New released Swaro CL Companion 8x30 B (3 Viewers)

Elkhornsun · Jun 9, 2019

The FP attachment is an OK design but Swarovski should include their Optik strap loop connectors as well. With the standard Field Pro connection I cannot use a harness with the CL Companion binocular. The EL loop connectors don't fit so it was good to learn that Swarovski will ship them to me if I contact them.

As for standard connectors never coming loose, they have on my cameras from time to time and now I put heat shrink tubing over the ends and seal them tight. If I was worried about the FP connection I would use blue Loctite on the screws, same as I do with the tiny screws on my eyeglasses and other screws that I want to come loose only with a screwdriver.

I would not compare a $2200 8x32 with a $1200 8x30 binocular any more than I would compare a Porsche to to a Mazda. I would expect perfection from a binocular costing more than two thousand dollars. I have two Swarovski binos but the best bang for the buck are the Pentax 10x43 SCF FP for which I paid $469. In low light situations these are the ones I usually grab.

ceasar · Jun 10, 2019

Elkhornsun said:
....................................
................................................

I would not compare a $2200 8x32 with a $1200 8x30 binocular any more than I would compare a Porsche to to a Mazda. I would expect perfection from a binocular costing more than two thousand dollars. I have two Swarovski binos but the best bang for the buck are the Pentax 10x43 SCF FP for which I paid $469. In low light situations these are the ones I usually grab.

Is this Swarovski's idea of perfection?

The latest version of the CL Companion 8x30 B is the CL Companion 8x30 B Nomad. It costs $2880.00

https://www.allbinos.com/1931-Swarovski_CL_Companion_8x30_B_NOMAD-binoculars_specifications.html

Bob

FireStation1776 · Jun 17, 2019

Sawro’s

New to forum here! I have a Swaro CL 8x30 and SLC 10x42

I have to look up what the differences are with the newer versions out vs. my binos.

DocSarvis · Jun 17, 2019

This is one reason I don’t care for the Field Pro system on the latest Swarovski binoculars. Too many hoops to jump through to use anything but a Swarovski strap. Which I don’t care one little bit for in the least! I’ve always liked the OpTec pro strap. Comfy and light. It’s what I use on my Swaro SLC8x42HD’s and I like it fine. The original Swarovski strap sits unused in the box after the first time I tried it on. I’d love a pair of 12x50’s but the Field Pro system really puts me off and after hearing about the difficulties involved, sours me even more.

Call me a curmudgeon if you will! I happily accept the title. A binocular won’t do you much good if you can’t carry it comfortably.

ceasar · Jun 17, 2019

FireStation1776 said:
New to forum here! I have a Swaro CL 8x30 and SLC 10x42

I have to look up what the differences are with the newer versions out vs. my binos.

Hi Fire Station!

Welcome to Bird Forum!

I see this is your first post here!

It looks like you may have abbreviated their designations.

Swaro earlier had CL Companion 8x30s and 10x30s. They were replaced with the current Swarovski CL Companion 8 (and 10) x 30B.

You can find pictures along with some individual reviews of Swarovski's binoculars listed chronologically in reverse here:

https://www.allbinos.com/1-Swarovski-binoculars.html

Bob

yarrellii · Jun 17, 2019

After being blown away by the optical quality (and the customer service) of the 8x30 Habicht I tried recently, I got my eyes set on a compact Swarovski, namely the new 8x30 CL or the 8x32 EL (just like Doc Sarvis, I don't care much about the new Field Pro strap system; honestly I find it utterly unnecesary. I've never had any issue with traditional straps or strap lugs, neither felt the need for any upgrade).

I'm hesitant whether to open a new thread, and since there's some discussion about the CL here. Is there anyone with first hand experience comparing both?
At nearly twice the price, I expect the EL to offer better optical performance. I am fully aware of the law of diminishing returns, so my question is more on personal experience. For those who have tried them both: what did you like more about each model?

