I had no idea where to put this post, so I created this thread...
Review of:
Nikon HG 8X42
Swarovski SLC 7X42
Swarovski 8.5 EL
Leica Ultravid 8X42
I went to Cabela's looking for a pair of Zeiss FL's, but they haven't arrived yet. Since I was in the store I decided to put my time to good use comparing some old and new bins.
Cabela's does not sell new Nikon LX/HG models, but they do sell refurbished Nikon's in their Bargain area. I found a slightly used SLC 7X42 and several 8X42 LX/HG to compare.
As many of you know I use and love a Nikon SE 8X32. It isn't perfect, but the SE view has become an old friend. Naturally, I thought a Nikon roof would be the perfect foul-weather complement. Sorry, Nikon, the LX/HG 8X42 doesn't work for me and I am not sure why. The image is bright, clear, etc. but the focus snap I'm looking for fails to materialize in my eyes. I had the SAME difficulty with the 8X32 LX/HG and, again, I have no explanation. Yes, I got the same result with several pair.
I tested the SLC 7X42 side-by-side with the Nikons and, after looking all over the store (it's a really big store with plenty of mounted animals to look at), I concluded that I preferred the SLC. Yes, the SLC is somewhat old, but it's still a killer bin and so easy to use. The SLC snapped into focus every time and it was as comfortable in my hands as any bin I've used. If Swarovski would reduce the 13' close focus to about 9', brighten the optics a tad, and remove some weight, the SLC 7X42 would be a killer woodland birding bin. Come to think of it, it already is.
Next, I went to the optics shop where there are more bins than you can count except, of course, the new FL's! I asked them to put a Leica Ultravid 8X42 (they didn't have a 7X), a new SLC 7X42, and an 8.5 EL on the countertop for comparison. I spent the next hour working these 3 bins over from top to bottom. The SLC lost the brightness battle, so I put it aside and concentrated on the EL and the Ultravid.
Brightness <Virtual tie>
For my eyes, in this cavernous store, looking at every obscure thing I could find the Ultravid seemed brighter by an amount that was so small it was almost impossible to discern. Has anyone compared EL/Ultravid brightness in a more scientific manner?
Sharpness (center and across the field) <Tie>
Equal. Excellent. Superb.
The loss in sharpness across the fields of these bins is meaningless.
Aberrations <Tie>
If you scan across a vertical beam with either of these bins you will see some bowing as the beam approaches the edge. To my eyes it was a bit more extreme in the Ultravid, but the same effect could be replicated in the EL. I performed this test because I scan forests (vertical beams!) and if this is excessive it can be annoying and distracting. In practice, I don't see this aberration as anything to be concerned about. It's on the edges and it's pretty minor.
Diopter (my eyeglasses correct me to 20/20)
As expected, set to almost 0 on both bins.
Handling <Very slight edge to Ultravid>
Ultravid is lighter and handles very well. I ignored the EL's thumb things and just grabbed it and got comfortable. I could not use the EL the way it was designed but, as I said, I just got comfortable with it!
CA
I really could not measure this, nor is it usually a problem for me.
Focus <EL wins>
Why Leica puts a notch, ratchety, sticky, call-it-what-you-will focus on such a bin is beyond me. It was not silky smooth, it irritated me, at times I felt like I had to overcome a lot of inertia to get it going, etc. You've read the comments before. Maybe it smoothes out over time; I don't know.
The EL focus is something else. I don't know if this is a revised version or not because I have little experience with any older EL model. In any case, I found the focus to be exactly what I like...smoooooth and very precise like the Nikon SE. In contrast, I find the Nikon HG/LX much too fast and finicky. The stickiness of the Leica makes it feel like there are hundreds of preset positions and you're just clicking into them one after another as you adjust the focus.
As I write this, I realize that smooth and precise focus control is so important to me that it may be one of those characteristics that's a deal breaker, or maker for that matter!
Build Quality <EL wins>
There's something about the EL that says "I'm made to last a lifetime". I'll bet the Leica will last forever too, but it didn't speak to me the way the EL did. I'm not happy with the exposure of the focus knobs on either of these bins and I wonder what happens when you drop the bin and it lands directly on the knob? I suppose they are both well protected against the elements. Any thoughts on which model is more rugged?
Conclusions: EL 8.5/42 vs. Ultravid 8X42
Optical tie, EL wins on focus control, Ultravid has slight edge on weight and handling.
If I HAD to buy one of these today I'd go with the EL because I could not, in any way, fault its ergonomics. Optically the two were so close I don't think I would notice a difference.
Any and all comments will be appreciated. Soon, I hope to be able to do a side-by-side comparison with an FL.
