Swarovski SLC 7x42 roofs: model history? (3 Viewers)

Hello, all.

I haven’t paid much attention to the Swarovski SLC 7x42 over the years. It was always too heavy, I thought.

But I’m reconsidering that now, since the SLC 7x42 goes for relatively sane sums of money on the used market, by alpha standards. The more I look at those prices, the more inclined I am to think I could put up with the weight. After all, I have a Nikon 8x32 SE for idly ambling around.

This might be a terrible mistake, but I’m keen to explore this line of thought.

My question concerns the available models. Swarovski has probably never made a bad binocular, but am I right to favour a model with Swarobright coatings?

Can anyone list the model revisions off the top of their head? It would take me a long time to find this information myself, but I apologise if starting a thread about it is nonetheless considered a bit lazy.

Any other thoughts are welcome.

Thank you.

Dorian Gray said:

Hello, all.

I haven’t paid much attention to the Swarovski SLC 7x42 over the years. It was always too heavy, I thought.

But I’m reconsidering that now, since the SLC 7x42 goes for relatively sane sums of money on the used market, by alpha standards. The more I look at those prices, the more inclined I am to think I could put up with the weight. After all, I have a Nikon 8x32 SE for idly ambling around.

This might be a terrible mistake, but I’m keen to explore this line of thought.

My question concerns the available models. Swarovski has probably never made a bad binocular, but am I right to favour a model with Swarobright coatings?

Can anyone list the model revisions off the top of their head? It would take me a long time to find this information myself, but I apologise if starting a thread about it is nonetheless considered a bit lazy.

Any other thoughts are welcome.

Thank you.

Click to expand...

Never made a bad binocular, maybe, but they made many bad focusers.

You missed a sweet deal on Astromart. Klipy finally sold his 7x42 SLC for $585. He once told me it was the only bin he'd never sell but I guess something new caught his eye.

It had the old style body (not neu) with the deep thumb grooves, but the prisms had Swarobright coatings like the SCLneu model and the newSLC model. The new owner said it was the sharpest 7x42 he's owned, and that includes Zeiss Classic, Leica BA, Zeiss 7 x 45 Night Owl, and Meopta Meostar. Swarobright is Swaro's marketing name for dielectric coatings.

OTOH, the 7x42 SLCneu probably has better AR coatings. As I've learned, it's not just "all about the view," it's "all about the latest coatings that makes the view."

I don't like to carry a lot of weight around my neck these days. I wish Swaro would re-introduce the 7x30 SLC to its newSLC lineup. That I would go for if I could find one with a smooth focuser, particularly if it had deep thumb grooves like the old 7x30 SLC and the 8x56 newSLC. Regrettably, the push and turn diopter mechanism is gone. Best Ive used.

<B>

That is a "fabled" binocular. It seems like everybody who has used one finds it heavy but with a view sensational. I haven't used one myself, but can offer up that there is a difficult fine point here for the purchaser. All SLC "neu" have the desirable Swarobright dielectric coating on the prisms. But some of the later "pre-neu" models also have it. Only the most ardent Swaro fan, or Swaro itself, can tell you what serial number separates the silver coateds from the Swarobright.

Personally I'd love to try one. I know I could take it because my first good roof was a 31 ounce 8x42 Trinovid BA, and I'm still alive to tell about it (but I carried it on a strap slung diagonally across a shoulder, not reefing on my neck vertebrae).

Ron

Of course you should get one with Swarobright which goes back at least to 2006 because that's when my 7x42 SLC B neu was made and the documentation with it says it has Swarobright coatings. But why would it be any heavier than 8 x 42 and 10 x 42 SLCs of the same vintage?

Nobody ever complains about their weights.

Or does more power make them lighter?

Bob

ronh said:

That is a "fabled" binocular. It seems like everybody who has used one finds it heavy but with a view sensational. I haven't used one myself, but can offer up that there is a difficult fine point here for the purchaser. All SLC "neu" have the desirable Swarobright dielectric coating on the prisms. But some of the later "pre-neu" models also have it. Only the most ardent Swaro fan, or Swaro itself, can tell you what serial number separates the silver coateds from the Swarobright.

