Evolution of Swaro EL models (1 Viewer)

[benjaminH]

The Swarovski el binoculars have a long history that I don't know much about. I have the opportunity to buy a slightly old model (the one in the first photo below). Do you know if the specifications and especially the optical quality are much lower than the models that followed (photo on the right) ?
Thanks in advance,
Benjamin

 

[YuShan]

Personally I wouldn't worry about optical quality, because that is excellent anyway.

However, I would prefer some of the older models over the newer ones because they can focus at closer range than newer models (they downgraded EL in that sense when the NL got introduced). The other thing that I would check is the armour. Older models have more durable armour.

How much of this applies to the models in the picture, I don't know. But these are the things I would check, rather than worry about the optical quality that is excellent for all EL versions.

 

[Noctua_Grace]

Personally I wouldn't worry about optical quality, because that is excellent anyway.

However, I would prefer some of the older models over the newer ones because they can focus at closer range than newer models (they downgraded EL in that sense when the NL got introduced). The other thing that I would check is the armour. Older models have more durable armour.

How much of this applies to the models in the picture, I don't know. But these are the things I would check, rather than worry about the optical quality that is excellent for all EL versions.

I’m curious, how do you usually tell which model has more durable armor between the older and newer ones? Anything specific to look for?

 

[dwatsonbirder]

*the original had slightly round barrels, with a solidly dark metal interior to the bridge (as shown in the first image you posted). The 2nd gen 'swarovision/SV' was more squared off, with the dark metal in the inside of the bridge restricted to two thin lines. This version also had the standard strap attachment. The 3rd gen 'field-pro' looked similar to the 2nd gen, but has the updated strap button system (as shown in your second image).
The first gen had very tough armour, and earlier versions of 2nd Gen were also field-worthy but there was a change to the armour composition towards the end of this generation. The 3rd gen seems to have been most affected, though apparently the armour issue is resolved now.
Optics on all are very good to excellent - there is a clear step up in quality between 1st and 2nd gen, with the latter working much better for glasses (for me anyways).
Don't forget the excellent Zeiss SF in this size, CS is as good (if not better) than Swarovski in the UK, and there are no reported armour issues.

*I think!

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

BenjaminH, post 1,
On the WEB-site of House of Outdoor I have published a review paper describing the history of Swarovski Optik and the different binocular models that were made during the past centuries. The development of EL models is described in it also.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[John A Roberts]

In terms of visual identification of the various EL models, see posts #4 and 6 at: Swarovski EL with or without field flattener lenses

e.g. the original EL on left vs the first version of EL SV:




For more on the technical details, especially the differing optical construction of the EL and EL SV models, see posts #2, 9 and 10 at:
Pre Swarovision EL vs SLC HD


The current Legend version of the EL x42 was introduced at the same time as the all new NL x42 in 2020.
It increased the minimum focus distance from 1.5 m (4.9 ft) to 3.3 m (10.8 ft), allowing the use of a simpler, less costly focuser mechanism.
Swarovski stated that the change was necessary to enable the EL x42 to continue to be commercially viable alongside the NL x42.


John


p.s. Gijs' 100 page monograph is an unmatched introduction to Swarovski's optical products from WWII on!

 

[safaridreaming]

Fundamentally my understanding is that the original models didn’t have field flatters in them? I’m happy to stand corrected….

Gen 2 onwards the changes were more cosmetic vs optical?

 

[henry link]

That's right, no field flatteners in the Gen 1, which I used for about four years. The EL color transmission started off in 1999 with a noticeable yellow cast and pretty mediocre contrast, both of which were gradually improved, but were still not quite equal to the Gen 2 Swarovision when it first appeared around 2010. Also early production of the Gen 1 had excruciatingly slow focus, which was modified after two or three years and made available as an upgrade to owners of early slow specimens. The armor on my early sample was beginning to show some deterioration at about 3 years and was replaced when the focus was modified. Its current owner has replaced the armor at least once more since 2004.

 

[greekgeek]

I was fortunate to purchase a first Generation EL 8x32 from the tail end of its production, last year on this forum. I say fortunate because in addition to having been well cared for and in great condition for ~15 years, it checks a lot of desirable boxes for me.