John
Review of:
Nikon HG 8X42
Swarovski SLC 7X42
Swarovski 8.5 EL
Leica Ultravid 8X42
I went to Cabela's looking for a pair of Zeiss FL's, but they haven't arrived yet. Since I was in the store I decided to put my time to good use comparing some old and new bins.
Cabela's does not sell new Nikon LX/HG models, but they do sell refurbished Nikon's in their Bargain area. I found a slightly used SLC 7X42 and several 8X42 LX/HG to compare.
As many of you know I use and love a Nikon SE 8X32. It isn't perfect, but the SE view has become an old friend. Naturally, I thought a Nikon roof would be the perfect foul-weather complement. Sorry, Nikon, the LX/HG 8X42 doesn't work for me and I am not sure why. The image is bright, clear, etc. but the focus snap I'm looking for fails to materialize in my eyes. I had the SAME difficulty with the 8X32 LX/HG and, again, I have no explanation. Yes, I got the same result with several pair.
I tested the SLC 7X42 side-by-side with the Nikons and, after looking all over the store (it's a really big store with plenty of mounted animals to look at), I concluded that I preferred the SLC. Yes, the SLC is somewhat old, but it's still a killer bin and so easy to use. The SLC snapped into focus every time and it was as comfortable in my hands as any bin I've used. If Swarovski would reduce the 13' close focus to about 9', brighten the optics a tad, and remove some weight, the SLC 7X42 would be a killer woodland birding bin. Come to think of it, it already is.
Next, I went to the optics shop where there are more bins than you can count except, of course, the new FL's! I asked them to put a Leica Ultravid 8X42 (they didn't have a 7X), a new SLC 7X42, and an 8.5 EL on the countertop for comparison. I spent the next hour working these 3 bins over from top to bottom. The SLC lost the brightness battle, so I put it aside and concentrated on the EL and the Ultravid.
Brightness <Virtual tie>
For my eyes, in this cavernous store, looking at every obscure thing I could find the Ultravid seemed brighter by an amount that was so small it was almost impossible to discern. Has anyone compared EL/Ultravid brightness in a more scientific manner?
Sharpness (center and across the field) <Tie>
Equal. Excellent. Superb.
The loss in sharpness across the fields of these bins is meaningless.
Aberrations <Tie>
If you scan across a vertical beam with either of these bins you will see some bowing as the beam approaches the edge. To my eyes it was a bit more extreme in the Ultravid, but the same effect could be replicated in the EL. I performed this test because I scan forests (vertical beams!) and if this is excessive it can be annoying and distracting. In practice, I don't see this aberration as anything to be concerned about. It's on the edges and it's pretty minor.
Diopter (my eyeglasses correct me to 20/20)
As expected, set to almost 0 on both bins.
Handling <Very slight edge to Ultravid>
Ultravid is lighter and handles very well. I ignored the EL's thumb things and just grabbed it and got comfortable. I could not use the EL the way it was designed but, as I said, I just got comfortable with it!
CA
I really could not measure this, nor is it usually a problem for me.
Focus <EL wins>
Why Leica puts a notch, ratchety, sticky, call-it-what-you-will focus on such a bin is beyond me. It was not silky smooth, it irritated me, at times I felt like I had to overcome a lot of inertia to get it going, etc. You've read the comments before. Maybe it smoothes out over time; I don't know.
The EL focus is something else. I don't know if this is a revised version or not because I have little experience with any older EL model. In any case, I found the focus to be exactly what I like...smoooooth and very precise like the Nikon SE. In contrast, I find the Nikon HG/LX much too fast and finicky. The stickiness of the Leica makes it feel like there are hundreds of preset positions and you're just clicking into them one after another as you adjust the focus.
As I write this, I realize that smooth and precise focus control is so important to me that it may be one of those characteristics that's a deal breaker, or maker for that matter!
Build Quality <EL wins>
There's something about the EL that says "I'm made to last a lifetime". I'll bet the Leica will last forever too, but it didn't speak to me the way the EL did. I'm not happy with the exposure of the focus knobs on either of these bins and I wonder what happens when you drop the bin and it lands directly on the knob? I suppose they are both well protected against the elements. Any thoughts on which model is more rugged?
Conclusions: EL 8.5/42 vs. Ultravid 8X42
Optical tie, EL wins on focus control, Ultravid has slight edge on weight and handling.
If I HAD to buy one of these today I'd go with the EL because I could not, in any way, fault its ergonomics. Optically the two were so close I don't think I would notice a difference.
Any and all comments will be appreciated. Soon, I hope to be able to do a side-by-side comparison with an FL.
John