I have not tried the EL, only tested the CL. So, these are my guesses.
I value lightness (+CL)
I don't wear glasses, I had some issues with the view on a 8x42 Conquest HD (blackouts), and the 8x30 Nikon MHG gave me terrible kidney beaning (unfortunately, on paper is my dream binocular), I found the eyecups on the Meostar B1 8x32 too narrow and the ones on the Habicht just didn't gave me enough comfort. I love the view (and the ease of view of the 8x30 Nikon E2)
I don't think I care a lot about flat field (+CL), but I am very interested in contrast and sharpness (EL).
Personally, and I know this is irrelevant, I find the look of the CL appalling (+EL), I value understatement, and the new CL is so bling (ideally, I would like a pre-FP EL). I tested the CL and liked it, but I tend to like open bridge design (+EL).
Money is not crucial in this decision.

What are your views?

dries1 · Jun 17, 2019

For those who want the pre FP versions, there are a few EL SV 8X32s NON-FP editions out there for sale, but better jump on now or they will be gone, then you will have to go with the FP versions.

Andy W.

yarrellii · Jun 17, 2019

Andy, good advice. Are you referring to a particular place/seller?

mwhogue · Jun 18, 2019

yarrellii said:
After being blown away by the optical quality (and the customer service) of the 8x30 Habicht I tried recently, I got my eyes set on a compact Swarovski, namely the new 8x30 CL or the 8x32 EL (just like Doc Sarvis, I don't care much about the new Field Pro strap system; honestly I find it utterly unnecesary. I've never had any issue with traditional straps or strap lugs, neither felt the need for any upgrade).

I'm hesitant whether to open a new thread, and since there's some discussion about the CL here. Is there anyone with first hand experience comparing both?
At nearly twice the price, I expect the EL to offer better optical performance. I am fully aware of the law of diminishing returns, so my question is more on personal experience. For those who have tried them both: what did you like more about each model?

I have not tried the EL, only tested the CL. So, these are my guesses.
I value lightness (+CL)
I don't wear glasses, I had some issues with the view on a 8x42 Conquest HD (blackouts), and the 8x30 Nikon MHG gave me terrible kidney beaning (unfortunately, on paper is my dream binocular), I found the eyecups on the Meostar B1 8x32 too narrow and the ones on the Habicht just didn't gave me enough comfort. I love the view (and the ease of view of the 8x30 Nikon E2)
I don't think I care a lot about flat field (+CL), but I am very interested in contrast and sharpness (EL).
Personally, and I know this is irrelevant, I find the look of the CL appalling (+EL), I value understatement, and the new CL is so bling (ideally, I would like a pre-FP EL). I tested the CL and liked it, but I tend to like open bridge design (+EL).
Money is not crucial in this decision.

What are your views?

Yarrellii,

Sounds like you are headed to EL 32 ownership. Based on owning and using various pre FP and FP SVs, I also much prefer the pre FP accessories except for the objective covers although the pre FP objective covers were the best of their type IMO. When I installed my first FP kit, I immediately took it off and used the adapter to attach a pre FP strap. However I did test recently in the field a SW 12x50 FP. While I'm still not a fan of the FP package, it is not a deal breaker and you may get used to it.

More importantly, as you have probably read elsewhere on the forum, the FP focus system has been changed/improved. The knob on my one FP version moves more smoothly and uniformly than in my various pre FP SVs. Further my later model 8x32 pre FP focus is smoother and more uniform than my earlier 8.5x42 model. And, in my late model pre FP 8x32, I do not experience excessive glare. Others have posted elsewhere that glare resistance may have been upgraded somewhat in the later pre FP 32 models (and the focus function as well?). Of course this could also all be sample variation.

So, it would be ideal if you could compare the actual examples of the 8x32s you will be considering at the same time given the sample variation I have experienced (but none of these variations are deal breakers).

Finally, I have only the previous edition CL 8x30, not the new one, so I can't comment/compare directly on that, although presumably the 32 would be better optically than even the new CL. For me, the ergonomics of the 32 are great so the slightly greater weight and size are easy to handle and well worth it considering the better optical performance.

Hope this helps.

Mike

denco@comcast.n · Jun 18, 2019

DocSarvis said:
This is one reason I don’t care for the Field Pro system on the latest Swarovski binoculars. Too many hoops to jump through to use anything but a Swarovski strap. Which I don’t care one little bit for in the least! I’ve always liked the OpTec pro strap. Comfy and light. It’s what I use on my Swaro SLC8x42HD’s and I like it fine. The original Swarovski strap sits unused in the box after the first time I tried it on. I’d love a pair of 12x50’s but the Field Pro system really puts me off and after hearing about the difficulties involved, sours me even more.

