• 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.

Swarovski must have fixed the glare issues in the SV 8x32. (1 Viewer)

No "cost" whatever as long as the baffles are sized and positioned properly. Also virtually no additional production cost.

Dennis,

The 8x32 ELSV has similarly bad internal reflections of the same type as the 8x30 Habicht. If the Habicht was so unacceptable to you why did it take several months and a particularly difficult lighting situation for you to suddenly notice the problem? Inconsistent observations from different observers or from the same observer at different times are why we need photos of the interior of a recent 8x32 ELSV to determine if any actual change has been made.

Coopershawk,

Sorry, I didn't notice you had already posted a link to the photos.

Henry
 
Last edited:
No "cost" whatever as long as the baffles are sized and positioned properly. Also virtually no additional production cost. ...

Henry

Hi Henry,

Assuming the glare problem has been corrected, it would really be interesting if Swarovski could now fix the older models when they are sent in for repair. That's about the only company I would even speculate about doing that sort of thing since they did 'upgrade' my 8x30 SLC Type II twice since 1993.

Ed
 
I think the glare thing is a non-issue for 90% of users. We have those on here
who can criticize and find a problem in every optic. I suspect Swarovski designed
this binocular with expertise, and if it was a problem it would be corrected. The Swarovision
has been out for 8 years now, and the 8x32 still remains the top of the alpha heap, by
most users.

I have owned the EL 8x32 and now the SV, and the ergos. the wide 8* view, and
brightness, sharp, flat field view, make it a very nice binocular. ;)

Jerry
 
No "cost" whatever as long as the baffles are sized and positioned properly. Also virtually no additional production cost.

Dennis,

The 8x32 ELSV has similarly bad internal reflections of the same type as the 8x30 Habicht. If the Habicht was so unacceptable to you why did it take several months and a particularly difficult lighting situation for you to suddenly notice the problem? Inconsistent observations from different observers or from the same observer at different times are why we need photos of the interior of a recent 8x32 ELSV to determine if any actual change has been made.

Coopershawk,

Sorry, I didn't notice you had already posted a link to the photos.

Henry
I saw veiling glare which completely covered the FOV with the Habicht 8x30 W while observing at steep upward angles in bright sunlight and with the SV 8x32 in the same situation I did not observe this. For me the Habicht 8x30 W was unusable and the SV 8x32 was not. I have heard that less baffling in a binocular makes for easier eye placement and that is why the SV's use less baffling and that is one reason they have such easy eye placement and an easy view. Has anybody ever heard this? I know there are trade offs in all optical designs. Could this be one of them? Jerry, very good post. I like your posts. They are to the point and you say a LOT with few words. You obviously have had a lot of binoculars and you have a lot of knowledge and experience. Another poster I really appreciate is Chuck. Great style and he always includes those great pictures and he has a LOT of binoculars to draw experience from. Of course Henry Link is our technical wizard. There is a lot of optical knowledge on Bird Forum and it can be very helpful! I agree with elkcub in that Swarovski is one of the few companies that will upgrade your binocular when you send it in for repair and it seems they make ongoing improvements in their binoculars in response to feedback which a lot of manufacturers don't do. That is why I think they made some changes to improve the glare on the SV 8x32. Dries1 for me it would be a hard decision if I had to decide between the SV 8x32 and the SV 8.5x42. The bigger binocular is more technically perfect probably but the little SV 8x32 has more WOW. It just impresses because it is good yet so small and compact.
 
Last edited:
I have a 2016 8.5x42 and a 2018 8x32, I have reported many times how my 2012 8x32 suffered with terrible veiling glare, thus far my new example does seem better, but I have no theory to explain why.

Waiting for Winter to see if I still feel this way.
 
Yesterday I went on a long hike: sunny weather, blue sky with some clouds, water surdaces, sunrays in the surfaces, green opasture land, trees. Took my 8x32 EL : no sign of glare at all.
Conclusion: most people in Holland are inocculated against measles and therefore may never see glare.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Gijs,

Isn't your 8x32 EL the original pre-ELSV model? I haven't tested that one for internal reflections, but since the optical design is completely different from the ELSV perhaps there is no glare problem with it, even for the unvaccinated. ;)

Henry
 
Henry:

I have discussed the glare issue of the SV 8x32 with a Swaro engineer a few years ago. His comment was that there is no simple way in which the current design can be modified to reduce glare (I guess he meant to also say: without compromising other optical parameters). He also tried to convince me that most glare falls outside the EP, so a change was not really needed, a claim I did not agree with---there are conspicuous reflections at the edge of the EP. Anyway, my point is that using extra baffling might look like a simple operation to you/us, but if there were no trade-offs associated with it I am sure that Swaro would have implemented it by now.

Peter
 
Gijs and Dennis:

To test the resistance to glare of the SV 8x32 (or of any other bino for that matter) you should use them under a cloudy sky by looking at a dark area---in such a case the eye pupil is open and glare, if present, becomes visible. If the binos are used in sunny weather then your pupils are closed and most glare is filtered out, or at least it can be eliminated by slightly re-positioning the binos.

Peter.
 
I think the glare thing is a non-issue for 90% of users. We have those on here
who can criticize and find a problem in every optic. I suspect Swarovski designed
this binocular with expertise, and if it was a problem it would be corrected. The Swarovision
has been out for 8 years now, and the 8x32 still remains the top of the alpha heap, by
most users.

