• 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.

Binomania Review of New CL POCKET 10x25 (1 Viewer)

brocknroller said:
Mark,

I don't know if they could be called complaints, I think it was a case of perhaps expecting the CLs to deliver more than they did for some people since it was a Swarovski. Other users, like yourself, rate them highly, although you are only the second BF member to rate them right behind the SV EL (Dennis was the first, but he changed his mind about that not long after).

Part of the issue, I think, is that the Companion was often compared to the 8x30 SLCneu and 8x32 EL, and it usually came in last, as in this review by our very own Stephen B.

http://www.opticstalk.com/my-review-of-a-8x32-el-8x30-slc-neu-and-a-8x30-cl_topic30011.html

Here's another Optics Talk thread where you will find similar comments:

http://www.opticstalk.com/swarovski-cl-8x30-vs-el-8x32_topic33597.html

The 8x30 SLCneu vs. 8x30 CL is an apples and apples comparison, because the SLCs used to cost around the same amount, and the CLs replaced the 8x30 SLCs in Swaro's line-up. But when you bring the EL into the mix, which is top tier, of course, the CL will be behind it.

I'd like to see some reviews that pit the 8x30 CL against the other current second tier roofs such as the 8x32 Conquest HD and Meopta 8x32 Meostar. How does it compete in its own segment is the relevant question to ask.

If there is a complaint, it would probably be the moderate 7* FOV. I've read more negative comments about that than anything else. But a smaller FOV is the price you pay for a smallish traveling "companion."

Brock
Click to expand...

Brock,

I have located the link with Gijs's comments on the Swarovski 8 x 30 CL. He has compared it with the Meopta Meostar 8 x 32. He has compared their FOV, size of the sharpness of the field with in it. The light transmission of both of them. The level of service to be expected from their manufacturers and their prices. Read it in the link below: His measurements show that the CL has about 5% better light transmission than the Meostar and it's FOV has a 24% larger area of centerfield sharpness than the Meostar. 89% to 65%.

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2711041&postcount=4

In post #2 of the same thread he mentions that he takes it with him when he goes on hikes.

It is because of this review, and the fact that he uses it himself, that I decided to get one for my wife. She likes it very much and she uses it while wearing glasses. I like it a lot too and to be truthful I am using it more than she is. I've compared it to my 8 x 30 SLC and it is just as bright and I think it controls veiling glare better. It compares favorably with my older Nikon 8x32 LX L too and is nearly 7 ounces lighter.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Torview said:
Brock, I had the CL and Meostar side by side back in January at a favorite dealer with a countryside view.

To me on that day the Meopta was in a different league optically. Brighter, wider and sharper, in fact its still my favorite 8x32 roof and I plan to get one to use when its too wet for my SE.

To top it all the Meopta was considerably cheaper !
Click to expand...

The price went up on the Meostar, only about $50 difference between the CL and the Meopta @ EO.

Eventually, I'd like to get a WP back-up to my SE, too. I'm really not one for birding in the rain (though I have been known to dance around lampposts while singing in the rain) ;) It's more about the dampness and mold in the fall and for high pollen days in spring, to keep all that junk from getting in and mucking up the optics, and for cold weather when it's hard to turn the SE's focuser.

I have always found the view through midsized roofs (aside from the 8x32 EL) to lack a 3-D view. Plus, to my eyes midsized roofs show more CA than the SE, so I if I did go roof, I would want ED glass. Now that Meopta is coming out with an 8x32 HD version, the Meopta might be worth checking out.

<B>
 
Last edited:
Hi to All. Two days ago I wrote that Swarovski 10x25 compact binoculars is the best I've tried for two characteristics: quality at the edges of the field and the eye relief. I use compact "in situation of emergency":) obviously i am not a big user of these formats, i observe with my compact only on Sunday with the family, in museums ... etc.etc. I'm used to observe in binoculars of at least 40mm with a good exit pupil. My favorite binoculars are Swarovision 8.5x42 and a Nobilem 8x56.In the area of ​​30mm I love the Nikon SE but also the Kowa 8x33:)
However, the new 10x25 seems quite comfortable to use, better than the ones I tried. So in memory, the Leica 10x25 seems more "crisp" in the center, but as I wrote yesterday, I have to make a comparative next week.
. In contrast the Swarovski 10x25 seems easier "to wear" and with a flatter field.
Since I use the SWAROVISION tecnology or Canon tecnology, I struggle to use the binoculars with the curved field. I know that in some cases a flat field is counterproductive, but I am also an amateur astronomer and I am used to appreciate this feature.:)

I can not argue about the price, because, as you well know, between a pair of binoculars of average cost and a high cost, the price difference is not proportional to the optical performance. I always write "to have a little more you have to spend a lot more" I hope you will understand this sentence.However I think the 8x25 version should be even more comfortable, for what concerns the vibration and the exit pupil
 
Sancho said:
The Tooth Fairy has been wise to this type of communication for a long time. Cant´t trust them Tooth Fairies.
Click to expand...

:-O

I blame it on hyperinflation. When I was a kid, the tooth fairy only left quarters, the most I made was 50 cents for a molar, now when my cousin's kid loses a tooth, he finds a $5 bill underneath his pillow. 20x5=$100! Tooth Fairing has become Big Business, and you know what that means - Fairy lobbyists in Washington asking for perks and earmarks! :smoke:

<B>
 
brocknroller said:
Does the "mothership" communicate through telepathy? Just curious. ;)

What they said makes sense, given the "CL" designation, however, given the less than stellar reviews of the CL Companion (just ask Dennis :), how do we reconcile Pier's glowing/B] review of the 10x25 CL compacts "sharp to the edge" performance and being the best compacts he's ever seen? Not that anybody has panned the CL Companion, but would they say the it was the best 8x30/32 roof they've ever seen?

The unit Pier got could be a "cherry," but if it's a typical sample, we could be looking at a compact series that outperforms its midsized siblings. That might be a first. It cold also put Swaro at the top of the heap in compacts.

<B>
Click to expand...


Ya know, my Nikon 10 x 25 LX L, nka Premier, is also sharp almost to the edge of it's view.:t:

It costs about $300.00 less than the Swaro CL Pocket will. It has 15mm ER and FOV of 284'@1000yards and weighs about 10.5 ounces.

Bob
 
henry link said:
Maybe Swarovski will clarify what the count of "elementi" means, but in the SV models it includes the prisms (Leica's count includes only lenses). The old Swaro Pocket models have 10 elements per side including the prisms, which suggests that the CL POCKET probably lacks the doublet field flattener of the SV. ED glass also seems improbable at such a small aperture, but hopefully Swarovski will supply the official information.
Click to expand...

proudpapa56 said:
OK, got word from the U.S. mothership that they are not Swarovision but the same set-up as the other CL models.
Click to expand...

binomania said:
..... I can not argue about the price, because, as you well know, between a pair of binoculars of average cost and a high cost, the price difference is not proportional to the optical performance. I always write "to have a little more you have to spend a lot more" I hope you will understand this sentence.However I think the 8x25 version should be even more comfortable, for what concerns the vibration and the exit pupil
Click to expand...
Ok, due to binary gremlins, I'll have to re-post, as it's worth saying again ....

If there is no field flattening doublet included, then it makes the light transmission drop from 91% down to 88% very puzzling indeed :brains: ...... :cat:


Chosun :gh:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gEIk99BOAg

Video says most compacts do not come with lens covers.
That is not correct.
My Leica Ultravid 10X25 Nikon LXL 10X25 both came with ocular covers.

Ocular covers are not optional they are MANDATORY in the field for general use .
Especially in wet weather or dust etc.

The fact SWARO does not know this is scary. I will be happy to help SWARO understand what actually goes on in the field for a free pair of these bins (with ocular covers please).

At any price ocular covers are mandatory. They keep the binocular functional in the rain, protect the ocular from breath, fog, mist, dust and stuff that falls al over them or condenses on them, including a sneeze. Do really I have to explain this to a binocular company? Or am I dealing with the crystal division?

No hydrophilic coating and no ocular covers? I would expect both at this price. Where is the Flourite glass that all bins at this price have these days have? No mention of that anywhere.

Objective covers are always appreciated, but if you really need that few cents you can omit them...
Maybe your customers can find a bottle cap that will fit the $800 binocular.

BUT DO NOT OMIT OCULAR COVERS OR YOU WILL HAVE A CONSTANT REMINDER THAT THE DESIGN, AND MARKETING TEAM NEVER ACTUALLY WENT OOUTDOORS IN ANY WEATHER, OR THE ACCOUNTANTS WERE RUNNING THE PROJECT.
 
Last edited:
Ocular covers should never be thought of as an "accessory after the fact" even in a WP bin. When I walk through the brush in the woods, I always put the rain guard on to protect the EP enses from protruding branches I might not see while looking up in the trees for birds. I usually snap on the Bushwackers too so I'm protected at both ends.

$800 is already a record price for compact binoculars, but then you get gypped of lens covers? Makes no sense.

Zeiss asking you to buy a $10 field case and giving you a plastic display case instead is also a head scratchier. Who wouldn't pay $359 who bought the bins for $349 if the case were included?

Did the focus groups tell them they don't use ocular covers and cases? Where did they get the notion that these items which come standard with most binoculars were optional?

Brock
 
brocknroller said:
Ocular covers should never be thought of as an "accessory after the fact" even in a WP bin. When I walk through the brush in the woods, I always put the rain guard on to protect the EP enses from protruding branches I might not see while looking up in the trees for birds. I usually snap on the Bushwackers too so I'm protected at both ends.

$800 is already a record price for compact binoculars, but then you get gypped of lens covers? Makes no sense.

Zeiss asking you to buy a $10 field case and giving you a plastic display case instead is also a head scratchier. Who wouldn't pay $359 who bought the bins for $349 if the case were included?

Did the focus groups tell them they don't use ocular covers and cases? Where did they get the notion that these items which come standard with most binoculars were optional?

Brock
Click to expand...

You pay for them anyway. Just like you pay for "free" repairs of problems under binocular warranties. They are factored into the purchase price as you know.

I know you don't think those overblown cases and overdone ocular covers that Swarovski gives out with their binoculars (items which hardly ever get used except for storage) come free. Check out their prices on Swarovski's accessory list if you lose one and have to replace it. There is a really good profit margin there for sure! But with Swarovski you do get well made boxes to store your binocular in.

Nikon makes a decent case but their objective covers are legendary for their uselessness. Their boxes are utilitarian at best.

If Zeiss sold a boxed Terra ED it wouldn't be in a box like Swarovskis, you can count on that. I don't know what the plastic container costs, maybe it's a loss leader for advertising purposes once Zeiss gets the TerraED up and running in big box stores. Zeiss's Victorys come in sturdy boxes too. As for the case for the TerraED; 10 bucks is a bargain which also includes shipping. The same case from Eagle Optics costs 18.99 plus shipping.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocula...ptics/eagle-optics-ranger-42mm-binocular-case

And it is the same case except for the logo. Actually Eagle's doesn't have D rings on the side panels like the Terra's has.

Bob
 
Last edited:
The dual hinge design necessitates having 2 separate ocular covers. On my 8x20 this is just annoying enough that I don't use them at all. If I need coverage I usually just hold my hand over the oculars. I mostly do that anyway since I don't like tethered rainguards much. Just remove them and shove them in a pocket.

An accordion style would be great, but then you couldn't fold the bino up. That would work for me since I don't tether them, but nobody makes one small enough!

A conundrum.

Here's what you need for dual hinge compacts: a quick release one-piece rainguard. Good in use, remove for storage. Then lose it somewhere in the back seat. 8-P

Mark
 
ceasar said:
As for the case for the TerraED; 10 bucks is a bargain which also includes shipping. The same case from Eagle Optics costs 18.99 plus shipping.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binocula...ptics/eagle-optics-ranger-42mm-binocular-case

And it is the same case except for the logo. Actually Eagle's doesn't have D rings on the side panels like the Terra's has.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yo Bob

I think you will find that the Zeiss case/pouch also has side extensions to the 'shoulder' of the lid (for want of a better word) so that when your bins are inside and the lid fastened down, the sides of the case don't bulge out, creating a gap at each side that rain and dust can get down.

Lee
 
Troubador said:
Yo Bob

I think you will find that the Zeiss case/pouch also has side extensions to the 'shoulder' of the lid (for want of a better word) so that when your bins are inside and the lid fastened down, the sides of the case don't bulge out, creating a gap at each side that rain and dust can get down.

Lee[/QUOTE

Yes, it does have "shoulders" but they also get in the way of the strap on the binocular if you want to just put the case on over it. Otherwise you have to roll the strap up around the bin when you put it into the case.

Never the less I've been keeping both my 7 x 42 Victory FL and 8 x 42 Terra in their cases with their straps hanging out of them. That bunches up the "shoulders" a little bit.

Bob
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
ceasar said:
Troubador said:
Yo Bob


Yes, it does have "shoulders" but they also get in the way of the strap on the binocular if you want to just put the case on over it. Otherwise you have to roll the strap up around the bin when you put it into the case.

Bob
Click to expand...

Yes you are right Bob. A curious thing this, I have never thought about leaving the strap hanging out of the case when putting the bins away. But I can see it would make stowing them easier and also make it easier to pull them out.

Our bins cases are used for storage of the bins at home. My Victory 8x20 is always out for emergency birding. The cases then act as protection in transit when we travel to places where we holiday. When we get there the bins come out and don't go back in until we set off back for home. So we don't have a need for quick in-and-out of the case action.

Lee
Click to expand...
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 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.

Similar threads

J
Terra Pocket 10x25 - stiff focusing
Replies
5
Views
950
julay
J
binomania
What should I do with my 300 video reviews? Request for advice
Replies
7
Views
710
tenex
tenex
Joe H
Random Ramblings on the CL 7x21 Curio
2
Replies
22
Views
6K
Sky2goflying
Sky2goflying
binomania
REVIEW KOWA TSN-66 A PROMINAR - a little fluorite gem with incredible performance!
Replies
10
Views
5K
kwikstaart
K
binomania
My review of Kite Optics APC 16x42
Replies
1
Views
3K
yarrellii
yarrellii

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top