-
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!
Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
New SLC is on the way... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter pepe
- Start date
Dale Forbes
SWAROVSKI OPTIK Austria
despite the advantages of a 7x bin (and the vocal support on BF), it seems that almost no one actually ever buys one. Consequently, the SLC HD has been moved up to an 8x and 10x. Incidentally, the FOV of the SLC 8x42 HD is a rather large 136m (compare this to the 140m of the 7x42 SLCneu).
Curious reasoning, considering that any Binocular Manufacturer that aspires to have the reputation as NUMBER 1 IN THE INDUSTRY, should absolutely have one in it's arsenal!
Query: How hard or costly is it to have one? Couldn't it be done by simply using a different ocular? Or do you have to change other interior components?
Cordially,
Bob
brocknroller
A professed porromaniac
Dale,
Thanks for posting that link to your review. Looks like you got a sneak peak before most of us even knew the SLC HD existed!
I have some questions related to your review and a statement from Swaro's ad for the SLC HD:
"The view is not quite as incredible as the EL42 Swarovisions, but it is still impressive, with a great big sweet spot with high transmission (I think the official figure is at least 91 or 92%) despite keeping colour fidelity a nose ahead of anything from other companies. There is always a compromise between transmission and colour fidelity which is why some binoculars with high colour transmission have such strong colour biases."
From what Kevin said earlier, Swarobright = dielectric coatings, therefore the SLCNeu already had dielectric coatings.
Plus, it seems that the other coatings, at least in name, are also the same as the "Neu" model: SWARODUR and SWAROTOP.
Are you saying that Swaro boosted light transmission on the SLC HD (can't remember what the SLCNeu's #'s were??).
And that boosted light transmission usually results in color bias, but not in the new SLC HDs?
Not sure what you mean, could you please clarify that? Thanks.
Also, this is from Swaro's press release: Cranston, Rhode Island - SWAROVSKI OPTIK announces the new SLC 42 HD. The high-performance HD Binocular has fluoride containing HD lenses to ensure bright images with maximum color fidelity and will minimize the color fringing that is unavoidable with conventional types of glass.
Someone on BF said earlier that ED glass does not increase light transmission in which case the blurb about "fluoride containing HD lenses"... "ensure bright images" is marketing propaganda?
The view through ED bins have always appeared brighter to my eyes, but I suppose that could be due to less scattering of the spectrum (extra low dispersion) and therefore more color saturation in my eye rather than ED glass increasing the overall light transmission. IOW, colors look more vivid, therefore increasing the apparent brightness of the image. There's a question in there somewhere.
Q. Do you see any difference in color bias in the SLC HD vs. the SLCNeu?
Some people have commented on the blue bias of dielectric coatings, but if the SLCNeu already had dielectric coatings, why would the color bias change on the SLC HD? Did Swaro upgrade one or both of the other two coatings (SWARODUR, SWAROTOP)?
Q. Do the images through the SLC HD look brighter than the SLCNeu under the same lighting conditions?
Q. If the price difference between the SLC HD and SV EL is only $300 (haven't confirmed that so I may be propagating rumor here, but that's the only price info I've seen posted), then aside from perhaps being sensitive to the "rolling ball" in the ELs, why would someone chose to buy the SLC HD over the SV EL, particularly now that they are closer to the same magnification 8x vs. 8.5x (same in the 10x42 model)?
Thanks.
Dale,
Thanks for posting that link to your review. Looks like you got a sneak peak before most of us even knew the SLC HD existed!
I have some questions related to your review and a statement from Swaro's ad for the SLC HD:
"The view is not quite as incredible as the EL42 Swarovisions, but it is still impressive, with a great big sweet spot with high transmission (I think the official figure is at least 91 or 92%) despite keeping colour fidelity a nose ahead of anything from other companies. There is always a compromise between transmission and colour fidelity which is why some binoculars with high colour transmission have such strong colour biases."
From what Kevin said earlier, Swarobright = dielectric coatings, therefore the SLCNeu already had dielectric coatings.
Plus, it seems that the other coatings, at least in name, are also the same as the "Neu" model: SWARODUR and SWAROTOP.
