-
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.
Swarovski SLC 15x56 Review (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter quincy88
- Start date
Pronghunter
Active member
Glad you’ve done some comparisons. I can’t decide between the SLC / Zeiss / Meopta all in 15’s for long range observation and low light situations. I’ve been wanting the SLC’s but just can’t decide or compare them all side by side. I’m almost wondering if I would be better off just going with the BTX for the 95 Swaro. Any advice on the 3?
Too bad the EL isn’t available in a 15x56 or HT??
RobMorane
Well-known member
Regarding SLC vs Zeiss, I tried them both and I do find the SLC's better balanced. Easier to deal with them hand held. If you're planning to use them on a tripod, it's another story.
I'm actually dreaming about trying the Meopta (15x56 and 12x50), but they are very hard to find in a shop in France
(
I'm actually dreaming about trying the Meopta (15x56 and 12x50), but they are very hard to find in a shop in France
(14Goudvink
Well-known member
From my own experience: less CA in the Swaro compared to Conquest. Binomania did a comparison as did scopeviews.
https://www.binomania.it/comparativa-15x-docter-nobilem-15x60-swarovski-slc-15x56-zeiss-conquest-hd-15x56/
http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro15x56SLCHD.htm
George
https://www.binomania.it/comparativa-15x-docter-nobilem-15x60-swarovski-slc-15x56-zeiss-conquest-hd-15x56/
http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/Swaro15x56SLCHD.htm
George
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I own the 15x56 Conquest. There have been a few reports here of a ''bit'' or ''minimal'' CA in this bin. These observers should not comment on CA as they are obviously nearly immune to it - the Conquest has an abundance of CA, with elements such as branches in the outer parts of the FOV bathed in blue / purple fringing in harsh back-lighting. Thankfully the centre of the FOV is clear of CA, colour fidelity and whiteness of the image impeccable, sharpness and contrast really excellent, nearly the entire field is sharp, glare / flare resistance very good and focus speed and feel as good as any bin I own.
So, if you are not bothered by CA, save yourself hundreds and get the HD. If you are, you need to weight up the excessive CA with the bins otherwise excellent performance, ergos and build. Bright, clear conditions will mask much of the CA and many users not subjected to Ontario's 6 months of gloomy overcast and snowy weather will never see much of a problem.
So, if you are not bothered by CA, save yourself hundreds and get the HD. If you are, you need to weight up the excessive CA with the bins otherwise excellent performance, ergos and build. Bright, clear conditions will mask much of the CA and many users not subjected to Ontario's 6 months of gloomy overcast and snowy weather will never see much of a problem.
Last edited:
Patriot222
Well-known member
Actually, yes! One of the people in our party had the Meostar HD. It's the only time I've actually spent real, viewing time with one, and that was over a year ago. This acquaintance asked if I wouldn't mind switching glass for a bit and I was quick to say yes! We were watching Desert Bighorn sheep from about 1500M away and the sun was about 90 degrees to my left because I remember putting a t-shirt over my head/tripod to keep the sun out of my eye. In any case, we swapped for about 30-40 minutes and it was also a very nice optic.
At one point, there were two groups of sheep within the FOV and I remember that I wanted to point his binocular around a little bit more because I detected the slightest bit of soft focus as I got too far off center. The only reason that I noticed and remembered this is because for that type of spotting, the optic remains trained on the same FOV for long periods of time, while seated with the tripod, in order to detect movement. With the SLC, it's my regular practice to just set/establish the FOV and then leave it alone until that particular FOV is exhausted. After that I'll adjust elevation or windage (depending on distance and terrain) by 1/3rd of a FOV overlap and then exhaust that FOV before moving another 1/3. When I used the Meopta, I felt like I wanted to move the optic between the two subjects within the FOV when they were significantly separated. The other reason that I remember this is because he had a Manfrotto pistol grip head and when I wanted to move it precisely, it was difficult and I would sort of sweep left/right, up/down more than I wanted to and then would have to go back the other way. I use a large pan head with a spotting scope and 15X's on a double camera mount, and we had just switched chairs, leaving the tripods where they were.
After a while, we switched back and thanked one another. I told him that I liked his binocular just fine but preferred my pan tilt head. He said that my tripod head spoiled him. He added that the SLC was "easy to focus." I said, gosh, I thought your focuser was just as nice. He said, that he meant that he could land on the perfect focus easier, then said in so many words that he liked the SLC more but stretched to purchase what he had. He had purchased his Meopta from another person in the group and so I rightly assured him that he made an outstanding purchase and got one of the best.
The only other thing that I noticed was that the color through the Meopta reminded me of my 2nd generation 15x56SLC, which was the tiniest bit warmer than that of my 3rd gen 15x56. I had noted that difference between the two SLC's back when I owned them simultaneously for about a year.
Anyhow, perhaps more detailed than what you were looking for but there's no doubt the Meopta HD is a fine optic! I could have done the job with either binocular.
Last edited:
Patriot222
Well-known member
Yes, the 15x's and BTX's are completely different classes of instruments. When the BTX was first introduced, people were claiming to be able to use them in an overyly-wide range of roles and the people making those claims were often the dealer selling Swarovski's newest product. While very versatile, it's not a do-everything instrument. It basically comes down to a trade off between FOV vs. observable detail. If I want to find/locate animals at any 'normal' distances... say, out to 1000 yards, the 15X are hands down, the better tool and a 95mm BTX would be a handicap. Once located, if you have to identify a certain animal or record details, the BTX or any spotter is the preferred tool. Likewise, if you have to observe or visually follow a particular mobile animal, for a long period of time or need to be able to study body language, the BTX would come into its own. My subjective opinion of course but there's a certain consensus within the community about which tools work best for which situation. If these basics aren't understood, then you might not be able to give another person in the party the information they need at a particular time. Likewise, you might never find what you're looking for if you start with the wrong tool.
I would also say that, it just so happens, all of the 15x models you mentioned are probably priced very accordingly. If you can't try before you buy and you don't want to make a mistake or second guess yourself, and you can afford the SLC, there's nothing about the SLC that you'll later regret.
Last edited:
RobMorane
Well-known member
I'm not sure there would be a point making a 15x56 EL.
I'm probably going to be "shot at" |;| saying something like that, but the SLC 15x56 might be better glasses (for me) than the EL line.
The use of AK prisms makes light transmission around 93% if my memory is still good, above the EL Line values.
After that, making the design like the EL line, why not.
But the EL line already have a 12x50, which is close enough.
Patriot222
Well-known member
I completely agree. The 15x56 has become quite the specialized binocular in Swarovski's model line up, with the change to AK prisms. I own the 12x50EL and I really feel it would be a duplication which might provide a slight advantage in a couple of areas, while at the same time being disadvantaged in a couple of areas.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Swarovski probably sells more 15x56 models than the 12x50.
Both are special sizes. Most 15x56 size binoculars are purchased by long
distance viewers, that is the size they want, all tripod mounted.
Jerry
Patriot222
Well-known member
For sure. One of the local Swarovski dealers saya they sell the 15x56 by a 3:1 margin over the 12x50
