-
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.
EL opinions (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter cjunemann
- Start date
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Welcome to Birdforum.
Go to search bar, type in Swarovski EL and read until your hearts content.
Swarovski EL line , in my opinion is in the top five best binoculars money can buy.
Paul
I would be weary of the armor. There have been a lot of complaints lately about degrading armour on EL's and NL's. Maybe get a Zeiss or a Leica for that reason. I have never heard of a Leica's armour degrading like that. I have seen 20-year-old Leica BN's and the armour is like new. Swarovski might replace it, but they make you pay the return shipping, it takes 4 months to repair, so you won't have your binoculars for 4 months, and you are probably going to get the armour replaced with the same crappy armour.
www.birdforum.net
www.birdforum.net
www.birdforum.net
www.birdforum.net
Problem with green coating of EL SV 8x32
I bought my EL SV 8x32 new in May 2019 and I have just noticed that the green plastic coating has started to peel off just where my right thumb touches the barrel. Has anyone noticed the problem of the green material peeling off, either there or elsewhere on the binoculars. These are the first...
www.birdforum.net
EL 10x42 casing deterioration.
Best thing Swarovski could do is track this guy down and GIVE him a new pair.
www.birdforum.net
12x50 Rubber Coating Breaking Up
The rubber coating on my 12x50 purchased in 2018 is cracking. The binocular has never been left in hot sun or cold temperatures or in any other condition I can think of that coulsd be detrimental to the rubber. It has never been used after applying alchohol to my hands (pandemic) and very few...
www.birdforum.net
Swarovski SLC 10X42 Rubber Casing Fault
Last year I had my 10x42's repaired . The problem was that the "rubber" outer casing had perished after about 6 years of occasional use on Birding Holidays. Although the bins were about 6 years old I noticed a significant deterioration after about 4 years of ownership. I now know of 3 friends...
www.birdforum.net
Last edited:
I sent a pair of old 8.5x42 back to swarovski for service and repair of the Green amour as it had started coming way, they were 19 years old, I got them back 6 weeks later all refreshed and no cost whatsoever apart from the £11 special delivery I paid to send them to their UK headquarters.
I got them back a couple of weeks ago.
I got them back a couple of weeks ago.
fully seconded. I've used my brother's 8.5x42 SV fieldpro quite a bit over the years and it never fails to impress - superb bright, sharp, detailed image that is virtually all sweet spot thanks to the field flatteners that also (IMO) contribute to great ease of view/effortless eye placement; and handles very well (although a fairly large binocular) - the open bridge really lets you wrap your hands around the barrels for a very steady hold. 8.5x works remarkably well - the little extra over 8x is noticeable while not being as shaky as 10x. He hardly ever uses anything else, from watching distant raptors to close in birding, and it's easy to see why. A true modern day classic.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I totally agree with Torview and Patudo, these are marvelous binoculars. I love these 8.5’s, don’t let anybody dissuade you from trying or buying what I consider one of the best of the best.
Paul
Paul
I thought they were great a few years ago when I was shopping for them. Optically they are still fantastic, but the sticky and disintegrating rubber armour on my 2 ELs have become an issue recently. I don't think this is acceptable for the price paid. Others' and your mileage may vary.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Absolutely a lot of people agree with that. It’s totally unacceptable for Binoculars on this level and a company with this reputation. A lot of people here have been discussing how prominent this issue actually is. In any event you should send them in and let them make it right.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I wondered the same thing a while back. There we’re a few people here that opined that Swaro wanted even magnification spacing, 7x, 8.5x and 10x. Sounds logical, I like the 8.5x configuration in both the Swaros and the Swift Audubons.
Paul
John A Roberts
Well-known member
Just to make sure that everyone is talking about the same thing . . .
Swarovski has used the EL designation for a series of binoculars starting in 1999 with the 8.5x42 and 10x42 models.
There are two main versions, with two changes to the more recent version
(setting aside the issue of the quality of the RA covering on the more recent production).
See the details with images in post #4 at: Swarovski EL with or without field flattener lenses
John
p.s. And for completeness:
Since 2001, the EL designation has also been used for binoculars with an integral rangefinder, primarily the EL Range and the EL Range TA.
See the details and images starting in post #5 at: Updated Swarovski Range and CL pockets.
Swarovski has used the EL designation for a series of binoculars starting in 1999 with the 8.5x42 and 10x42 models.
There are two main versions, with two changes to the more recent version
(setting aside the issue of the quality of the RA covering on the more recent production).
See the details with images in post #4 at: Swarovski EL with or without field flattener lenses
John
p.s. And for completeness:
Since 2001, the EL designation has also been used for binoculars with an integral rangefinder, primarily the EL Range and the EL Range TA.
See the details and images starting in post #5 at: Updated Swarovski Range and CL pockets.
Last edited:
I have seen it postulated that the reason is that 8.5 is halfway between 7 and 10.
(Late to the party ….. see post #12)
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Will , what was the the big difference that stuck out for you with the NL and EL? I found them to be extremely close, central resolution almost indistinguishable, the EL was smaller and lighter and easier (more comfortable ) eye box. The only things that were different on the NL’s were the ergos , wider FOV and a nicer focuser.
Paul
tehri
Well-known member
Obviously I can't allow myself to answer in Will's place, of course not... But the 3 points you mention here, Paul, and not the least, would in themselves be largely sufficient to influence a possible choice by some...
In a way, you are answering to your own question
Paultricounty
Well-known member
8° to 8.5° FOV, improved focuser = $1000+.
Motorcycle modified barrels = $0 , subjective.
Why won’t you swap out your 10x42EL for the NL, it has a larger FOV, improved focuser and the Motorcycle modified barrels? it’s not consistent Tom 😜.
Will K
Too well-known member
The AFOV and ergonomics were the main thing (I also appreciate the new focus wheel position), and the improved field flattening effect was a big bonus. I’m one of those people who find the ELs a bit woozy when panning. The NL is noticeably more forgiving in that respect.
Similar threads
