Swarovski DF 8x30W O GA STP (1 Viewer)

ceasar · Mar 5, 2016

jan van daalen said:
typo

Mine has# B7929.... and I got it delivered about 5 years ago straight from Austria. It has a reticle in the right tube and came without a bag in the normal box that only included a small green canvas belt with no brand name on it. No manual or guarantee card.
It is my "comparison bin" and so far it beat the sh.... out of any other bin/brand.
It will never leave! He feels a little bit alone. A little sister would be nice, so.......

Could you provide me/us with a little bit more details about 115/D against 240/D resolving power?

Maybe Dale Forbes could step in and provide some info.

Jan

Jan,

If you do this will you complete and sign this resolution?

RESOLVED

I ______________________________

Having researched and tested the __________________ binocular; I find that it has better resolution than the ______________________ binocular.

Signed and sworn to this date: __________________

_____________________________________:king:

Binastro · Mar 5, 2016

What does 95% contrast mean?

I resolved Mizar in Ursa Major with Canon 10x30 IS, cleanly split, one star 5x brightness of other. 14.4 arcsecond from memory. A selected 12x45 Russian also splits it, as do some other 10x binoculars.
My eyes were 20/15..
The resolution depends on your eyesight, the binocular, the exit pupil and the brightness of the stars.

A 16x56 Hensoldt, c.1955 outresolves anything I have compared it to.
The 20x60 Zeiss is better, 6.5 arcsecond double stars. and the 30x50 Yukon mirror folded refractor binocular is similar,
Canon 18x50 IS about 8 arcseconds.

Double star separation is not the same as other resolution tests. Stars are very high contrast.

With telescopes it is fine faint planetary detail that separates the best from others. Double stars are not difficult tests.

The only way to know how good any optical instrument is, is to test it against others.
Reading reports doesn't do it.

Binastro · Mar 5, 2016

I like posts 41, 42 and 46.
What about Monty Python and the parrot he is selling?
Or a Polygon?

115/D and 240/D. Not sure if that means anything in the real world.
If you want refractor like resolution a selected 30x50 Yukon will surprise you.

22x60 Takahashi is probably the best bet.
The Lunt 100mm APO is factory test bench colllimated at 100x and star tested in the U.K. One side performed well on Jupiter at 220x.

P.S.
Sorry, I am slow on the uptake.
It was a Norwegian Blue in Monty Python.

jan van daalen · Mar 5, 2016

ceasar said:
Jan,

If you do this will you complete and sign this resolution?

RESOLVED

I ______________________________

Having researched and tested the __________________ binocular; I find that it has better resolution than the ______________________ binocular.

Signed and sworn to this date: __________________

_____________________________________:king:

LOL,

But unfortunately every bin is less (in my modest opinion) so in sales it's contra productive:cat:

jan van daalen · Mar 5, 2016

Sancho said:
In 2012, I visited the Beijing store that had previously sold 8x30 green rubber-armoured habichts. Basically an office in the corridor of a regular office-building, kitted out inside with display cases. (Anyone who's been to Beijing and searched out the more unusual stores that aren't aimed at foreigners will know the kind of place I'm referring to). He had a bewildering array of optics, mostly alphas but a very unusual selection of models. He showed me IF green 7x42 habichts, but had no 8x30 in stock. He said he could get them. He made a phone call and I heard his end of the conversation. It would take three days to get me a pair. Unfortunately I was leaving next day. I don't know who he was speaking to, but put it this way...the conversation was in Chinese, not German, so it wasn't Absam...

I remember the Jadestreet (1995) in Peking where they sold The North Fake gear for a few dollars. Recently I was on a obscure website from China where they offered genuine Zeiss and Swarovski optics for less then hundred dollar.
When it is to nice to be true....it often is.

Sancho · Mar 5, 2016

jan van daalen said:
I remember the Jadestreet (1995) in Peking where they sold The North Fake gear for a few dollars. Recently I was on a obscure website from China where they offered genuine Zeiss and Swarovski optics for less then hundred dollar.
When it is to nice to be true....it often is.

