my review of Swarovision 10x50 and 12x50 (1 Viewer)

Hi to all.
The review of Swarovision 10x50 and 12x50 is now available on www.binomania.it
http://translate.google.com/transla...inocoli/swarovision10x50/swarovision10x50.php
excuse me for the translation offered by google :-C
Best Regards from Italy
Piergiovanni

I enjoyed reading through the review...even in the google translated version. I have yet to have the opportunity to check out any of the Swarovisions but look forward to that day.

On a somewhat related note, the second last picture in the article shows the Swarovisions lined up with a variety of other binoculars you had on hand. I believe that is the 42 mm in the middle with the 50 mm over on the lefthandside. Which binocular is just to the left of the 42 mm Swarovision?

The reason I ask is because it has a striking resemblance to a binocular I have on hand under a different brand name. I am curious to see what it is called on your side of the world.

Thanks.

FrankD said:

I enjoyed reading through the review...even in the google translated version. I have yet to have the opportunity to check out any of the Swarovisions but look forward to that day.

On a somewhat related note, the second last picture in the article shows the Swarovisions lined up with a variety of other binoculars you had on hand. I believe that is the 42 mm in the middle with the 50 mm over on the lefthandside. Which binocular is just to the left of the 42 mm Swarovision?

The reason I ask is because it has a striking resemblance to a binocular I have on hand under a different brand name. I am curious to see what it is called on your side of the world.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Frank,
Are you talking about a Meopta or their Cabela's version? Do they have another name over there?

I like that wooden Berlebach binocular tripod adaptor. I wonder if it is available here? I couldn't locate one. B&H sells one of their wooden car window mounts.

Bob

Bob,

Actually the one on the other side of the 42 mm Swarovision. It has an uncanny resemblance to that Pro Optic I reviewed all be it in different colors.

;-)

FrankD said:

Bob,

Actually the one on the other side of the 42 mm Swarovision. It has an uncanny resemblance to that Pro Optic I reviewed all be it in different colors.

;-)

Click to expand...

Hello! Thanks for the comments. Here is a list of binoculars in the foreground, from the left:

Swarovision 12x50
Zeiss Dyalit 8x56
Canon 10x42
Minox Hg APO 10x43
GHT ED 8x42 (chinese)
Swarovision 8.5x42
Meopta 8x42
Nikon Edge 8x42
Swarovski SLC HD 8x42
Vortex Razor Hd 8x42

A few weeks ago I called some Italian experts who use the binoculars in various sectors: hunters, bird watchers, police, amateur astronomers, etc.etc.. The companies have sent me their best "8x42", available on the market.
I will publish the review in the coming days, with all results. It has been an "exhausting" work but I hope useful. If someone is interested in today i'll publish the review of the Zeiss Diascope FL85.
This is the link to the berlebach support:
http://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=70&sprache=english
However this support is also very easy to build..
Have a nice week end!
Piergiovanni

Pier,

Thanks for posting the link to the 50mm SV EL review. I enjoyed reading it and also the SLC-HD review.

I was impressed by the beautiful photos you took of the SV ELs and the SLC-HD in their "natural environment'. The photos make them look very appealing. You should sell those photos to Swarovski for a nice price so you can use the money to buy more binoculars and do more reviews!

I noticed that you mentioned the "rolling ball" in the SV ELs. I got flak from a couple SV EL devotees for mentioning it here ("it isn't an issue," they wrote). Well, maybe not for them but for enough people to make it worth mentioning in any review. I'm glad you did.

As far as Swaro's answer about the "rolling ball" being a trade-off for optimizing the "static image," that makes no sense to me. It reminds me of Zeiss' reason for having the astigmatism at the edges of the FLs to optimize the centerfield sharpness.

There are some birders like Henry who don't pan much. How that works I don't know. Except birds on the ground in an open field pecking for worms, I have to pan to find birds in the woods or to follow them in flight.

