Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

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.

Similar quality to 10X42 Swaro.?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 13:25   #1
pluton
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: spain
Posts: 12
Similar quality to 10X42 Swaro.?

Hello,
I have occasionally been able to use some 8X32 or 8X42 but, truly, I have always felt that I was missing some magnification, for this very reason I am looking for some binocular 10x42, I usually observe in open lands not in forests or densely vegetated sites .. .yo yengo a binocular 10x50 but this is very heavy, porro prism, I was behind a 10x42 Swaroski secondhand ... but this one disappeared ... some fellow friend told me about the quality of other binoculars, such as the Canon 10X42 L IS or the Zeiss Victory FL 10X42 ..., and I have even read in this forum about a model like the 10X40 Habicht ... but in your opinion or experience these models have the same quality and solidity as the Swaroski 10X42 model? ?
thanks for your comments
Pluto.
pluton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 14:44   #2
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Swarovski's Habicht porro line is every bit as solid and and as quality as their SV roof line. I highly recommend the Habicht 10x40 W because it is one of my favorite binoculars. It will be just as bright as the Swarovski SV 10x42 because it has higher transmission, it will be much lighter at 23 oz. compared to 29 oz. for the SV and it will give you a more realistic 3D view and on-axis it is just as good as anything plus at $700.00 it is a third the price of the SV. The SV will be sharper at the edge and have a flatter field and the focuser will be easier to move. The Habicht has less eye relief than the SV so it usually doesn't work as good if you wear glasses. I have three SV's(8.5x42, 8x32 and 10x32) and I usually grab a Habicht. I have the 8x30 W, 7x42 and 10x40 W Habicht.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Swarovski-T...0AAOSw-ZBdFfUP

Last edited by [email protected] : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 15:04.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 15:28   #3
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 9,178
If a bigger field of view is important to you then you may want to try out Zeiss's SF 10x42 which has an area of view at 1,000 metres 14.8% times bigger than the Swaro EL and 23.5% bigger than the Habicht. This gives you more for your money each time you look through your binos.

The SF is not as sharp as the Swaro EL at the edge of the field, although it is not unsharp, but is its equal in the centre, and has IMHO a better balance making it easier to hold steady.

If you can, you should try them all to find out which suits you best.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 16:17   #4
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Swarovski's Habicht porro line is every bit as solid and and as quality as their SV roof line. I highly recommend the Habicht 10x40 W because it is one of my favorite binoculars. It will be just as bright as the Swarovski SV 10x42 because it has higher transmission, it will be much lighter at 23 oz. compared to 29 oz. for the SV and it will give you a more realistic 3D view and on-axis it is just as good as anything plus at $700.00 it is a third the price of the SV. The SV will be sharper at the edge and have a flatter field and the focuser will be easier to move. The Habicht has less eye relief than the SV so it usually doesn't work as good if you wear glasses. I have three SV's(8.5x42, 8x32 and 10x32) and I usually grab a Habicht.

Your observations nicely summarized the minute improvements in binocular performance achieved over the past 30 years. Binocular design has reached its apex.

Last edited by Omid : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 16:24.
Omid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 17:05   #5
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omid View Post
Your observations nicely summarized the minute improvements in binocular performance achieved over the past 30 years. Binocular design has reached its apex.
Attributed to Max Planck in 1924

"When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly...he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed, almost fully matured science...Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries."
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Intellectual curiosity is as rare as common sense.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 13th July 2019, 18:49   #6
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
Attributed to Max Planck in 1924

"When I began my physical studies [in Munich in 1874] and sought advice from my venerable teacher Philipp von Jolly...he portrayed to me physics as a highly developed, almost fully matured science...Possibly in one or another nook there would perhaps be a dust particle or a small bubble to be examined and classified, but the system as a whole stood there fairly secured, and theoretical physics approached visibly that degree of perfection which, for example, geometry has had already for centuries."
Of course. There is no limit to physics. The problem with improving "image quality" of binoculars is not related to quantum physics, it is related to elementary mathematics: the minimum value of a positive quantity is zero. Binocular designers have been focused on minimizing aberrations and as we have seen in the past 20 to 30 years, there is not much room left there.

This is not say that there is no way to meaningfully improve binoculars. Progress with image stabilization is an an example of where "user experience" with binoculars has been and can be improved. To your point actually, there are also areas with classical (not-electronic) binocular design that we might be able to improve the user experience: match the binoculars with the stereoscopic visual characteristics of the human eye. That's the area I am exploring myself.


Last edited by Omid : Saturday 13th July 2019 at 19:34.
Omid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 19:04   #7
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omid View Post
To your point actually, there are also areas with classical (not-electronic) binocular design that we might be able to improve the user experience: match the binoculars with the stereoscopic visual characteristics of the human eye. That's the area I am exploring myself.

