New released Swaro CL Companion 8x30 B (2 Viewers)

I consider any dioptre adjustment that is hidden to be unsuitable. When I start my birding, 1st thing I do is glance at the dioptre to make sure it is where I left it, and having to access the scale is a pain.

I always hated the FL dioptre - hard to access, hard to adjust quickly and an answer to a problem that didn't exist - also adding unneeded complexity.

Just give me a good ole push pull on the hinge or right barrel.

james holdsworth said:

I consider any dioptre adjustment that is hidden to be unsuitable. When I start my birding, 1st thing I do is glance at the dioptre to make sure it is where I left it, and having to access the scale is a pain.

I always hated the FL dioptre - hard to access, hard to adjust quickly and an answer to a problem that didn't exist - also adding unneeded complexity.

Just give me a good ole push pull on the hinge or right barrel.

Click to expand...

The new Swarovski CL diopter is not hidden. In fact as your eyes come up to the binocular you can see where it is set. Swarovski was trying to design a lightweight, compact binocular that we all desire with the new CL so they made the diopter control compact, lightweight and out of the way with out a big knob on it like the SV's. Every ounce in the field can be felt around your neck. It is a push and turn diopter on the hinge and it is simple to adjust. The greatest majority of buyers are NOT adjusting their diopters that frequently but they will appreciate a lighter more compact binocular.

Troubador said:

Thats good to hear Dennis. I do this with our Terra 8x32s and it works fine. But as Bruce points out you need to take care setting the eye cups at the same height and keeping them there. If you don't you won't be looking through the bins on axis and can expect more CA and quite probably other undesirable optical effects.

Lee

Click to expand...

Yes Lee, I checked the eye cups and they will stay where they are set at selected mid points without the need to be locked there. But they still can be inadvertently turned.

I don't have to worry about that because I can use that mysterious "optical box" to move the fully opened eye cups from being braced on my brow ridge to back into my eye sockets and not be afflicted with black outs!:t:

Bob

ceasar said:

Yes Lee, I checked the eye cups and they will stay where they are set at selected mid points without the need to be locked there. But they still can be inadvertently turned.

I don't have to worry about that because I can use that mysterious "optical box" to move the fully opened eye cups from being braced on my brow ridge to back into my eye sockets and not be afflicted with black outs!:t:

Bob

Click to expand...

Terrific news Bob. I think everyone should have an optical box and the first company to bring an optical box to market that can be retro-fitted to all the brands and models of binos out there will become the new alpha :eek!:. We need more innovative product product like this. I predict that the next product in this radical product line with be an image stabilised optical box powered by mini-photovoltaic cells. Elon Musk is rumoured to be contemplating an autonomous solar powered optical box which will be able to go birding on its own, subject to agreement by insurance companies who are worried by who will be responsible if it knocks over whole lines of spotting scopes fielded by old fashioned twitchers.

Lee

Well, Bob and Lee, I do not know about all of this new optical box technology. The older green cardboard square shaped boxes worked great!

Per the SONA video, the stated eye relief is 16m (that is for the 8X, 14mm for the 10X) and it has a usable plus or minus range of 11.5mm to 20.5mm. That seems to be quite a range if correct. I am not sure how that compares to other models.

BruceH said:

Well, Bob and Lee, I do not know about all of this new optical box technology. The older green cardboard square shaped boxes worked great!

Per the SONA video, the stated eye relief is 16m (that is for the 8X, 14mm for the 10X) and it has a usable plus or minus range of 11.5mm to 20.5mm. That seems to be quite a range if correct. I am not sure how that compares to other models.

Click to expand...

If SONA says so. I don't know how to measure that range though.

I have to start with the eye cups fully extended.

If I put the eye cups right against the base of my eye brows I get an excellent view without any problems but I don't know how long the ER is from there.

It is more comfortable for me to brace the eye cups against the bottom of my brow ridge under my brows. The view is perfect there but I still don't know what the ER is.

I can also push the eye cups back into my eye sockets and still get an excellent view but I don't know how long that ER is either.

