BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="huronbay" data-source="post: 3684647" data-attributes="member: 135126">Patudo (#26)We are fortunate to own both.  The IS won my wife over over on the first look at the night sky and became her only handheld.  I wouldn't want to choose between them if held to one, as would probably pick the 8.5x42.   They are both more or less specialty glass for us, low-light wildlife and astro.As to sharpness, I have only compared once really, by placing both on tripods. Definitely, of our two examples the Swaro is the sharper. Not to say the Canon isn't superb...it is.  IMHO, in practical use, the IS makes it an alpha competitor. The 10x56 Swaro gives me a discernible advantage in low-light having spent considerable time comparing it to the Canon and others. Like its stable mate the 15x56, it gives fantastic daytime views and I prefer it to the 10x EL.  For whatever reason, I can hold the big SLC more steadily than the EL--well enough to prefer using it to the Canon--my wife cannot. However, the IS feature of the Canon allows it to perform better in revealing detail in low-light than other 42mm, we have compared.  It would be interesting to compare the Canon 10x42 next to some alpha type 50mms in low-light. The Swaro 56mm SLC next to a Zeiss HT 54mm has a noticeably larger "sweet spot" for me and in practice, between the Canon and Swaro 10x56, do consider the edge differences a non-issue.  But on paper, I'm sure that may be important...<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />fwiw...</blockquote>

Verification