Interesting.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Intellectual curiosity is as rare as common sense.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 19:14   #8
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,576
Swarovski Vs Zeiss, who will win in total sales after-all, I always say follow the money.

Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 14th July 2019, 19:49   #9
Omid
Registered User

 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Los Angeles, California
Posts: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maljunulo View Post
Interesting.
Yes. It is interesting indeed. Here is one example of a disconnect:

Imagine you are looking at a distant scene. What's the field of view if you use one of your eyes? How much FOV do you gain if you use both eyes?

Now imaging doing same using binoculars. What's the field of view of if you look through one binocular barrel? How much FOV do you gain if you look through both barrels?

Omid is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 13:28   #10
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,030
Hi,

to the o.p. - if money is not an object the already mentioned Zeiss SF is probably the best package at the moment - very wide field for a 10x42, large sweet spot, ok ER for most glasses (18mm) and waterproof.

If you want sth not quite as nice but a bit cheaper, a used Nikon SE, a Nikon E2 or the already mentioned Habicht 10x40 might also be interesting. Very quickly:

Habicht waterproof, super sharp on axis and very hight transmission, narrowish 6.2 deg field and no flattening, ER is very short, certainly unusable with glasses non-armoured version is quite light
SE not waterproof, sharp on axis, good field flattening, narrowish 6.0 deg fov, quite light, good ER for use with glasses
E2 not waterproof, sharp on axis and a good sweet spot, very wide fov - a tad more than the SF, ER short, will not work for most glasses, light.

PS: the Canon 10x42 IS is a special case... the optics is pretty good, although maybe not quite up to current alphas... but unless you are superman or use a tripod, you will see more detail with them than with any other 10x pair. But they're not light and of course electronic, so plenty of things to go wrong and remain unrepairable when spare parts get rare... so far they're still in production...

Joachim, who likes his pair of SE 10x42...

Last edited by jring : Monday 15th July 2019 at 13:31. Reason: addes Canon IS remarks.
jring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 14:41   #11
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by jring View Post
Hi,

to the o.p. - if money is not an object the already mentioned Zeiss SF is probably the best package at the moment - very wide field for a 10x42, large sweet spot, ok ER for most glasses (18mm) and waterproof.

If you want sth not quite as nice but a bit cheaper, a used Nikon SE, a Nikon E2 or the already mentioned Habicht 10x40 might also be interesting. Very quickly:

Habicht waterproof, super sharp on axis and very hight transmission, narrowish 6.2 deg field and no flattening, ER is very short, certainly unusable with glasses non-armoured version is quite light
SE not waterproof, sharp on axis, good field flattening, narrowish 6.0 deg fov, quite light, good ER for use with glasses
E2 not waterproof, sharp on axis and a good sweet spot, very wide fov - a tad more than the SF, ER short, will not work for most glasses, light.

PS: the Canon 10x42 IS is a special case... the optics is pretty good, although maybe not quite up to current alphas... but unless you are superman or use a tripod, you will see more detail with them than with any other 10x pair. But they're not light and of course electronic, so plenty of things to go wrong and remain unrepairable when spare parts get rare... so far they're still in production...

Joachim, who likes his pair of SE 10x42...
Don't forget the Habicht 10x40 W porro is much lighter, has higher transmission and a much better 3D stereoscopic view making it more realistic than the Zeiss 10x42 SF. This made a big difference picking animals out of the woods in Yellowstone National Park and the view is more realistic than an SF or SV. Don't discount this advantage. It makes a big difference.

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 15th July 2019 at 14:50.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 16:00   #12
pluton
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: spain
Posts: 12
Thank you all for your opinions and advice ..
On the one hand the stabilized image of the Canon powerfully calls me my interest but I am scared of possible repairs, possibly expensive!
On the model Nikon SE I read that it has a tendency to blackout, something that scares me even more ..., the Nikon E2 has 8X, right?
Maybe the Zeiss SF or some FL t * or the cheaper Habicht 10X40 could be good candidates ..
Pluto
pluton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 16:33   #13
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by pluton View Post
Thank you all for your opinions and advice ..
On the one hand the stabilized image of the Canon powerfully calls me my interest but I am scared of possible repairs, possibly expensive!
On the model Nikon SE I read that it has a tendency to blackout, something that scares me even more ..., the Nikon E2 has 8X, right?
Maybe the Zeiss SF or some FL t * or the cheaper Habicht 10X40 could be good candidates ..
Pluto
Hi,

the SE does indeed blackout for some without glasses - for me it's just fine. There is a 10x35 variant of the E2.

As for the weight mentioned by Dennis - the non-armoured Habicht is indeed quite light - just as the SE. The E2 is even lighter...