-pre-SV view (no rolling ball)
-includes the modern coatings upgrade ca. 2010
-traditional strap lugs
-durable armor
-tack sharp
-lightweight
-Bonus: top flight seller

No idea on how many were produced with that make up but it seems like a rather narrow production window, timewise.

I wonder if one were to own a pre-SV EL of earlier production, what the cost would be to upgrade the lens/prisms system to the more modern version. That could also be a good option the have "the best of both worlds" in case prefers the pre-SV view.

 

[Harry Stottle]

I had one of the original 10x42 EL but found I could not focus quickly enough on birds flying away from or to me. There was also the glare problem in certain circumstances, so I sold them. When the new model with field flattening lenses came out I tried them at the Birdfair, but hated the rolling ball! I do have a Swarovski scope though.
I did not try any Swarovski binos again until recently when I bought the Curio and looked through the NL 14x52. I like the image and am tempted by their low weight, wide field and head rest, but I do not like the lugs. Then there is the problem of the armour and eyecups disintegrating. I may look at the Canon 15x50 IS instead and save £1600.

 

[tenex]

No idea on how many were produced with that make up but it seems like a rather narrow production window, timewise.

Yes, those last pre-SV ELs could be a sweet find. Optically, probably similar to the SLC HD from c.2010, which would be an interesting comparison (does anyone have both? Canip? Chuck?)... but available also in 32mm.

I did not try any Swarovski binos again until recently when I bought the Curio and looked through the NL 14x52. I like the image and am tempted by their low weight, wide field and head rest, but I do not like the lugs. Then there is the problem of the armour and eyecups disintegrating. I may look at the Canon 15x50 IS instead and save £1600.

You might find it interesting to try SLC 15x56 as well. Not everyone's cup of tea, but $1100 less here, and one of my own favorite bins. (I still haven't seen NL 52.)

 

[Harry Stottle]

You might find it interesting to try SLC 15x56 as well. Not everyone's cup of tea, but $1100 less here, and one of my own favorite bins. (I still haven't seen NL 52.)

Yes I will - when I am near a dealer who has one in stock to try. I have also been looking for a used mint example at a good price, but the only ones I can find at the moment are all the older versions. They are a little heavier than the 14x52 and narrower field but still good.
Do you know if it is possible to get a head rest for them?
The only used 14x52 I have seen was only £50 cheaper than new!

 

[PatR]

I had one of the original 10x42 EL but found I could not focus quickly enough on birds flying away from or to me. There was also the glare problem in certain circumstances, so I sold them. When the new model with field flattening lenses came out I tried them at the Birdfair, but hated the rolling ball! I do have a Swarovski scope though.
I did not try any Swarovski binos again until recently when I bought the Curio and looked through the NL 14x52. I like the image and am tempted by their low weight, wide field and head rest, but I do not like the lugs. Then there is the problem of the armour and eyecups disintegrating. I may look at the Canon 15x50 IS instead and save £1600.

The incidents of armour, eyecups and the field pro ‘lugs’ are the subject of a separate discussion in the forum and elsewhere and I sympathise with those that have experienced problems. My 10x42 NL’s are coming up towards 2 years old, have been all over and in extremes of weather and terrain. I do look after them, like all my stuff. Not pampering, just common sense. Still as good as new.

The 14x52’s are still youngsters but are just the same. Brilliant bino’s and I know that if anything untoward does happen to them, Swaro will sort it out. Fingers and everything else crossed.

Funny you should mention the Canon 15x50 IS. Finger hovering over the ‘buy it now’ button on a pair………Oh no, should be here tomorrow.🤗

 

[PatR]

Yes I will - when I am near a dealer who has one in stock to try. I have also been looking for a used mint example at a good price, but the only ones I can find at the moment are all the older versions. They are a little heavier than the 14x52 and narrower field but still good.
Do you know if it is posible to get a head rest for them?
The only used 14x52 I have seen was only £50 cheaper than new!

I don’t think that you can. The headrest is fitted to both of my NL’s. It has transformed them, especially with the winged eyecups fitted.

 

[tenex]

Swaro has no headrest for SLCs. Some seem to find that their mass makes them stable, others hard to support for any length of time. The view is superb.

Yes, those last pre-SV ELs could be a sweet find.

Speaking of this, were there also pre-SV 12x50s from this late period around 2010? That could be very nice too.