New Product Introduction Today From Swarovski ? (4 Viewers)

[[email protected]]

Is it possible that the head rest is actually the most significant innovation here?

Optimistically, it may be an IS alternative with no batteries and no moving parts.
Even though I've been a total IS convert since 2008, I'm very much looking forward to seeing this in the flesh and field testing it. If the head rest really allows more effective stabilization, it would be a game changer. Presumably Swaro has already patented it, so the idea can't be knocked off by the other alphas.

I think you are right about the head rest. It could be a game changer. It is well thought out and will add a lot of stability to your view without batteries! I think it would be especially nice if you wear glasses because you are going to have three solid contact point's like a tripod.

 

[[email protected]]

They don't have to. They're a solid player in the sub $1k segment, which is a very large market. From the specs, and excitement, it appears Leica and Zeiss got left in dust again.

Those NL's look looooooong, dont' they?

Yes, the NL's do look kind of big. I am kind of into carrying less weight lately with 32mm's and below. We will have to wait and see how they perform though and see if it is worth it to carry the 30 oz. Maybe I will wait for the 8x32 NL which will surely follow. It will probably weigh 20 oz. and have a 520 foot FOV and sell for $2600.00.

 

[[email protected]]

Yes indeed, they look large.

Regardiing FOV, I think back to occasions when it would make a difference, and mostly it wouldn't have made a difference.

Examples:
Loons, maybe a quarter mile. Forget it, put the binos down and wait for them.

Sea Otters, West coast, quarter to half mile, forget it, put the binos down and wait for it.

Gray Whales, a mile or more off the coast. Skip FOV.

Finback whales off Cape Cod, well they are big, but still FOV is mostly a guess.

Warblers, no way. Look for them first. Skip the windy days. You'll see them soon enough.

I have an 8x32 FL at 420 and and 8x32 SV at 423 or some such. FOV is not a huge priority for me anyway.

You need a spotter for most of that stuff!

 

[John A Roberts]

Regarding the size of the x42 NL verses the x42 EL FieldPro . . .

From the respective data sheets, the listed dimensions with the same 64 mm IPD adjustment are:
• Length: 158 mm (6.2") vs 160 mm (6.3")

• Width: 131 mm (5.1”) vs 131 mm (5.2")

• Height: 71 mm (2.8") va 61 mm (2.4")


So the NL is the same length and width. However, the 10 mm (0.4”) greater height would indicate that the bridge/ focuser assembly protrudes more
This may be necessary for the narrowed waist (made possible by having the main focuser rod starting in the optical barrel further forward than otherwise?)

In many other designs the focuser is located further to the rear:
- the main focus rod in the body travels past the prisms before reaching the objective housing, and
- the external shape of the housing remains either cylindrical (or is even slightly larger towards the front)
e.g. see the EL SV cutaway with the highlighted focus action components


John


p.s. the NL mechanism may be something like this simplified image from a 2013 EL Range patent

 

[[email protected]]

Good catch Dennis (post #212) - there does seems to be a new strap . . .

John

It look's like it still has the excess strap hanging down. That is the part about the cord's that I don't care for. When it come's to straps I am a minimalist.

 

[[email protected]]

Regarding the size of the x42 NL verses the x42 EL FieldPro . . .

From the respective data sheets, the listed dimensions with the same 64 mm IPD adjustment are:
• Length: 158 mm (6.2") vs 160 mm (6.3")

• Width: 131 mm (5.1”) vs 131 mm (5.2")

• Height: 71 mm (2.8") va 61 mm (2.4")


So the NL is the same length and width. However, the 10 mm (0.4”) greater height would indicate that the bridge/ focuser assembly protrudes more
This may be necessary for the narrowed waist (made possible by having the main focuser rod starting in the optical barrel further forward than otherwise?)

In many other designs the focuser is located further to the rear:
- the main focus rod in the body travels past the prisms before reaching the objective housing, and
- the external shape of the housing remains either cylindrical (or is even slightly larger towards the front)
e.g. see the EL SV cutaway with the highlighted focus action components


John

Nice comparison, John. I thought the NL looked higher because the bridge/focuser is higher. It is better positioned though than the EL IMO.

 

[lmans66]

Yes indeed, they look large.

Regardiing FOV, I think back to occasions when it would make a difference, and mostly it wouldn't have made a difference.

Examples:
Loons, maybe a quarter mile. Forget it, put the binos down and wait for them.

Sea Otters, West coast, quarter to half mile, forget it, put the binos down and wait for it.

