for a Nikon like they will for a Swarovski, Zeiss or Leica no matter how good they are. The HG is their top glass now and they have it pretty well perfected. Now if they would give you a case like the SV and a smaller better designed strap they would be perfect. Two things I prefer on the 10x42 HG versus the 10x42 Noctivid are the bigger FOV on the HG and the lighter weight but I know those are not important to you because you carry a lot of 50mm's.
 
Last edited:
Hello,

I find that the heavier binoculars are much easier to hold steady.

My heavy Nikon 8 x 40 Action EX Porro's are a case in point , one does get used to the weight.

Others will probably not agree with me.

Cheers.
 
I'm interested to follow up on a wish to have one pair of 10x binoculars but at present don't have much chance to try any out and so would welcome some thoughts and advice....

Thank you,

Tom

Tom,

Out of the 3 Swarovski formats you listed (x32, x42, x50) I have a preference for the 10x50 SV. The view is exceptional and suits my hands well and so is very steady to hold. I really don't like the feel of the x42, and the x32 is way too small for me (though if that is what you are after it would be excellent. I would rate it's view next behind the x50 due to the large Fov). As good as the 10x50 SV is too hold, I wouldn't like to have a kilo hanging around my neck for a day - you would definitely want a sling. Definitely hand holdable.

The other 10x I really like the feel of is the Nikon 10x42 MHG. Fantastic ergonomics, equally as steady to hold as the 10x50 SV, and light too. Nice wide Fov and a quality feel to it. The optics may ultimately be just a shade behind the Swarovski though.



Chosun :gh:
 
I know the HG has a wide FOV and is light and is 1/2 the price of a premium 10X42, so I guess the sacrifice is the optics? Regarding the build quality, it is a replacement glass, definitely not the quality build of an EDG. The 10X42 EDG can be purchased for a bit more than a HG Tom, see if you can find one.
For an all around 10X50 if you are interested, the Leica UV+ is the one, it does everything well, but it is a 10X50.
No glare or ghosting, and yes I have the 10X50 SV.

Andy W.
 
Tom,

Out of the 3 Swarovski formats you listed (x32, x42, x50) I have a preference for the 10x50 SV. The view is exceptional and suits my hands well and so is very steady to hold. I really don't like the feel of the x42, and the x32 is way too small for me (though if that is what you are after it would be excellent. I would rate it's view next behind the x50 due to the large Fov). As good as the 10x50 SV is too hold, I wouldn't like to have a kilo hanging around my neck for a day - you would definitely want a sling. Definitely hand holdable.

The other 10x I really like the feel of is the Nikon 10x42 MHG. Fantastic ergonomics, equally as steady to hold as the 10x50 SV, and light too. Nice wide Fov and a quality feel to it. The optics may ultimately be just a shade behind the Swarovski though.



Chosun :gh:
I agree with you Chosun. I really like the Nikon MHG 10x42 also. Given equal quality optics like on the SV's the bigger aperture in my experience is always going to be better. The 42mm is better than the 32mm and the 50mm is better than the 42mm. You have to decide if you want to carry the weight. The 10x50 SV is the best 10x Swarovski makes without a doubt. I have the 12x50 SV and I like it even better than the 10x50 SV I had. It is an awesome binocular.
 
Last edited:
I know the HG has a wide FOV and is light and is 1/2 the price of a premium 10X42, so I guess the sacrifice is the optics? Regarding the build quality, it is a replacement glass, definitely not the quality build of an EDG. The 10X42 EDG can be purchased for a bit more than a HG Tom, see if you can find one.
For an all around 10X50 if you are interested, the Leica UV+ is the one, it does everything well, but it is a 10X50.
No glare or ghosting, and yes I have the 10X50 SV.

Andy W.
Andy. I agree with you on aperture. A big 50mm is going to kill a 42mm or 32mm every time. I think the total package on the HG beats the EDG for me even though the optics might be a little better on the EDG. The HG is lighter, smaller, objective covers actually stay on and the rainguard is perfect, it has a bigger FOV and a better close focus. I really like the big FOV and the smaller size and weight on the HG 10x42. I will give up a little on optics for FOV and weight. Basically the EDG is done so it makes you wonder how long Nikon will support them , whereas, the HG is their new flagship so they have to support it. You are different in that you don't mind how much a binocular weighs because you want the very best optics regardless of size and weight. That is why you like the 10x50's. It is HARD to beat a good 10x50. The difference between the SV 10x50 and Leica UV+ 10x50 is the SV has sharper edges and less distortion but the UV+ has less glare so it depends on which you prefer. They are both nice.
 
Last edited:
..... The 10x50 SV is the best 10x Swarovski makes without a doubt.....
I don't know Dennis - have you tried the SLC 10x56 ?! :cat:
That is an awesome binocular.
It is also a brick !
I have looked through this a few times - 1, I was like where's the Wow? 2nd time - I was like - ok this is nice, and the 3rd time I was like Wow there's the clarity !
Not viable hand held I don't think unless you are a hairy chested Marlboro Man ! 3:)



Chosun :gh:
 
I don't know Dennis - have you tried the SLC 10x56 ?! :cat:
That is an awesome binocular.
It is also a brick !
I have looked through this a few times - 1, I was like where's the Wow? 2nd time - I was like - ok this is nice, and the 3rd time I was like Wow there's the clarity !
Not viable hand held I don't think unless you are a hairy chested Marlboro Man ! 3:)



Chosun :gh:
You forget I had the 8x56 SLC. It was a monster but it was awesome optically especially in low light obviously! I prefer the optics of the SV's a little more though. They are a little more perfect. Sorry, no chest hair.:-C
 
Last edited:
In a bin with larger exit pupil the image will probably feel less shaky.
The 10x50 SV is very nice but IMO a bit heavy for everyday birding and focusing not the snappiest.
But a lovely bin in many ways of course.

