• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

Choosing SLC over NL... (Swaro please read) (1 Viewer)

adhoc

Well-known member
My dominant impression for two decades about the Swaro. SLC 42 (8 and 10x) has been that it is the best binocular for nature observation, conveying the most information most easily in the most situations.

It seems to me that the last-but-one model, with the shorter close focus, was and is the reference standard among binoculars at least according to this criterion. I have no experience with the "latest and greatest" but I read BirdForum!

Why does Swaro. not make a replacement? Maybe, soon...

BTW, it is sharper than the EL, or was 7½ years ago, in some conditions at least, at 8 vs 8.5x. (Binocular resolution in field use is a meaningful subject, despite Henry Link's recently expressed misgivings!)

Much of the time I think as Mac308 above: "The SLC is the only Swarovski I'd own..."

Adding in edit, mostly on seeing Canip's comment below and recalling very recent reviews: Might the Zeiss SFL take its place at 8x?
 
Last edited:

William Lewis

Wishing birdwatching paid the bills.
United Kingdom
This all makes a very interesting read. I've not considered the 42 slc before but it seems most users rate them very highly - preferring a high transmission glass it's not been on my radar as such.

So I suppose the natural questions are, would the kahles version be a good every day substitute for an slc8x56 hd? Or is it worth waiting so see what appears in the next few months under the mysterious "sl" banner? My gut feeling is that the slc 56hd is a pretty immense bit of kit so whatever does appear would have to be quite special to replace it in the birding bag....

Top thread either way, it's nice to see the "latest and greatest" not always having it all its own way.
 

Canip

Well-known member
.... it's nice to see the "latest and greatest" not always having it all its own way.

.... or, if I may quote your words and use them slightly differently, my take-away is that it doesn't always have to be the "latest and greatest" (i.e. NL, SF, NV) to get an exceptionally good birding binocular such as the SFL (as Lee's and others’ practice reviews, I think, have clearly demonstrated) or the SLC.

Canip
 

Vespobuteo

Well-known member
This all makes a very interesting read. I've not considered the 42 slc before but it seems most users rate them very highly - preferring a high transmission glass it's not been on my radar as such.

So I suppose the natural questions are, would the kahles version be a good every day substitute for an slc8x56 hd? Or is it worth waiting so see what appears in the next few months under the mysterious "sl" banner? My gut feeling is that the slc 56hd is a pretty immense bit of kit so whatever does appear would have to be quite special to replace it in the birding bag....

Top thread either way, it's nice to see the "latest and greatest" not always having it all its own way.

I suspect Swaro will try to shave some weight from the SLC:s, and perhaps tune the coatings to be more similar to NL and target them more towards the birding community (which the Kahles brand is not). Having both Helia and SL[C], Swaro can reach a larger group of customers.

Maybe the new SL something will be a breed of the EL SV:s and SLC:s, and the EL SV:s are discontinued?

Close to the optical specs of the EL SV, but lighter with faster focusing and to a similar price as the SFL.

(still amazed that Swaro managed to keep the price down on the EL SV)

More rational I guess is putting SLC specs in a new lighter package with new coatings, for $500 less than the Zeiss SFL.

But as always, I suspect that Swaro will surprise us all...

And I would definitely wait and see before I buy anything else...
 
Last edited:

tenex

reality-based
would the kahles version be a good every day substitute for an slc8x56 hd?
Is that what you already have? The 42 is certainly more portable, but it's not just a question of smaller aperture/exit pupil. As I just noted in a more obscure thread: "It's a great bin in its own right, but surprisingly different from the 56s. Somewhat higher contrast, a slight warm/yellow bias in comparison, and stronger pincushioning... a bit like Leicas, actually. Designed several years apart, and not exactly the same recipe with S-P prisms as one might expect." This works also for me, so I'd be tempted to answer Yes, but the final verdict is yours.
 
Last edited:

Tringa45

Well-known member
Europe
BTW, it is sharper than the EL, or was 7½ years ago, in some conditions at least, at 8 vs 8.5x. (Binocular resolution in field use is a meaningful subject, despite Henry Link's recently expressed misgivings!)

Try putting the binocular on a tripod and viewing a test chart.
Then put a doubler or tripler behind one eyepiece. I think you will see more detail than at 8x unless you have better than 20/10 acuity.

John
 

William Lewis

Wishing birdwatching paid the bills.
United Kingdom
Is that what you already have? The 42 is certainly more portable, but it's not just a question of smaller aperture/exit pupil. As I just noted in a more obscure thread: "It's a great bin in its own right, but surprisingly different from the 56s. Somewhat higher contrast, a slight warm/yellow bias in comparison, and stronger pincushioning... a bit like Leicas, actually. Designed several years apart, and not exactly the same recipe with S-P prisms as one might expect." This works also for me, so I'd be tempted to answer Yes, but the final verdict is yours.
Interesting, just got back from an evening bird up with a mate, all day I think a 42 SLC would be better, so much easier to hold and carry a smaller bin, just makes for a nicer experience, right till it gets a bit dark and I can make use of the higher transmission and larger exit pupil - currently.

Give it a few years and I think natural logic will make a 10x56 then an 8x42 followed when I'm proper knocking on a 10x42 better and better options. I probably won't be able to hold them even mildly steady by then though!
 
Last edited:

quincy88

Well-known member
I like the SLC 10x42s. I owned a pair briefly a few years ago. The focus was a little worse the very best, but still decent. Otherwise one of my favorite pairs of 42s. I also think that they are as good as every other alpha 42 in most of the ways that matter.
I still own the SLC 15x56s and they are one of my favorite pairs of binoculars ever.
 

adhoc

Well-known member
...BTW, it is sharper than the EL, or was 7½ years ago, in some conditions at least, at 8 vs 8.5x. (Binocular resolution in field use is a meaningful subject, despite Henry Link's recently expressed misgivings!)...

Try putting the binocular on a tripod and viewing a test chart.
Then put a doubler or tripler behind one eyepiece. I think you will see more detail than at 8x unless you have better than 20/10 acuity.

John

Saw that late, John. The clause "in field use" is an essential part of what I say there. (My VA is, I reckon, 20/15, no better.) Please see the foll. posts, in another current thread: link 1, link 2, link 3, link 4. Adhoc
 

Troubador

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
This was a very good thread until the talk about a CNN anchor came up. Surprising a moderator chimed in, Lee.
Very off topic.
Jerry
You are quite right Jerry and all posts referring to the lady have been deleted. No disrespect towards her was intended.

Lee
MODERATOR
 
Last edited:

kimmik

Well-known member
United Kingdom
I had an opportunity to try the Kahles 8x42 (amazing optics collection, Gijs! House of Outdoor).

Excellent in all the ways already discussed for the SLC. You’re not missing much by skipping NL. NL does have that little something extra though and you will need to pay ++ for it.
 

elkcub

Silicon Valley, California
United States
Nope. Just a pun. Don't want anything to do with that. Nice T-shirts though - only $70.
Do you have any thoughts on SLCs? Or maybe what Tenex said about them?

Well, I said this recently to someone considering a used SLC-HD:
I have owned and used the original SLC 8x42 SLC-HD like this one for a decade, and appreciate its virtues more each time I use it. So far as I'm concerned Swaro never made a better binocular and probably never will. I never experienced the globe effect while using it.

Due to the fact that they designed this product to include just enough pincushion distortion to avoid the globe effect, and achieved a largely flat field without the need to add a flattener lens, they reached a sublime state of optical design that unfortunately conflicted with their other business interests. In short, it was too good, and they degraded later models ... which was carried forward into the current Kahles Helia version.
...

Ed
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top