EL Range TA 8X42 - Layman Review (1 Viewer)

[tenex]

A strangely bungled (and prurient) illustration! But I am now coming to understand that this mongrel distortion is a deliberate choice, and that should keep distortion and field curvature nicely separate in my thinking from now on.

 

[CharleyBird]

Isn't it simply splendid to be informed by Swarovski that they have manufactured their
'perfect image' with
'largest ever field of view' and
'revolutionary ergonomics' so bringing a
'new era'

Guess we'll never be needing a Swarovski upgrade, they're already perfect😉

 

[PeterPS]

Also, notice that the pincushion side of the image has mistakenly mixed the pincushion of the white vertical lines with barrel distortion applied to the reed the dragonflies are using for a perch in the photo.

That would be possible only if the "standard bino" had a strong barrel distortion near the axis, which abruptly became a strong pincushion distortion off axis---obviously they compare with a non-existent bino, without a doubt this image is the creation of Swaro marketing people.

 

[GrampaTom]

https://www.birdforum.net/attachments/dsc_0989-jpeg.1456636/

Not defending Swaro. Their long-standing policy of not participating at Birdforum is not helpful. Intuition is no substitute for fact. After some time looking at this pic tho, Henry's idea the reed bends in the opposite direction of the overlaid white lines got me wondering. Do we think this is a pair of photos or marketing "artwork"? Looking at the bend in the reed in the right photo and what seems the same dragonflys now clinging to the opposite side of that reed. What if these were 2 photos, taken through 2 different optics? The wind picked up, between shots, causing the reed to bend in the middle and the bugs to be clinging to the downwind/opposite side? If so the marketing guys didnt notice and created part of this controversy??? Whats weird though is the dragonfly details seem identical just flipped 180....

I dont know....

 

[PeterPS]

This cannot be anything but marketing artwork meant to show the advantage of Swaro's flat field. If they stopped there they would have succeeded. But their image also tries to suggest that Swaro has zero linear distortion, which is not true, and that the competition has pincushion distortion, which was wrongly illustrated.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi Tom (post #24),

The image is from one of two brochures for the original EL SV series. One was subtitled nature and the other hunting,
with the dragonfly image from the former. In the past I've used the image from the latter, since it lacks the added effect.
Seen side-by-side . . .

 

[John A Roberts]

And interestingly the 2011 Nature catalogue had a different illustration, somewhat more clearly distinguishing between the concepts of distortion
and field shape, that does not seem to have been used elsewhere . . .


John


p.s. Of course all three illustrations fail to unambiguously show the differences.

 

[GrampaTom]

Hi Tom (post #24),

The image is from one of two brochures for the original EL EV series. One was subtitled nature and the other hunting,
with the dragonfly image from the former. In the past I've used the image from the latter, since it lacks the added effect.
Seen side-by-side . . .

View attachment 1456858

Thanks John. That deer pic is more clear. I wonder if the dragonfly image wasnt inadvertent? That is, the marketing guys didn't notice the dragonfly pic had a curved reed, bending in the opposite direction. .. Looking hard at the dragonflies themselves for any evidence of the same distortion the reed has, doesn't seem there.

Just now looking through my late 2019 EL 1042s, at the extreme edge of view, towards a straight vent tube on a roof, I see a bit of the distortion Swaro calls "standard," nothing that looks or feels like a mustache.
G'T

 

[tenex]

Surely this should have been easy to do precisely and correctly in Photoshop, with either base image?

 

[GrampaTom]

Surely this should have been easy to do precisely and correctly in Photoshop, with either base image?

If they noticed. Indeed, it would've been. Im just guessing. Bugs on the left. Bugs on the right... See it? Curious.

 

[GrampaTom]

My God. Thread regarding the EL Range TA utterly hijacked. But who am I to complain? You gentlemen obviously own this site and can chase any rabbit as long as you darn well want.

dwever,
I guess Id be one of those you refer to. I own nothing here. I do endeavor to understand, clarify things other folks post. I notice you left a thumbs up back on #9 when Henry started the discussion of distortion in Swarovski binos. Seems, these subsequent posts have wandered down that related path, intending to do just that. Is that a bad thing?
G'Tom

 

[GrampaTom]

There's not a single rough edge or line or fitment, which was not the case with my NL 8X42's, particularly with the well documented glue-seams,

Back on your thread, then. I remember those early posts with pictures of described "glue seams." They were indeed unsightly in the pics, less so when I got my hands on one at a dealer. I'd bet... ohh a dollar mebbe, these were not glue seams but rather mold parting lines. Rather different things. Im just being nit picky. Nice writeup. Thanks for it.

 

[dwever]

dwever,
I guess Id be one of those you refer to. I own nothing here. I do endeavor to understand, clarify things other folks post. I notice you left a thumbs up back on #9 when Henry started the discussion of distortion in Swarovski binos. Seems, these subsequent posts have wandered down that related path, intending to do just that. Is that a bad thing?
G'Tom

No it’s not a bad thing. It was just starting to feel interminable . Sorry for being grumpy.

 

[GrampaTom]

Sorry for being interminable... Ha!