The new 8x30 CLl's (1 Viewer)

stephen b said:

But,... now I may have to spend the shipping coin just to test them out. I really hate to do that, because I do not want to keep these. I am keeping my current SLC and going to wait for the upgrade in HD?ED glass to either a 8x30 or 8x32 format. But I may just order anyways, even though I hate to take advantage of the liberal 30 day send back time. I really should just wait till the Cabelas in town gets them in and then get them to look at.

Click to expand...

I hear ya'. I've got an 8x32 FL and an 8x SE as well. I find it hard to believe the CL is actually better so I haven't sprung for it.

Yet.

Eagle Optics generally gets my business but they've been out of stock on the CL's for a month or more. More time to mull things over I guess.

I have been looking for the lightest midsize that really satisfies so I can maybe give up the compacts. The CL might do it. The forthcoming Opticron 8x32 Traveller sounds intriguing as well. 13.4 ounces! I can live with that--all day, every day, and everywhere. Mixed opinions over on the Opticron forum though.

Mark

[email protected] said:

I never trust SALES people because that's what they are SALES people. Of course he is going to tell you the SLC and the EL are way better than the CL because they make more profit on a more expensive binocular. SALES people will always steer you to the most expensive model or the one with most profit margin for them. I would do like you are doing. Try them and see what you think. I think you will be surprised how good they are if they work for you.

Click to expand...

Well, I do trust this particular salesperson at that place of business more than a # of people that I do not really know on the internet. This guy always gives me a straight scoop and will talk about binoculars without ever trying to steer you to one, or for that matter to get to to buy period. And he really knows his Swaro bin's- so he is a good one to get opinions on those especially.

I have been a Swarovski owner since 1994 (my first real Alpha purchase) and I for one am a big fan of theirs. I was not trying to put down the CL for what it is- but only for what I wished that it could have been. But I fully understand the probable reason for the direction with this size format that they are taking. I had and have read all the raves about the SV and HD's and have looked at those myself. And I was really wishing for the 8x30 HD; but like they say "if wishes were horses, beggars would ride".

So to now really test out the new CL, I decided to put my $$ where my mouth is/was. Cabela's has them in stock; So..... I am picking up in 2 weeks from my in town Cabela's - a new 8x30 CL; the newest 8x30 SLC and the newest 8x32 EL. Then I am going to do a thorough personal test of them for myself against each other and against my older SLC and a Pentax DCF ED among others.

And for what it is worth- I will let you know what MY eyes tell me.

Alexis Powell said:

Personally, I'm not much interested in the pricing. I can see how it is very relevant for first time buyers and potential new Swarovski customers, but for those of us who already own a premium alpha, the question is more about whether a new bin is a significant upgrade (or fills a significant niche use) rather than whether it is worth its price. It is also hard to be impressed with $800-$1000 price tags on alphas when one can remember when today's alphas could be had new for the same. Sure, the dollar is worth less, but my salary is very much the same as back then, and other things like food and such don't seem to have risen in cost nearly as much as have alpha binocular prices. I'm still more impressed with how high prices have climbed on alphas than how low the price of the CL has been set.

--AP

Click to expand...

I really think the CL has been priced low to get new people into the brand who have previously not been able to afford a Swarovski. They try the CL and like it and like Swarovski customer service and they are a customer for life and eventually want to move up to an SV. The auto manufacturers do the same thing. Buy the baby Mercedes when you are younger and then if you like it you move up to the more expensive model when you are older and your income goes up. I feel Swarovski for this reason made the CL a bargain for it's quality. I mean you get there best coatings with Swarobright ,Swarodur and Swarotop for only $900.00. The quality of the CL is just as high as the SV with the only difference being it doesn't have the Magnesium frame like the SV using polycarbonate and aluminum which works great on the smaller binocular keeping it light and it doesn't have ED glass which probably isn't that big of a deal on a 30mm aperture anyway. The CL uses an eyepiece diopter which works just great not moving at all after adjustment like some binoculars I have had in the past. The eyecups move smooth as silk just like the SV and are made of the same great feeling rubber where it meets your face. Both the rainguard and objective covers are the best I have seen on any binoculars working perfectly and fitting perfectly. The armor on the CL is perfect just a little bit tacky but yet comfortable in your hands and the fit of them in your hands is great being better than both the Leica BN or the Zeiss FL. The case might be a little big for some people but it hold the CL's with the strap with no problem and since it swings way open it is easy to take the binoculars in and out of them. The strap fits nicely in the the little extra front compartment with the binoculars at the back and it is comfortable on your belt. The weight at 17.5 oz. is not to be ignored either. It is easier to hold all day than even the Zeiss FL which is around 20oz. Less than 18oz. seems to be a good weight which allows you to hold the binoculars all day but yet they are not so light as to jiggle around more like the smaller compacts and they are big enough to grasp with even bigger hands.

stephen b said:

Well, I do trust this particular salesperson at that place of business more than a # of people that I do not really know on the internet. This guy always gives me a straight scoop and will talk about binoculars without ever trying to steer you to one, or for that matter to get to to buy period. And he really knows his Swaro bin's- so he is a good one to get opinions on those especially.

