• 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.

10x50 BR (1 Viewer)

Temmie,
It surely would feel front heavy if you held it with both hands at the rear, thumbs against the thumbrests. I can't hold a binocular that way very well at all. I always grab near the front of the barrel with my left hand and focus with my right.

Steve,
Thanks.
 
Jerry,
I have what I thought is a completely average State Farm homeowner's policy with a $500 deductible. The binoculars were stolen from my brother in law's car, not mine. I was very surprised that they were willing to replace both binoculars, which had been top of the lines when new, with the current tops of the lines. They would have swung $2400 for me a new 50mm Leica HD, but I had already found a good deal on my BR on Ebay. I had searched far and wide for over a week without finding an acceptable used EL for my wife, so took them up on a Swarovision for her. It's embarrassing to come out ahead that way. "Don't feel sorry for the insurance company!" my wife tells me, but such generous settlements must run everybody's rates up.

There is something interesting about the deal with the Swarovision. They would have given me $1950, or have a SV shipped "from Swarovski". They must have an arrangement with Swaro, but not with Leica. It should be about another week.
Ron
 
Jerry,
I have what I thought is a completely average State Farm homeowner's policy with a $500 deductible. The binoculars were stolen from my brother in law's car, not mine. I was very surprised that they were willing to replace both binoculars, which had been top of the lines when new, with the current tops of the lines. They would have swung $2400 for me a new 50mm Leica HD, but I had already found a good deal on my BR on Ebay. I had searched far and wide for over a week without finding an acceptable used EL for my wife, so took them up on a Swarovision for her. It's embarrassing to come out ahead that way. "Don't feel sorry for the insurance company!" my wife tells me, but such generous settlements must run everybody's rates up.

There is something interesting about the deal with the Swarovision. They would have given me $1950, or have a SV shipped "from Swarovski". They must have an arrangement with Swaro, but not with Leica. It should be about another week.
Ron

Ron:

Now I understand, it goes back to the autowners coverage, and that must
cover the theft part. You have been treated very well and this would seem
to offer a bit of a bump for the Ins. Co. mentioned here.
Let us know how you and your wife like the SV. I am thinking you both will
be well pleased. Thanks for the explanation.

Jerry
 
Temmie,
It surely would feel front heavy if you held it with both hands at the rear, thumbs against the thumbrests. I can't hold a binocular that way very well at all. I always grab near the front of the barrel with my left hand and focus with my right.

Steve,
Thanks.

Me too, and have the left thumb parallel to the tube axis. Makes holding binos with longer barrels much steadier.
 
My wife's prized EL is much the same deal. It is going to be replaced with a new, well, I am too embarrassed to say it, but it starts with "S"!

Ron,

If the 8.5x42 EL SV is what you're aiming at, please take my advise and have a good look at the 8x42 SLC HD as well. Don't simply assume the EL is to be preferred over the SLC because it's more expensive and advertized as Swarovski's top model. In my experience the innovations - I'd rather call them experiments - worked into the EL SV are not necessarily for the better when it comes to ease of view. And you (your wife) may find the SLC's ergonomics more to your liking as well. After some months of heavy use I haven't found one single fault in the SLC, while in the EL SV I definitely did.

Renze
 
Renze,
Thanks for this advice which is very reasonable. We did in fact seriously consider the 8x42 SLC HD for her, although without having tried one. I think for myself I might have bought it, because I am accustomed to the common simple pincushion distortion. Here is how we chose the SV instead.

We have tried a Swarovision in a shop. I found the rolling ball noticeable if I looked for it, but hardly disturbing. As Henry Link discovered, the effect is minimized in the SV with a compound field correction-- pincushion near the center to smooth out panning, but fading to distortion-free near the edge. She didn't notice any difference in the view from the original EL, so I think she'll get used to it if she ever even notices it at all. The SV is also noticeably lightweight, compact and slender, compared to the original.