A 10x bin is really a specialist tool, it will have less FOV, smaller DOF and more CA than the 8x counterpart.
At shorter distance with faster moving birds, even my 8.5x42 is harder to use compared to my 7x42 FL.
At longer distance, shake will be more apparent with higher magnification and shake might mitigate the larger image.

I guess it's why the majority* of people prefer 8x (or 8.5x) bins.

*65% according to the Birdforum poll.

But if you really want a 10x bin, I would also consider 10x42 SF, 10x42 SV and 10x42 Noctivid.
 
Last edited:
There is still a lot of birders that like the extra reach of a 10x. 22% according to the Birdforum Poll. That is almost 1 out of 5. I think a lot of birders have an 8x and a 10x in their arsenal for different situations. I have 7x, 8x and 10x which I use depending on where I am going.
 
Thank you all for so many replies all within one day! I waited till now to reply by forcing myself to do some work - and a workout - during daylight hours but I am still not a Marlboro man! Lots to think about and in due course more importantly to try out.

I am so impressed by my EDG 7x42 - most specs are still just available here in Britain - but if the support is going to fail I would be sensible now to give them (i.e. the EDG in 10x magnification a swerve. I would like Swarovski for a change from L and Z but the smaller Nikon will be tried out if possible first. Am very pleased with all the advice on this great forum. Cheers!

Tom
 
I've got a few 10X42s....Swarovski EL10X42 and 10X50, Zeiss FL, Zeiss Conquest HD, Noctivid. The 10X42s are perfectly fine for most uses. It's rare to really NEED a 10X50 or a 10X56. Although it would be hard to find fault with ANY of the above binoculars, the Swarovski EL Swarovisons seem to have the least issues(real or imaginary) of any of them. I tend to use the Noctivid the most but that's just me.
 
I've got a few 10X42s....Swarovski EL10X42 and 10X50, Zeiss FL, Zeiss Conquest HD, Noctivid. The 10X42s are perfectly fine for most uses. It's rare to really NEED a 10X50 or a 10X56. Although it would be hard to find fault with ANY of the above binoculars, the Swarovski EL Swarovisons seem to have the least issues(real or imaginary) of any of them. I tend to use the Noctivid the most but that's just me.

Chuck,

The 10x42 Noctivids seem to be getting some very positive mentions in this thread. Thank you for your input.

To
 
SP:
Personally, a larger/heavier binocular is easier for me to hold steady than a smaller/lighter example. Ergos or hand comfort is really not a big issue to me with any binocular--including Canons IS. The comparison I use is looking at a house or a boat light in the dark at 100 or 200 yards--it quickly shows with a side by side how steady you are with a particular binocular. We live on a wooded river bottom so there are no street lights...

Personal preference is a 50mm or 56mm objective for a 10x to differentiate over the 8 or 8.5x42. The 10x50 SV would be the first choice--a stand-out to my eyes. For something to nearly eliminate tremor, the impressive Canon 10x42 IS. That said, I don't use a neck strap for any binocular unless it is for a look out the window or a quick grab as we keep an 8x32 BN handy on a window sill. Any serious glassing or ID work outside, I use a harness.
 
Huron Bay,

When my local shop can get hold of a demo EL SV 10x50 I am keen to try it out against one of the EL SV 10x42 that they regularly keep in stock.

What you say is encouraging so the 50 is still on the table but as always trying out is going to be vital before making a decision. The good thing is there is no trip etc that means I need to be in a hurry!

Thank you for posting your own experience.

Tom
 
I know the HG has a wide FOV and is light and is 1/2 the price of a premium 10X42, so I guess the sacrifice is the optics? Regarding the build quality, it is a replacement glass, definitely not the quality build of an EDG. The 10X42 EDG can be purchased for a bit more than a HG Tom, see if you can find one.
For an all around 10X50 if you are interested, the Leica UV+ is the one, it does everything well, but it is a 10X50.
No glare or ghosting, and yes I have the 10X50 SV.

Andy W.

Andy,

By chance I saw a Monarch HG 10x today at the London Wetlands Centre - not a 42 but a 32. Optically it was very good - conditions were harsh unclouded sunlight. It put me in mind from the point of view of build quality of a Zeiss Conquest as against a Victory. The objective caps stayed in place as well (actually they do in my EDG so N probably listened in the end - something they are traditionally not well known for) and as you say you get the optical quality for half the price. I was there to get a green special 8x32 FL; I checked it out and not only were the optics spot on but the cosmetics were undamaged. A really good example of Zeiss at its best, a fine glass in green.

Meant to say: no hurry for 10s but will strike when I have lots of info and comparisons stored up here (points to head) and above all made hands on trial of all the offerings. For the meantime it will be good to keep using what's already to hand: some good glass that covers most bases apart from astronomy if I go down that road now I have more time for these interests.

One of those theoretical questions, Andy: if you could keep only one example of each mag from 7x (I think you prefer 8x) thru 12x or 15x what would be the keepers?

Tom
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top