Gray Whales, a mile or more off the coast. Skip FOV.

Finback whales off Cape Cod, well they are big, but still FOV is mostly a guess.

Warblers, no way. Look for them first. Skip the windy days. You'll see them soon enough.

I have an 8x32 FL at 420 and and 8x32 SV at 423 or some such. FOV is not a huge priority for me anyway.

I feel that there is a limit to FOV...and this new product might have surpassed the true need. The above examples are great examples. You forgot to mention anything 'up-close' ; oh yes, the new Swaro doesn't 'do' up-close.

But is FOV over-rated? Look at how even the cheapo bins have adopted coatings, Ed glass, etc etc...Swaro is simply doing what they do best and in this case perhaps are 'marketing' and creating a need. They are creating a directional change in how you look at a product. So Swaro 'markets' and puts a bug in your ear to be better than others regardless if there is a true need for it. I am not saying this isn't a good product, but I am suggesting that someone is promoting a 'need' for FOV and attempting to sell it when perhaps it is not that needed.

Realistically do you really want to carry around 30 ounces? Are not binoculars 'long enough'...? Are you willing to spend $3000 or whatever it is? Anyhow....step back, breathe....think before buying. Is bird watching more important or is the product around your neck with the correct logo more important?

 

[elkcub]

No edges at all! That is going to be like Virtual Reality.

To those with such concerns, apprehensions or expectations, the edges will not disappear. Thin lens approximations of the 'apparent' fields for the new series are: 72º, 78º, and 78º for the 8x, 10x, and 12x models, respectfully. This is far smaller than the 96º apparent field of the Linet 8x40 binoculars (made c. 1980s by Hiyoshi with the same body and optical quality as the Swift Audubon.)

The Linet is an extreme case, of course, but monocular views through either tube reveal annoying vignetting/occlusion on the nasal sides. With binocular viewing, therefore, lateral eye movements become restricted, and fixed forward viewing with increased head movements becomes more comfortable.

All and all, users may or may not like this, but there are also a few other perceptual aspects. Because of the wide field, monocular perspective cues are greatly increased, which produces extended visual gradients. The result is an increased sense of spatial depth with a corresponding perceived decrease in image size.

Because the new Swaros are roofs with closer objective spacing than the Linet, I wouldn't be too surprised if 78º is close to the upper practical limit for apparent field. However, I would predict similar, but perhaps more subtle, user effects.

Whatever the case, getting me to part with $3200 at this point in my life is a marketing pipedream.

Ed

 

[[email protected]]

I feel that there is a limit to FOV...and this new product might have surpassed the true need. The above examples are great examples. You forgot to mention anything 'up-close' ; oh yes, the new Swaro doesn't 'do' up-close.

But is FOV over-rated? Look at how even the cheapo bins have adopted coatings, Ed glass, etc etc...Swaro is simply doing what they do best and in this case perhaps are 'marketing' and creating a need. They are creating a directional change in how you look at a product. So Swaro 'markets' and puts a bug in your ear to be better than others regardless if there is a true need for it. I am not saying this isn't a good product, but I am suggesting that someone is promoting a 'need' for FOV and attempting to sell it when perhaps it is not that needed.

Realistically do you really want to carry around 30 ounces? Are not binoculars 'long enough'...? Are you willing to spend $3000 or whatever it is? Anyhow....step back, breathe....think before buying. Is bird watching more important or is the product around your neck with the correct logo more important?

I agree with you to a point. But the idea is to sell binocular's so Swarovski's job is to make you think there is a need for a bigger FOV and some people just have to have the best or the latest and greatest so they will no doubt sell. Have you looked through a Nikon WX 10x50? It might change your mind about big FOV's. What I don't understand is what they mean by no edges. They must have figured out a way to put you IN the FOV so in effect it is like VR and you are part of the FOV or totally immersed IN it. They will be interesting to see.

 

[Chosun Juan]

I feel that there is a limit to FOV...and this new product might have surpassed the true need. The above examples are great examples. You forgot to mention anything 'up-close' ; oh yes, the new Swaro doesn't 'do' up-close.

But is FOV over-rated? Look at how even the cheapo bins have adopted coatings, Ed glass, etc etc...Swaro is simply doing what they do best and that is 'marketing' and creating a 'need where there is no need.' They are creating a directional change in the market for products available now are leveling off a bit making the low end closer to the high end. So Swaro 'markets' and puts a bug in your ear to be better than others regardless if there is a true need for it. I am not saying this isn't a good product, but I am suggesting that someone is promoting a 'need' for FOV and attempting to sell it when perhaps it is not that needed.

