-
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.
New Swarovski EL? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter kristoffer
- Start date
brocknroller
porromaniac
Yeah but they replaced the lead with that fancy "FL stuff".
..and they are heavy, not plasticky enough and unreasonably dim.
And don't forget too looooong! 6.8". That's even longer than an EL!
You're going to need a pair of these to hold it comfortably (just keep the index finger out so you can focus):
http://s7ondemand1.scene7.com/is/image/TeamExpress/PRO2004JBT
Since there's no thumb indents nor ridges either on the FL, extraordinary holding measures will naturally be required. With some of the webbing removed, the "thumbs up" grip should work great with those babies. Dang, I wish I'd ordered the 8x56 now.
Another good thing, Fluorine is very toxic. There's hope.
Ron
Another good thing, Fluorine is very toxic. There's hope.
Ron
Long huh?
Maybe the focal length is longer too. That should help with the CA.
Bob
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Gaseous flurorine is toxic but fluoride is not so bad (unless you ingest a few toothpaste tubes of it).
The same as the difference between the poisonous green gas chlorine and not very toxic chloride ion (say like sodium chloride).
I think you'd have to suck on a fluorophosphate glass lens for a long time before you had a problem.
The same as the difference between the poisonous green gas chlorine and not very toxic chloride ion (say like sodium chloride).
I think you'd have to suck on a fluorophosphate glass lens for a long time before you had a problem.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Ron,
The difference between the early Leica BA owner's perception of CA on the other thread and yours may have to do with different levels of sensitivity to CA.
Also, sensitivity to CA seems to change as people get older and their eye lenses becomes yellow (and harder).
I'm not sure if this is why your BA's are starting to get on your nerves when before you sang their praises or if after trying bins with ED or FL glass, you realized what you were missing?
Also, I read that at some point Leica changed over to lead-free glass in their BA series without announcing it (and to the best of my knowledge no-one has been able to pin down the serial # or year when this happened).
So even though your a BA is an "early" sample, it's possible that it has lead-free glass since no-one knows exactly when the changeover occurred.
I'm not sure if there's a way to test this objectively (without melting down the lenses
. I noticed that I'm more sensitive to CA in the winter since there tends to be higher contrast backgrounds with the gray skies and snow.
In the winter, my LX starts to "get on my nerves" but in the spring, summer, and early fall, I rarely notice the CA.
Also, after comparing the Promaster ED to my LX, I became more sensitive to the CA in the LX.
I also have porros, which I sometimes take out with me at the same time as the LX, and when I switch back and forth I can notice the difference in CA if I'm looking at birds against a high contrast background.
So I stopped taking the porros out with me when I'm using the LX, and this has changed my perception since I no longer "look for it" though I'm sure it's there.
If you can afford it, I would recommend that you hang on to your Leica until you have thoroughly tested and used your FL for a while.
Despite the FL glass, the Zeiss might not appeal to you for other reasons, and you might find yourself wishing you hadn't sold the BA! Hopefully not.
Brock
Ok, all this Fluor..... -talk has me spinning in circles. From now on I am just going to call it FL glass like all the salespeople.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Looking for a job?
Ben
Ben Lizdas
Sales Manger
Eagle Optics
www.eagleoptics.com
falcondude
Well-known member
spitfiretriple
Well-known member
Interesting hypothesis. I wonder if there is anyone out there who could tell us whether Chinese manufacturers still use lead.Does anyone know what the lead content is in the new Chinese bins everyone is so excited about, maybe the lead is why they are so good?
We have to remember that in communist China, there is no political correctness, and just last summer they had to shut down a lot of their polluting factories for several months just to clean the air up enough to have the Olympic games.
I also wonder if we could case the eurocrats in molten glass. Maybe we would then be safe from the danger they, like the nuclear waste, pose to us.
falcondude
Well-known member
Ok, all this Fluor..... -talk has me spinning in circles. From now on I am just going to call it FL glass like all the salespeople.
will new Swarovski EL use FL glasses?
falcondude
Well-known member
That answers the question. thanks.
Mike McDowell
Well-known member
I had the opportunity of birding with a Swarovski Swarovision EL 10x42 on Saturday. An owner of an 8x32 EL, I went out with 2 other birders; one who owns the current EL 10x42, and another who uses the current EL 8.5x42. All of us were literally blown away by the new EL's resolution and edge-to-edge sharpness. Easily the best view I've ever seen through any pair of binoculars. I can't wait to get my own set!
Mike M.
www.birddigiscoper.com
Mike M.
www.birddigiscoper.com
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
henry link
Well-known member
AP,
Since Mike hasn't answered I'll jump in with all the authority of someone who hasn't even seen these binoculars. If there really is no pincushion distortion in the new EL then the "rolling globe" effect is inescapable for an AFOV much over 45 degrees. I already own binoculars with no pincushion and have found I'm not bothered at all by the obvious presence of "rolling globe" when panning. For others it will be a deal breaker.
Henry
Since Mike hasn't answered I'll jump in with all the authority of someone who hasn't even seen these binoculars. If there really is no pincushion distortion in the new EL then the "rolling globe" effect is inescapable for an AFOV much over 45 degrees. I already own binoculars with no pincushion and have found I'm not bothered at all by the obvious presence of "rolling globe" when panning. For others it will be a deal breaker.
Henry
Last edited:
Mike,
If you were in fact "literally blown away" that would make them very dangerous bins to own.
What you actually mean is (figuratively) blown away.In any event, it's hard to conceive anything really being that much better than the current alphas (except if you are speaking strictly as an optics connoisseur who appreciates differences barely noticeable to the lay person), but I guess we will have to judge for ourselves. I remember seeing similar pre-release claims about the Nikon EDG bins here that seem rather overblown in retrospect (not denying they are a very good bin though of course). Also, I suppose in the interest of full disclosure it should be noted that you work for Eagle Optics.
Best,
Jim
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Henry,
From my reading (or perhaps misreading) of your initial review of the 7x42 EDG , I was expecting about the same level of "rolling ball effect" as the full sized LX/LX L/Premier roofs, but to my pleasant surprise, the 10x42 EDG did have pincushion, about the same amount as the 8x32 LX. Panning was fairly smooth.
What in our opinion is the reason for manufacturers not adding pincushion to binoculars that are intended for daytime use?
Is there some optical advantage? For example, it is easier to stretch the edges when there's no pincushion?
Thanks.
Similar threads