Are you saying that Swaro boosted light transmission on the SLC HD (can't remember what the SLCNeu's #'s were??).
And that boosted light transmission usually results in color bias, but not in the new SLC HDs?
Not sure what you mean, could you please clarify that? Thanks.
Also, this is from Swaro's press release: Cranston, Rhode Island - SWAROVSKI OPTIK announces the new SLC 42 HD. The high-performance HD Binocular has fluoride containing HD lenses to ensure bright images with maximum color fidelity and will minimize the color fringing that is unavoidable with conventional types of glass.
Someone on BF said earlier that ED glass does not increase light transmission in which case the blurb about "fluoride containing HD lenses"... "ensure bright images" is marketing propaganda?
The view through ED bins have always appeared brighter to my eyes, but I suppose that could be due to less scattering of the spectrum (extra low dispersion) and therefore more color saturation in my eye rather than ED glass increasing the overall light transmission. IOW, colors look more vivid, therefore increasing the apparent brightness of the image. There's a question in there somewhere.
Q. Do you see any difference in color bias in the SLC HD vs. the SLCNeu?
Some people have commented on the blue bias of dielectric coatings, but if the SLCNeu already had dielectric coatings, why would the color bias change on the SLC HD? Did Swaro upgrade one or both of the other two coatings (SWARODUR, SWAROTOP)?
Q. Do the images through the SLC HD look brighter than the SLCNeu under the same lighting conditions?
Q. If the price difference between the SLC HD and SV EL is only $300 (haven't confirmed that so I may be propagating rumor here, but that's the only price info I've seen posted), then aside from perhaps being sensitive to the "rolling ball" in the ELs, why would someone chose to buy the SLC HD over the SV EL, particularly now that they are closer to the same magnification 8x vs. 8.5x (same in the 10x42 model)?
Thanks.
Now these are excellent questions though i do not believe a straight anawer will be forthcoming i would love to compare the old and new SLC in low light conditions to see if i can tell the difference and intend to do that if i get a chance.
Dale Forbes
SWAROVSKI OPTIK Austria
The coating name specifies a type of coating, but the specific formulation of the coating within a particular binocular is determined individually per surface and within the framework of that particular optical system, i.e. an antireflexion Swarotop on objective lens 2 will not be exactly the same in an EL 8,5x42 SV and an SLC 8x42 HD.
The new SLC HD has an official transmission of 91%.
Essentially, if you want to have perfect colour fidelity, the coatings need to produce a light transmission curve that is flat over the entire visible light spectrum. This is evidently very difficult to achieve as plethora factors tend to reduce transmission in the red-yellow side of the spectrum. This results in the typical transmission curve with a “bump” around bluish and can produce very high listed transmission values (as stated in catalogues and test reports), i.e. high transmission, high colour bias. In order to combat this and increase colour fidelity, lower wavelength transmission needs to be maximized and the blues reduced, producing a flatter transmission curve overall, but a lower listed transmission, which is only taken within a very limited wavelength range.
BUT, how perfectly each of the surface coatings are designed individually and within the whole system can make a great difference to light transmission throughout the spectrum. This is what has made the major transmission/colour difference between the SLC HD and the SLCneu in that the SLC HD has a completely new designed coatings system which maximizes transmission to a certain level, but does not push it any further as this would result in an unacceptable colour bias (too sloped a transmission curve).
Also, this is from Swaro's press release: Cranston, Rhode Island - SWAROVSKI OPTIK announces the new SLC 42 HD. The high-performance HD Binocular has fluoride containing HD lenses to ensure bright images with maximum color fidelity and will minimize the color fringing that is unavoidable with conventional types of glass.
Someone on BF said earlier that ED glass does not increase light transmission in which case the blurb about "fluoride containing HD lenses"... "ensure bright images" is marketing propaganda?
The view through ED bins have always appeared brighter to my eyes, but I suppose that could be due to less scattering of the spectrum (extra low dispersion) and therefore more color saturation in my eye rather than ED glass increasing the overall light transmission. IOW, colors look more vivid, therefore increasing the apparent brightness of the image. There's a question in there somewhere.