Realistically do you really want to carry around 30 ounces? Are not binoculars 'long enough'...? Are you willing to spend $3000 or whatever it is? Anyhow....step back, breathe....think before buying. Is bird watching more important or is the product around your neck with the correct logo more important?

Watchutalkinboutwillis ?!!

As per the figures John quoted earlier, the bin is actually shorter than the SV's ! 158mm is not overly long. A Nikon Monarch HG is 145mm long (~1/2" shorter) and that's a very compact 42mm bin.
The Bushnell M Legend is 165mm long (roughly the same as the Zen ED3 - and it's got fantastic ergonomics!) , and the Zeiss SF is 173mm long (just over ~1/2" longer than the new Swaro NL) and even it's okish.

It's a bit silly to suggest this NL is a 'long' bin ..... I think it's more smack bang in the middle 'goldilocks' size. Certainly, the extra physical length over more compact length full-sized bins helps with things like CA handling. Zeiss Dialyt bins - now they're long !

Sometimes I wonder whether people actually go 'birding' at all.

Of course the Fov is not unwelcome - the weight you could argue is, and expensive ? heck yeah ! .... however the weight is in the ballpark of the SV's, HT's and many more, and while that's heavier than I'd like to see, it's still lighter than some - like the Kowa Genesis .... fwiw.





Chosun :gh:

 

[Chosun Juan]

I agree with you to a point. But the idea is to sell binocular's so Swarovski's job is to make you think there is a need for a bigger FOV and some people just have to have the best or the latest and greatest so they will no doubt sell. Have you looked through a Nikon WX 10x50? It might change your mind about big FOV's. What I don't understand is what they mean by no edges. They must have figured out a way to put you IN the FOV so in effect it is like VR and you are part of the FOV or totally immersed IN it. They will be interesting to see.

I think by saying the edges 'virtually' disappear (or whatever carefully chosen words Swarovski have used) , means that most people probably won't be aware of them when looking straight ahead. You'd actually have to deliberately focus on them. Of course you'll be able to see them.

Based on the carefully chosen language Swarovski has used, I'm also expecting SV-type clear/sharp to edge views. Just guessing, but I think RB phenomena will be similar too - ie. a non issue for up to and more than ~80% of potential users.





Chosun :gh:

 

[[email protected]]

The size of the FOV's Swarovski is stating for the NL WITH sharp edges should be very impressive to say the least no matter if you think you need a big FOV or not. I am sure there will be some RB if you are sensitive to it. It doesn't personally bother me at all.

 

[Jason Bugay Reyes]

advantages of wide FOV:
1. frequently diving birds (grebes, divers,...) The more FOV, the faster you will get them sharp in your bins.
2. fast moving birds in canopy / bushes. The more FOV, the faster... etcetera.
3. counting flocks on migration overhead. A large FOV enables you to keep all birds in your view.
4. watching hummers that hoover, move quickly for some meters, hoover again,... Just try following them with your small FOV.
5. scanning lakes edges for movement.
6. scanning the sea while seawatching. A wide FOV is all the difference between catching and not catching that low-flying shearwater that flies under the waves for some time.
7. scanning the action: for example foraging waders constantly running around, or that same flock flying around, or murmuring starlings. If you don't have a wide FOV, you simply don't see the whole story of the interaction / dynamics.
8. I can go on and on...

Maybe the best example: My avatar is a Western Tragopan. That's a shy forest pheasant of the Western Himalayas. I saw the bird moving in the understory, but as there is a lot of cover (mainly ringal bamboo), I didn't know for sure where it would pop up next (or completely disappear) while moving around. I focused on an area with less dense vegetation (with my bins). With a small FOV, I could have easily just missed them coming out of the woods... That is the difference: people who don't appreciate large FOV actually don't know what birds they are missing, simply because they haven't seen them! ha!

I wonder if you have ever actually watched birds?

Agree!

That is why, many birders in my place uses 8x32 for rainforest birding

 

[Hermann]

All and all, users may or may not like this, but there are also a few other perceptual aspects. Because of the wide field, monocular perspective cues are greatly increased, which produces extended visual gradients. The result is an increased sense of spatial depth with a corresponding perceived decrease in image size.

An even more extreme case is the Deltarem with its *huge* field of view (198/1000m, AFOV 90 degrees). I had a chance to look through one (in excellent condition!) many years ago, and found the experience strange. I remember I really liked the immersive view, but scanning was really strange.

