Hi, I have question to those who have experience with canon 10x42 is, swarovski slc 10x42 and nikon se 10x42, what is the difference them in terms of sharpness, brightness and clarity? Swaro slc 10x42 is much expensive than the nikon se 10x42, is it worth it? Which is the best instrument optically with wow view?
-
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.
nikon se, canon is or swarovski slc 10x42 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hati
- Start date
WJC
Well-known member
Sorry:
When you're in that league of quality, no one on this, or any other bino list, can offer truly helpful differences.
Because:
DIFFERENT tests performed at DIFFERENT times with DIFFERENT subjects having DIFFERENT ranges of accommodation for DIFFERENT visual acuities under DIFFERENT conditions will produce DIFFERENT results. :cat:
Bill
PS I don't think I have seen you here before ... so ... welcome!
Last edited:
WJC
Well-known member
"the Canon IS will show you most handheld, the SE on a tripod."
Joachim is such a showoff. But, people who have it together usually are. He, of course, is correct on both counts. I have an 8x32 SE which one of my grandkids will be pleased to own, and sold many of the 42mm L IS units. With either, you're in the big league. Also ...
... And if there’s one thing I hope to convey, it would be that many of those who believe everything relating to the quality of observations can be explained in terms of binocular performance alone, with no reference to our physiological differences—early onset glaucoma, cataracts, strabismus, macular pucker induced distortion, and the like—are in error. Like it or not, or believe it or not, the eye/brain partnership is every bit as important to binocular observing as the instrument itself. And, to those who try to get around this fact with myriad tests, I would add: (already posted)
:cat:
Bill
Last edited:
edwincjones
Well-known member
About the only thing these 3 have in common is 10x42
-the IS is heavier
-the SW most expensive
-the SE no longer made but available on the used market
You really need to try out for yourself, but side by side probably not possible
If I could compare , the decision would be one of personal preference
I doubt I could see much difference with optics, but would be happy with each
-the IS is heavier
-the SW most expensive
-the SE no longer made but available on the used market
You really need to try out for yourself, but side by side probably not possible
If I could compare , the decision would be one of personal preference
I doubt I could see much difference with optics, but would be happy with each
WJC
Well-known member
Yeah, but even when you re-evaluate you already know you will probably not SEE an improvement. :cat:
Bill
PS if there is ANYTHING humble about the SE it's that the rounded backplates, so popular TODAY, was first used on the Wallensak of the 1940s.
Hati,
I own the Nikon 10x42 SE and the Canon 10x42 L IS, and have tested the 10x42 SLC at home, comparing it against the other two. The one I use is the Canon, because it shows me more. Of the other two, I would pick the SLC over the Nikon as it has better transmission, slightly more natural colors and less chromatic aberration than the Nikon, as well as being nicer to hold and waterproof.
The Canon is heavier and clumsier, but the stable image is worth doing some arm exercises for. Besides, it can be supported by a simple finnstick (a small monopod or a sturdy selfie stick) threaded onto its tripod attachment thread. Image quality is first rate.
Kimmo
I own the Nikon 10x42 SE and the Canon 10x42 L IS, and have tested the 10x42 SLC at home, comparing it against the other two. The one I use is the Canon, because it shows me more. Of the other two, I would pick the SLC over the Nikon as it has better transmission, slightly more natural colors and less chromatic aberration than the Nikon, as well as being nicer to hold and waterproof.
The Canon is heavier and clumsier, but the stable image is worth doing some arm exercises for. Besides, it can be supported by a simple finnstick (a small monopod or a sturdy selfie stick) threaded onto its tripod attachment thread. Image quality is first rate.
Kimmo
If you are just talking about optics the Canon 10x42 IS-L easily has the most WOW view because it has the biggest AFOV and it has sharper edges than either the SLC or the SE. It has a more immersive view. I am like Kabsetz in that I can see more with the Canon because of the IS. I even preferred the Canon 10x42 IS-L over the Swarovski 10x50 SV after comparing them for a long time. I can SEE more detail with the Canon. I feel the Canon is the best 10x binocular you can buy optically.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Hi Kimmo,
The few opportunities I've had to evaluate the Canon brand have been disappointments because of inadequate eye relief. I need a min. of 17.5 mm. Now, I also find that the 10x42 L IS has been discontinued, — and as I recall it might have met my needs.
With regard to the others under discussion I greatly admire the original SLC-HD series, and their newer version. I'm a happy camper with the original 8x42 SLC-HD.
Ed
HI Ed
That is important news, the 10x42L has been discontinued.
Is there any link to the announcement?
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Kimmo and etudiant,
Eagle Optics doesn't list them at all, and I found a statement somewhere that it had been discontinued. Naturally, I can't find it now. Adorama and Amazon do list it at a very discounted price ($1049). Hope I'm wrong and didn't spread misinformation.
The eye-relief of the 10x42L is only 16mm, however, so for me it would be inadequate. Maybe the next version will improve that feature.
Ed
Eagle Optics doesn't list them at all, and I found a statement somewhere that it had been discontinued. Naturally, I can't find it now. Adorama and Amazon do list it at a very discounted price ($1049). Hope I'm wrong and didn't spread misinformation.
The eye-relief of the 10x42L is only 16mm, however, so for me it would be inadequate. Maybe the next version will improve that feature.
Ed
Here,
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/...s/list/binoculars/is-binoculars/is-binoculars
Displayed on the same page as the new 32 mm series.
Kimmo
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/...s/list/binoculars/is-binoculars/is-binoculars
Displayed on the same page as the new 32 mm series.
Kimmo
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Not good news!
Very much hope Canon will continue to offer an L grade glass, even if the price goes up.
Optics Planet says the Canon 10x42 IS-L has been discontinued. http://www.opticsplanet.com/canon-1...oof-image-stabilized-binoculars-0155b002.html
"Product Discontinued by Manufacturer
Canon 10x42 L IS WP Waterproof Image Stabilized Vari-Angle Prism Binoculars 0155B002 has been discontinued by Canon and is no longer available. Our product experts have helped us select these available replacements below. You can also explore other items in the Binoculars category yourself to try and find the perfect replacement for you!"
"Product Discontinued by Manufacturer
Canon 10x42 L IS WP Waterproof Image Stabilized Vari-Angle Prism Binoculars 0155B002 has been discontinued by Canon and is no longer available. Our product experts have helped us select these available replacements below. You can also explore other items in the Binoculars category yourself to try and find the perfect replacement for you!"