Does the FPro Swaro EL 8x32 still have the "glare" "issue?" (2 Viewers)

I've never noticed any glare issues whatsoever with the SV 8X32. None. I did see some with the 10X32 SV when I first got IT. But I have to say once in the field birding, ZERO issues concerning glare with it as well. Eye placement wth sunglasses particularly was the only real issue I had with the 10X32.

I compared both the 10X32 and 8X32 SVs with their closest 42mm counterpart. I could find little reason for purchasing the 42mm bigger brother.

Still to this day I feel like the SV 8X32 is THE 32mm 8X binocular for birding. That might change if I owned a EDG II 8X32, IDK. From what I've owned the SV 8X32 is still #1. Conquest HD 8X32 is #2.

chill6x6 said:

I've never noticed any glare issues whatsoever with the SV 8X32. None. I did see some with the 10X32 SV when I first got IT. But I have to say once in the field birding, ZERO issues concerning glare with it as well. Eye placement wth sunglasses particularly was the only real issue I had with the 10X32.

Click to expand...

It's just a fact that the 8x32 SV displays bright internal reflections at the edge of the exit pupil under some common lighting conditions. They're easily photographed through the eyepiece. How have you managed to escape noticing them?

I can think of a couple of possible explanations. The first one is suggested by your somewhat different experience with the 10x32. It should be more prone to glare than the 8x32 because the smaller exit pupil exposes your pupil to the reflections at the exit pupil edge more frequently than the larger 8x32 exit pupil. The exposure would be even more frequent when wearing sunglasses that cause your pupil to dilate to a little larger diameter. Perhaps your pupil is usually small enough to avoid the 4mm exit pupil edge, but that wouldn't explain never noticing glare.

Another possibility (mentioned in post #39) is that you view with your pupil unconsciously de-centered a little upward so that the bottom of the objective lens is usually masked by the resulting misaligned prism aperture. The reflections at the bottom of the objective tend to show up most often in the field since the sky above is usually the source of the light. If the eye is well centered on the exit pupil and open wide enough to accept light from the exit pupil edge those reflections will inevitably be visible as a fuzzy crescent of glare at the bottom of the field. Try moving the binocular up and down in front of your eye while looking at a dark area under a bright sky. I'll be stumped if you can't see any glare at any pupil position.

Henry

chill6x6 said:

I've never noticed any glare issues whatsoever with the SV 8X32. None. I did see some with the 10X32 SV when I first got IT. But I have to say once in the field birding, ZERO issues concerning glare with it as well. Eye placement wth sunglasses particularly was the only real issue I had with the 10X32.

I compared both the 10X32 and 8X32 SVs with their closest 42mm counterpart. I could find little reason for purchasing the 42mm bigger brother.

Still to this day I feel like the SV 8X32 is THE 32mm 8X binocular for birding. That might change if I owned a EDG II 8X32, IDK. From what I've owned the SV 8X32 is still #1. Conquest HD 8X32 is #2.

Click to expand...

I am curious, eye placement is ok with the 10X32 swaro ? For me it was too tricky with the 10X32 conquest...

I’m still confused about rolling ball and what that is. When panning today with the el 10x32’s At Cabela’s, something didn’t look right but I only know what it was. I will say I was planning back and forth rather fast as I was curious about “rolling ball.”

I see rolling ball at slow panning speeds and to me it looks like a gentle bending of things as they move through the field of view, as though everything is a bit elastic.

henry link said:

It's just a fact that the 8x32 SV displays bright internal reflections at the edge of the exit pupil under some common lighting conditions. They're easily photographed through the eyepiece. How have you managed to escape noticing them?

I can think of a couple of possible explanations. The first one is suggested by your somewhat different experience with the 10x32. It should be more prone to glare than the 8x32 because the smaller exit pupil exposes your pupil to the reflections at the exit pupil edge more frequently than the larger 8x32 exit pupil. The exposure would be even more frequent when wearing sunglasses that cause your pupil to dilate to a little larger diameter. Perhaps your pupil is usually small enough to avoid the 4mm exit pupil edge, but that wouldn't explain never noticing glare.

Another possibility (mentioned in post #39) is that you view with your pupil unconsciously de-centered a little upward so that the bottom of the objective lens is usually masked by the resulting misaligned prism aperture. The reflections at the bottom of the objective tend to show up most often in the field since the sky above is usually the source of the light. If the eye is well centered on the exit pupil and open wide enough to accept light from the exit pupil edge those reflections will inevitably be visible as a fuzzy crescent of glare at the bottom of the field. Try moving the binocular up and down in front of your eye while looking at a dark area under a bright sky. I'll be stumped if you can't see any glare at any pupil position.