I've got two binoculars with an AFOV of ~70 degrees, and I really like those. I'll certainly have a look through the NL at some stage, however, I find the price is a bit much, and as I'm getting older I'm more interested in lighter binoculars.

Hermann

 

[mak]

Thanks for the link, but the video is somewhat boring. It was really surprising to see that the designer couldn't answer a simple question about the prism system!

He was the product manager, not the designer. The product manager sees the process through and has some input, the designer is most probably someone in their R&D.

The sales and marketing manager appeared to know the prism (as in the EL), granted the product manager may have known, but didn’t want to say?

 

[elkcub]

An even more extreme case is the Deltarem with its *huge* field of view (198/1000m, AFOV 90 degrees). I had a chance to look through one (in excellent condition!) many years ago, and found the experience strange. I remember I really liked the immersive view, but scanning was really strange.

I've got two binoculars with an AFOV of ~70 degrees, and I really like those. I'll certainly have a look through the NL at some stage, however, I find the price is a bit much, and as I'm getting older I'm more interested in lighter binoculars.

Hermann

Hermann,

I know what you mean. The HR/5 Swift Audubon has ~70º apparent field, and although I loved them, their limited eye relief was off putting. For that reason I'm curious about the eye relief of these new Swaros. So far, there's been no mention of it.

I suspect that you found scanning to be "strange" with the Deltarem because the eye has a tendency to saccade in the direction of head movement, and with a 90º field that would induce occlusion/vignetting. With the Linet I have to force my eyes to look forward while moving my head laterally, which is not a natural way to scan. Too much of a good thing.

Ed

 

[Torview]

We`ve been here before with the SF and NV, then not long after some good sales to forum members here the niggles start to appear.

It reads well and I look forward to trying them.

That forehead rest risks making the user look a total p**t IMHO.

 

[Dale Forbes]

I posted before I’d watched to the very end...Yes the illusion dropped in the questions... how long were they working on the new product, which prisms? Given they only release new stuff very infrequently the “we are constantly testing new products” sounded odd,
Peter

The NL Pure was a very long time in the making and what Wolfgang was trying to express was that it is almost impossible to designate a point in time where we started as most of our projects have a longer germination phase. For example, the first design sketch ideas including dropping the front bridge and moving the focusing wheel were made in November / Dember 2009. But major ergonomics workshops - including intensive input from physiotherapy and osteopathy - only started in 2014.

Trying to present live to camera without an interacting audience and in a foreign language is incredibly difficult.

 

[Chosun Juan]

Hermann,

I know what you mean. The HR/5 Swift Audubon has ~70º apparent field, and although I loved them, their limited eye relief was off putting. For that reason I'm curious about the eye relief of these new Swaros. So far, there's been no mention of it.

I suspect that you found scanning to be "strange" with the Deltarem because the eye has a tendency to saccade in the direction of head movement, and with a 90º field that would induce occlusion/vignetting. With the Linet I have to force my eyes to look forward while moving my head laterally, which is not a natural way to scan. Too much of a good thing.

Ed

Ed,

ER was listed as 18mm for all 3 models in an earlier post.

It is interesting that with different SV models and formats all listed with 20mm ER that I'm backing the eyecups out by a different smidge depending on format - go figure !

As long as it is a genuine 18mm I will be covered.

What interests me are all the unstated factors:
What will the distortion profile, edge performance and viewing experience be like ?
Will the designs have the familiar randpupille aspect for easy 'eyeroamaboutability' ?
How will all of this work with the huge Fov under varying conditions for glare performance ?
What is the focusing speed ?
Etc ......

Plenty to look forward too






Chosun :gh:

 

[Chosun Juan]

We`ve been here before with the SF and NV, then not long after some good sales to forum members here the niggles start to appear.

It reads well and I look forward to trying them.

That forehead rest risks making the user look a total p**t IMHO.

I suppose the forehead rest provides a golden opportunity for birder nerds to punk their 'friends' !

I can just see it where Mr/Mrs/Miss dedicated Swaro owner puts their bins down for a few minutes to be watched over by their 'friends' - who then proceed to write 'Zeiss' or 'Leica' or 'Nikon' or something in permanent black marker on the contact surface of the rest. The first time unsuspecting Mr/Mrs/Miss puts binoculars and rest to forehead - they are indelibly 'branded' for the rest of the day !

Imagine their surprise when they get home and look in a mirror to see what everyone has been sniggerring about all day !! :-O 3








Chosun :gh: