Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

7 year old 8.5x42 elís ????? Just as good????

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 02:14   #1
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
7 year old 8.5x42 elís ????? Just as good????

Been lurking for years, getting ready to buy a 2010 el 8.5x42 swarovision. I love the field pros, but canít justify the extra dough. I know about the focuser issues on the older models, but was wondering about other diffrences. Besides the obvious, some have mentioned increased rolling ball. This may be a problem, considering i do notice it in the newest pro model. Wish i could compare a new vs. old pair. So thats why i thought iíd ask u all. Should i b concerned. My gut tells me they are optically the same. At least i hope. Just for reference, ive owned 10x42 slc, zeiss victory 10x42 t fl, leica trinovid 8x42 and nikon monarch 8x42. Oh and the first pair was tasco world class 8x42. Thats my 20year binocular progression. Iíve decided the swaro 8.5ís are gonna b the bino to end all binos. Haha!
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 03:50   #2
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrythedog View Post
Been lurking for years, getting ready to buy a 2010 el 8.5x42 swarovision. I love the field pros, but canít justify the extra dough. I know about the focuser issues on the older models, but was wondering about other diffrences. Besides the obvious, some have mentioned increased rolling ball. This may be a problem, considering i do notice it in the newest pro model. Wish i could compare a new vs. old pair. So thats why i thought iíd ask u all. Should i b concerned. My gut tells me they are optically the same. At least i hope. Just for reference, ive owned 10x42 slc, zeiss victory 10x42 t fl, leica trinovid 8x42 and nikon monarch 8x42. Oh and the first pair was tasco world class 8x42. Thats my 20year binocular progression. Iíve decided the swaro 8.5ís are gonna b the bino to end all binos. Haha!
The newest Swaro 10x42 SLC HD is a big improvement over the older model (although I personally prefer the 8x42 SLC-HD). Both models have sufficient distortion to avoid the rolling ball illusion and might be something to consider.
Easier on the pocketbook too.

Good luck.
Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 08:35   #3
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
Has the rolling ball issue lessened from 2010 swarovision to current. Swarovski says it hasn't changed. Some here seem to suggest it has?
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 09:32   #4
Torview
Registered User
 
Torview's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Dartmoor.
Posts: 2,067
Hi Henry, in my humble opinion you can`t really claim that RB exists in the binocular but is more a function of the binocular viewer interface, some will see RB and others not in the same binocular, a bit like CA.

The whole focusser issue is overblown, they function perfectly its just the spring Swarovski put in to prevent diopter creep can cause a difference in tension between directions and some coarseness, but IMHO they have totally sorted it now with the FP.

Personally if I could get a good deal on any good condition EL I`d buy it happily.
Torview is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 11:42   #5
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 2,810
If you search the forum archive, you will find threads discussing changes in the 8.5x42 Swarovision, including substantial changes to the optical formula (lens design) with potential consequences for sharpness and distortion across the field, and for rolling ball. I didn't test the model over most of its life enough to be able to comment myself. I'm not a fan of some aspects of the FieldPro version, so I bought a pre-FP manufactured just before the switch to the current design. For me, that one is the perfect bin for birding, and it serves for butterflies in a pinch (close focus adjustment is too slow to be really good for that--c'mon Swarovski, when will we see variable-ratio focus implemented?).

--AP

Last edited by Alexis Powell : Thursday 14th December 2017 at 11:47.
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 12:24   #6
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
So are we saying more rolling ball for an early 2010 model, or less? I guess thats my root question. Swaro says no difference.
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 13:15   #7
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrythedog View Post
Been lurking for years, getting ready to buy a 2010 el 8.5x42 swarovision. I love the field pros, but canít justify the extra dough. I know about the focuser issues on the older models, but was wondering about other diffrences. Besides the obvious, some have mentioned increased rolling ball. This may be a problem, considering i do notice it in the newest pro model. Wish i could compare a new vs. old pair. So thats why i thought iíd ask u all. Should i b concerned. My gut tells me they are optically the same. At least i hope. Just for reference, ive owned 10x42 slc, zeiss victory 10x42 t fl, leica trinovid 8x42 and nikon monarch 8x42. Oh and the first pair was tasco world class 8x42. Thats my 20year binocular progression. Iíve decided the swaro 8.5ís are gonna b the bino to end all binos. Haha!
Hi Henry,
You answered your own question. I'd say if you see it in the new models you'll see it in the older ones.

Try a Nikon EDG II.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 13:39   #8
Kammerdiner
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 1,754
I don't think the question has ever really been settled. I do recall a member here who directly compared an early to a later SV (maybe it was Kimmo??) and saw no optical changes, but that was already a few years ago.