Call me a curmudgeon if you will! I happily accept the title. A binocular won’t do you much good if you can’t carry it comfortably.

Don't forget about the other Field Pro improvements besides the strap attachment system. IMO the armour upgrade is alone worth the diffference in price between the two. I personally would never go back to the older armour I like the feel of the new armour way better.

denco@comcast.n · Jun 18, 2019

yarrellii said:
After being blown away by the optical quality (and the customer service) of the 8x30 Habicht I tried recently, I got my eyes set on a compact Swarovski, namely the new 8x30 CL or the 8x32 EL (just like Doc Sarvis, I don't care much about the new Field Pro strap system; honestly I find it utterly unnecesary. I've never had any issue with traditional straps or strap lugs, neither felt the need for any upgrade).

I'm hesitant whether to open a new thread, and since there's some discussion about the CL here. Is there anyone with first hand experience comparing both?
At nearly twice the price, I expect the EL to offer better optical performance. I am fully aware of the law of diminishing returns, so my question is more on personal experience. For those who have tried them both: what did you like more about each model?

I have not tried the EL, only tested the CL. So, these are my guesses.
I value lightness (+CL)
I don't wear glasses, I had some issues with the view on a 8x42 Conquest HD (blackouts), and the 8x30 Nikon MHG gave me terrible kidney beaning (unfortunately, on paper is my dream binocular), I found the eyecups on the Meostar B1 8x32 too narrow and the ones on the Habicht just didn't gave me enough comfort. I love the view (and the ease of view of the 8x30 Nikon E2)
I don't think I care a lot about flat field (+CL), but I am very interested in contrast and sharpness (EL).
Personally, and I know this is irrelevant, I find the look of the CL appalling (+EL), I value understatement, and the new CL is so bling (ideally, I would like a pre-FP EL). I tested the CL and liked it, but I tend to like open bridge design (+EL).
Money is not crucial in this decision.

What are your views?

I have had the CL and the EL 8x32 and IMO the Cl is a good binocular but it is NO EL. If I was looking for a binocular in the 8x30/8x32 size category and price was not a factor there is no question in my mind that I would buy the 8x32 EL FP. It is without a doubt the better binocular and always remember you get what you pay for.

yarrellii · Jun 18, 2019

Mike, Dennis,

Thanks for your input. Lots of valuable information there, great! On paper, I prefer what a 450 g 8x30 like the MHG or the new CL have to offer. I know I'm losing some optical performance, but the view is good enough and the size and weight kind of make up for that. On the other hand, I'm planning to have a bino that can last a long time and can provide as much performance as possible, hence my interest on the EL.
I had a huge disappointment trying out the 8x30 MHG, there was something in the eyecup design that made it unusable for me (actually, I preferred the view over the new 8x30 CL, but the CL was much more pleasing to use). Now I have to try the EL, my only problem is that I live on a small island with very limited offer of quality optics to be tested. So I'll have to wait for a trip to a big city to try and compare. Thanks again!

ceasar · Jun 18, 2019

yarrellii said:
Mike, Dennis,

Thanks for your input. Lots of valuable information there, great! On paper, I prefer what a 450 g 8x30 like the MHG or the new CL have to offer. I know I'm losing some optical performance, but the view is good enough and the size and weight kind of make up for that. On the other hand, I'm planning to have a bino that can last a long time and can provide as much performance as possible, hence my interest on the EL.
I had a huge disappointment trying out the 8x30 MHG, there was something in the eyecup design that made it unusable for me (actually, I preferred the view over the new 8x30 CL, but the CL was much more pleasing to use). Now I have to try the EL, my only problem is that I live on a small island with very limited offer of quality optics to be tested. So I'll have to wait for a trip to a big city to try and compare. Thanks again!

Yarrelli,

You are probably aware that the Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B has a uniquely designed eye piece with what is called an "Optical Box" which makes eye placement very easy.