The Swarovskis, Leicas and Zeiss that were being sold at the Beijing Store in question weren't fakes. I had my own Swaro SV 8x32 with me when I visited the seller and compared lots of his binos. And he wasn't selling anything for a hundred dollars, in fact his prices were no lower than those at home, because he wasn't marketing to gullible Europeans or Americans who buy fakes online, he was marketing to well-off Chinese. We were informed of his store on BF by a Chinese BF member who had visited the store, and I got the address by contacting him. His stock was genuine, I just don't know where he was sourcing it.

denco@comcast.n · Mar 5, 2016

whezka said:
I think it's pretty cool as a reference bino for comparison. It has maximum contrast transfer. Do you know the best way to describe it. I think looking thru a Habicht is like looking thru a refractor without any erect 45 degrees diagonal prism! When you put an erector in a refractor. The image degrades. So the Habicht is exactly like a refractor without erector and other binos are those with diagonal erector prism with less image quality.

I never thought it's possible to have the same refractor quality when using a binocular until I see thru the 8x30W DF. Therefore if it is confirm to be slightly sharper than the standard black Habicht 8x30W. Then yes I'll keep it as reference binocular where others are judged.

That is a perfect comparison. The Habicht 8x30 W is like looking through a fine quality APO refractor like an Astro-Physics refractor telescope. The transparency, clarity, 3D image and lack of optical distortions is similar. Optical purity at it's finest. Maybe a roof prism would be like a Cadadioptric telescope. A more complicated optical system and harder to make perfect.

denco@comcast.n · Mar 5, 2016

PHA said:
Hi denco@..

The added weight in the GA Habichts versions is a VERY GOOD THING...! Even with that great military grade "rubber", all the Habichts GA are LIGHTER than most of the other ALPHA binoculars of similar specifications.

Best Regards

PHA

Nah. The 10x40 Habicht GA weighs almost 28 oz. Most of your newer 10x42 alpha roofs are close to that weight. The Zeiss 10x42 SF weighs 27.5 oz. The 8x30 Habicht W weighs 19 oz. Now that is light. HUGE difference. That is big reason I like the 8x30 W because of the light weight. I personally don't need all that rubber of the GA. I was comparing a Dove sitting in my backyard tree with the my Swarovski 8x32 SV's and my Swarovski 8x30 Habicht's W and I almost think the Habicht's gave me a better view. More 3D and I think those damn little Habicht's are a little brighter than the SV's. Could that be? The SV's have 90% transmission compared to 96% for the Habicht's. I have NEVER seen a 30mm objective lens suck in as much light as the Habicht's do.

whezka · Mar 5, 2016

Someone message me and said

"Where military binoculars do differ from birdwatching ones is in their transmission profile. The loss of contrast in smoke, mist and heat haze is caused by light scatter primarily at the shorter (blue) end of the spectrum. Military binoculars will specify reduced blue transmission to improve contrast (or perceived sharpness). In the past extra yellow or even red filters would have been supplied to enhance contrast further. They also will also block red laser wavelengths. The result is a binocular that can look distinctly sharper but would totally lack the colour rendition much praised in civilan models."

How do I test if this is the case with the DF 8x30W O GA STP compared to the standard black Habicht 8x30W? The DF color looks neutral at daytime, even direct sunlight. If there is really less blue.. should it look warmer or other changes in the midtones? Or other indications?

Jan. Please ask Swaro this weekend if this is the case with military Habicht or what difference they did to it compared to the standard black one. Thanks.

jan van daalen · Mar 5, 2016

whezka said:
Someone message me and said

"Where military binoculars do differ from birdwatching ones is in their transmission profile. The loss of contrast in smoke, mist and heat haze is caused by light scatter primarily at the shorter (blue) end of the spectrum. Military binoculars will specify reduced blue transmission to improve contrast (or perceived sharpness). In the past extra yellow or even red filters would have been supplied to enhance contrast further. They also will also block red laser wavelengths. The result is a binocular that can look distinctly sharper but would totally lack the colour rendition much praised in civilan models."

How do I test if this is the case with the DF 8x30W O GA STP compared to the standard black Habicht 8x30W? The DF color looks neutral at daytime, even direct sunlight. If there is really less blue.. should it look warmer or other changes in the midtones? Or other indications?

Jan. Please ask Swaro this weekend if this is the case with military Habicht or what difference they did to it compared to the standard black one. Thanks.

I'll ask!

A very oldo

(wise) man entered my shop. He listens to the name Gijs and took a look trough my beloved 10x40. Mumbling, he left the store. I heard him saying that the bin was out of aligment:eek!:

At his first upcoming test run, the military version will be tested against the "civilian" one.