Henry

Click to expand...

Here's what was said in the OP first post:

So my questions is, is glare apparent in the new Field Pro 8x32 model? My guess is that I would've never thought of such a thing until I read about it on here.

Click to expand...

THAT'S the question I was answering. For me GLARE is not an issue in typical/normal usage of birding in the field. It's NEVER an issue for me. NEVER. Once the leaves get on the trees it's probably the binocular I use the most after the 7X42s. I could pick any of several other binoculars too. I was on a trip last week to S Florida(plane trip)....I really wanted to take the SV 8X32 but took the Monarch HG instead(no regrets of course!). I kinda LOL when then OP never thought of it until he read about it here.

So does the SV 8X32 have internal reflections at the exit pupil? Yes it DOES! I see them too! Every SV I have from 32mm to 50mm do as well. I suppose that's a EL SV trait. Is THAT a problem for me? No it isn't. Those EP internal reflections never materialize to being an issue for me. But I'll be the first to admit I don't go looking for it either. I have had mine for three years and have used it from the Caribbean to Ohio and I'll stand by my comments and observations.

I really would find it hard to believe anything other than MOST that use/own an SV 8X32 have NO issue with glare. Isn't that Swarovski's best selling binocular? Swarovski is the #1 binocular I see at birding events and the 8X32 and 8.5X42 are the two most frequently seen.

Chris223 said:

I am curious, eye placement is ok with the 10X32 swaro ? For me it was too tricky with the 10X32 conquest...

Click to expand...

Here's my take. Eye placement is MANAGEABLE with the 10X32 but it sure isn't as second nature as the 8X32 or 42mm etc are. I can get used to a binoculars specific parameters after a little while, usually. Every binocular is different. I had used the 10X32 quite a bit with just normal eyeglasses close to home with no issues. So I took them on a cruise on a birding trip in Grand Cayman. Of course I wore Oakley RX sunglasses. I made it thru it but it wasn't the best combination. Eye placement with sunglasses was one issue compounded by some of the unexpected thick foliage we birded in. I would have been much better off with 8X32s in this instance.

chill6x6 said:

Here's what was said in the OP first post:



THAT'S the question I was answering. For me GLARE is not an issue in typical/normal usage of birding in the field. It's NEVER an issue for me. NEVER. Once the leaves get on the trees it's probably the binocular I use the most after the 7X42s. I could pick any of several other binoculars too. I was on a trip last week to S Florida(plane trip)....I really wanted to take the SV 8X32 but took the Monarch HG instead(no regrets of course!). I kinda LOL when then OP never thought of it until he read about it here.

So does the SV 8X32 have internal reflections at the exit pupil? Yes it DOES! I see them too! Every SV I have from 32mm to 50mm do as well. I suppose that's a EL SV trait. Is THAT a problem for me? No it isn't. Those EP internal reflections never materialize to being an issue for me. But I'll be the first to admit I don't go looking for it either. I have had mine for three years and have used it from the Caribbean to Ohio and I'll stand by my comments and observations.

I really would find it hard to believe anything other than MOST that use/own an SV 8X32 have NO issue with glare. Isn't that Swarovski's best selling binocular? Swarovski is the #1 binocular I see at birding events and the 8X32 and 8.5X42 are the two most frequently seen.

Click to expand...

Chuck:

I agree with your thoughts, most users of the SV 8x32 will not have a concern with an issue of glare. I enjoy the Swarovision models like you do, and find them a very good choice.

And for the OP, now we have the topic of rolling ball, which is another overblown topic, that will not affect well over 90% of the population.
It is unfortunate it would be a consideration, as it is not.

I find the SV or reg. EL 8x32 to be the best handling, most ergonomic binocular that I have enjoyed.
The small size and massive 8* FOV is very nice.

As far as 10x32, that would be my least choice option, in choosing between
sizes, in the EL range of binoculars.

Jerry

Even if I did have the rolling ball "issue," this wouldn't be a big deal would it? Or are people getting sick from an issue like this?

StressBaller said:

Even if I did have the rolling ball "issue," this wouldn't be a big deal would it? Or are people getting sick from an issue like this?

Click to expand...

It seems if anyone that has noticed the issue, most would get used to it
shortly.

Otherwise, the top companies like Swarovski and Zeiss would have never
introduced these superior flat field optics to the market.

It is a big nothing burger, in the big picture.

If you are in the market for a top binocular, go ahead with confidence.

