rogernashv
Member
I want to buy a pair of binoculars for bird and wildlife observarion.I want a pair that will last a lifetime.Are Swarovski's worth it?Money is tight and i dont want to regret spending more than i have to
-
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.
worth it? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter rogernashv
- Start date
Hi Roger,
Welcome to the forum. The only way you can tell whether binoculars are worth it, is to try them out yourself. But midpriced binoculars have improved a lot in recent years, and many people consider the differences between high-end binoculars (like Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica) and binoculars costing around $500 to be quite minor (though some do love their high-end binos). Here are some links to binoculars views that should help you narrow your choices (though there is no substitute for trying them yourself):
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics.html
There are a number of excellent articles on this page. In particular, check out the Midpriced Binocular Roundup link with the accompanying chart, as well as the "Binocular Picks for Every Price Range" chart.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/buying_guide.asp?cid=4
The above is a list of Eagle Optics (a very well respected American optics dealer) "staff picks" for birding binoculars in various price ranges.
http://www.birddigiscoping.com/2006/12/closer-look-at-binoculars-advice-from.html
If you scroll down to the bottom of this page, you will see a list of binocular picks for various price ranges. The author works for Vortex Optics, though I think he is actually very objective in his opinions.
There are also various sites with out of date information. I would take their recommendations with a grain of salt because they do not include consideration of more recent models such as those from Vortex, but they have some good info:
http://www.betterviewdesired.com/index.php
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html
Best,
Jim
Welcome to the forum. The only way you can tell whether binoculars are worth it, is to try them out yourself. But midpriced binoculars have improved a lot in recent years, and many people consider the differences between high-end binoculars (like Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica) and binoculars costing around $500 to be quite minor (though some do love their high-end binos). Here are some links to binoculars views that should help you narrow your choices (though there is no substitute for trying them yourself):
http://www.birdwatching.com/optics.html
There are a number of excellent articles on this page. In particular, check out the Midpriced Binocular Roundup link with the accompanying chart, as well as the "Binocular Picks for Every Price Range" chart.
http://www.eagleoptics.com/buying_guide.asp?cid=4
The above is a list of Eagle Optics (a very well respected American optics dealer) "staff picks" for birding binoculars in various price ranges.
http://www.birddigiscoping.com/2006/12/closer-look-at-binoculars-advice-from.html
If you scroll down to the bottom of this page, you will see a list of binocular picks for various price ranges. The author works for Vortex Optics, though I think he is actually very objective in his opinions.
There are also various sites with out of date information. I would take their recommendations with a grain of salt because they do not include consideration of more recent models such as those from Vortex, but they have some good info:
http://www.betterviewdesired.com/index.php
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html
Best,
Jim
I birded with a pair of 8x30 SLC Swarovski binocs for many years. Had an opportunity to purchase a pair of 10x43 ELs for dealer cost. Excellent binoculars. Did not like 10X and my wife needed binoculars so she uses them.
About three years ago I purchased a pair of Pentax 8x43 DCF SP binoculars as I wanted more eye relief than the 8x30 swarovski provided.
Optically I can't detect any significant difference between the three binoculars. The Pentax's seem brighter, but maybe it is just better contrast than the 8x30 Swarovski's. Yes the EL's are excellent and if I put all three binoculars on a tripod and looked thru them in all light conditions I'm sure there is a difference.
I picked the particular pentax model because of its 22 mm eye relief. I gave up field of view.
I've been meaning to sell the 8x30 swaro's for several years and will eventually.
Yes, I underline what J. Moore stated. Once you get in the $500 range there are a lot of excellent bins. And no matter the cost trying out the binoculars is extremely important. Face shape, eyeglasses can make a big difference in how the binoculars come to the eye.
Bob
About three years ago I purchased a pair of Pentax 8x43 DCF SP binoculars as I wanted more eye relief than the 8x30 swarovski provided.
Optically I can't detect any significant difference between the three binoculars. The Pentax's seem brighter, but maybe it is just better contrast than the 8x30 Swarovski's. Yes the EL's are excellent and if I put all three binoculars on a tripod and looked thru them in all light conditions I'm sure there is a difference.