Jan

henry link · Mar 5, 2016

I think I'm seeing some points of confusion about light transmission vs contrast and what to expect for resolution in binoculars.

First, the light transmission percentage doesn't tell us anything about contrast. Possibly the OP is confusing it with the Strehl ratio, which is an expression of contrast. High light transmission can be combined with high aberrations so that the Strehl ratio is low, meaning a large percentage of the light transmitted falls outside the Airy disk of a focused star point. Binoculars are not low aberration instruments and are not intended to be. They are for hand held use at low magnification where the low wave front errors of a fine APO refractor are just not needed.

Secondly, even mediocre "civilian" binoculars should do better than 240/D for resolution. I think I've only measured resolution that bad a couple of times and those were defective binoculars. AFAIK, there is no requirement for exquisitely good optics in military binoculars. I can't recall the exact resolution spec required, but I remember it was modest. High mechanical quality is what is demanded. At any rate, really good "civilian" binoculars usually have resolution that falls somewhere between 120/D and 150/D at full aperture. In my own binoculars I like to see it at least 130/D at full aperture and around 120/D when the binocular is stopped down by the eye in daylight to around a 2.5mm exit pupil.

I quickly measured the resolution of the left side of my old 8x30 Habicht using the USAF 1951 chart and boosting the magnification to 64x. Full aperture resolution was about 124/D (4.1"), which improved to about 120/D (5.45") relative to the aperture when the objective was stopped down to 22mm (2.75mm EP). These are excellent resolution numbers for a binocular, the second about twice as good as I can see when looking at the chart through it at 8x. The overall image in this particular binocular, however, would be cleaner, more relaxed and more natural with improved coatings, a better eyepiece and lower spherical aberration, but the visible resolution on the USAF chart at normal magnification wouldn't change at all.

Henry

whezka · Mar 5, 2016

henry link said:
I think I'm seeing some points of confusion about light transmission vs contrast and what to expect for resolution in binoculars.

First, the light transmission percentage doesn't tell us anything about contrast. Possibly the OP is confusing it with the Strehl ratio, which is an expression of contrast. High light transmission can be combined with high aberrations so that the Strehl ratio is low, meaning a large percentage of the light transmitted falls outside the Airy disk of a focused star point. Binoculars are not low aberration instruments and are not intended to be. They are for hand held use at low magnification where the low wave front errors of a fine APO refractor are just not needed.

Secondly, even mediocre "civilian" binoculars should do better than 240/D for resolution. I think I've only measured resolution that bad a couple of times and those were defective binoculars. AFAIK, there is no requirement for exquisitely good optics in military binoculars. I can't recall the exact resolution spec required, but I remember it was modest. High mechanical quality is what is demanded. At any rate, really good "civilian" binoculars usually have resolution that falls somewhere between 120/D and 150/D at full aperture. In my own binoculars I like to see it at least 130/D at full aperture and around 120/D when the binocular is stopped down by the eye in daylight to around a 2.5mm exit pupil.

I quickly measured the resolution of the left side of my old 8x30 Habicht using the USAF 1951 chart and boosting the magnification to 64x. Full aperture resolution was about 124/D (4.1"), which improved to about 120/D (5.45") relative to the aperture when the objective was stopped down to 22mm (2.75mm EP). These are excellent resolution numbers for a binocular, the second about twice as good as I can see when looking at the chart through it at 8x. The overall image in this particular binocular, however, would be cleaner, more relaxed and more natural with improved coatings, a better eyepiece and lower spherical aberration, but the visible resolution on the USAF chart at normal magnification wouldn't change at all.

Henry

How do you boast the magnification of the 8x30mm to 64? what exact magnifier (brand, model) did you use?

Do you think the modern standard black Habicht 8x30W has already optimum coatings of 96% light transmission and more important, optimum implementation of the coatings? Because I heard when coatings are not applied correct.. it can lower contrast even if light transmission is 97% (I understood your point). So in the Habicht, is the coating application already perfected such that there is no more room for improvement?

(I'm asking this because if there is still room for improvement and it is more costly.. maybe that's what they are doing with the Military Habicht.. more expensive precise implementation of the coatings for even better contrast)

Binastro · Mar 5, 2016

When it comes to resolution it is my opinion that the Canon 8x25 IS will soundly beat the 8x30 Habicht and any other hand held 8x unstabilised binocular. Unless possibly in extremely dark conditions.
The Canon 8x25 IS is not waterproof, it is complex and not very robust, but it still will beat the Habicht.

As to 96%, 97% or 98% transmission, I certainly wouldn't care which I used.
In real use, it is other things like veiling glare and others factors that matter more.

I don't fancy the Habichts because for me the FOV is too narrow.

I accept the restricted field of the Canon because of its superb resolving power in real use.

whezka · Mar 5, 2016

If you will go inside a church and use the Habicht 8x30W watching the birds outside. You will notice the ceiling of the church is at the sides of the field of view but vertical. So it's like the image from above is rotated 90 degrees to the sides. But it doesn't affect the center of the field. I think Swarovski refusal to fix it is just them making a statement that they can perfect on center axis performance and also at the sides via the EL Swarovision series. But even with veiling glare, the contrast of the Habicht at center still beat other binos.

For those who own the military Habicht.. is the individual focuser as stiff as the center focus of the black Habicht? Which his stiffer?

If I exchange it to the black one. Will I be able to get the Green eyecups extra as well as the GA objective lens cover that is strapped to the tube at the front? Is there other lens cover like GA but other brand.. can it fit? It may be handy for other brand of 8x30 too.

denco@comcast.n · Mar 5, 2016

PHA said:
Hi denco@..

The added weight in the GA Habichts versions is a VERY GOOD THING...! Even with that great military grade "rubber", all the Habichts GA are LIGHTER than most of the other ALPHA binoculars of similar specifications.

Best Regards

PHA

The really nice thing about the Habicht's8x30 W is their weight/performance ratio. I weighed the Habicht's on my scale with the rainguard and tethered objective covers on and it weighed only 20 oz. My SV 8x32 which is a light binocular weighed 23 oz. A considerable difference in the feel around your neck and holding them. But yet I think the Habicht's are brighter!

denco@comcast.n · Mar 6, 2016

whezka said:
If you will go inside a church and use the Habicht 8x30W watching the birds outside. You will notice the ceiling of the church is at the sides of the field of view but vertical. So it's like the image from above is rotated 90 degrees to the sides. But it doesn't affect the center of the field. I think Swarovski refusal to fix it is just them making a statement that they can perfect on center axis performance and also at the sides via the EL Swarovision series. But even with veiling glare, the contrast of the Habicht at center still beat other binos.

For those who own the military Habicht.. is the individual focuser as stiff as the center focus of the black Habicht? Which his stiffer?

If I exchange it to the black one. Will I be able to get the Green eyecups extra as well as the GA objective lens cover that is strapped to the tube at the front? Is there other lens cover like GA but other brand.. can it fit? It may be handy for other brand of 8x30 too.

I think Proud Papa(A Swaro Dealer) said you can't get the green GA eyecups for the 8x30 W Habicht. Here are some nice tethered objective covers that I found fit the Habicht 8x30 W made by Opticron. Get the 40-42mm size.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00I3ZZZOA?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s00

denco@comcast.n · Mar 6, 2016

Binastro said:
When it comes to resolution it is my opinion that the Canon 8x25 IS will soundly beat the 8x30 Habicht and any other hand held 8x unstabilised binocular. Unless possibly in extremely dark conditions.
The Canon 8x25 IS is not waterproof, it is complex and not very robust, but it still will beat the Habicht.

As to 96%, 97% or 98% transmission, I certainly wouldn't care which I used.
In real use, it is other things like veiling glare and others factors that matter more.

I don't fancy the Habichts because for me the FOV is too narrow.

I accept the restricted field of the Canon because of its superb resolving power in real use.

I think the high light transmission of the Habicht at 96% is one of it's better features. It is amazing how bright it is for a 30mm aperture. Also, the FOV on the Habicht 8x30 W at 406 feet is actually quite wide. Almost as wide as my SV 8x32's. I have had every Canon IS binocular and the only one that could compare optically with a binocular like the Habicht is the Canon 10x42 IS-L. You may be able to see detail because of the IS stabilization with the Canon line but the view doesn't have near the contrast or vividness of the Habicht or an alpha roof. I found the Canon's flat and lifeless in comparison except for the Canon 10x42 IS-L which is a whole different binocular with much better glass than the rest of the Canon line. You really need a top alpha roof to beat the Canon 10x42 IS-L and even them you will see more detail with the Canon because of the IS system. I compared the Canon 10x42 IS-L to my Swarovski 10x50 SV for a long time and I decided the Swarovski really has better optics if you can hold it steady but the Canon will still allow you to see more detail if you have to hand hold the SV and the Canon has the IS engaged. I kept the Swarovski 10x50 SV because I think overall considering the much better ergonomics and lighter weight and the fact that you need no batteries it a better birding binocular. On a tripod the big 10x50 SV will beat the Canon 10x42 IS-L optically. But there is an advantage when it comes to resolution if you can hold the binocular steady no doubt. None of the Canon's including the 8x25 IS will measure up to an alpha roof or the Habicht 8x30 W EXCEPT for the Canon 10x42 IS-L.

whezka · Mar 6, 2016

[email protected] said:
I think the high light transmission of the Habicht at 96% is one of it's better features. It is amazing how bright it is for a 30mm aperture. Also, the FOV on the Habicht 8x30 W at 406 feet is actually quite wide. Almost as wide as my SV 8x32's. I have had every Canon IS binocular and the only one that could compare optically with a binocular like the Habicht is the Canon 10x42 IS-L. You may be able to see detail because of the IS stabilization with the Canon line but the view doesn't have near the contrast or vividness of the Habicht or an alpha roof. I found the Canon's flat and lifeless in comparison except for the Canon 10x42 IS-L which is a whole different binocular with much better glass than the rest of the Canon line. You really need a top alpha roof to beat the Canon 10x42 IS-L and even them you will see more detail with the Canon because of the IS system. I compared the Canon 10x42 IS-L to my Swarovski 10x50 SV for a long time and I decided the Swarovski really has better optics if you can hold it steady but the Canon will still allow you to see more detail if you have to hand hold the SV and the Canon has the IS engaged. I kept the Swarovski 10x50 SV because I think overall considering the much better ergonomics and lighter weight and the fact that you need no batteries it a better birding binocular. On a tripod the big 10x50 SV will beat the Canon 10x42 IS-L optically. But there is an advantage when it comes to resolution if you can hold the binocular steady no doubt. None of the Canon's including the 8x25 IS will measure up to an alpha roof or the Habicht 8x30 W EXCEPT for the Canon 10x42 IS-L.

What is the light transmission of other porros like the Nikon 8x30 eII? Is it below 90% If other porros were made 96%. Would it perform the same as the Habicht 8x30W? Remember Henry mentioning "Binoculars are not low aberration instruments and are not intended to be. They are for hand held use at low magnification where the low wave front errors of a fine APO refractor are just not needed."

I want an example of another porro with 95% light transmission but poorly applied multi coatings and compare it to the Habicht.

whezka · Mar 6, 2016

I compared my green 8x30W IF with my friend Nikon 8x30 eII on top of a building looking at the city and park at noontime with full sun. I noticed something.

1. In the green Habicht 8x30W IF.. everything beyond 15 meters are in focus to the farthest.
2. In the Nikon 8x30 eII... even things beyond 50 meters are not in focus with respect to the farthest.

In other words. The green Habicht 8x30W IF has greater depth of field. Is it because the Nikon 8x30 eII has greater magnification more than 8X? perhaps it is 8.3X? This may explain the green Military Habicht much greater depth of field. Is the standard black Habicht also like this.. with very great depth of field? With it this good. there is no problem with individual focuser because everything beyond 15 meters are in focus so you don't need to adjust the focuser.

Well. How about view between the Habicht and Nikon 8x30 2II in pure daylight with full sun. The contrast of the Habicht is just so incredible and stunning.. I didn't think I'd say this myself after reading other describe it.. it is so refractor like making the Nikon almost like a Catadiophic with lesser contrast. My friend after seeing my Habicht decide to sell his Nikon. This is how good the Habicht is!

PHA · Mar 6, 2016

Hi denco,

About the weight in hand held binoculars, lighter than a point is worst! For me, around 28 oz in a 10x and 22 or a litte more in a 8x is about the lowest for a confortable hand held observation. The difference of even 4 oz up is a good thing for the viewing and hardly noticeable in the neck or shoulder.

PHA

Swarovski DF 8x30W O GA STP (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Guest

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Guest

Guest

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread