It´s so ironic the Zeiss SF copies the SVs outer design, but optically has a really different approach. IMO the Zeiss SF is not a flat field design at all (at least if I take the Swarovision as a role model). For good - better 3D than the SV - and for bad - much worse edge performance. Edge performance of the SF is right inbetween the classic binos like HT, Ultravid, SLC, and the still revolutionary Swarovision. I believe this truth to be self-evident. This is one price for extreme wide-angle.
Street price difference of SF and SV, in Europe SF is 400.- more expensive at the moment. It will be very difficult for Zeiss to keep that price if the hype ends and people start to actually compare both models side by side. One thing the SF definitely lacks is perfect colours, IMO they need to get rid of the yellowgreen contrast enhancing cast and do it just like the SV does. By sheer manufacturing quality. Sorry, now I turned your question the other way round.
Swarovski can improve details about the SV but never ever ever can they sell it cheaper. The 8.5x42 could need: A little bit better flare control maybe which is probably difficult enough. HT glass, yes, a bit more high transmission sparkle, to keep up with HT, Ultravid Plus. But SF would need that, too. Rolling ball is superbly controlled compared to the SF. OK, the focusing knob, could it be as good as in an Ultravid??? Yes, they should really go for that. And slightly warmer colours, as in most of the others, and their own SLC.
What Swaroski also should do is kill the now compromised SLC 8x/10x42 design - I mean, about 500.- reduction in price compared to the predecessor, where does that possibly come from? - and relaunch the SLC line as an evolution of their pre-Swarovision El line as the alternative to the Swarovision. Of course they knew exactly what they did and wanted to cater for a market segment that can still spend 1400.- but not 1950.-. Small segment, probably. Ok, leave the SLC where it is, and have a third line, the EL classic. The premium alternative for people who need as much 3D a roof prism can possibly yield. More and more people get aware of the disadvantages of flat field and should be catered for. A new EL non Swarovision 8x32 would obviously be great. And why not have a new 8x/10x42 EL CLASSIC or whatever they want to call it with AK prisms. If I carry that weight anyway, I don´t mind a slightly longer glass. The Zeiss HT 8x42 is an exciting glass in a way the SLC 8x42 is clearly not.
And of course they really must design a modern premium porro line. Habicht MK2 with long eye relief and good glare control. They sell more stuff than the others, so let them give us really the best stuff for all tastes. They could easily do it. Even Swarovision critics might start to love them for that and even start to buy binoculars from them.
If you say "Swaros answer to the Zeiss SF", what exactly was the SF supposed to do? That statement really only makes sense if the SF were a revolutionary improvement on the SV, or the Zeiss slogans were totally true. The SF has a different design philosophy, although aimed at the same market - birders primarily. Then again, the hunting market (so I´m told) is much bigger than nature observation, but that might change...
, but the optical quality should be top-notch.