I also like to watch circling hawks, vultures, and on occasion, eagles, and I have to pan and tilt to follow them as they fly.

I also know from looking through the Nikon SE and Nikon EDG that optical engineers can get excellent edge performance and image sharpness without sacrificing smooth panning. So both Swaro's and Zeiss' reasoning for their design choices seems questionable to me.

But at least Swaro covered their bases; those who are bothered by the "rolling ball" can buy the SLC-HD and get nearly the same performance without the image being obsessively sharp to the edge.

If the Google translation was accurate, I gather that you found the focusing was not as smooth as you would expect from binoculars at this price point?

I've read about this same issue with other Swaro bins and have noticed it myself. I thought they would have solved that problem after they breached the $2K mark!

Some people report the Swaro SLC and EL focusers as being very "smooth" so I have to wonder if there's sample variation or if some people are just less bothered by stiff focusers than others.

Ciao,
Brock

Excellent review.

binomania said:

Hi to all.
The review of Swarovision 10x50 and 12x50 is now available on www.binomania.it
http://translate.google.com/transla...inocoli/swarovision10x50/swarovision10x50.php
excuse me for the translation offered by google :-C
Best Regards from Italy
Piergiovanni

Click to expand...

Nice Review. I just looked through the Swarovision 10x50's and the 12x50's and I must say they are trully impressive. I still prefer my Swarovision 8.5x42's for the type of birding I do but I wouldn't mind getting a pair of the 10x to complement them for the times I do open country birding and especially birds of prey.

[email protected] said:

Nice Review. I just looked through the Swarovision 10x50's and the 12x50's and I must say they are trully impressive. I still prefer my Swarovision 8.5x42's for the type of birding I do but I wouldn't mind getting a pair of the 10x to complement them for the times I do open country birding and especially birds of prey.

Click to expand...

you can do that type of birding also with the x42 , without the heavy weight

brocknroller said:

Pier,

Thanks for posting the link to the 50mm SV EL review. I enjoyed reading it and also the SLC-HD review.

I was impressed by the beautiful photos you took of the SV ELs and the SLC-HD in their "natural environment'. The photos make them look very appealing. You should sell those photos to Swarovski for a nice price so you can use the money to buy more binoculars and do more reviews!

I noticed that you mentioned the "rolling ball" in the SV ELs. I got flak from a couple SV EL devotees for mentioning it here ("it isn't an issue," they wrote). Well, maybe not for them but for enough people to make it worth mentioning in any review. I'm glad you did.

As far as Swaro's answer about the "rolling ball" being a trade-off for optimizing the "static image," that makes no sense to me. It reminds me of Zeiss' reason for having the astigmatism at the edges of the FLs to optimize the centerfield sharpness.

There are some birders like Henry who don't pan much. How that works I don't know. Except birds on the ground in an open field pecking for worms, I have to pan to find birds in the woods or to follow them in flight.

I also like to watch circling hawks, vultures, and on occasion, eagles, and I have to pan and tilt to follow them as they fly.

I also know from looking through the Nikon SE and Nikon EDG that optical engineers can get excellent edge performance and image sharpness without sacrificing smooth panning. So both Swaro's and Zeiss' reasoning for their design choices seems questionable to me.

But at least Swaro covered their bases; those who are bothered by the "rolling ball" can buy the SLC-HD and get nearly the same performance without the image being obsessively sharp to the edge.

If the Google translation was accurate, I gather that you found the focusing was not as smooth as you would expect from binoculars at this price point?

I've read about this same issue with other Swaro bins and have noticed it myself. I thought they would have solved that problem after they breached the $2K mark!

Some people report the Swaro SLC and EL focusers as being very "smooth" so I have to wonder if there's sample variation or if some people are just less bothered by stiff focusers than others.

Ciao,
Brock

Click to expand...