Personally I'd love to try one. I know I could take it because my first good roof was a 31 ounce 8x42 Trinovid BA, and I'm still alive to tell about it (but I carried it on a strap slung diagonally across a shoulder, not reefing on my neck vertebrae).

Ron

Click to expand...

The owner of the SLC could tell you whether or not the prisms have Swarobright coatings, because it's written on the ID sticker on the box. That's how Klipy was able to advertise his 7x42 SCL "Alt" version as having Swarobright.

For an Arnold-armed guy like you who carries oversized bins into the field, the 33.5 oz. of the 7x42 SLC should be a piece 'o cake. To me, it's not just the weight around the neck, but having to "pump" that weight all day. The 34.6 oz. full sized Nikon LX s(8x and 10x) felt like an albatross by the end of the day.

I just found this review when I was looking for the weight spec:

Pete Ward's 7x42 SLC review

<B>

Swarovski introduced Swarobright dielectic prism coatings in 1999, with the introduction of the EL models.
The SLC larger models started with Swarobright coatings in 2002, and the 8x30 SLC
in 2003, with the Mark III model.
In 2006 Swaroclean, easy to clean lens coatings were added.

Also I believe in 2006 was the armor change with the Neu model which was the last
armor change. Other coatings changes have occurred over the years, and the later models have some improvements that can be seen.

You can determine the year of manufacture, by adding 30 to the first 2 digits of the
ser. #.

Jerry

NDhunter said:

Swarovski introduced Swarobright dielectic prism coatings in 1999, with the introduction of the EL models.
The SLC larger models started with Swarobright coatings in 2002, and the 8x30 SLC
in 2003, with the Mark III model.
In 2006 Swaroclean, easy to clean lens coatings were added.

Also I believe in 2006 was the armor change with the Neu model which was the last
armor change. Other coatings changes have occurred over the years, and the later models have some improvements that can be seen.

You can determine the year of manufacture, by adding 30 to the first 2 digits of the
ser. #.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Thanks for that precise information about the years when Swarobright was added to various models. I bookmarked this thread in case the subject comes up again (I'm sure it will) or in case I starts eatin' me's spinach and the weight is no longer an issue.

Brock

brocknroller said:

Thanks for that precise information about the years when Swarobright was added to various models. I bookmarked this thread in case the subject comes up again (I'm sure it will) or in case I starts eatin' me's spinach and the weight is no longer an issue.

Brock

Click to expand...

Brock,

Swarobright coating refers to both mirror coatings and on the surfaces of lenses.

Here is the exact quote about Swarobright coating from the SLC "Instructions for use and care. Warranty card," (from the operating manual on page 19; which is dated 02/2006 on page 21). I received this with my 7x42 SLC B neu which was manufactured in 2006, per it's SN.

Swarobright coating

"Interference mirror with a reflective capacity of 99.5% over the entire light spectrum!

During the coating process extremely specialized micro thin coatings are applied with various highly scientific techniques to the surfaces of lenses and prisms. Some elements receive more than 30 coatings. This complicated procedure reduces reflections and controls all color spectrums to provide the highest light transmission, best contrast, sharpest resolution and optimal color fidelity."

I also noticed your comments about the similarity of the eye cups and focus/diopter knobs on the SLCs and the Meopta's in Absolute Beethoven's thread here:

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2841527&postcount=7

I noticed a listing of Swarovski patents on the bottom of Page 19 right under the comment about Swarovison above and they do not mention having patents on the eye cups but the focusing system is patented.

Here (at the bottom of page 19 in the above cited operating manual) are listed four (4) Patents.

"Reflux reducing coating: Swarotop."

"Central focusing system with all SLC binoculars."

"Rainguard for binoculars."

"Tripod adapter with quick-lock mechanism."

Bob

I believe I have linked this before, but in case anyone didn't see it.....

http://www.juelich-bonn.com/jForum/file.php?9,file=769,filename=image.jpg

This is most probably pre-"Neu" status as current multicoating has up to five layers and is tailored to the refractive indices of individual elements.

Interesting too to see that the "focussing elements" are basically the objectives.

John

ceasar said:

Brock,

Swarobright coating refers to both mirror coatings and on the surfaces of lenses.

