• 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.

Are EL 8.5x42 made in 2001 still considered good? (1 Viewer)

45srbest

Member
I bought my 2001 EL’s new (they came in an aluminum case) and used them a few times a year to help count during hawk migrations where I use to live. I thought then, and still do, that they have a great view. However I don’t have any good stores to check out any new binoculars and understand things have changed a lot in 17 years. Would they still be considered a decent binocular by today’s standards?
I recently ordered a pair of Zeiss Victory 8x32 FL T which haven’t come yet because of all the complaints of the “rolling ball” effect on the EL 8x32.
Thanks for your expertise in these questions folks!
 
Welcome to the Birdforum. I have used the original EL similar to yours for many years, and it
is still a very good binocular by todays standards.

The EL had a nice run, from 1999 - 2009, and then then the Swarovision came out in 2010.

There are the changes of a new flat field eyepiece, so there is very little distortion all the way to
the edge. Also the new SV, has a slimmer frame, and is a little brighter. The changes are nice
and I have the new model, and really like it.

You mention "rolling ball", but it is something most people will never see, and I find no reason
to be concerned about it.

Keep asking questions, there are many opinions on here, most of them very sound.

Jerry
 
Would they still be considered a decent binocular by today’s standards?

My 2003 EL 8.5's are still going strong, and I really like the view they provide; in fact, I like them better than the newer SV and FP versions. At one time I owned both 8.5 EL and SV, and and I ended up selling the SV and keeping the EL. Just a matter of personal preference; they're both great binos, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
The EL 8x32 is my absolute favorite. I saw rolling ball once, the first time I looked through it, for about 10 seconds. That was it, haven't seen it since.
 
Way back in the early 2000s I swapped my beloved Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 BGAT* for one of these because it was so much better. Unfortunately the focus went wonky and the factory couldn't make it as-new so I moved on. However there is no doubt in my mind that the view through it was absolutely first class and is still competitive today. You have had yours long enough to find out if the focus was going to deteriorate and if its OK after all this time then there is nothing to worry about. Actually you can be proud of owning a modern design-classic, a game-changer that established Swarovski as market leader, and binos don't do that unless they are very special.

Lee
 
I have the original Swarovski 8.5x42 EL, which I purchased in 1999 or early 2000. I still consider it a superb binocular, even by the standards of the latest and greatest. It never fails to impress me optically, even in side-by-side comparison with my fairly recent production 8.5x42 EV SV. My biggest complaint is that the focus ratio makes for very slow focus on near objects, which matters to me a lot since I often combine butterflying with birding (On the other hand, for viewing at distance, it allows for very precise focus). Another thing I notice (but that is not bothersome to me) is that although it seems color neutral at first glance, it is somehow deficient in parts of the orange/magenta spectrum. Some people say that the original 8.5x42 EL suffers from high CA, but I don't find this to be the case even though I notice excessive CA in many other bins. I suspect that when this model was updated to the faster focus ratio (can't remember when this happened, but I don't think it was until after 2001 when your unit was produced, so I think you have the slow focus version of the original EL like I do) that the new focusing lenses in the faster focus version impart more CA than occurred in the original design. Mine has everything original, including the rubber armor, but I did have it serviced once when the focus became very stiff. They got it sorted and it remains fine to this day, though it is not silky-smooth like my new EL SV.

--AP
 
Whenever I'm at an optics shop I try out the newer models to compare them to my 2004 8.5 x 42 Swaros. None have come remotely near to providing £1,000 worth of improvement over my 14 year old model, which is what an upgrade would cost.

To my 74 year old eyes, some of the newer models are a tiny bit brighter or sharper, but £1,000 worth????



Jeff
 
Whenever I'm at an optics shop I try out the newer models to compare them to my 2004 8.5 x 42 Swaros. None have come remotely near to providing £1,000 worth of improvement over my 14 year old model, which is what an upgrade would cost.

To my 74 year old eyes, some of the newer models are a tiny bit brighter or sharper, but £1,000 worth????

Jeff

I share your sentiments entirely Jeff. I'm still using my 2004 vintage 8x32EL and swear by it. It cost me £799 at the time but I would need to shell out nearly twice as much to replace it with a new SV FP! Sure, it has a flat field and is a little brighter but for me, it's ergonomics are inferior and I just couldn't justify a so-called 'upgrade' for such a small benefit.

RB
 
What year did Swarovski introduce the 'faster' focusing mechanism in the ELs, cutting the travel from close to 2.5 revolutions to 1.5?
 
What year did Swarovski introduce the 'faster' focusing mechanism in the ELs, cutting the travel from close to 2.5 revolutions to 1.5?

If I recall correctly, it has been said that the faster focuser came in around
2004 or so. Swarovski has updated binoculars sent in for service to the
faster focusing also. A call to Swarovski service would be good, they will know.

I hope this helps.

Jerry
 
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