Binomania Review of New CL POCKET 10x25 (1 Viewer)

Hi Guys, i've published a review of New CL Pocket 10x25
I've received a specimen, from Swarovski, some days ago.
The article is here
http://www.binomania.it/wordpress/?p=3869
Best Regards from Italy
Piergiovanni

Thanks Piergiovanni!

Interesting that it uses Swarovision field flatteners yet they call it a CL.

It looks a lot bigger than my Leica 8x20 UV, but I'm already sold. It's half a pound lighter than the 8x32 SV.

Interesting diopter placement. You can see it in one of the photos at the bottom of the page.

Mark

binomania said:

Hi Guys, i've published a review of New CL Pocket 10x25
I've received a specimen, from Swarovski, some days ago.
The article is here
http://www.binomania.it/wordpress/?p=3869
Best Regards from Italy
Piergiovanni

Click to expand...

Pier,

Thanks for posting that link.

"The Swarovski CL Pocket 10 × 25 has SWAROVISION technology: ie flat field and excellent correction of distortion."

"I believe that these binoculars possess the optics that could be defined as low-dispersion"

Sounds like the technology in the CL compact is more advanced than Swaro's higher priced 8x20B-P pocket compacts! And 5mm extra aperture on the 8x model to boot!

In fact, since the CL compacts contain SWAROVISION technology, that would make them more advanced than the 8x and 10x30 CL Companions!

Also, since the 8x30 CL has only 7* FOV and the 8x25 CL has 6.8*, you're not losing much aperture or FOV by going to a CL compact, and you're shaving off about 5 and 1/2 ounces.

My beef with compacts is that they are too lightweight, so I'm not sure I'd see the weight savings as a blessing, and 7* for the CL is already a bit smaller FOV than I'd like.

How does the new CL compact compare with the Doctor 8x21 Compact you reviewed? As I recall it has a 7.5* FOV, more in line with midsized roofs than compacts, and while the Doctor doesn't have field flatteners, you rated it sharp to about 90% out. I'd like to see a "shootout" between an 8x CL compact and an 8x Docter compact.

Also, besides "sand," is the CL compact also available in black and green like the midsized CLs? I don't see the new compacts listed on SONA's Website.

Brock

Brock, check my post on the New Swaro Pockets thread with prices. They will come in green and black but no U.S. release date yet.

Brock, check my post on the New Swaro Pockets thread with prices. They will come in green and black but no U.S. release date yet.

proudpapa56 said:

Brock, check my post on the New Swaro Pockets thread with prices. They will come in green and black but no U.S. release date yet.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I didn't read that last post, this thread knocked frankie oy vey's thread down a notch.

I got "sticker shock" reading your post. Being designated "CLs," I was expecting them to be lower priced than the Swaro's top of the line compacts, just as the CL Companions are priced lower than the ELs and SLC-HD, but according to what you wrote, the CL compacts will cost about the same as Swaro's "B-Pocket" compacts.

"The 8x will MSRP at $888.00, so dealers MAP will be $799.00. That's $60 more than the current 8x. The 10x will MSRP at $954, so dealers MAP will be $859.00"

Naturally, I'm disappointed, Swaro talks "entry level" with the CLs and then charges second tier. I was hoping the CL compacts would be in line price-wise with the Docter compacts, which are made in Germany (whatever that actually means) and sell for btwn $375-$475:

Docter 8x21 compact

I really can't understand the pricing unless the CL compacts are intended to replace the "B-Pockets.," which they must be, otherwise they'd have two compact lines in the same price bracket, which makes no sense. Lieca has two price tiers of compact roofs, so does Zeiss and Nikon. Swaro refuses to make even compact bins for the common man.

Swaro has the CL compacts at about the same price as the midsized CL Companion line. Given the fact that the CL compacts are somewhat large for compacts and the CL Companions are somewhat small for midsized roofs, there's somewhat an overlap between these two lines in terms of features and price.