I have been a Swarovski owner since 1994 (my first real Alpha purchase) and I for one am a big fan of theirs. I was not trying to put down the CL for what it is- but only for what I wished that it could have been. But I fully understand the probable reason for the direction with this size format that they are taking. I had and have read all the raves about the SV and HD's and have looked at those myself. And I was really wishing for the 8x30 HD; but like they say "if wishes were horses, beggars would ride".

So to now really test out the new CL, I decided to put my $$ where my mouth is/was. Cabela's has them in stock; So..... I am picking up in 2 weeks from my in town Cabela's - a new 8x30 CL; the newest 8x30 SLC and the newest 8x32 EL. Then I am going to do a thorough personal test of them for myself against each other and against my older SLC and a Pentax DCF ED among others.

And for what it is worth- I will let you know what MY eyes tell me.

Click to expand...

Are you going to buy them or compare them in store? While you are comparing them compare them to the Zeiss FL also(Cabella's might not have the FL). Really look at brightness and sweet spot size. I think the only difference you will notice will be the slightly bigger FOV of the EL and SLC. I think the CL will be brighter because I think it has a little better light transmission. It could be Swarovski has improved the coatings on the CL a little over the EL and the SLC. 91% transmission is close to the FL if not equal which is quite a benchmark for SP prisms. The CL's are really bright and they are unbelievable in twilight for a 30mm.

(Stephen b)... So to now really test out the new CL, I decided to put my $$ where my mouth is/was. Cabela's has them in stock; So..... I am picking up in 2 weeks from my in town Cabela's - a new 8x30 CL; the newest 8x30 SLC and the newest 8x32 EL. Then I am going to do a thorough personal test of them for myself against each other and against my older SLC and a Pentax DCF ED among others.

Click to expand...

Thanks for putting your $$ on the barrel head. We need hands-on comparisons of the CL and SLC. An analysis of CA as related to field angle could be helpful, since that might account for the reduced FOV designed into the CL. As an aside, if you wear glasses and are far sighted I'd predict that it might be possible to see more of the FOV with the CL — basically because there is less of it. The eye relief is the same.

Have fun,
Ed

[email protected] said:

I thought the slightly smaller FOV of the CL would bother me but it doesn't. I would say the CL is as good if not better than any 32mm I have tried including the Zeiss FL, Nikon SE, Nikon EII,Leica BN or Leica Ultravid. But I am going by memory because I don't have those anymore. Overall I would say it is smaller and more compact than any 32mm I have tried and the optics in this thing are amazing for it's size. It really fits your hands nice probably better than any of the more bulky 32mm's. The optics although not quite as good are similar to the 8.5x42 SV. The 8.5x magnification in the SV brings things quite a bit closer than the 8x in the CL and of course the edges are a little sharper in the SV but the CL has quite sharp edges and a big sweet spot typical of Swarovski. I am telling you it is a very nice binocular especially to get Swarovski quality for less than $1 K. Great compact binocular for traveling and carrying about. It is lighter than most 32mm's and it is strange how much difference a few ounces makes but you can hold the CL all day without tiring.

Click to expand...

You gotta admit that Swarovski has accomplished a remarkable feat of salesmanship on many of the experts and fans they have on this forum. The experts are now describing 32mm binoculars as "bulky" and possibly not quite as bright as the 30mm CL's.

This is good to know and may explain why Cabela's has dropped the prices on the 32mm EL's by $400.00. There may be much less demand for them as our men get weaker, refusing to bird all day with a 21 ounce binocular when a 17 ounce one is available. Maybe the prices will continue to drop and then real bargains will ensue for amateurs as the experts continue to eschew the EL's in favor of the new and remarkable CL.

Will we yet see the 32mm EL's fall to the price level that the Nikon EDG I 32 mm's reached last year?

I also can't help but wonder if the new CL's will hurt the sales of those heavy Swarovski 42mm's?

Bob

[email protected] said:

Are you going to buy them or compare them in store? While you are comparing them compare them to the Zeiss FL also(Cabella's might not have the FL).

Click to expand...