Hello. Thanks again for the comments. You are very kind. As for "the rolling ball effect" I have noticed that it is very subjective. In addition, using it for several hours, the problem is perceived less,at least in my personal case. While we have made the mega-review all the ornithologists have preferred the Swarovski SLC HD respect the Swarovision, because thet do more and more "Panning" In any case, Swarovski is right when they says that their new SLC HD is better than the old EL, because I also got to check this. I used a few pieces of Swarovski Swarovision, 4-5, I must only say that the best focus I've found is that of the SLC HD. Obviously this is only my poor and opinable opinions. You can see all the results of the mega-review shortly
Best Regards from Italy and excuse me for my very poor english
Piergiovanni

pimpelmees said:

you can do that type of birding also with the x42 , without the heavy weight

Click to expand...

Bu there are alot of advantages with the bigger aperture as we all know. Of course the 10x and 12x will allow you to see more detail. If I could have only ONE though it is going to be the 8.5 x42. It is the best all around size for sure.

QUOTE=brocknroller;2177446]Pier,

Thanks for posting the link to the 50mm SV EL review. I enjoyed reading it and also the SLC-HD review.

I was impressed by the beautiful photos you took of the SV ELs and the SLC-HD in their "natural environment'. The photos make them look very appealing. You should sell those photos to Swarovski for a nice price so you can use the money to buy more binoculars and do more reviews!

I noticed that you mentioned the "rolling ball" in the SV ELs. I got flak from a couple SV EL devotees for mentioning it here ("it isn't an issue," they wrote). Well, maybe not for them but for enough people to make it worth mentioning in any review. I'm glad you did.

As far as Swaro's answer about the "rolling ball" being a trade-off for optimizing the "static image," that makes no sense to me. It reminds me of Zeiss' reason for having the astigmatism at the edges of the FLs to optimize the centerfield sharpness.

There are some birders like Henry who don't pan much. How that works I don't know. Except birds on the ground in an open field pecking for worms, I have to pan to find birds in the woods or to follow them in flight.

I also like to watch circling hawks, vultures, and on occasion, eagles, and I have to pan and tilt to follow them as they fly.

I also know from looking through the Nikon SE and Nikon EDG that optical engineers can get excellent edge performance and image sharpness without sacrificing smooth panning. So both Swaro's and Zeiss' reasoning for their design choices seems questionable to me.

But at least Swaro covered their bases; those who are bothered by the "rolling ball" can buy the SLC-HD and get nearly the same performance without the image being obsessively sharp to the edge.

If the Google translation was accurate, I gather that you found the focusing was not as smooth as you would expect from binoculars at this price point?

I've read about this same issue with other Swaro bins and have noticed it myself. I thought they would have solved that problem after they breached the $2K mark!

Some people report the Swaro SLC and EL focusers as being very "smooth" so I have to wonder if there's sample variation or if some people are just less bothered by stiff focusers than others.

Ciao,
Brock[/QUOTE]

Brock:

I have much to agree with you in this post. I am one that likes great edges in my
optics, and the Nikons you mention and the Swaro. EL. including the SV do qualify.

As far as focuser quality, I feel the Nikon EDG is at the very top, and they are so
silky smooth right out of the box, and the speed is just right also.

Recently, Mark, Kammerdiner, posted that the Swarovision just needs a little use,
and then the focus smooths out. I agree with that, mine is much the same.

It seems that some who have posted about a knotchy focuser on the Swaro. may
have just tried a new one in the store, and that is not what happens in real life.

No rolling ball for me with the SV, and I wonder if it comes down to what someone
mentioned recently, as I am used to using binoculars with great edges, and I have
no need for eyeglasses, and good vision.

I really don't have any favorites, but do recognize quality.

Jerry

Can someone explain to me what the "rolling ball" is? Thanks.

BDL said:

Can someone explain to me what the "rolling ball" is? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Hi BDL, welocme;

Basically, it is a distortion of the scale of objects entering the FOV and leaving the FOV while panning for some people.

A rather complex perceptual situation. You can start with this tread.
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=180904

Thanks Surveyor