Consider also the size:

CL Companion: 119 x 114 x 58 mm
CL Compact: 110 x 65 x 46 mm

If the CL compacts are as good as Pier claims, they could hurt CL companion sales since I can't really see much advantage to the Companions given the specs are so close and the flatter field of the CL compacts. Their smaller width and depth would make them easier to pack as traveling "companions."

OTOH, I can also see it go the other way, with some buyers saying to themselves, if I'm going to pay that much for a Swaro compact, I might as well go for a midsized CL Companion and get a bit more aperture, particularly hunters.

Which customers do you think Swaro is aiming the CL compacts at?

<B>

They're replacing/discontinuing the current model so my thought would be that's who they're going for.

Just got an email this afternoon that they're due for U.S. release in Sept and dealers can now place orders.

proudpapa56 said:

They're replacing/discontinuing the current model so my thought would be that's who they're going for.

Just got an email this afternoon that they're due for U.S. release in Sept and dealers can now place orders.

Click to expand...

That's what I suspected based on the price, although I wonder why they chose to give them the "CL" designation (yes, compact and lightweight), but I think "CL" is too closely associated with the CL Companions. My expectations were for mid-tier, not top tier compacts/

Do you know if the CL compacts actually have field flatteners like Pier suggested? How about low dispersion glass?

If both those features are included, then you're stepping up in aperture and quality with the CL compacts and getting those features at around the same price as the current crop of Swaro compacts, which now seem overpriced (seemed overpriced to me even before the CL version).

I have heard some birders say (and an outdoors man say in a video I watched earlier today on BoobTube) that compacts are not suited for birding, because they don't deliver enough fine detail at a distance. Okay for hunting and general use but not for birding is what he said, and he was talking about an 8x25 Leupold reverse porro, which costs $99.

I remember Stephen Ingraham's review of compacts in which he found that the reverse porros beat the alpha roofs in resolution and brightness. That was many moons ago, I wonder if that's still true?

Brock

No info on the glass yet. Even the folks at the Swarovski U.S. mothership are asking.

But they did take my order.

It's been a long time since my heart skipped a beat for binoculars. SWEET.

Here's a big plus for the "rolling ballers" amongst us:

"Also thanks to the low apparent field I did not notice the effect rolling ball, during panning."

SWAROVISION w/out the "rolling ball," now that opens The Doors to Perception. Aldous Huxley would have been interested in trying these.

<B>

brocknroller said:

That's what I suspected based on the price, although I wonder why they chose to give them the "CL" designation (yes, compact and lightweight), but I think "CL" is too closely associated with the CL Companions. My expectations were for mid-tier, not top tier compacts/

Do you know if the CL compacts actually have field flatteners like Pier suggested? How about low dispersion glass?

If both those features are included, then you're stepping up in aperture and quality with the CL compacts and getting those features at around the same price as the current crop of Swaro compacts, which now seem overpriced (seemed overpriced to me even before the CL version).

I have heard some birders say (and an outdoors man say in a video I watched earlier today on BoobTube) that compacts are not suited for birding, because they don't deliver enough fine detail at a distance. Okay for hunting and general use but not for birding is what he said, and he was talking about an 8x25 Leupold reverse porro, which costs $99.

I remember Stephen Ingraham's review of compacts in which he found that the reverse porros beat the alpha roofs in resolution and brightness. That was many moons ago, I wonder if that's still true?

Brock

Click to expand...

Odd really. Brock doesn't like compacts (uses none). Doesn't like SV's (denigrates them sight unseen). Has no intention of ever buying a Swaro compact CL (can't afford one). And yet within 12 hours he's written more speculations about them than most ever will, even after they buy them.

PS: small wonder the "brokenrollerballexpress" has fired up the boiler and left the station. He's got one track and that's the way he goes.

It's really amazing, all I have to do is mention RB on any thread, and guaranteed Oscar Mayer will pop out, as if he were the duck on the Groucho Show and I had just said the magic word. :smoke:

<B>

Kammerdiner certainly does have a good point Brock. The SV line has been out almost 4 years and Lord only knows how many words that you have typed about them- without ever touching one. In fact you must have the world record for that. It is indeed rare to see someone spend so much time and energy discussing something they have never seen in person or experienced. Unique really- almost like a religious conversation, but without personally actively engaged it it nor having experience with it.

Kammerdiner said:

Odd really. Brock doesn't like compacts (uses none). Doesn't like SV's (denigrates them sight unseen). Has no intention of ever buying a Swaro compact CL (can't afford one). And yet within 12 hours he's written more speculations about them than most ever will, even after they buy them .....

Click to expand...

:-O :t:

Very curious ..... :cat:

stephen b said:

Kammerdiner certainly does have a good point Brock. The SV line has been out almost 4 years and Lord only knows how many words that you have typed about them- without ever touching one. In fact you must have the world record for that. It is indeed rare to see someone spend so much time and energy discussing something they have never seen in person or experienced. Unique really- almost like a religious conversation, but without personally actively engaged it it nor having experience with it.

Click to expand...

Nor ever will ??!

(To be fair though, this is Brock's MO with many other brands and products .... =(

I agree with Brock's summation of the naming though, that's a little strange since the CL's haven't exactly set the world on fire optically (for the price) - you'd think Swaro would want to put a little distance between the two .....


Chosun :gh:

binomania said:

Hi Guys, i've published a review of New CL Pocket 10x25
I've received a specimen, from Swarovski, some days ago.
The article is here
http://www.binomania.it/wordpress/?p=3869
Best Regards from Italy
Piergiovanni

Click to expand...

Pier,

Thanks for the review :t:

Very interesting to see the pics of the eyepiece ends. Just about all of that 17mm ER is available for use thanks to the very low profile ocular mounting flange and eyecup protrusion. Quite a welcome addition to the market for eyeglass wearers (as can be seen in the profile view pic of the bambino). In fact, looks like quite a good bin for the bambini (but the high cost of $ entry, means only those with well-heeled parents! ..... =(

Also, even though your last table contains some typographical errors, it is interesting to note 2 things.
1. Surprisingly, the listed light transmission is reduced by 3% to 88% in the compact-CL, down from 91% in the compact-B's.
2. From the table (I gather, folded dimensions - ie. minimum?), there is scant increase in physical size of the compact-CL, over the compact-B's ..... +6mm width, +8mm height, +2mm length. So this new bin should really still fit in most pockets as the compact-B's did.


Chosun :gh:

Chosun Juan said:

Nor ever will ??!

(To be fair though, this is Brock's MO with many other brands and products .... =(

I agree with Brock's summation of the naming though, that's a little strange since the CL's haven't exactly set the world on fire optically (for the price) - you'd think Swaro would want to put a little distance between the two .....


Chosun :gh:

Click to expand...

Try one of those CLs.

You might like it.

Bob

Thanks for the review Pier. How fortunate that you could get a sample so soon! This is very encouraging. Better than their previous jewel of an 8x20, I've got to see.
Ron

Hello Folks, thanks for the comments. I try to write in my bad English.
From the translation, with google, probably you do not understand, I changed a little the form of the sentence. I wrote that, the new CL has not inherited all the features of SWAROVISION technology, but a feature it has it. The flat field .. Last night I rechecked the stellar images. With star III-IV magnitude the stars are pinpoint to the edge of the field. With bright stars, like Vega i pereceive a bit 'of stellar deformation towards the extremes of the field. In my humble opinion,is a very good performance, the best in the compact I have tested.
As you know the perception of the rolling ball effect is subjective. Personally I have no problem with these binoculars.

I have lent the Bushnell 10x25 HD to my mother because she is in holiday in Tuscany. In addition to this I will be able to do another comparative: Next week a friend of mine, who owns the Leica 10x25 HD, is coming to visit me and we'll make a comparison. I do not trust to make judgments using memory.
I will update next week.
Have a nice week end e Best Regards from Italy