I normally have to brace the eye cups of a binocular up against my brow ridge just under my eye brows to get the eye relief I need but with my CL Companion 8x30 B I can also place it back in my eye sockets and still use it without having black outs.

It is the easiest binocular to use that I own; even easier to use than my Monarch HG 8x42 which has long, comfortable eye relief and a wider FOV (like the 8x30 MHG that you had problems with) than my Swaro CL Companion 8x30 B has.

Bob

yarrellii · Jun 18, 2019

ceasar said:
You are probably aware that the Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 B has a uniquely designed eye piece with what is called an "Optical Box" which makes eye placement very easy

Bob, yes, I tried the Companion and found it was really comfortable. It is bemusing how personal the fit of binoculars is. I had a 8x32 Victory FL which I found to have the most comfortable eyecups I have ever tried, and yet I've read opinions stating exactly the oposite. With the new Companion there seems to be an agreement. I found them to be very comfortable, the kind you can use in any position, whether just leaning on your eyebrow or actually squeezing your entire eye socket into the eyecup. Really nice. How does the EL compare in your opinion? I'm really curious about the double hinge design on the EL (I found most double hinged binos I've tried were really a pleasure to hold).

ceasar · Jun 18, 2019

Yarrelli,

Re your question in post #454. Unfortunately I don't have an EL nor have I had the opportunity to use one.

Bob

NDhunter · Jun 21, 2019

[email protected] said:
Don't forget about the other Field Pro improvements besides the strap attachment system. IMO the armour upgrade is alone worth the diffference in price between the two. I personally would never go back to the older armour I like the feel of the new armour way better.

Dennis:

You are off base, the original Swarovision models are the same optically and mostly identical to the Field Pro. For me I would not want
the gimmicky, twisty FP string strap. The strap thing attachment sticks out more from the binocular than the previous version. A bad thing, don't bother
with the ergos of one of the best handling binoculars made.
The Field Pro was just a cosmetic update, so for those watching, any changes
are not much of a benefit, maybe less than that.

If I were in the market today for a new Swarovski, I would wait until the
new EL model is announced. It could be any day now.

Jerry

denco@comcast.n · Jun 21, 2019

NDhunter said:
Dennis:

You are off base, the original Swarovision models are the same optically and mostly identical to the Field Pro. For me I would not want
the gimmicky, twisty FP string strap. The strap thing attachment sticks out more from the binocular than the previous version. A bad thing, don't bother
with the ergos of one of the best handling binoculars made.
The Field Pro was just a cosmetic update, so for those watching, any changes
are not much of a benefit, maybe less than that.

If I were in the market today for a new Swarovski, I would wait until the
new EL model is announced. It could be any day now.

Jerry

Jerry. My comment was about the armour on the new SV FP. I understand the problems many people have with the strap attachment. You either like them or you don't. They also upgraded the armour on the new FP and IMO it has a much better feel and it is grippier when handling the binocular.

https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=334654

NDhunter · Jun 21, 2019

Dennis:
The armor is a very small part of a binocular, and any changes are not always better.

Jerry

denco@comcast.n · Jun 21, 2019

Jerry

John, did an excellent summary of the changes on the Field Pro Swarovision. Very interesting. Some things I didn't know. Post#12.

https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=377476

I asked Swarovski if they upgraded the armour on the new Field Pro Swarovision and this was their response.

"Good Morning,

The armor on the new Field Pro ELs is an improved texture for comfortable handling compared to the original EL Binocular.
It's definitely very comfortable in the hand!

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance, or if you have any further questions about our products.

Best Regards,

David Eickelmann
Customer Relations Representative

SWAROVSKI OPTIK NA
2 Slater Road
Cranston, RI 02920
T 800-426-3089 ext. 2955
F 877-287-8517
[email protected]
SWAROVSKIOPTIK.COM"

IMO the feel and grippiness of the armour is very important in a binocular but things like that are personal preference and alot of people don't care. I am the kind of person that has to have all the latest "Bells and Whistles". Also, you have to understand Swarovski's product philosophy. Their motto is to "Improve Things that are Already Good." So they are constantly trying to improve their binoculars even if it is a small change. If the armour on the older Swarovision is good enough and you don't care about the newer objective covers and rainguards or the texture of the focus wheel or the newer diopter lock or strap attachments then you can save a lot of money buying the older Swarovision or Generation II. They are the same optically. For me I have to have the Field Pro. There are five types of people in marketing and I know I am an Innovator. I am the first one to adopt and accept something new. Here is a description of these five groups.