I'm personally not a big fan of the Habicht series - they have their strong points like transmission and center sharpness but also quite a lot of flaws, like super stiff and slow focus, haze and flare problems in the 8x30 and a super narrow fov due to undersize prisms and non-wide angle EPs in the 7x42... so the 10x40 would be my choice if I had to choose one of them, as it is the least flawed... and be it to compare with the SE ;-)

Joachim
jring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 20:13   #14
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
"I'm personally not a big fan of the Habicht series - they have their strong points like transmission and center sharpness but also quite a lot of flaws, like super stiff and slow focus, haze and flare problems in the 8x30 and a super narrow fov due to undersize prisms and non-wide angle EPs in the 7x42... so the 10x40 would be my choice if I had to choose one of them, as it is the least flawed... and be it to compare with the SE."

Since I have been using the Habicht's extensively I have become an advocate of them whereas in the past I have criticized them for the problems you are mentioning. What I have personally found is a lot of these problems are blown out of proportion by people that have really never tried to use the Habicht's in the field like I have. The slow stiff focus is really just a matter of adjusting to it after being used to the sometimes over easy spongy focusers on many roof prism binoculars. After having some MIC roofs and even the Nikon EDG which had too much gear lash or play in the focuser the nice tight direct focuser on the Habicht that doesn't move after you set your focus is a welcome change. One reason the Habicht 8x30 shows more glare than some other binoculars is the objective lens is so close to the end of the objective tube so by putting some sun shades on it or do what I do and simply be aware of where the sun is and you can greatly reduce the glare. There is hardly any binocular that you can look very near the sun without getting some glare. The 7x42 Habicht does not have undersize prisms it has a narrower FOV due to the fact Swarovski chose to use a simple Kellner Eyepiece with less optical surfaces to increase transmission and decrease the overall weight of the binocular. The narrower FOV is the price you pay for 96% transmission and a 22 oz. 42mm binocular. It was probably designed as a lightweight, low light simple to use and carry hunting binocular. It may have a narrower FOV but man is it bright and sharp and like most 7x42's it has really easy eye placement due to the large exit pupil! I sometimes I get it out at dusk just too look at stuff I can't see with my other binoculars. If you are so turned off by the flaws everbody talks about with the Habicht's you are missing out on some excellent optics. I don't think you will find a brighter, lighter, sharper on-axis binocular with a fantastic 3D view for a 1/3 the price of the alpha's. As far as comparing the Habicht to the EII or SE there is none. The Habicht is much brighter than either and has a sparkle that neither Nikon has. The EII or SE seem lackluster in comparison even though they are fine binoculars. The Habicht has better glass and coatings than either the EII or SE that is why the transmission is so high. HT glass and high end coatings equal high transmission. The Habicht has Swarovski's best glass and EL coatings so you know it has to be good.

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 15th July 2019 at 20:23.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 20:24   #15
jgraider
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: West Texas
Posts: 1,299
Problem is Dennis, you sing the praises of your current binos as "being the best ever", no matter what you have at the time. When you recycle those on Ebay, whatever you wind up with is the new "best ever". Glad you like your equipment, but you need to give it a rest. The SLC HD's are fabulous binos, period.
jgraider is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 21:47   #16
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
"As far as comparing the Habicht to the EII or SE there is none. The Habicht is much brighter than either and has a sparkle that neither Nikon has. The EII or SE seem lackluster in comparison even though they are fine binoculars. The Habicht has better glass and coatings than either the EII or SE that is why the transmission is so high. HT glass and high end coatings equal high transmission. The Habicht has Swarovski's best glass and EL coatings so you know it has to be good.
Hi Dennis,

it's ok that you like your Habichts at the moment (although you have liked quite a few other bins over the years ;-)

I have compared my E2 8x30 and a pair of current Habicht 8x30 side by side a few years ago and I noticed the flaring and how much better the E2 handled the situation. Plus I could barely focus the damn thing - this probably will get better after a thousand or so full focus travels... but if you have a new pair, no fun.

The idea that Swaro did use Kellner EPs in the 7x42 on purpose for better transmission might have been true in the 50s when these models were designed. But modern examples deliver 94% transmission regardless of eyepiece design - see Gijs' reviews with transmission data for the 8x30 with wide angle EPs and the sad 7x42 with Kellners.

https://www.houseofoutdoor.com/wp-co...-FEBR-2016.pdf
https://www.houseofoutdoor.com/testr...ember_2011.pdf

As for the weight - the weight difference between a Kellner and an Erfle EP in the sizes needed for 8x30 or 7x42 bins is not really a big deal (unlike for astro EPs where one example can get heavier than your average pair of binoculars).

I'd say that Swaro used the same prisms and prism housings for the whole series and that worked well with the 4mm exit pupils of the 8x30 and 10x40 pairs.
The 7x42 with 6mm had a wider light cone and in order to not have nasty vigneting, they used a Kellner with a small field stop to fix that.

