Apochromat
ZEISS VICTORY SF 8x42 SWAROVSKI EL 8.5x42 WB NL Pu
Dear All,
a few months ago -and being a ZEISS fan- surprisingly I bought a factory new SWAROVSKI EL 10x32 WB SWAROVISION FIELD PRO PACKAGE. The decision was made on image quality and a bit on the binoculars ability to give a stable image when birding.
BTW this is my favorite 10x birding glass now:
It is noticeable better in contrast, structural detail rendition and colour reproduction than any other SWARO 10x binocular of the EL range (I looked at all of them in a hunting store and was allowed to take them outside looking at some rural birds, trees and summer flowers nearby the store) and as such it is a totally overlooked gem. Especially its amount of chromatic aberration is the lowest of all EL 10x and visually very comparable to the ZEISS SF´s and the KOWA PROMINAR binoculars. Its focus feeling is good and even in both directions, but not as buttery smooth as the focus wheel feeling of my SF. I also had the opportunity to compare it with a factory new SF 10x42. I liked the color reproduction slightly more, but especially the micro contrast and most of all the edge sharpness of the SWARO slightly better, albeit the superior ergonomy and felt lesser (!) weight of the SF 10x42 (780 g versus 595 g).
I also looked at a factory new LEICA NOCTIVID 10x42 (beautifully strong color contrast, the individual sample had a fairly stiff focus and I did not like its ergonomy too much, smaller perceived field of view, felt weight was also higher but still reasonable to good). If the LEICA NOCTIVID would have had a slightly larger imaged object field, a lower felt weight and a better focus feeling, I would have gone with that one, just because of its fantastic image color density.
The Swaro EL 10x32 WB, compared to my beloved ZEISS SF 8x42, due to its slightly smaller pupil diameter of 3.2 mm has an eye placement that is a bit more crucial when wearing glasses. But the height of its exit pupil of 20 mm is a very good value -if not the best. It has the same but ultra-edge sharp image diameter of 120 m/ 1000 m, exactly the same as the SF 10x42. As I am north of 50, a pupil diameter of 3.2 mm works fine for me and the birds I am interested in are active when the sunlight is still there. If not, I prefer my SF 8x42.
The ZEISS VICTORY FL 10x32 I was able to borrow for 2 days was also a superior alpha binocular for birding, with the strongest micro contrast of all, but I liked the EL´s ergonomy much better, as well as the overall make of the SWAROVSKI. Imagewise the FL ist still a stunning piece of optics.
I also noticed that the SWAROCLEAN coatings are very different from those of LEICA (AquaDura) and ZEISS (LotuTec): Whereas the LotuTec has the strongest repellent effect on liquids of all, the SWAROCLEAN has a more antistatic effect on the dust particles. It is easiest to blow off the dust here with an appropriate tool like the GIOTTOS Pro Dustblower (not the silly tolls included in the SWAROVSKI or ZEISS cleaning kits, they are useless). What I did not like is the type of grease SWAROVSKI is using to lubricate the eyecup tubes with. It is difficult to remove from the eyepiece´s eye lens when on it.
Thanks Michael
a few months ago -and being a ZEISS fan- surprisingly I bought a factory new SWAROVSKI EL 10x32 WB SWAROVISION FIELD PRO PACKAGE. The decision was made on image quality and a bit on the binoculars ability to give a stable image when birding.
BTW this is my favorite 10x birding glass now:
It is noticeable better in contrast, structural detail rendition and colour reproduction than any other SWARO 10x binocular of the EL range (I looked at all of them in a hunting store and was allowed to take them outside looking at some rural birds, trees and summer flowers nearby the store) and as such it is a totally overlooked gem. Especially its amount of chromatic aberration is the lowest of all EL 10x and visually very comparable to the ZEISS SF´s and the KOWA PROMINAR binoculars. Its focus feeling is good and even in both directions, but not as buttery smooth as the focus wheel feeling of my SF. I also had the opportunity to compare it with a factory new SF 10x42. I liked the color reproduction slightly more, but especially the micro contrast and most of all the edge sharpness of the SWARO slightly better, albeit the superior ergonomy and felt lesser (!) weight of the SF 10x42 (780 g versus 595 g).
I also looked at a factory new LEICA NOCTIVID 10x42 (beautifully strong color contrast, the individual sample had a fairly stiff focus and I did not like its ergonomy too much, smaller perceived field of view, felt weight was also higher but still reasonable to good). If the LEICA NOCTIVID would have had a slightly larger imaged object field, a lower felt weight and a better focus feeling, I would have gone with that one, just because of its fantastic image color density.
The Swaro EL 10x32 WB, compared to my beloved ZEISS SF 8x42, due to its slightly smaller pupil diameter of 3.2 mm has an eye placement that is a bit more crucial when wearing glasses. But the height of its exit pupil of 20 mm is a very good value -if not the best. It has the same but ultra-edge sharp image diameter of 120 m/ 1000 m, exactly the same as the SF 10x42. As I am north of 50, a pupil diameter of 3.2 mm works fine for me and the birds I am interested in are active when the sunlight is still there. If not, I prefer my SF 8x42.
The ZEISS VICTORY FL 10x32 I was able to borrow for 2 days was also a superior alpha binocular for birding, with the strongest micro contrast of all, but I liked the EL´s ergonomy much better, as well as the overall make of the SWAROVSKI. Imagewise the FL ist still a stunning piece of optics.
I also noticed that the SWAROCLEAN coatings are very different from those of LEICA (AquaDura) and ZEISS (LotuTec): Whereas the LotuTec has the strongest repellent effect on liquids of all, the SWAROCLEAN has a more antistatic effect on the dust particles. It is easiest to blow off the dust here with an appropriate tool like the GIOTTOS Pro Dustblower (not the silly tolls included in the SWAROVSKI or ZEISS cleaning kits, they are useless). What I did not like is the type of grease SWAROVSKI is using to lubricate the eyecup tubes with. It is difficult to remove from the eyepiece´s eye lens when on it.
Thanks Michael
Last edited:
.