The 5 Customer Segments of Technology Adoption

Back to Rogers’ research, we see that not everyone will immediately adopt a disruptive idea despite obvious benefits. Over years of research, Rogers identified some fascinating personality traits that help us organize how people will accept a new innovation. It turns out we approach innovations in the following ways.
(From Diffusion of Innovations)

Innovators (2.5%) – Innovators are the first individuals to adopt an innovation. Innovators are willing to take risks, youngest in age, have the highest social class, have great financial lucidity, very social and have closest contact to scientific sources and interaction with other innovators. Risk tolerance has them adopting technologies which may ultimately fail. Financial resources help absorb these failures. (Rogers 1962 5th ed, p. 282)

Early Adopters (13.5%) – This is the second fastest category of individuals who adopt an innovation. These individuals have the highest degree of opinion leadership among the other adopter categories. Early adopters are typically younger in age, have a higher social status, have more financial lucidity, advanced education, and are more socially forward than late adopters. More discrete in adoption choices than innovators. Realize judicious choice of adoption will help them maintain central communication position (Rogers 1962 5th ed, p. 283)
.
Early Majority (34%) – Individuals in this category adopt an innovation after a varying degree of time. This time of adoption is significantly longer than the innovators and early adopters. Early Majority tend to be slower in the adoption process, have above average social status, contact with early adopters, and seldom hold positions of opinion leadership in a system (Rogers 1962 5th ed, p. 283)

Late Majority (34%) – Individuals in this category will adopt an innovation after the average member of the society. These individuals approach an innovation with a high degree of skepticism and after the majority of society has adopted the innovation. Late Majority are typically skeptical about an innovation, have below average social status, very little financial lucidity, in contact with others in late majority and early majority, very little opinion leadership.

Laggards (16%) – Individuals in this category are the last to adopt an innovation. Unlike some of the previous categories, individuals in this category show little to no opinion leadership. These individuals typically have an aversion to change-agents and tend to be advanced in age. Laggards typically tend to be focused on “traditions”, likely to have lowest social status, lowest financial fluidity, be oldest of all other adopters, in contact with only family and close friends, very little to no opinion leadership.

If we were to graph these groups, we’d see the standard bell shape curve:
How technology gets adopted. Everett Rogers Diffusion of Innovation

Where blue represents the groups of consumer adopting a new technology and yellow is the market share which obviously reaches 100% following complete adoption. This is the point of market saturation.

Which One Are You?
It is important to note that individuals do not always line up as “Innovators” in all areas of their decision making processes. For example, a person may adopt cutting-edge green technologies for their home with solar heating and yet not belong to an online social network or own a smartphone. We bounce back and forth across the curve in large part based on the pain points we are trying to solve and our interest in the underpinnings of the change presented.
Bonus: While this research can seem a bit high-level, it has profound real-world impacts on how technology products and services get adopted. Many entrepreneurs and marketers fail to take into account that you must move from left to right in the adoption curve. As a result, they drastically overestimate their market size and how much work and time will go into getting a disruptive idea into the mainstream. For a detailed must-read in this area that builds on Rogers’ research with real-world examples from the tech space, check out Crossing the Chasm by Geoffrey Moore.

Apodidae49 · Jul 10, 2019

At WWT Martin Mere yesterday, I wanted to see some Leica Trinovid 8x42, as they are round about my budget, but they were out of stock. Instead I was offered a look through Zeiss Conquest 8x42, Vortex Viper HD 8x42 (bit downmarket compared to the others) and Swarovski CL Companion 8x30.

I found the Swarovski to be a better personal fit and optically really clear and sharp. It was a dull, misty day and I didn’t notice any appreciable loss of light compared to the two 8x42’s. As I am not a full-time birder I shall be looking at the Swaros when my impending 70th birthday comes around.

New released Swaro CL Companion 8x30 B (3 Viewers)

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well Known Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread