New Swaro Pockets (1 Viewer)

elkcub said:

Brock,

If you're taking the stance of a focus-change denier, I should point out that Gijs simply confirmed what Swaro already said in their blog. I thought the new 8x42 SLC would have an 'improved' focusing system, — but it turns out to be a technology regression like the 8x30CL. Frankly, I've lost interest in their new SLCs altogether.

Ed

Click to expand...

Ed:

I think this is a very good thing, bringing out some changes in an already
nice optic.

Simpler, same optics, and for a lot less money. I like that.
It looks like any small change such as close focus distance will not be missed in
any way, by most users.

Jerry

NDhunter said:

Ed:

I think this is a very good thing, bringing out some changes in an already
nice optic.

Simpler, same optics, and for a lot less money. I like that.
It looks like any small change such as close focus distance will not be missed in
any way, by most users.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Jerry,

To paraphrase Voltaire: I buy only to please myself and like only what suits my taste. :t:

Ed

Here's a comparison I hope to see in coming weeks: Swaro 8x25 CL v. Bushnell 7x26 Elite Custom.

Swaro:
8x
17mm ER
8.2 feet close focus
12.2 ounces
357 feet FOV
waterproof

Bushnell:
7x
16mm ER
12 ounces (no it's not, Bushnell, it's 13.5; I weighed it)
363 feet FOV
non-waterproof

I haven't been using my Bushnell but I took it out a few days ago and was seriously impressed all over again with how good it is. It has an atrocious hang angle--pretty much horizontal--but aside from that, and the fact that it's not waterproof, I suspect it may be among the few serious competitors for the new CL, in terms of size/weight, and for a lot less money. I suspect the little 8x20's just won't hold up in that competition, and the mid-size bins will all be larger/heavier.

Hmm, we'll see.

Mark

Incoming - Our First Order

We will be getting our first order of the new pockets on Friday. I'm really looking forward to checking out the 8x25. Sell it or keep it?

proudpapa56 said:

We will be getting our first order of the new pockets on Friday. I'm really looking forward to checking out the 8x25. Sell it or keep it?

Click to expand...

So .... what is your verdict. Are you tempted to give up your 8x32. How does it compare to the swaro 8x32, by the way?

thanks,
Charles

No way! My EL SV 8x32s are my forever keepers. But, I am going to replace the 8x20s in my camera bag with the 8x25s.
Sharper image, signs are clearer across the street, better eye relief, brighter, and it feels more like you're holding a binocular in your hand.

proudpapa56 said:

No way! My EL SV 8x32s are my forever keepers. But, I am going to replace the 8x20s in my camera bag with the 8x25s.
Sharper image, signs are clearer across the street, better eye relief, brighter, and it feels more like you're holding a binocular in your hand.

Click to expand...

" My EL SV 8x32s are my forever keepers" The best "All-Around Birding Binocular on the Planet"

proudpapa56 said:

No way! My EL SV 8x32s are my forever keepers. But, I am going to replace the 8x20s in my camera bag with the 8x25s.
Sharper image, signs are clearer across the street, better eye relief, brighter, and it feels more like you're holding a binocular in your hand.

Click to expand...

Would you say the CL pocket bin is sharper than the 8x30 CL? Can you read as much or more detail on those signs with the compact as you can with the 8x30 CL Companion?

I ask because there are contradictory reports from the few who have tried the CL compacts. Pier thought they were the sharpest and best compacts he's tried, others thought they were lacking in sharpness.

The consensus with the 8x30 CL is less divided, with more on the "could be sharper" side of the fence since they've been out longer and handled (and owned) by many more users. Only one user thought the CL Companions were almost as sharp as his SV EL, but he later recanted.

I realize that as a dealer, you probably don't want to pit one model against the other, but chances are buyers are either going to go for a CL compact OR a CL Companion, not both (except the deep-pocketed who have to buy every new toy that comes along).

But for the rest of the bozos on the bus, it's going to be one or the other. With the objectives and FOV being close in size, the CL compact being large for a compact (something you like, but others such as Alex may not), and the CL Companion being small for its configuration, buyers are probably going to try both and base their decision on which gives the sharpest view (at least I would, my eyes need all the help they can get).

So the $800-$900 question is: Which is sharper? The 8x30 CL or 8x25 CL? You have more than one sample of each, so you'd be in a better position to tell more than others. Please take out that 1951 RAF chart and let us know.

Two more questions about the CL pocket:

Does the color rendition appear to be the same as the Companion?

With its imbedded focuser, how much of a turn can you get with one pull of the finger (that is, how many degrees out of the entire focusing range can you go before you hit the bridge with your finger). Some people have expressed concerns that they are going to need to keep on cranking and cranking to get to the bird because the focuser is only partly exposed.

Much appreciated.

Brock

Well, the one CL 8x25 we got is already gone and they're now backordered for a month so any comparison (my "from memory" comparisons wouldn't be as good as some other folks) on that model will have to wait.

As soon as I receive the 8x25 on Thursday ( I purchased the one that Gordon briefly had in stock ), I'll post my opinion. I've recently tried and/or owned all the latest pocket bins and 8x32 bins from Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski & Nikon as well as all their 7x / 8x 42's. I can give an overall opinion based on that lot but cannot comment on the Swarovski CL 8x30 since I've not tried one. I have a vivid recollect of the Swaro 8x20 I just sold and currently have the Swaro SV 8x32 in possession so can comment on those also.

Charles

packlite said:

As soon as I receive the 8x25 on Thursday ( I purchased the one that Gordon briefly had in stock ), I'll post my opinion. I've recently tried and/or owned all the latest pocket bins and 8x32 bins from Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski & Nikon as well as all their 7x / 8x 42's. I can give an overall opinion based on that lot but cannot comment on the Swarovski CL 8x30 since I've not tried one. I have a vivid recollect of the Swaro 8x20 I just sold and currently have the Swaro SV 8x32 in possession so can comment on those also.

Charles

Click to expand...

Charles,

I hadn't heard of "Palouse" so I looked it up and found it is a not a lesser known province of France but a region of the northwestern United States, encompassing parts of southeastern Washington, north central Idaho and, in some references, south into northeast Oregon. Are the residents of Palouse trying to be recognized as a state the way the residents of "Jefferson" are?

You've had a lot of experience with compacts and midsized bins from the Four Tops, so it will be interesting to see how you rate the CL compacts. I didn't realize that Gordon had received only one sample.

A smaller than average sized 8x30/32 and the larger sized 8x25 compact seems to be a nexus point where a buyer could go either way.

My biggest bone of contention with compacts is their smallish FsOV. The only compact with a FOV comparable to a midsized 8x is the Docter 8x21 compact, which somehow manages to pack in 7.5* into its tiny dimensions. Being an insufficiently intelligent person when it comes to the physics of optics, I'm not sure how they can pull that off while the Four Tops apparently cannot.

My other nudge is that good quality compacts cost so much more than reverse porros but in resolution tests, the porros beat them. Hence, the other reason for my question about the CL pocket bin's "sharpness".

There is one area where roofs excel over porros -- compactness. Reverse porros can't fit in your pocket unless you have pockets as large as Captain Kangaroo's.

Funny to say, perhaps, but I also like the fact that I can "wear" a compact less conspicuously than I can a midsized bin. Last year I was walking along the edge of the woods with a 10x42 SE hanging from my neck, when lo and behold a convertible filled with college students passed by and one guy yelled out, "Hey, nerd! Looking for a dodo bird?" Oh, my goodness, young people today can be so rude.

Sheldon out

Swarovski has been very good about trying to get me at least one of a new release early on but then I have to wait a month or so until other accounts get some of their orders filled.

It would be a pleasant surprise of a high quality X25 outperformed a high quality X30.

It would be nice to see a comparison of the best small 10X25 binoculars available.

I of course am eager to find out if the wildly priced Swaroviski is actually outperforming the competition and in what categories. Other than the Swaro I have owned all the bins below. For my eyes the Ultravid is my choice. I would welcome (and pay for) a better choice (even though the Swaro does not come with ocular covers - grumble). But I would like to see some unbiased indicators that are clearly expressed.

For instance a comparison of

Swarovski 10x25 CL at $859
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994404-REG/swarovski_46210_10x25_cl_pocket_binocular.html

Compared to the 10x25 Ultravid at $749.00
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348289-USA/Leica_40253_10x25_Ultravid_Binocular_Black.html

Compared to the Victory Compact 10x25 T* $699.99
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676553-USA/Zeiss_52_20_79_Victory_Compact_10x25_T.html

Compared to the 10x25 Premier LX "L" $546.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348637-USA/Nikon_7507_10x25_Premier_LX_L.html

Tvc15_2000 said:

It would be a pleasant surprise of a high quality X25 outperformed a high quality X30.

It would be nice to see a comparison of the best small 10X25 binoculars available.

I of course am eager to find out if the wildly priced Swaroviski is actually outperforming the competition and in what categories. Other than the Swaro I have owned all the bins below. For my eyes the Ultravid is my choice. I would welcome (and pay for) a better choice (even though the Swaro does not come with ocular covers - grumble). But I would like to see some unbiased indicators that are clearly expressed.

For instance a comparison of

Swarovski 10x25 CL at $859
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994404-REG/swarovski_46210_10x25_cl_pocket_binocular.html

Compared to the 10x25 Ultravid at $749.00
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348289-USA/Leica_40253_10x25_Ultravid_Binocular_Black.html

Compared to the Victory Compact 10x25 T* $699.99
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676553-USA/Zeiss_52_20_79_Victory_Compact_10x25_T.html

Compared to the 10x25 Premier LX "L" $546.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348637-USA/Nikon_7507_10x25_Premier_LX_L.html

Click to expand...

The biggest change/differences in the new and the old Swarovski 10 x 25s are the weight, the close focus and the eye relief which is 4mm longer at 17mm. It is 4 ounces heavier at 12.3 ounces and close focuses at 8.2' rather than 16'.

FOV change is minimal (5.4º to 5.6º) as are the lengths and widths of the binocular. The difference in weight could be mostly caused by the redesign of the bridge although the oculars probably are larger too.

I expect similar differences with the other 3 binoculars mentioned.

Bob

Tvc15_2000 said:

It would be a pleasant surprise of a high quality X25 outperformed a high quality X30.

It would be nice to see a comparison of the best small 10X25 binoculars available.

I of course am eager to find out if the wildly priced Swaroviski is actually outperforming the competition and in what categories. Other than the Swaro I have owned all the bins below. For my eyes the Ultravid is my choice. I would welcome (and pay for) a better choice (even though the Swaro does not come with ocular covers - grumble). But I would like to see some unbiased indicators that are clearly expressed.

For instance a comparison of

Swarovski 10x25 CL at $859
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/994404-REG/swarovski_46210_10x25_cl_pocket_binocular.html

Compared to the 10x25 Ultravid at $749.00
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348289-USA/Leica_40253_10x25_Ultravid_Binocular_Black.html

Compared to the Victory Compact 10x25 T* $699.99
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/676553-USA/Zeiss_52_20_79_Victory_Compact_10x25_T.html

Compared to the 10x25 Premier LX "L" $546.95
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/348637-USA/Nikon_7507_10x25_Premier_LX_L.html

Click to expand...

Demo Swarovski Pocket 10x25 B-P @ Euro Optic for $593:

http://www.eurooptic.com/swarovski-pocket-10x25-b-p-green-da318.aspx

<B>

In my experience the Swarovski 10x25 B Pocket Binocular did not deliver the quality of the others I mentioned. But that is a mute issue since the successor is on store shelves.

At this price I am hoping the new Swarovski 10X25 CL measurably outperforms the competition on sharpness, color, flare, brightness, and in particular **improved back lighting performance** along with other improvements we can appreciate in the field. I expect that extra weight to add performance - not just dead weight.

I don’t mind paying the price if Swarovski can deliver an improvement I can actually see, I will even pay for the missing ocular covers (I guess they need the money) which are needed for the normal conditions we encounter birding such as rain, dust, mist, snow, fog, eating a sandwich and other stuff…

I am not reading any innovations in the descriptions. Nothing new on the glass, aluminum is not new. I would expect magnesium or titanium at this price. They seem to be touting ergonomics such as interpupillary distance and a protective case that looks unfriendly along with added size and added weight. If there is no quality improvement I will be disappointed. But 20 elements should deliver something pleasing!

I am not out to bash a new offering - I just want to know where and how large the optical improvements in this offering.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zr-8FcMYI4U

The under $400 price I paid for my Zeiss Victory 10x25's a few years ago looks better and better over time. I know the folks at EO really like the new Swaro 8x25's but there's not much they'd offer me over the Zeiss', I suspect. Regardless, I'm not going to pay to find out.

I had my first very quick look at and with the 8x25 CL. I had thought I may sell my Ultravid 8x20 and get the Swaro, but now am less sure of that. The size and weight difference is substantial enough that I may well find that the 8x25 would be left home in situations where the 8x20 would be taken with, such as jogging or theaters and concerts. The larger eyepieces are nice, but the eyecups are not that much more comfortable to view with, and are still small enough that they don't rest against the bone on my brow, so I cannot support them the way I can full-size binoculars.

Also, in the conditions I tried them at, the sunny backlight with a little bit of haze evoked rather more flare than I was hoping to see. I will not say anything about sharpness, since the encounter was brief and only hand-held. I'll write more about them later when I have evaluated them more fully.

Kimmo

I received my 8x25 Swarovksi CL pocket binoculars yesterday. I used them for some low key birding for about 30 minutes this morning

My initial impression is very favorable although perhaps I am influenced by my status as a Swarovski "fan". (My everyday birding binos are Swarovision EL 8.5x42. My wife uses EL 8x32). Optical quality is excellent and they are easy to focus. However the dioptric compensation wheel(if needed) is a bit difficult to use (very small). The neck strap is not particularly comfortable

As for the weight of 12 oz whether that is an issue depends on how you will use these pocket optics. For my wife & I the small size will be great for packing when we take a non-birding trip(e.g to visit relatives). We plan to keep them handy for watching birds from our apartment window.They will be a nice backup pair in case one of us needs to have our other pair of binos repaired .We don't believe the weight will be an issue when using them for concerts etc but that is a personal decision.

Swarovski CL Pocket 8x25 Bin (experience thus far)

Received my Swaro CL 8x25 Pocket Bin (from Honey Creek Bill and Beak) and have several comments after a day of handling it.

I really appreciate my eyes and eyesight, but after 67 years, they have become less forgiving and more demanding for optimal conditions in order to function properly. Pocket bins are not well received by said eyes, but that is the nature of pocket bins. It took a long while to get a proper balance between right/left eye.

But once that frustration was out of the way, I have good impressions.

The diopter adjustment wheel is stiff to move - I see this as positive because once it is set, chances are it won't move when inadvertantly brushed against by finger or otherwise. Secondly, related to the diopter adjust, when the bin is folded it completely encloses, conceals and protects the diopter adjustment wheel so that it is impossible to accidentally move it. Finally, the diopter ajustment wheel is positioned out-of-the-way. There is room for a little pinky finger on both sides of it if holding the bin in such a way. I was able to hold it as if it was a mid-size. All good stuff.

Very good resolution. I was able to get a good sharp image but had to work for it. Whereas my main bin - a Swaro SV 8x32 - seems to just snap into perfect focus everytime I look thru it, this little compact did not oblige so easily.

Focus wheel very nice (unlike most other Swaro bins I've tried - oh, if only Swaro would purchase the rights to the Nikon focus wheel). I didn't pay too much attention to the focus wheel nor its range - which is a good thing. I didn't have to give my finger a workout going from short to long range viewing, it was quite fluid. Sorry to folks who demand quantitative data - what's empirical to me is that it works good

I found the optics to be excellent. Probably the best of all the compacts I've tried this spring/summer - all the Swaro, Zeiss, Leica offerings. I was surprised to find a clear, bright view from edg to edg.

The added weight (over the previous version) is a non issue for me. The size is what matters. It is truly a pocket bin. Even while nested inside its relatively bulky case, it fit easily and comfortably into my field jacket.

When holding up the bin for viewing, it really feels more like a mid-size than a pocket bin. Less easy to get proper eye placement than a mid-size but easier than a smaller pocket bin.

Overall, optics very good, ergonomics excellent, the case is very nice.

One comment about the case is that it is long enough where you can easily store the bin with the eye pieces extended. For me, this makes the bin more at-the-ready because eye pieces extended is how I use it. Plus, with the eye pieces extended, there really isn't the need for ocular covers (which you won't get anyway with this bin). Not sure what the eye relief is but I'm not seeing any black spots!!

Oculars are same as other Swaro bins, in that the eye pieces screw out leaving the lens' very easy to clean.

That's my "data" dump on this subject. Thanks, Charles