I am going to go ahead and take the time to look at them in my own home over a period of at least a few days. Same as I would have if I ordered them from Eagle optics and had them sent to me- which I would have done if they had the CL in stock. It is convenient to have a Cabela's right here in town- as I can have them shipped right to the store and then either look at them there, or take them home. I will treat them as the precious item that they are and return them (unless I keep one) as I received them. Cabela's said it is no problem to return them as long as they are not all scratched up. I told them not to worry- they certainly will not have any scratches on them.

As to the Zeiss FL 8x32- I will not be getting one of those also; as I have enough on my plate here and I really wanted to just focus on the Swaro's. Now I will look at the Swaro's in the store when I pick them up just to make sure that everything is OK with them when I accept them. I can at that time do a quick in store comparison of the CL to them if you would like. I really do not have any experience with the Zeiss line.

elkcub said:

.... An analysis of CA as related to field angle could be helpful, since that might account for the reduced FOV designed into the CL. As an aside, if you wear glasses and are far sighted I'd predict that it might be possible to see more of the FOV with the CL — basically because there is less of it. The eye relief is the same.

Have fun,
Ed

Click to expand...

"An analysis of CA as related to field angle could be helpful, since that might account for the reduced FOV designed into the CL"
???

Not exactly sure what you mean by this? -are you talking about the CA at the lateral fringe of the FOV, or are you talking about the CA related to the angle of the bino's in relationship to the horizontal plane. Excuse my ignorance with what is meant here.

I really am not affected much by CA myself- as in I know what it is and I know when I see it, but it has never really been an issue for me.

As far as FOV and my eyes related to to glass wearing: I am a little near sighted with a small amount astigmatism and wear corrective lenses on a need basis- as in not all the time. I both wear glasses when looking through binoculars and sometimes I do not- often I prefer not to for extended viewing. I adjust the diopter setting according to which I am doing.

stephen b said:

I am going to go ahead and take the time to look at them in my own home over a period of at least a few days. Same as I would have if I ordered them from Eagle optics and had them sent to me- which I would have done if they had the CL in stock. It is convenient to have a Cabela's right here in town- as I can have them shipped right to the store and then either look at them there, or take them home. I will treat them as the precious item that they are and return them (unless I keep one) as I received them. Cabela's said it is no problem to return them as long as they are not all scratched up. I told them not to worry- they certainly will not have any scratches on them.

As to the Zeiss FL 8x32- I will not be getting one of those also; as I have enough on my plate here and I really wanted to just focus on the Swaro's. Now I will look at the Swaro's in the store when I pick them up just to make sure that everything is OK with them when I accept them. I can at that time do a quick in store comparison of the CL to them if you would like. I really do not have any experience with the Zeiss line.

Click to expand...

Enjoy it sounds like fun. Cabela's has alot of binoculars to look at.

stephen b said:

"An analysis of CA as related to field angle could be helpful, since that might account for the reduced FOV designed into the CL"
???

Not exactly sure what you mean by this? -are you talking about the CA at the lateral fringe of the FOV, or are you talking about the CA related to the angle of the bino's in relationship to the horizontal plane. Excuse my ignorance with what is meant here.

I really am not affected much by CA myself- as in I know what it is and I know when I see it, but it has never really been an issue for me.

As far as FOV and my eyes related to to glass wearing: I am a little near sighted with a small amount astigmatism and wear corrective lenses on a need basis- as in not all the time. I both wear glasses when looking through binoculars and sometimes I do not- often I prefer not to for extended viewing. I adjust the diopter setting according to which I am doing.

Click to expand...

Stephen,

Sorry for getting ahead of myself; to avoid going off track I'd just a soon wait for your results before saying more. I was thinking of ordering a CL from Eagle Optics to make the same comparison with my newly refurbished 8x30 SLC, but ...

Ed

elkcub said:

Stephen,

Sorry for getting ahead of myself; to avoid going off track I'd just a soon wait for your results before saying more.

Ed

Click to expand...

Ed,

I understand- but, for my own info. I still would appreciate a brief explanation as to what is meant by:

"An analysis of CA as related to field angle"

Thanks

-Stephen

Dennis, these CL's sound great. You wouldn't, by chance, have a pair for sale?

Stephen,
When talking about binoculars, the "field of view" means the field of view internal to the binocular, not the space out in front of the binocular that could be viewed.

In particular he is referring to the fact that "CA", or the colored fringes seen around high contrast edges, get progressively worse as the edge of the field is approached. For example, how noticeable are the fringes in the middle, halfway to the edge, and at the edge?

Sorry to butt in, just FYI Stephen.
Ron

james holdsworth said:

Dennis, these CL's sound great. You wouldn't, by chance, have a pair for sale?

Click to expand...