Here is the exact quote about Swarobright coating from the SLC "Instructions for use and care. Warranty card," (from the operating manual on page 19; which is dated 02/2006 on page 21). I received this with my 7x42 SLC B neu which was manufactured in 2006, per it's SN.

Swarobright coating

"Interference mirror with a reflective capacity of 99.5% over the entire light spectrum!

During the coating process extremely specialized micro thin coatings are applied with various highly scientific techniques to the surfaces of lenses and prisms. Some elements receive more than 30 coatings. This complicated procedure reduces reflections and controls all color spectrums to provide the highest light transmission, best contrast, sharpest resolution and optimal color fidelity."

I also noticed your comments about the similarity of the eye cups and focus/diopter knobs on the SLCs and the Meopta's in Absolute Beethoven's thread here:

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2841527&postcount=7

I noticed a listing of Swarovski patents on the bottom of Page 19 right under the comment about Swarovison above and they do not mention having patents on the eye cups but the focusing system is patented.

Here (at the bottom of page 19 in the above cited operating manual) are listed four (4) Patents.

"Reflux reducing coating: Swarotop."

"Central focusing system with all SLC binoculars."

"Rainguard for binoculars."

"Tripod adapter with quick-lock mechanism."

Bob

Click to expand...

I should just say PA-TAH-TOE , but I think there must be some misinformation or a mistranslation going on here. How could Swarobright coatings be applied to the SLC's lenses when they REFLECT 99.5% of the spectrum? You need the lenses to TRANSMIT light not reflect it. Something's nicht richtig about that statement you quoted. Maybe they used Google Translate.

As to the list of patented items, that might not be complete. Did you read the patent information that someone posted about the EL? It was quite extensive. I also find it curious that Swaro didn't patent the SLC's diopter mechanism. No other company ever copied it, and IMO, it's the best one ever made.

Anyway, my point was, that it's odd that Sawro bothers to patent the shape of the EL, and threatens to sue Nikon for copying a shape that many other optics companies use, the open bridge design, yet the fact that the Meopta B1 and Sawro SLCAlt looked morphologically so much alike as to warrant a paternity test apparently didn't phase them in the least.

Brock

Brock,

The first 2 paragraphs quoted in my post are not contradictory. The 1st paragraph is about the reflecting capacity of the mirrors which catch the light transmitted to them from the (coated) lenses and transfer it to other (coated) lenses (see 2nd paragraph). It does not say anything about the types of coatings on the mirror or lens surfaces.

As far as the Nikon open bridge EDG I; if Swarovski indeed did threaten them with a lawsuit over it then they did Nikon a favor. Nikon's design is crude, and lumpy with it's thick metal caps covering the hinges. They impinge on ones knuckles. They are not beveled off smoothly like Swarovskis are. Besides the EDG II is better looking too. And one more thing: There seems to have never been an official Nikon announcement about the EDG I. The EDG was first announced on March 12, 2010 (my birthday :king: which is why I remember it) and it concerned what we know now as the EDG II.

Also, my quotes above are exactly what Swarovski wrote in it's manual of operations for the SLCs in 2006.

Meanwhile, what do you think Swarovski meant when they said they had patented the "Central focusing system with all SLC binoculars"? Do you think the diopter mechanism is not part of that system?

Bob

‘Klipy’ offered his binocular at a good price, that’s for sure. That’s a good bit better than the prices I’ve seen on this side of the pond. Unfortunately my $12 one-off access fee to Astromart has inexplicably expired, so I won’t be using their classifieds again.

Piecing together the titbits, I surmise the SLC 7x42 development went something like this:
• SLC
• SLC with Swarobright
• SLCneu
• SLC
• further updates, but no longer in the classic 7x42 configuration

Is that correct?

Swarovski should consider adding to their catalogue or website a timeline listing key developments, though I don’t suppose it’s in the company’s interests to promote secondhand sales.

Ceasar: more power does apparently make the SLC 10x42 lighter than the SLC 7x42: the respective weights are 870 g (30.7 oz) and 950 g (33.5 oz) according to a 2007 catalogue. I suppose the 7x42 has bigger prisms, and I know it has bigger eyepieces. Maybe that’s why 10x42 owners don’t often complain about the weight? Or perhaps the average layperson simply expects greater magnification to come with greater weight.

I have a feeling, entirely uninformed, that the real reason manufacturers are dropping the 7x42 configuration is not that there’s no market for it, but that they can’t reasonably use the same prisms for both a 7x42 and a 10x42, whereas they can share prisms between 8x42 and 10x42 models – therefore dumping the 7x42 streamlines manufacturing quite a bit. Anyone know better?

NDhunter: I appreciate the tip on Swarovski serial numbers. Why don’t all manufacturers use such a useful system?

All things considered, it looks like a post-2006 SLC 7x42 is my best bet. Whether I can afford that, or lift it, remains to be seen.

brocknroller said:

Anyway, my point was, that it's odd that Sawro bothers to patent the shape of the EL, and threatens to sue Nikon for copying a shape that many other optics companies use, the open bridge design, yet the fact that the Meopta B1 and Sawro SLCAlt looked morphologically so much alike as to warrant a paternity test apparently didn't phase them in the least.

Click to expand...

Do we know that Swarovski threatened Nikon or that it isn’t extorting fees out of Meopta? The ‘quadrangle’ EDG bordered on ugly and had more than its fair share of technical problems. Maybe Nikon redesigned it only because it was a flop or a warranty liability.

Dorian,

You are probably right about the weights. The 7x would take a larger eyepiece than a 10x would.

As for a post 2006 7 x 42, it might be hard to find. I bought mine as a demo from Eagle Optics immediately after they were discontinued by Swarovski. If I remember correctly it was the only one EO had left. I don't think Swarovski made very many of them over the years.

If you do get one I would recommend you also get the small screw on Swarovski 2x adaptor for it which will give you 14 x 42. It can be put on and taken off quite easily. Then you can handhold the binocular very steadily in a vertical position with 2 hands easier than you can hold a telescope and it is more convenient than lugging a small scope along with you.

Regarding your questions about the putative threat of a patent lawsuit by Swarovski against Nikon regarding their open frame EDG please see my comments about that in Thread #11 herein and above.

Bob

Ceasar: I had bizarrely missed post #11 in this thread, so thanks for drawing my attention to it. Interesting comments. I agree the original EDG was “crude” in some ways.

The press-release situation, like everything else about the original EDG, is murky. But a press release was prepared and sent to some people (British, Polish; it may not have reached America) on 14 March 2008. If it was ever published on Nikon’s UK website it has since vanished. It’s not in Nikon’s own press-release archives, and I can’t find any trace of it on the Wayback Machine. A proper little mystery!

Thanks for the suggestion of the Swarovski Booster. If I knew I would end up with an SLC 7x42 I would jump on Sancho’s Booster, but I don’t.

I can't add much to what has been written already, but I would add a vote of support for the 7x42 SLC.

A few year's ago I resolved to buying a pair of highly-regarded Zeiss Dialyt 7x42. While looking through a pair in store, the sales assistant passed me a pair of the Swarovskis to try. I hadn't really considered them 'til then, but after spending quite some time with both pairs at the store, I came away with the Swaros (pre neu model).

Yes, they are heavy, though the neoprene neck strap helps a little. The view has a slight yellow cast, but they offer a wide and very relaxed view. They handle beautifully and are exceptionally well put together. The eyepiece rain covers are poor, and I've never understood why Swarovski continue with this design after all these years.

I have a few pairs of binoculars, and I always return to using these Swaros. They're a pleasure to use.

Thanks for your thoughts, trealawboy.

I’m tempted to just go for it. However, I recently did that with a Nikon EDG 10x32 (the other option to complement my 8x32, I thought), and it didn’t work out for me: the eye relief wasn’t right with glasses no matter what I did (though it was fine without glasses). I managed to sell it here, but buying and selling gets expensive very quickly. The next binocular I get will have to be the right one.

There are shops in Paris, of course, but they mostly stock new binoculars. Maybe I’m not looking in the right places.

trealawboy said:

The eyepiece rain covers are poor, and I've never understood why Swarovski continue with this design after all these years.

Click to expand...

I'll second that, but both Zeiss Victory FL and Leica Ultravid rain guards work very well on the SLCs and ELs.

John

Swarovski has patented their Rain Guards I believe. See here down among the patents listed:

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2841553&postcount=8

Bob