I have owned the EL 8x32 and now the SV, and the ergos. the wide 8* view, and
brightness, sharp, flat field view, make it a very nice binocular. ;)

Jerry

I agree; the trick is, to find an instrument which works best for you and get to know/understand it's limitations (all makes/models have them). If you don't push them beyond their limitations or, if you do, don't expect them to perform without showing these limitations, you won't have issues or suffer extreme 'binocular envy' as a result :t:.

RB
 
Henry:

I have discussed the glare issue of the SV 8x32 with a Swaro engineer a few years ago. His comment was that there is no simple way in which the current design can be modified to reduce glare (I guess he meant to also say: without compromising other optical parameters). He also tried to convince me that most glare falls outside the EP, so a change was not really needed, a claim I did not agree with---there are conspicuous reflections at the edge of the EP. Anyway, my point is that using extra baffling might look like a simple operation to you/us, but if there were no trade-offs associated with it I am sure that Swaro would have implemented it by now.

Peter

Hi Peter,

I don't think I quite buy that. In the Leica 8x32 Ultravid we have an example of a binocular with essentially identical objective elements and the same prism and yet excellent suppression of internal reflections.

If you look at the interior photos you see two bright rings (the objective cell and the focusing lens cell). Those reflections could be easily blocked by a knife edged baffle or shallow cone attached directly to their back sides. The prism edge reflections just outside of the rings are a little less of a problem since they lie on a circle about 5.5mm in diameter. Those could be dealt with by slightly increasing the size of the first prism to place them further away from the exit pupil or by placing a baffle between the prisms or a combination of both so that the baffling is not placed so close to the edge of the light cone as to cause a significant increase in vignetting of the field edge.

Henry
 
Last edited:
Hi Henry,

I did not quite buy their arguments either. Given the fact that additional baffling would incur only a minor extra production cost, I am wondering why the SV 8x32 is not well baffled. Maybe most people are not sensitive to glare, so why bother. However, even if that was true, many reviewers of binos (Allbinos, etc.) take points away for internal reflections/glare, so why lose points when a simple solution to avoid that is available? I am afraid that the answer is that Swaro engineers experimented with extra baffling in the SV 8x32 and the result was not to their liking, for a reason that beats me.

Peter
 
Henry:

We see mention of other 30-32 mm binoculars that may have some issues with glare.

I suppose stopping down the smaller objective models, is more difficult due to size
constraints, compared to 42-50 mm.
Also consider the Leica Ultravid compared to the Swarovision, the flat field eyepiece is more complex, so that may be another consideration, where a simple baffle may not work.
I am sure Swarovski has worked with all of these things into the design.

Jerry
 
Hi All just wondering i have 2004 8.32 el is it worth upgrading to the swarovision model I also have first model 8.5 -42 el WHENcomparing these two side by side i for the cannot see much of an optical difference between these two MAYBE my eyes arent optically trained to see the diffenence THANKS all Just to add the 8.5 el is the first swarovision model which i think is one awesome binocular
 
Last edited:
I too use a 2004 8x32EL and am reluctant to 'upgrade'. The SV FPs are sharp to the field edge and a little brighter but their ergonomics are inferior imho. Bear in mind that you will have to pay twice as much (less trade-in/resale of course) for the new model. Best thing to do is try them side by side and judge for yourself whether the upgrade would be worthwhile to you.

RB
 
"...Maybe most people are not sensitive to glare, so why bother..." That is, of course, written by Peter as possibly the Swarovski designers' attitude. It seems to me that more precise would be "...not disturbed by/worried about glare..." A user can not see it, or see it and tolerate or not tolerate it.

That applies to both flare and veiling glare as follows. If there is flare pretty much everyone sees it though in different ways depending on their vision e.g. presence of cataract. Veiling glare is induced in some models with some users because they wear glasses and is not seen in those models by other users. It may possibly be (I am not sure of this) induced or aggravated also by other vision problems in the user e.g. cataract again.
 
It seems strange that bino manufacturers spend so much time and money eradicating CA [and advertising the fact, with HD this and that], when most buyers would have never heard of or known of its' existence.

Then, they go and ignore something easy to see, like glare...
 
Hi,

To see the veiling glare is not needed to be a Hidden Science Expert!!!! It can be seen, clearly, looking toward the sun, not directly but at a very close angle. In that circumstances the viewing in almost all binoculars, Alpha ones, I know, get a "milky" glare, veiling glare that reduces substantially the contrast and the general definition. Any person can see this. It is not a subjective matter!!! The ONLY binocular I saw, almost impervious to this has been the Leica NOCTIVID. Truly AMAZING ! See to believe !!Trying to figure out the cause, I concluded THE CAUSE is the reflected light from inside the objective system, from shiny rings, and part of the lenses, back to the front! Period. The "objects" that do reflect the light can be seen looking from the objective: as I said, shiny rings that shines because the painting is not the right one, poor baffling, etc. I cannot see other reason. It is the only defect I can see in the Zeiss HT vs the NOCTIVID. I said this a few times...
Please, comment about this...!!! Thank you!!

PHA

Good luck!
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 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