Joachim, who does not want a super bright view in bright daylight - this often means lots of stray light or too large an exit pupil for the situation. Contrast is important!

Last edited by jring : Monday 15th July 2019 at 21:50.
jring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 22:08   #17
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 153
Hi, the Canon IS is a no brainer for wide open spaces. That's what I have and they are amazing. There's no comparison with IS and non IS at long distances. I've used the old 15x IS for about 8 years and didn't have any issues. The new 14 IS are much better and lighter. The 12x is on sale by Adorama on eBay for $600 (I think). The link is in the Binocular Bargain thread. If you don't like them, then return them. This forum has a lot of super knowledgeable guys. I don't understand 90% what they talk about when they go deep. But, if you are able to enjoy the amazing view and not worry about all the other stuff then I think you will agree.

I'm not trying to knock the guys who go deep. I guess I'm just too stoopid and that helps me keep it simple.
Good luck.
Dave
Super Dave is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 22:59   #18
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
I tried the New Canon 12x32 and 14x32 IS and I absolutely hated them. The eye relief was way too long for the eye cups for me. I kind of feel that is why they cut the price by 1/2. Just saying.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 15th July 2019, 23:45   #19
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,432
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgraider View Post
Problem is Dennis, you sing the praises of your current binos as "being the best ever", no matter what you have at the time. When you recycle those on Ebay, whatever you wind up with is the new "best ever". Glad you like your equipment, but you need to give it a rest. The SLC HD's are fabulous binos, period.
It's kind of getting out of hand isn't it? Again.....
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 00:07   #20
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 153
Yea Dennis, I agree that Canon could have done a lot better with the eyecups. But, it's the view that can't be beat for long distance viewing by hand. I've accepted that the eyecups suck and they don't bother me one bit. (I take my glasses off and roll down the eyecups. They need to be rolled down to get the full view. A little work but it's worth it.)
It's kind of like going bald. When it started falling out I tried the Rogaine until I realized that was snake oil (and growing hair on my palms). Once I accepted being bald it quit bothering me and now wouldn't go back to hair.

Last edited by Super Dave : Tuesday 16th July 2019 at 00:13.
Super Dave is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 03:27   #21
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Dave. It is just the new Canon's I had issues with the eye cups. All the other Canon's I have never had a problem with them. They usually worked well.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 03:31   #22
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
I have 14 binoculars including 3 SV's and I am not saying the Habicht's are the best for everybody but I think a lot of people don't try them because of some of the issues with them. They may not work for everybody but I am just saying give them a try.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 05:49   #23
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
It's kind of getting out of hand isn't it? Again.....
Chuck. i think we all kind of defend the binocular we like or own to a certain extent. I have heard many, many times from you how much you like your 8x32 SV's and how much you dislike the Habicht's. It is just personal preference really in the end isn't. They are all good binoculars really. We all have different tastes.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 06:05   #24
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgraider View Post
Problem is Dennis, you sing the praises of your current binos as "being the best ever", no matter what you have at the time. When you recycle those on Ebay, whatever you wind up with is the new "best ever". Glad you like your equipment, but you need to give it a rest. The SLC HD's are fabulous binos, period.
I think we are all guilty of pushing the binocular we own or like to a certain extent including you. I do not recycle binoculars on Ebay. I did not say anything critical about the SLC HD's. I don't know where that came from. I think they are great binoculars.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 16th July 2019 at 14:52.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 16th July 2019, 06:07   #25
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
Yea Dennis, I agree that Canon could have done a lot better with the eyecups. But, it's the view that can't be beat for long distance viewing by hand. I've accepted that the eyecups suck and they don't bother me one bit. (I take my glasses off and roll down the eyecups. They need to be rolled down to get the full view. A little work but it's worth it.)
It's kind of like going bald. When it started falling out I tried the Rogaine until I realized that was snake oil (and growing hair on my palms). Once I accepted being bald it quit bothering me and now wouldn't go back to hair.
I just shave my head every day. That way I don't have to worry bout it.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
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
Similar Designs: Victory HT vs Swarovski SLC in 10x42's! Theo98 Zeiss 12 Monday 1st June 2015 15:06
Handling of the Swaro 10x42 EL, Leica 10x42 HD? spiralcoil Leica 2 Tuesday 13th July 2010 10:16
Nikon 10x42 HGL or Swaro 10x42 SLC?? harley1450 Nikon 4 Thursday 15th January 2009 20:41
Swaro DCB or something similar. Suffolkringer Digiscoping Adapters 6 Sunday 26th March 2006 06:14
10x42 or similar? RockyRacoon Binoculars 9 Thursday 24th February 2005 23:02

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.23683691 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:26.