I picked the particular pentax model because of its 22 mm eye relief. I gave up field of view.
I've been meaning to sell the 8x30 swaro's for several years and will eventually.
Yes, I underline what J. Moore stated. Once you get in the $500 range there are a lot of excellent bins. And no matter the cost trying out the binoculars is extremely important. Face shape, eyeglasses can make a big difference in how the binoculars come to the eye.
Bob
etc
Well-known member
My first bino ever was a Leica. I used it and said it's OK. But I thought it's not really that great.
Well, since getting it I looked through others binos and could never get as nice a view optically no matter what else I tried. Eventually it dawned on me, through comparison, what a nice bino it actually is. I had no basis for reference before.
Eventually I got a Swarovski too, and it excelled even the Leica. The EL is a "wow" factor every time you pick it up.
Very expensive for sure.
No, you absolutely don't need Alpha bino, only if you want them.
If I had to do it again, I would get a used Alpha bino 1 generation old. With Swarovski, it's SLC. With Leica, it's Trinovid. Great value. Keep it for a long time.
Other reason for buying used is that if you are actually going to use it in the field, you will scratch it, or damage it somehow over the years. Inevitably, even the most precious optik will get dropped, or banged against a tree, or wet.
Well, since getting it I looked through others binos and could never get as nice a view optically no matter what else I tried. Eventually it dawned on me, through comparison, what a nice bino it actually is. I had no basis for reference before.
Eventually I got a Swarovski too, and it excelled even the Leica. The EL is a "wow" factor every time you pick it up.
Very expensive for sure.
No, you absolutely don't need Alpha bino, only if you want them.
If I had to do it again, I would get a used Alpha bino 1 generation old. With Swarovski, it's SLC. With Leica, it's Trinovid. Great value. Keep it for a long time.
Other reason for buying used is that if you are actually going to use it in the field, you will scratch it, or damage it somehow over the years. Inevitably, even the most precious optik will get dropped, or banged against a tree, or wet.
black lark
Registered User
edwincjones
Well-known member
For me-YES
I struggled with this decision for 1-2 years. I was using a Swift Audubon 8.5x42ED (a very good reasonably priced binocular) and was trying to justify the cost of upgrading to the 8.5x42EL. I would go back and forth, argueing that rationally the extra cost could not be justified, but lusting in my heart and hands for the great erogonic feel of the ELs.
After 2 years of indecision, I went for the ELs and am very pleased.
My strongest arguement is that I am getting older, my eyes are fading, and the ELs (or other high end binocs) will give me the best possible view.
edj
I struggled with this decision for 1-2 years. I was using a Swift Audubon 8.5x42ED (a very good reasonably priced binocular) and was trying to justify the cost of upgrading to the 8.5x42EL. I would go back and forth, argueing that rationally the extra cost could not be justified, but lusting in my heart and hands for the great erogonic feel of the ELs.
After 2 years of indecision, I went for the ELs and am very pleased.
My strongest arguement is that I am getting older, my eyes are fading, and the ELs (or other high end binocs) will give me the best possible view.
edj
I collected my EL 8.5 x42 yesterday after lots of deliberation and comparison. I went for them because of the clarity of the optics compared against Leica Trins, Ultras but not the HDs (which were out of my price range), Swifts, Optis, and Zeiss FL. The latter were the closest in quality, but I do a lot of Odonata work (surveys) and the extra magnification (0.5) and the close focus of the ELs was a winner. I cannot praise these bins enough - they are terrific - they suck in light in dark conditions.
Regards
Jon
Regards
Jon
etc
Well-known member
SLCs are outdated. Swarovski needs to reduce the weight, brighten the optics and improve the close focus distance just to mention a few.
They do have one advantage over the EL line, and that's they are more compact it seems. That is, if they made a 8x42 SLC. Right now, if you want an 8x42, you have to go with 8.5x42 EL.
etc
Well-known member
I have Leica Trinovid 8x42 BA and didn't think it was possible to improve on its stunning image.
Yet Swarovski 8.5x42 EL does exactly that. It's not any more sharp, but more lively, better color rendition, plus can see more detail with additional 0.5x. Plus, less flare and easier to hold ergonomically. It's easily the most stunning optical instrument I've ever held.
Last edited:
As stated in the very first reply. It is important that you get out there and try them!
Maybe you can see the difference maybe you can't? Maybe you don't think the difference is worth the extra hard earned cash?
There is also the question of the feel of the things, how they sit in your hand. They can have the best optics in the world, but if they don't sit right in the hand and on your face they are worse than useless.
Get down to a good local retailer and get them to lay put a selection from one end of your price range to the other and then just try them out.
Maybe you can see the difference maybe you can't? Maybe you don't think the difference is worth the extra hard earned cash?
There is also the question of the feel of the things, how they sit in your hand. They can have the best optics in the world, but if they don't sit right in the hand and on your face they are worse than useless.
Get down to a good local retailer and get them to lay put a selection from one end of your price range to the other and then just try them out.
You are free to see it that way.
To me it seems to be more of a question of point of view.
If the SLCs are outdated ... hell, most of what's on the market today is.
If you apply such stringent criteria rigorously, you are left with very, very few models to choose from.
Minimal focussing distance is better in others, that's true. But it is not equally important for all users.
Whether the SLCs lack in brightness, .... well, that seems to be a matter of debate. Objective measurements show they are right up there with the best (if by brightness you mean transmission).
You will have noticed that some of the differences between the SLCs and the ELs are deliberate to keep them apart to avoid in-house competition.
The weight argument applies to the 42 mm models, not to the 30 mm and the 56mm models, which are just as heavy as competing models (within very reasonable tolerances).
To have an 8x42 SLC would economically not be wise. It's enough to have competition from other companies; it would be an unfortunate move to create competition in the own product line.
Swarovski by the way is offering three (!) different 8x30/32 mm models.
In the 8x40/42 category, the EL is certainly a good choice. For those who don't like it, cannot afford it or do not want to afford it, there is a host of others with their respective strenghts and weaknesses.
The one and only that pleases everybody will most likely never exist.
In the meantime, enjoy what you have.
Tom
etc
Well-known member
I am considering trading my 8x42 Trinovid for 7x42 SLC "Neu", but for one reason only: Because the latter has greater focus past infinity and I can use it without eyeglasses, while the Trinovid, I cannot. The difference between diopter range is 4 vs. 6 if I am correct in my assessment.
The relationship between Trinovid and Ultravid is the same as SLC and EL.
They are very, very good but not the finest.
The relationship between Trinovid and Ultravid is the same as SLC and EL.
They are very, very good but not the finest.
John M Robinson
Well-known member
I still think it would be smart for Leica to continue offering the Trinovid as a very nice, but heavier and less expensive option to the Ultravid HD. I think there is a market for that niche, especially now that the HD is even more expensive. I believe Leica is going to lose market share to companies that still offer bins in the $1,000 - $1,400 range.
Yes, I really agree about the weight and close focus issues. But brightness? How much can the brightness improve? Yes, I have read that the new Zeiss Victory FL is brighter than Swarovski. But what is really the difference? I recently purchased the Swarovski SLCnew7x42, and without a doubt it's very bright. I mean, a binocular will never reach 100% light transmission and the Swarovskis are since long time claimed to have about 95% or so. A few percents improvement you will not be able to notice, would you notice even 100% in comparison to 95%? May it be possible that brightness has been mixed to contrast or a whiter color reproduction?
Regards, Patric
Last edited:
edwincjones
Well-known member
I am sure that if I would have gotten another top of the line binocular, I would have been just as happy; but I would have always wondered if I should have gotten the EL.
edj
etc
Well-known member
+1 to that
You cannot buy new Leica Ultravid HD for less than about 2 grand (or significantly less than that anyway)
It's good but in the price range (and less) there is a lot of very viable competition.