I doubt Swaro changed the optics but it appears the glass might have been updated and the coatings as well. Remember that RB was the pet project of a member who never actually looked through an SV but sure had a lot to say about it. Without that input the issue has all but died out.

My 8.5 SV will turn seven in a month or two and I like it every bit as much as the day I got it. Still my favorite, although I often prefer the 8x32 SV for its lighter weight.

I hope to see the new CL in a month or two when they arrive. I'll take both SV's with me and see if I can spot any changes with the Fieldpro models. I've been curious about that myself.
Kammerdiner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 22:40   #9
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
Kinda. I thought it can be worse in some models?
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 23:36   #10
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 681
Are you guys saying that rolling ball is in the eye of the beholder, and is not a matter of the optics? (ground in, if you will)
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 14th December 2017, 23:43   #11
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
Are you guys saying that rolling ball is in the eye of the beholder, and is not a matter of the optics? (ground in, if you will)
That is correct, rolling ball only affects around 2% of the population,
that may be sensitive to it. It is one of the most overblown issues on
optics that you may find. That is a shame, if it dissuades from someone
buying a great binocular.

This is from what Zeiss has researched, and reported. Lots on info. on other threads on the site.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 15th December 2017, 00:46   #12
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
That is correct, rolling ball only affects around 2% of the population,
that may be sensitive to it. It is one of the most overblown issues on
optics that you may find. That is a shame, if it dissuades from someone
buying a great binocular.

This is from what Zeiss has researched, and reported. Lots on info. on other threads on the site.

Jerry
Thank you.

I guess I never extracted that particular nugget from all the discussion, and there surely was a great deal of discussion.

It seems to me that it would be in the brain, rather than the eye, as I think about it more.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 15th December 2017, 02:57   #13
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrythedog View Post
Kinda. I thought it can be worse in some models?
With the SLC models it has not been reported AFAIK. It has been "reported" that later EL SV models it is less pronounced.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
That is correct, rolling ball only affects around 2% of the population,
that may be sensitive to it. It is one of the most overblown issues on
optics that you may find. That is a shame, if it dissuades from someone
buying a great binocular.

This is from what Zeiss has researched, and reported. Lots on info. on other threads on the site.

Jerry
Agreed.

For the small percentage that DO see it...is it debilitating? Can you live with it? It's a strange phenomenon that I've never experienced or seen so it's hard for be to get a grip on it.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 15th December 2017, 16:30   #14
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 7,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
With the SLC models it has not been reported AFAIK. It has been "reported" that later EL SV models it is less pronounced.



Agreed.

For the small percentage that DO see it...is it debilitating? Can you live with it? It's a strange phenomenon that I've never experienced or seen so it's hard for be to get a grip on it.
Chuck
I haven't seen this in binos yet either but I did brush up against it with Meopta's brilliant S2 scope, although not in the normal use of that scope. Let me explain. A friend had mentioned that he experienced mild RB with the S2 so I looked out for it when I was reviewing this model and had nearly finished field work with the unit without seeing any RB during panning when, I was about to leave the lake I was visiting, a flight of ducks landed way over to one side of my view. I couldn't resist panning the scope around to see what the ducks were and since the scope had been focused on subjects much closer, the image was a medium grey out-of-focus low contrast mush as I panned it around and boy did the ball roll. It was really obvious but since no real image was visible it wasn't at all disturbing, just startling. I focussed on the ducks and they were nothing special, panned from side to side, slow then quick and guess what? No RB. That was the only time I have seen it apart from on a recent tv show where the camera panned and purported to show the view through some binos and the obviously digitally created bino-image had stinking RB as the camera panned. It was gone in about 2-3 seconds on the screen and i was bouncing up and down saying to Troubadoris: Look, thats what rolling ball is like, but it was gone before she looked up.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 15th December 2017, 18:54   #15
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 681
I have seen it, and have chosen to ignore it. It has pretty much gone away, or I have ceased to be aware of it.

If you have a habit of looking for such phenomena ......... they will drive you crazy. (if you aren't already there)
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 15th December 2017, 19:56   #16
Vespobuteo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Utopia
Posts: 1,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kammerdiner View Post
I don't think the question has ever really been settled. I do recall a member here who directly compared an early to a later SV (maybe it was Kimmo??) and saw no optical changes, but that was already a few years ago.

I doubt Swaro changed the optics but it appears the glass might have been updated and the coatings as well. Remember that RB was the pet project of a member who never actually looked through an SV but sure had a lot to say about it. Without that input the issue has all but died out.
It seems we are still waiting for hard proof for any possible optical changes made over the years.