Jerry

Chuck. I agree with you also. The SV 8x32 does show a little glare too some people and it does show a little RB too some people but it is still my favorite 8x32 because of all it's positive attributes. The ergonomics and huge FOV with tack sharp edges are hard to beat.

StressBaller said:

Even if I did have the rolling ball "issue," this wouldn't be a big deal would it? Or are people getting sick from an issue like this?

Click to expand...

NDhunter said:

It seems if anyone that has noticed the issue, most would get used to it
shortly.

Otherwise, the top companies like Swarovski and Zeiss would have never
introduced these superior flat field optics to the market.

It is a big nothing burger, in the big picture.

If you are in the market for a top binocular, go ahead with confidence.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Agree with Jerry, SB. For me, it has become a non-issue!

In my early optical days (2012), I was sensitive to the RB effect in some binoculars that appeared to affect no one else (Vortex Viper 10X42, Leupold Gold Ring 8X42). In a few minutes of panning, I could induce motion sickness and even vertigo.

Good new is, I quickly overcame that issue (rewired my brain) and now, even field flattening oculars (the likes of Swarovski, Zeiss, Canon) don't bother me with rolling ball effect anymore!! :t:

Ted

StressBaller said:

Even if I did have the rolling ball "issue," this wouldn't be a big deal would it? Or are people getting sick from an issue like this?

Click to expand...

If you are part of the population that is affected by rolling ball, then it could be a big deal. I recall a post discussing a study which said about 30% of the population can see rolling ball and another report that about 10% is affected (meaning they can not only see it but it impacts their viewing).

I concluded there are the following grouping of people:
- Those that can not see rolling ball.
- Those that initially spot it but then adjust and do not see it afterwards.
- Those that continue to see it but are not affected by it.
- Those that see it and are continually affected by it.

The degree people are affected vary. Some like me just find it an annoyance where as some report dizziness, disorientation and even nausea.

Unfortunately, I know of no way to determine ahead of time if a person will be impacted by rolling ball. The only way that I know of to find out is to try out the binocular. That implies one should make sure there is a good return policy in case there is an issue. It is best to have several days to use the binocular to see if the impact goes away..

Also keep in mind that the degree of rolling ball can vary between different models. The amount my be slight in one model and is acceptable but then it may be extreme in another model and not acceptable. You can spot general trends reading posts here, but there is variation among individuals. I can see a small amount of rolling ball in my Zeiss SF 8X42 but it is minor to me and acceptable. I find it excessive in the Swaro 8.5X42 EL SV and unacceptable. Yet I have talked to folks who found just the opposite. Again, it is something you have to check out for yourself.

Rolling ball should be a consideration in the buying decision so go ahead with awareness. If you are affected by it, it can make what is normally an excellent binocular unacceptable. Just be sure be sure you have a plan to get rid of it if it does not work out. Rolling ball may be a non issue for many but you will not know if you fall into that category until you see for yourself.

NDhunter said:

It seems if anyone that has noticed the issue, most would get used to it
shortly.

Otherwise, the top companies like Swarovski and Zeiss would have never
introduced these superior flat field optics to the market.

It is a big nothing burger, in the big picture.

If you are in the market for a top binocular, go ahead with confidence.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Theo98 said:

Agree with Jerry, SB. For me, it has become a non-issue!

In my early optical days (2012), I was sensitive to the RB effect in some binoculars that appeared to affect no one else (Vortex Viper 10X42, Leupold Gold Ring 8X42). In a few minutes of panning, I could induce motion sickness and even vertigo.

Good new is, I quickly overcame that issue (rewired my brain) and now, even field flattening oculars (the likes of Swarovski, Zeiss, Canon) don't bother me with rolling ball effect anymore!! :t:

Ted

Click to expand...

My understanding is rolling ball is not a by product of flat fields but of distortion, meaning lack of distortion, generally lack of pin cushion. A classic binocular without lens flattener technology can have rolling ball and a binocular with lens flattener technology can be rolling ball free.

Here are some posts from Henry and Kimmo that discuss the relationship:

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2457137&postcount=4

https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3121432&postcount=37

Here are some examples of a few flat field models and rolling ball. This is based on my personal experience and is generally consistent with posts I have read here.

I saw noticeable rolling ball in in the Swaro 8.5X42 EL SV and the Zen-Ray Prime 10X42. I see small amounts in the Swaro 10X50 EL SV, Swaro 8X32 EL SV and the Zeiss SF 8X42. I do not see any in the Swaro 10X42 EL SV, Swaro 12X50 EL SV, Nikon EDG, Canon 10X42 L IS and Zeiss SF 10X42. This is not absolute. For example some folks who have used by Zeiss SF 10X42 said they could see some rolling ball.