In the meantime she is stuck with my 8x42 Zeiss FL, and has no idea how lucky she is, to say the least, but we have learned something from her time spent with it. She enjoys the light weight of the 27 oz Zeiss, but does not especially appreciate its excellent color correction. She misses the EL's extra little bit of magnification, snuggly wraparound grip, and excellent outfield sharpness. While some of the qualities are shared, the weight, the grip and the 8.5x are unique to the EL series.

She is not like most of us, raging fiends who can jump on any good binocular and within minutes be wrenching out the best performance possible, dealing nonchalantly with its foibles, and recognizing its strengths. It is cool, I think, that she is wildly enthusisatic about ANY binocular, and I intend to preserve this little bit of idealness in our relationship, which is completely thanks to my buying the EL for her in the first place, with no involvement from her whatsoever. There's nothing like boldness, when it works. I am a big hero in that department, see? So, this being about her (okay also about me but it's not going to be mine), SV it will be. We shall see.
Ron
 
VOP,
I am generally skeptical of weird grips, and howl with amusement at some of the things people report. Part of it is I just want to preserve some appearance of dignity!

But by Jove I think you are on to something with the parallel thumb thing. In a quick test the improvement seems significant. Of course it's a little unnatural, but I don't think anybody will notice...
Ron
 
VOP,
I am generally skeptical of weird grips, and howl with amusement at some of the things people report. Part of it is I just want to preserve some appearance of dignity!

But by Jove I think you are on to something with the parallel thumb thing. In a quick test the improvement seems significant. Of course it's a little unnatural, but I don't think anybody will notice...
Ron

:king:

Yes, it takes some time to get used to it, but now I'm always using it with my Swift 828.

I came up with it when misunderstanding the "thumbs up grip" (used with porros).

:t:
 
Last edited:
Ron,

If the 8.5x42 EL SV is what you're aiming at, please take my advise and have a good look at the 8x42 SLC HD as well. Don't simply assume the EL is to be preferred over the SLC because it's more expensive and advertized as Swarovski's top model. In my experience the innovations - I'd rather call them experiments - worked into the EL SV are not necessarily for the better when it comes to ease of view. And you (your wife) may find the SLC's ergonomics more to your liking as well. After some months of heavy use I haven't found one single fault in the SLC, while in the EL SV I definitely did.

Renze

Still expensive, it won't keep my insurance rates from going up!

Ron, If your wife is wildly enthusiastic about any binoculars, do you think she might like an 8x30 CL? -:)

Renze, Does the SLC-HD's focuser turn smoothly in both directions? Or is it harder to turn in one direction than the other. You may not see this as a "fault" like I do.

Brock
 
Does the SLC-HD's focuser turn smoothly in both directions? Or is it harder to turn in one direction than the other. You may not see this as a "fault" like I do.

I didn't find the focusser in favour of some direction, and this goes for the EL as well as the SLC. However, I did notice some notchiness in the focusser which disappeared with use in the EL, and not yet completely in the SLC. I didn't remember it because in practice I don't notice, but yes, I think you've cornered me here. OK, there is a fault in the SLC. One.

Renze
 
Brock,
I said "...that she's wildly enthusiastic about ANY binocular".
But I didn't mean "JUST ANY" binocular!
Ron

(my God, you're still speaking to me)
 
I didn't find the focusser in favour of some direction, and this goes for the EL as well as the SLC. However, I did notice some notchiness in the focusser which disappeared with use in the EL, and not yet completely in the SLC. I didn't remember it because in practice I don't notice, but yes, I think you've cornered me here. OK, there is a fault in the SLC. One.

Renze

Ah, hah! The Swaro "Achilles Heel" strikes again! -:)

The more people I ask about Swaro focusers, the more responses I get about "notchy" focusers or turning harder in one direction than the other.

I've experienced both on the 8.5x EL, and the harder to turn issue with the 8x30 SLC. I didn't spend enough time with the 8x32 EL to put it through its paces, but it seemed to be the smoothest focuser of the three.

So I started out thinking the two under par focusers I tried were exceptions, but then I began reading reviews and comments that pointed out these same issues with other SLCs and ELs, and even the SV EL, and now an SLC-HD.

Then I thought it's a matter of perception. Some people are more sensitive to focus smoothness than others, but then one BF member tried three Swaros in a store and found sample variation in terms of the smoothness in the focusers, so that pretty much clinched it that this was an concrete issue.

Took some heat for mentioning it on BF (not being a member of the "Club" and all), but now the evidence is strong enough to make a case in a court of common peeves.

It's obviously not a make it or break it issue for you, and hopefully it will work itself out like it did with the EL.

I suspect there would be even more reports on sites like Optics Talk and 24hrcampfire since SLCs and ELs are popular with hunters, but since hunters focus at a distance, not up close where more focusing is necessarily, they are probably less aware of the issue, and they often wear gloves so the focuser is not as palpable as it would be with bare hands.

My purpose is not to diss Swaro bins, which are among the finest instruments made, but to point out (more to Dale and any other Swaro reps that might read these comments than potential buyers) that there is an issue that needs to be resolved by the time I save up enough money to buy a Swaro 8x32 EL!

I feel that when you get to this price point, everything, including the focuser, should operate smoothly and stay that way for a long time before it needs servicing.

Brock
 
Last edited:
As some of this thread is about binocular faults, I was checking out a pair of 8 x 32 Ultravids recently as part of an attempt to upgrade my ancient Nikon 8 x42 HG's to something better and lighter and found that there was a smidgen of backlash on the focussing wheel. I wondered whether it would get annoying over time.
 
As some of this thread is about binocular faults, I was checking out a pair of 8 x 32 Ultravids recently as part of an attempt to upgrade my ancient Nikon 8 x42 HG's to something better and lighter and found that there was a smidgen of backlash on the focussing wheel. I wondered whether it would get annoying over time.

Couldn't answer you specifically on the Ultravid, though they seemed to have worked out the focuser issues in the HD version from user reports, but sample variations are always possible at all price points.

I personally find backlash in any birding bins annoying. My first sample 8x32 HG had this issue, so did my first sample 7x36 ED2. I bird close in with my eights so I do a lot of focusing, particularly with the 8x32 HG.

The 8x32 Ultravid is MUCH lighter than the 8x42 HG (about 16 oz lighter!), even 6 oz. lighter than the 8x32 HG. So no contest there.

But how did the Ultravid compare to the 8x42 HG optically ?

Brock
 
The 8x42 HG was the first great roof prism binocular I ever looked through. I about fell over. "That's some clear glass" said the clerk in Fox Camera. Woah, indeed. Now I realize there are complaints--CA, not very bright, reddish hue are sometimes said. But, that one look in the store, I'll never forget. I also realize now there are complaints about everything.

"an attempt to upgrade my ancient Nikon 8 x42 HG's to something better"
Lotsaluck,
Ron
 
I was comparing the bins inside a shop. I focussed on text on a wall poster and the clearest image was with the 8 x42 HD's. By clearest I mean a particular letter I couldn't read properly with the Nikons, and (Swarovision 8 x 42's) was legible with the Leica HD's. The backlash put me off as it's quite annoying, I couldn't work out where to put my thumbs on the Swaros. The offer of £100 px for my Nikons was also hard to swallow. Keep the Nikons and have a birding holiday is the probable outcome.
 
Malc1,
I had a binocular of the same vintage as yours, an 8x42 Leica Trinovid. After reading reams of stuff on this forum, I eventually became more mindful of its warts than of its many excellent qualities. I was proud that I had become such a critic. So, I upgraded to a Zeiss FL.

Am I happier in the long run? Not really, or at least not much. The FL did solve those particular problems, but some of the things about the old Trinovid, I miss. It did make birds look very nice, in its way.

Upgrade fever is rampant here, you have to watch out for it. If your neck is hurting, going from a heavy 42mm to a light 32mm is actually a good reason to switch. But any new binocular will take some getting used to, and will never beat your oldie in every way. If Nikon is your brand, you might even look for a good used 8x32 HGL.
Ron
 
Warning! This thread is more than 12 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