• 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.

New released Swaro CL Companion 8x30 B (3 Viewers)

I won't try to compare the "optical box" properties of the CL Compact to other binoculars, but for what it's worth, if I have the eyecups of the 10x30 CL C fully twisted out and view without glasses, I don't see any kidney beaning. If I have the eyecups twisted in, I pretty quickly get kidney beaning if I bring my eyes closer to the eye lens, but I can also rather easily avoid kidney beaning by bracing the eyecups against my brow and tilting my head.

If I carefully try to move my eyes backwards from the area of no kidney beaning, I pretty soon get to less-than-full FOV territory. Perhaps this means that eye placement is less critical, perhaps not. These certainly aren't binoculars where avoiding kidney beaning would be hard, but since the FOV is not particularly wide, I can't say I'm that wild about the possibility of viewing a very narrow field with no kidney beaning if my eyes are far from the eye relief distance.

All in all, the eyepieces are fine, but without the hype I would not suspect there's anything unusual going on here with eye placement.

Kimmo
 
Hi,

Can someone tell me the width of the urban jungle strap and the width of the wild nature strap? I don't find information regarding this with my on-line searching and I really don't want to place a call to headquarters to try and find out. Also, is the urban jungle strap just nylon strap on each side or does it have neoprene on the side that sits against one's body? Thanks again...

(Also, looks like there is a premium one has to pay for the northern lights and urban jungle accessories).

CG
 
CG,

The Urban Jungle strap has no padding on either side. It's roughly an inch and a quarter wide as I recall, and so long that it seems to be intended for bandolier style wearing. The Wild nature strap I haven't seen live, but it looks a lot like a standard SV Fieldpro strap. The Northern Lights strap is neoprene padded on the body side and grey felt on the outside, with fabric reinforced edges. It has a contoured shape, and the widest part is 1 5/8", 40 mm.

I would go with the Wild Nature package as I don't see any added value in the others and actually think the WN set is likely better.

Kimmo
 
Kimmo, post 305,
The Urban Jungle binocular strap as well as the strap for the case are both 2,5 cm wide, The binocular strap has a minimum length of 2x45 cm. Both straps have no padding (althoug a padded piece can be added or removed), what I like a lot, since I carry my binoculars often in my backpack and I do not like the wide padded straps (I know that a lot of people like these a lot, but not for me, it is a matter of taste).
The case for the Wild Nature is well made, but too large for me to be carried in a backpack, that requires a case as snugg as possible (I know that is not everybodies taste, but it is mine). The Wild Nature bag has a zipper and it takes some time to remove the Companion from its case, whereas the (in my opinion far too expensive) Urban Junglee case does not have zippers but very convenient sliding closure facilities: no noise and fast.
I did not try the Northern Light straps and case yet, but I am sure that the contoured shape is not something I will choose, again a matter of taste. The felt case looks beautiful and will certainly make excellent pictures in the snow for the owners, but again that will not be my choice.
I suppose that Swarovski thought: all these comments about our cases: we now offer different choices, so everybody can be made happy, but we let them pay.....
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Optical box = exit pupil x eye relief

I.e. the accessibility of the optical disc.

Vespo
I am trying to understand what the light box is too and from what I have read so far (doesn't mean I am correct) I would say that your phrase 'accessibility of the optical disc' is more correct than EP x ER.

For example lets imagine your eye is looking through the bino at the perfect eye relief point. You have the full fov and no blackouts or kidney beans. If you move your eye closer to the bino, the view is ok for a short distance and then you begin to encounter problems with fov and blackouts/kidney beans etc. Going back to the perfect ER point you do the same again but this time moving gradually back from the ER point. Again this is ok for a short distance before you start getting problems.

My understanding is that the light box is the distance between these two points and is like a plus and minus tolerance around the ER point within which the full fov can be seen without any blackout problems.

A techie at Zeiss explained that this concept is more easily explored using a rifle scope because of the tremendously long ERs they have so that the user's eye is well clear of the eyepiece and doesn't get kicked in the eye by the recoil when firing. This gives you a lot of room to move your eye backwards and forwards to discover the extent of the light box.

It sounds like this effect has always been present with binos and rifle scopes and the term light box has been invented to describe it.

Lee
 
Vespo
I am trying to understand what the light box is too and from what I have read so far (doesn't mean I am correct) I would say that your phrase 'accessibility of the optical disc' is more correct than EP x ER.

For example lets imagine your eye is looking through the bino at the perfect eye relief point. You have the full fov and no blackouts or kidney beans. If you move your eye closer to the bino, the view is ok for a short distance and then you begin to encounter problems with fov and blackouts/kidney beans etc. Going back to the perfect ER point you do the same again but this time moving gradually back from the ER point. Again this is ok for a short distance before you start getting problems.

My understanding is that the light box is the distance between these two points and is like a plus and minus tolerance around the ER point within which the full fov can be seen without any blackout problems.

A techie at Zeiss explained that this concept is more easily explored using a rifle scope because of the tremendously long ERs they have so that the user's eye is well clear of the eyepiece and doesn't get kicked in the eye by the recoil when firing. This gives you a lot of room to move your eye backwards and forwards to discover the extent of the light box.

It sounds like this effect has always been present with binos and rifle scopes and the term light box has been invented to describe it.

Lee

1. How could a box be a distance? :smoke:
Since there are 3 dimensions in a box, exit pupil size will also affect the 'box'. Larger exit pupil tend to give an easier, more forgiving view when it comes to eye placement etc. in the left/right/up/down dimension. Maybe you could see it as a given but still it's a fact, at least in my world and the reason I like 7x bins. :cat:

2. As you also note, I agree on that a larger ER will make a longer optical box possible. Light rays from the eye piece that are forming the optical disc will be more parallell to the optical axis. So more room for movement there in the forward/backward dimension.

3. Kidney beaning I think is due to that the optical disc is not entirely flat but spherical? Though not dependent on eye relief, it might correlate to that larger eye pieces with longer eye relief tend to have better correction for spherical aberration?

4. If you see blackouts, I guess you've completely missed the optical disc/box and got too close to the eye piece?

But I could be wrong...o:)

Maybe the optical experts could kick some box/but here...:-O
 
How could a box be a distance? :smoke:

Maybe the optical experts could kick some box/but here...:-O

You are right, a box is not just a 'distance' and I was using imprecise language. The 'distance' I describe would be the long dimension down the side of the box, while the EP would provide the other two dimensions. The only difference between my suggestion and yours is that, as far as I understand it, the length of your box is the ER while the length of mine is the 'distance' discussed in my post.

Clear as mud?

Lee
 
You are right, a box is not just a 'distance' and I was using imprecise language. The 'distance' I describe would be the long dimension down the side of the box, while the EP would provide the other two dimensions. The only difference between my suggestion and yours is that, as far as I understand it, the length of your box is the ER while the length of mine is the 'distance' discussed in my post.

Clear as mud?

Lee

Guess I wasn't completely clear as HT-glass,
but the "formula" was only a conceptual way to point out the parameters that the 'box' may depend on. I have no idea of the actual size of this 'box'. A more mathematical way to write it might be this:

Optical box ~ kErEp

Where:
k is Some muddy constant
Er is the eye relief in mm
Ep is the exit pupil area in mm2

Wouldn't a better name be 'optical pipe' btw?
Maybe the quality of the optical disc (if it's flat or curved) is an important factor and a part of k?
 
Last edited:
Just purchased a pair of 8x30`s, should be here next week, I love my 42`s but feel the need for a genuinely compact binocular with great performance, and having put a pair of these against a 32mm SV last month at Cleyspy, although the SV had the edge in outright performance the smaller size and ergonomics of the CL swung my decision.
 
Just purchased a pair of 8x30`s, should be here next week, I love my 42`s but feel the need for a genuinely compact binocular with great performance, and having put a pair of these against a 32mm SV last month at Cleyspy, although the SV had the edge in outright performance the smaller size and ergonomics of the CL swung my decision.
I think you will like the new Swarovski 8x30 CL's. They compare well to most 32mm's. I just picked up a pair of Zeiss Conquest HD's 8x32 and I was comparing them this morning out in the sun to my new 8x30 CL's and the CL's stack up quite well. The Conquest had a slightly bigger FOV but the CL had slightly sharper edges. The CL is of course more compact and lighter though. Both are great binoculars.
 
Hi Dennis, I ruled out a 32mm SV given the glare issues I was plagued by, side by side the CL is quite noticeably smaller, and really gave up very little optically.
 

Attachments

  • cl v sv.jpg
    cl v sv.jpg
    107.2 KB · Views: 358
Wow... that really is a big diff in size!!! I figured the two to be close enough to be negligible. Have these started arriving in stores in the US? Last I saw on B&H was "more on the way".

CG
 
Hi Dennis, I ruled out a 32mm SV given the glare issues I was plagued by, side by side the CL is quite noticeably smaller, and really gave up very little optically.

John
Are the eyecups fully extended on the CL as they appear to be on the EL?

Lee
 
Last edited:
Have these started arriving in stores in the US? Last I saw on B&H was "more on the way".

CG

We have had ours for several weeks. It was purchased from Gordon at Honey Creek Bill & Beak. He posts here with the username "proudpapa". He is our go-to dealer for Swarovski products, so I can highly recommend him.
 
Hi Lee,

It doesn`t appear they are, but the CL feels smaller in the hand than the EL.

John.

OK so now I am guessing you didn't take the photo yourself.

I like the look of the new CL and I liked the old one too although it is true that it didn't have the stellar optics of SLCs and ELs. I didn't think the old one was trying to be in the same league as the other models anyway, but this one sounds great. I will take care to try it out at Bird Fair.

Lee
 
A frustrating tidbit from a dealer point of view. The cases for the new Companions come in their own sealed boxes so I haven't been able to check out the Northern Lights wool felt cases. I'll have to buy one for myself.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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