Now that right there is pretty funny.

ronh said:

Stephen,
When talking about binoculars, the "field of view" means the field of view internal to the binocular, not the space out in front of the binocular that could be viewed.

In particular he is referring to the fact that "CA", or the colored fringes seen around high contrast edges, get progressively worse as the edge of the field is approached. For example, how noticeable are the fringes in the middle, halfway to the edge, and at the edge?

Sorry to butt in, just FYI Stephen.
Ron

Click to expand...

Thanks Ron!

That does help- I did think that he may have meant the CA at the edges as compared to the rest of the field.

stephen b said:

Thanks Ron!

That does help- I did think that he may have meant the CA at the edges as compared to the rest of the field.

Click to expand...

Exactly right. Thanks Ron!

So one should keep in mind that if the color fringes were to look somewhat stronger at the edge of the SLC's field than the CL's, it might simply be due to the SLC having a larger FOV.

Ed

james holdsworth said:

Dennis, these CL's sound great. You wouldn't, by chance, have a pair for sale?

Click to expand...

Not yet! Maybe in a month I hear they are coming out with the HD glass version soon from an insider at Swarovski.

stephen b said:

Now that right there is pretty funny.

Click to expand...

CA is rather well controlled in the CL's. I really don't notice that much. The smaller FOV controls it more. They have way less than the 8x32 EL's I used to have and I can remember that very well. Maybe slightly more than the FL's if any at all. The sweetspot is bigger on the CL than the FL or EL so even though the FOV is smaller the actual size of your on-axis view is probably just as big.

stephen b said:

Well, I do trust this particular salesperson at that place of business more than a # of people that I do not really know on the internet. This guy always gives me a straight scoop and will talk about binoculars without ever trying to steer you to one, or for that matter to get to to buy period. And he really knows his Swaro bin's- so he is a good one to get opinions on those especially.

I have been a Swarovski owner since 1994 (my first real Alpha purchase) and I for one am a big fan of theirs. I was not trying to put down the CL for what it is- but only for what I wished that it could have been. But I fully understand the probable reason for the direction with this size format that they are taking. I had and have read all the raves about the SV and HD's and have looked at those myself. And I was really wishing for the 8x30 HD; but like they say "if wishes were horses, beggars would ride".

So to now really test out the new CL, I decided to put my $$ where my mouth is/was. Cabela's has them in stock; So..... I am picking up in 2 weeks from my in town Cabela's - a new 8x30 CL; the newest 8x30 SLC and the newest 8x32 EL. Then I am going to do a thorough personal test of them for myself against each other and against my older SLC and a Pentax DCF ED among others.

And for what it is worth- I will let you know what MY eyes tell me.

Click to expand...

Stephen:

I have been using the CL 8x30 for several days now and still getting used to them.
I had the SLC Neu and was very happy with them but I did sell them to make
room for the new CL.
So far I really do like the new CL. I like the focuser position up top where it belongs, and I cannot compare them optically along side the SLC but I find them very bright and I find them to be much the same as the SLC. I have been comparing these to the Nikon SE 8x32, and the 8x30 EII and also the SV 8.5x42, so they are set up to some tough competition. The CL is a bit behind these in FOV, but is better than the 8x32 SE, in brightness, and an equal to the EII.

When comparing these to the SLC Neu, I find them to be very similar optically. The CL does have an advantage in being a bit lighter, and I find
I really like the up top focuser better than the SLC, and the design allows
my fingers to easily grasp the barrels. Just better ergonomics. Swarovski
has provided a new ocular cover for these, and the older strap which is better for this binocular.

Some here have been wondering about CA with the new CL, and I have tested
them. I have found the Swarovski SLC Neu and the CL 8x30 handle CA very
well, when tested against a typical high contrast background. I can find
a similar result when pushing a 8.5x42 SV in the same conditions. That means no CA in the center, and some CA when going out from center. I do think the smaller apertures in quality optics do better here.

I have found that I really do like the light weight of these, you can carry these all day and do not notice them.
I do have some nice 42's to compare with, and find these light weight Swaros. a nice alternative. They are
a full 13 oz. less weight than the SV 8.5x42. Fully loaded with strap and covers, CL - 20.8 oz, SV 33.8.

Your comments from the salesperson are expected, he wants you to upgrade, to the SV. These are not Swarovskis best, but very good. I see they have sold out of the CL, and are on backorder.
I am thinking they would like to be selling more of the SV model, and now with the economy, some budgets have changed.

I suppose they would like to have more in stock, as I am sure they are getting calls.

I think value wise these are a very nice binocular.

Jerry

Jerry, thanks for the thoughtful (and for you, verbose) review and comparisons.
Ron

Isn't about time to bring the Conquest 8x30 into the mix? That would appear to be the obvious competition.