Bob

Can a 30 mm compete with a 32mm? I purchased a Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 mainly so I had a 32mm to compare with my new Swarovski CL 8x30. I knew the Zeiss was an excellent mid-priced choice in a 32mm. When I received the Zeiss I could not get the eye cups out past the first click stop. I thought they only came out that far until I tried to remove the eye cups by screwing them out and suddenly they released and two more click stops became available but they also started to unscrew. The Zeiss Conquest HD has some tight, rough moving eye cups and if you adjusted your eye cups a lot they would be a deal killer. It is funny Zeiss has not corrected that problem over the years since they have been out especially considering that they are removable and they could easily be upgraded. I compared the two binoculars for several days and here is what I found. The Zeiss has two advantages which are a much closer focus of 4.8 feet versus 9.8 feet for the CL and the Zeiss has a larger FOV of 420 feet versus 396 feet for the CL. So if you like looking at bugs the Zeiss has a big advantage with it's closer focus and it's focuser is easier and faster to move than the CL. The bigger FOV of the Zeiss is noticeable when switching binoculars. The CL has sharper edges and a bigger sweet spot than the Zeiss and also a more neutral color presentation being almost neutral, whereas, the Zeiss has a slight brown tinge. CA and flare control are good on both binoculars and are about equal. The big advantage of the CL is an easier view with more flexible eye placement resulting in less blackouts. Also, the CL was slightly sharper on-axis and had better contrast resulting in more "pop" in the view. You can see detail with the CL better because of the better contrast and it has a more pleasing view. Even though the CL has a smaller FOV than the Zeiss it is a higher quality view in that field. Ergonomically there is no contest here. The CL is lighter at 17oz. versus 22 oz. for the Zeiss and more compact and you can wrap your fingers around it easier. It is really obvious when it is hanging around your neck or when you are holding the binocular which one is lighter. The rainguard and objective covers and the field pro strap system are also superior on the CL in my opinion and represent improvements in these areas which makes using the binocular more enjoyable. So overall the CL is better ergonomically and optically than the Zeiss unless you need the closer focus for some reason like bugs. The closer focus doesn't matter to me so I chose the CL and returned the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32. The Swarovski CL is a more modern binocular than the Conquest and represents the evolution of binoculars. The smaller apertures are getting higher and higher performance allowing you to carry a smaller more compact binocular for birding.

Amazing that the eye-cup problem [as Dennis noted] has been known since the models introduction, yet persists to this day.

Really shoddy for a Zeiss product. My personal 8x32 HD has eye-cups [2nd set] so crap that I can't adjust them without screwing out the entire assembly. 2 dollar eye-cups on a thousand dollar bin.....makes no business sense whatsoever.

james holdsworth said:

Amazing that the eye-cup problem [as Dennis noted] has been known since the models introduction, yet persists to this day.

Click to expand...

I have to agree with this, and also can't comprehend why Zeiss has not taken action to improve the situation.

Seems like Zeiss is capable of some wonderful things and some not so wonderful things. With the 8x32 conquest hd, a wonderful binocular at its price; unfortunately, below average eye cup operation and objective covers.

CG

Is Swarovski now "the low cost alternate"?o Ha... bet you haven't heard those words grouped together!!!

I'm thinking the 2018 8x30 CL Companion is in the super small binocular group dominated by the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD+ and the Zeiss 8x32 Victory FL despite being the longer (.5") binocular in the bunch.

One could argue they all offer excellent views, are well built, and are small and lightweight... however, the CL is doing it for $750-$800 less than the others - which would make it the low cost alternate for this user group, no?

Your thoughts...

CG

cycleguy said:

I have to agree with this, and also can't comprehend why Zeiss has not taken action to improve the situation.

Seems like Zeiss is capable of some wonderful things and some not so wonderful things. With the 8x32 conquest hd, a wonderful binocular at its price; unfortunately, below average eye cup operation and objective covers.

CG

Click to expand...

It is just strange that they wouldn't improve the eye cups on the Conquest HD 8x32 after all this time. They even developed and offer for free longer eye cups but they have the same rough action! I don't get it.

cycleguy said:

Is Swarovski now "the low cost alternate"?o Ha... bet you haven't heard those words grouped together!!!

I'm thinking the 2018 8x30 CL Companion is in the super small binocular group dominated by the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD+ and the Zeiss 8x32 Victory FL despite being the longer (.5") binocular in the bunch.

One could argue they all offer excellent views, are well built, and are small and lightweight... however, the CL is doing it for $750-$800 less than the others - which would make it the low cost alternate for this user group, no?

Your thoughts...

CG

Click to expand...

The CL is longer but it is slenderer and has better ergonomics than those two binoculars IMO. The CL is way lighter also than those 32mm's but yet I bet it will perform very close to them. I am thinking the CL will spark a reduction in the standard compact size of a 32mm binocular down to a 30mm. I would like to see Zeiss and Leica continue the trend and build some nice smaller 30mm binoculars for birders. How about a Zeiss 8x30 SF or a Leica Noctivid 8x30 with sub 17 oz. weights at about the $1200.00 price point? Sound interesting?

cycleguy said:

Is Swarovski now "the low cost alternate"?o Ha... bet you haven't heard those words grouped together!!!

I'm thinking the 2018 8x30 CL Companion is in the super small binocular group dominated by the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD+ and the Zeiss 8x32 Victory FL despite being the longer (.5") binocular in the bunch.

One could argue they all offer excellent views, are well built, and are small and lightweight... however, the CL is doing it for $750-$800 less than the others - which would make it the low cost alternate for this user group, no?

Your thoughts...

CG

Click to expand...

If it was competing with Ultravid HD+ (£1349) and FL (£1479) it would also be competing with Swaro's own 32mm EL (£1493). Seems unlikely that Swaro would intend this. So it is more likely that it is competing with Zeiss Conquest HD and LeicaTrinovid HD which come in at around the £700 mark and with the CL retailing at £910 - £1,010 depending on the accessory pack chosen, the CL is actually the expensive alternative!

Lee

Troubador said:

If it was competing with Ultravid HD+ (£1349) and FL (£1479) it would also be competing with Swaro's own 32mm EL (£1493). Seems unlikely that Swaro would intend this. So it is more likely that it is competing with Zeiss Conquest HD and LeicaTrinovid HD which come in at around the £700 mark and with the CL retailing at £910 - £1,010 depending on the accessory pack chosen, the CL is actually the expensive alternative!

Lee

Click to expand...

Hi Lee,

All those binoculars you mention are too large be a part of the small binocular group!!! This is reserved for the other x30 offerings from Nikon, Kite, Maven and the two little 8x32's Zeiss and Leica. That Swaro EL at 8/10" longer overall length is just a monster for this class! Even the new 8x30 CL is pushing the outer edge of this envelop being 1/2" longer than the rest. B

CG

cycleguy said:

Hi Lee,

All those binoculars you mention are too large be a part of the small binocular group!!! This is reserved for the other x30 offerings from Nikon, Kite, Maven and the two little 8x32's Zeiss and Leica. That Swaro EL at 8/10" longer overall length is just a monster for this class! Even the new 8x30 CL is pushing the outer edge of this envelop being 1/2" longer than the rest. B

CG

Click to expand...

OK CG I see what you mean. Folks prioritise binos in different ways and choosing by length is certainly one of them.

Lee

It is a pity that a small optical juwel is not mentioned in this 30/32 mm discussion. That is the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 not expensive at all and a very good competitor with many of the brand names mentioend here.
I have investigated the new Companions as well as the Meopta and both are excellent binoculars, where Meopta succeeds in a very attrative price, compared to quite a few others and where it can compete very well as far as quality is concerned And, no Dennis of the many Meoptas I used/investigated no one ever leaked oil or had hinge problems.
Is there a competition between 30 and 32 mm? For decades the 8x30 was considered the binocular for universal use, but that changed a bit in later years.
For me it is not a real point of discussion, it depends simply on the size, user comfort and optical performance whether it will be a 30 or 32 mm binocular when walking in the fields and mountains.
Gijs van Ginkel

Gijs van Ginkel said:

It is a pity that a small optical juwel is not mentioned in this 30/32 mm discussion. That is the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 not expensive at all and a very good competitor with many of the brand names mentioend here.
I have investigated the new Companions as well as the Meopta and both are excellent binoculars, where Meopta succeeds in a very attrative price, compared to quite a few others and where it can compete very well as far as quality is concerned And, no Dennis of the many Meoptas I used/investigated no one ever leaked oil or had hinge problems.
Is there a competition between 30 and 32 mm? For decades the 8x30 was considered the binocular for universal use, but that changed a bit in later years.
For me it is not a real point of discussion, it depends simply on the size, user comfort and optical performance whether it will be a 30 or 32 mm binocular when walking in the fields and mountains.
Gijs van Ginkel

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right Gijs, the little Meopta is a truly great bino and a similar size to Zeiss's FL.

Lee

Yep... the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 would be included in that group too (cabela's version is $900 which is less than the new CL)!!!

Lee, you have both the 8x32 Leica UV and new 8x30 CL on hand? Care to do a comparison??

CG

I compared the CL to my 8x32 Meostar, the Meopta was a tad brighter with a warmer tone, the CL better contrast, a bit sharper with a cleaner tone, for me the CL matched the Meopta optically easily, with better handling to boot.

Torview said:

I compared the CL to my 8x32 Meostar, the Meopta was a tad brighter with a warmer tone, the CL better contrast, a bit sharper with a cleaner tone, for me the CL matched the Meopta optically easily, with better handling to boot.

Click to expand...

Your correct. The CL is very sharp, has really good contrast and is very color neutral.