• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

2019 - New models EL (1 Viewer)

The WX are special optically. Get them in the same size and weight package as “normal” bins and you could name your price. Looking through anything else after the WX just feels very poor and tunnel vision.

Peter
 
The WX is a special glass, under a dark sky, I have enjoyed the views. Per my discussions with the owner, they are 10X, and under less than perfect skies with light pollution, he will reach for a 12 or high mag. The views in the day are very nice, but to really appreciate it at its current weight, it would be on a mono pod or tripod depending on the individual.

On topic, what Gijs said in post 128.

Andy W.
 
Last edited:
I hear what I hear from good sources....

Just trying to keep you guys informed ....Not my fault if they change there minds about new models...

If that's not good enough ....Boot me ....

Cheers Tim
 
Chosun, post 130,
The process I described in post 128 does not take 10 years, but that is the way the development of new products certainly in the higher price range frequently occur. Some top-companies have customer groups to identify the needs/wishes of customers (birders-hunters-travellers) for instruments that fulfill their needs. Seems a wise approach to me.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
I hear what I hear from good sources....

Just trying to keep you guys informed ....Not my fault if they change there minds about new models...

If that's not good enough ....Boot me ....

Cheers Tim

Tim, please list one example of when a development / rumour from your trusted sources has proved to fruition. By the way, it is their minds not there.

Perhaps you might consider ceasing putting out consistent rumours, it does get quite tedious.

Thanks, Pat
 
So the problem now for Swarovski is: What’s going to meet expectations in terms of similar significant innovation?
<snip>

In terms of possible directions for Swarovski:

Electronics
The most significant increase to practical performance in any flagship line, would be by the inclusion of Image Stabilisation technology
- especially so when used while standing without any other support

However, it would:
- necessarily add significantly to both bulk and weight (e.g. the Canon 10x40 IS is the size and weight of a conventional 10x50, and in a far less ergonomic package), and
- as with all electronics have reliability, durability, longevity and obsolescence issues

Don't forget stabilisation does not need to rely on electronics. The Zeiss 20x60S and the 20x60S Mono have a mechanical stabiliser that works very well indeed.

Optics
There is probably the least significant potential here. Looking at the cross-section views of various premium optics, what’s striking is their general conformity to common patterns
(with the main differences being in eyepiece complexity, depending on whether a flat field view is required)
i.e. optically there’s generally one best way to accomplish a desired outcome, and nothing to be gained by unnecessarily complex alternatives

Don't forget a switch to a better prism system might improve the optics more than, say, some changes to the field flatteners and so on. The SP prism, now almost universally used in the majority of compact binoculars, is weaker than AK prisms and *any* porro system. In fact, of the three roof prism types used in binoculars (SP, AK and Uppendahl) the SP is the one with the greatest weaknesses.

Sure, SP prisms are pretty good nowadays, however, at the level we're talking about here any of the other types would make a (visible) difference IMHO.

My own favourite would be a binocular with Perger prisms ... :t: I'd order it unseen as long as it isn't too heavy.

Hermann
 
...Perhaps the possibilities for significant binocular innovation - within the twin constraints of compactness and light weight - have reached a plateau...

No no no, you've forgotten a very important category: FOCUS CONTROL. The Swarovski EL SV have decent close focus for butterflying and the like, but it is nearly unusable because it is so _terribly slow_ to adjust. If the ratio were increased, we would lose precise focus at distance, which wouldn't be good for birding. The solution is variable-ratio focus. For those of us who regularly use bins for close viewing, and especially for those of us who are constantly switching from 5 feet to infinity, variable-ratio focus would be a SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT. Why do so few bins (e.g. Pentax Papilio, discontinued Brunton Epoch, discontinued Minox HG) make use of it? I think it is silly to give a bin excellent close-focus spec (as many modern bins do) and not also give it the focus control needed to make use of that capability. This is low-hanging fruit, easily achieved with existing technology.

--AP
 
No no no, you've forgotten a very important category: FOCUS CONTROL. The Swarovski EL SV have decent close focus for butterflying and the like, but it is nearly unusable because it is so _terribly slow_ to adjust. If the ratio were increased, we would lose precise focus at distance, which wouldn't be good for birding. The solution is variable-ratio focus. For those of us who regularly use bins for close viewing, and especially for those of us who are constantly switching from 5 feet to infinity, variable-ratio focus would be a SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT. Why do so few bins (e.g. Pentax Papilio, discontinued Brunton Epoch, discontinued Minox HG) make use of it? I think it is silly to give a bin excellent close-focus spec (as many modern bins do) and not also give it the focus control needed to make use of that capability. This is low-hanging fruit, easily achieved with existing technology.

--AP

+1 :t:



Chosun :gh:
 
…………...
The faster focus was one reason along with shorter length and slightly lighter weight. Really the final decision resulted from being fatigued from thinking about it all too much. I just decided to go with the FL since I was familiar with it and knew it would work well for me ... I was over-thinking everything and wanted an end to it (!)
I made a good choice and I'm feeling satisfied with what I have ……….
………...

posts #133-135: I was pretty much in the same boat, it seems. For me, the major deal breaker was the roller ball problem with the Swaros.

My only gripe with the FL 8x32 is that I'm somewhat unhappy with the reddish coating as outlined in another thread https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=378122. Wish I had bought an earlier version. My original notion that it might have to do with Lotutec was definitely wrong, however.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top