Sharpness of the SV would be more about getting a perfect sample than the actual age I think.
Vespobuteo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 15th December 2017, 20:18   #17
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,369
Lee, post 14,
I think that you did forget to mention all experimental conditions during your research. Was that not the time that you swallowed just before the actual optical experiment a small glass of yellowish coloured liquid, causing a rolling sensation in your eyes and your brain??????
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 13:46   #18
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
We’ll it sounds like if I love the newer pros, I’m gonna love a 2010 model. While saving quite a few bucks. Thanks everybody who chimed in.
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 15:11   #19
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
Chuck
I haven't seen this in binos yet either but I did brush up against it with Meopta's brilliant S2 scope, although not in the normal use of that scope. Let me explain. A friend had mentioned that he experienced mild RB with the S2 so I looked out for it when I was reviewing this model and had nearly finished field work with the unit without seeing any RB during panning when, I was about to leave the lake I was visiting, a flight of ducks landed way over to one side of my view. I couldn't resist panning the scope around to see what the ducks were and since the scope had been focused on subjects much closer, the image was a medium grey out-of-focus low contrast mush as I panned it around and boy did the ball roll. It was really obvious but since no real image was visible it wasn't at all disturbing, just startling. I focussed on the ducks and they were nothing special, panned from side to side, slow then quick and guess what? No RB. That was the only time I have seen it apart from on a recent tv show where the camera panned and purported to show the view through some binos and the obviously digitally created bino-image had stinking RB as the camera panned. It was gone in about 2-3 seconds on the screen and i was bouncing up and down saying to Troubadoris: Look, thats what rolling ball is like, but it was gone before she looked up.

Lee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
I have seen it, and have chosen to ignore it. It has pretty much gone away, or I have ceased to be aware of it.

If you have a habit of looking for such phenomena ......... they will drive you crazy. (if you aren't already there)
Thanks for y'alls input on this! I will continue in my quest to see it!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 15:14   #20
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrythedog View Post
Weíll it sounds like if I love the newer pros, Iím gonna love a 2010 model. While saving quite a few bucks. Thanks everybody who chimed in.
I think you will!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 15:41   #21
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 7,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Lee, post 14,
I think that you did forget to mention all experimental conditions during your research. Was that not the time that you swallowed just before the actual optical experiment a small glass of yellowish coloured liquid, causing a rolling sensation in your eyes and your brain??????
Gijs van Ginkel
You might just be right Gijs
But I would need to repeat the experiment to be sure within 3 standard deviations.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 15:42   #22
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 7,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
I have seen it, and have chosen to ignore it. It has pretty much gone away, or I have ceased to be aware of it.
This must be how you deal with looking at Connecticut but pronouncing it quite differently.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 16:28   #23
Jack Speer
Registered User
 
Jack Speer's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
For the small percentage that DO see it...is it debilitating? Can you live with it? It's a strange phenomenon that I've never experienced or seen so it's hard for be to get a grip on it.
Yes I can see it, but it has not bothered me yet. It's more visible when I'm looking for it. The trade off is a 100% sweet spot, which I will gladly take (and did ).

If you really want to see it, try panning vertically. It seems more pronounced that way.
Jack Speer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 16th December 2017, 18:13   #24
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by henrythedog View Post
We’ll it sounds like if I love the newer pros, I’m gonna love a 2010 model. While saving quite a few bucks. Thanks everybody who chimed in.
My three-year-old (or at least I have owned them for three years) EL SV still impress me every time I look through them. (It?)

Now if the voices in my head would stop telling me that if I just had a pair of Victory SF I would be able to see stuff better, I would be content.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.

Last edited by Maljunulo : Saturday 16th December 2017 at 18:26.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 19th December 2017, 12:48   #25
henrythedog
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: washington
Posts: 18
Got em. $1500 on ebay. Everything checked out with swaro. Super excited.
henrythedog is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
After a year with an 8.5x42 SV FPro. Torview Swarovski 61 Wednesday 18th April 2018 19:16
Was this year a good year? ChrisKten Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 17 Tuesday 18th August 2009 15:52
Good year/Bad year in the South-East paulwfromtheden Birds & Birding 11 Saturday 14th July 2007 10:31
Hello and a good new year Heinz Ritter Say Hello 7 Tuesday 3rd January 2006 18:26

{googleads}
Opticron - Imagic BGA VHD 8x42 ‚Äď 2018 BBR Award Winner

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.27116108 seconds with 37 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 00:12.