In my understanding, you have it perfectly correct: HD lenses do not increase transmission, but images appear brighter because of the crispness image reproduction (but better controlled CA is probably the main argument for HD lenses).
Colour differences are most likely to be apparent during the day. Other optical differences between the two binoculars will be most apparent under low light conditions.
The two binoculars follow completely different optical strategies, but they are both great binoculars. The Swarovisions aim for (almost) perfect edge to edge sharpness with a minimum of distortion, creating an (almost) perfect image of whatever you are looking at. The SLC HD takes a more traditional approach by including somewhat more distortion and aiming to optimize its performance within this framework.
I am looking forward to external comparisons of these binoculars against other top-class binoculars. I am happy with both but it is always interesting to hear how lots of different eyes and tastes respond to the various optics on the market.
I am on leave for the next few days on so will be rather out of touch.
Happy birding, I am going to go play in the fresh snow now :t: the snowfinches have just started breeding and there are some photos that need to be made!
I am sure I read in Swarovskis own publicity that the 7x42 slc was the best selling" most used binocular in the world " now you are saying nobody buys them what happened did they give them away????:-O
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Not that I'm doubting your recollection, of course, but it would really be interesting to see such a statement made by Swarovski. As for the statement itself, whether Swarovski made it or not, I doubt that it's true — not even for the SLC series, much less all the other binoculars "in the world."
Ed
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Dale,
Very nicely put! Logic would suggest that the uniformity of transmission across the visible spectrum is the primary determiner of color fidelity. To the extent that uniformity is not attained, however, the visual sensitivity curve of the eye is necessary to understanding the resulting perception. The eye has a peak sensitivity to the color yellow at .56 nm. and drops off fairly symmetrically on either side. So, the final perception will depend on how the brain weights the distorted color balance.
Ed
Dropping the 7x
Sad to hear this as this was next on my list. Part of the problem may have been that very few retailers stocked the 7x bins, and actually they usually pushed the 10x, since that is what they had in stock. Except for the 7x42 B&L that my Mom recently took I have never looked through a Swaro 7x. Like a fabled mystical beast they may now remain only a figment of my imagination.
Sad to hear this as this was next on my list. Part of the problem may have been that very few retailers stocked the 7x bins, and actually they usually pushed the 10x, since that is what they had in stock. Except for the 7x42 B&L that my Mom recently took I have never looked through a Swaro 7x. Like a fabled mystical beast they may now remain only a figment of my imagination.
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
That might be an over generalization. Perhaps no one was buying a 8.2° SLC 7x. Perhaps they were buying a 8.6° Zeiss 7x42 FL if they wanted a wider 7x bin
This is not to "slag off" Swaro but they are the first to kill off the 7x in their roof range.
I think it's a general issue on how bin makers make their trade off: is there really enough of a market for a sufficiently different product. After all we've seen the 7x35 disappear (mostly) from the market. One wonders if Leica or Zeiss will follow this thinking in their next revision of their bins. Nikon already decided to make a 7x in their EDG range.
And the last sentence Dale wrote I think reveals "the problem" the 7x42 SLCneu didn't have a really wide FOV and not much wider than a lot of the 8x available.
As FOV and magnification are the major trade offs in deciding which bin you use for a particular task in a particular habitat then if you can't get a much wider 7x then you go for the almost wide enough 8x unless you want the 7x for shake reduction.
Last edited:
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Kevin:
It really all goes back to sales numbers, the 7X sales have to be small compared
to the 8 and 10x. This would apply to most makers.
I am thinking for Swaro. there are more sales in the 12x and 15x SLC's and they are a market leader for many reasons, and especially for the hunters, who desire more of a long range optic. I think Dale offered that in his post.
If you surveyed birders, I am thinking the overwhelming power choice is 8X, and for many
is a very good choice. Think about the range of 8x20 - 8x56 from many makers, lots to
choose from.
Jerry
It really all goes back to sales numbers, the 7X sales have to be small compared
to the 8 and 10x. This would apply to most makers.
I am thinking for Swaro. there are more sales in the 12x and 15x SLC's and they are a market leader for many reasons, and especially for the hunters, who desire more of a long range optic. I think Dale offered that in his post.
If you surveyed birders, I am thinking the overwhelming power choice is 8X, and for many
is a very good choice. Think about the range of 8x20 - 8x56 from many makers, lots to
choose from.
Jerry
It's ironic that Swarovski is dropping it's Alpha 7 x 42 SLC while Nikon, for the first time, is introducing one in it's EDG line.
My guess is that the real reason Swarovski is dropping it is because it is not much selected by the hunting fraternity. It is more useful in birding pursuits where depth of field is a factor and where eye relief is important. It can't be saving them an awful lot of money by doing so. The only difference between the 8 x 42 and the 7 x 42, as far as I can see, appears to be the oculars used although I could be wrong about that.
Birder's who prefer a quality 7 x 42 roof prism can still opt for Leica, Zeiss, Nikon or Meopta. If they want to expand on their binocular inventory perhaps they will try Swarovski's other models at another time.
Bob
My guess is that the real reason Swarovski is dropping it is because it is not much selected by the hunting fraternity. It is more useful in birding pursuits where depth of field is a factor and where eye relief is important. It can't be saving them an awful lot of money by doing so. The only difference between the 8 x 42 and the 7 x 42, as far as I can see, appears to be the oculars used although I could be wrong about that.
Birder's who prefer a quality 7 x 42 roof prism can still opt for Leica, Zeiss, Nikon or Meopta. If they want to expand on their binocular inventory perhaps they will try Swarovski's other models at another time.
Bob
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
For the Zeiss Fl range I believe the objective (and perhaps some of the baffling?) is different in the 7x than the 8x and 10x.
So there is some extra work designing (and perhaps some extra production engineering too) in a 7x.
NDHunter: I don't doubt that this is a business decision: looking at the costs and benefits for Swaro it's a win on the bottom line.
I've not seen any surveys showing what the breakdown is but I'd agree that most birders use 8x, followed by a 10x and then probably a big drop to 7x (and then perhaps 6x).
With wider FOV 8x that one gets today (compared to perhaps 20 years ago) I think most folks are happy with what they have in that compromise. In the days of the Kellner oculars less magnification meant more ER and more FOV (in proprtion to the the change). Today with more complex oculars you can get better absolute numbers for ER and FOV than you used to at 8x so 7x is less compelling.
But I do worry about the reduction in choice though especially in ED 7x: Swaro never shipped one.
We'll see what Leica and Zeiss do on their next design. Fortunately Nikon seem to think the 7x is still needed (at least for now) although their offering is not super wide. The irony here is if I was buying a EDG I'd probably get the 8x (as I already have a 7x42FL) and I suspect that's making Swaro's point
Last edited:
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Interesting. I initially though they would be the usual EU == 10 years but US == lifetime. It seems not according to the web site.
The english (UK? Worldwide?) warranty is here
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/en/products/binoculars-slc-42-hd/warranty
The USA warranty is here.
http://www.swarovskioptik.us/en_us/products/binoculars-slc-42-hd/warranty
Both point to the same PDF
http://www.swarovskioptik.us/upload/media/media/34/ga_slc_hd_en[1567].pdf
which says "worldwide warranty of 10 years"
Is that true of the SV too?
I just pulled the warranty card from an SV and it's the standard lifetime limited warranty that we see on all the US products. I'd be quite surprised if the New SLC's deviate from this.
Ben
Ben Lizdas
Sales Manager
Eagle Optics
www.eagleoptics.com
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Is there a difference then between the SLC HD and the SV warranty?
Or is there a bug on the web site?
I see there is no warranty info for the EL SV on the US site ... there is a page but no content.
http://www.swarovskioptik.us/en_us/products/binoculars-el-42-swarovision/warranty
but there is for the Worldwide english site
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/en/products/binoculars-el-42-swarovision/warranty
The english language warranty is in this PDF
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/upload/media/media/34/garantie_el42sv_en[1411].pdf
and says 10 years.
So clearly something is wrong somewhere (I presume on the web site for the SV).
Or is there a bug on the web site?
I see there is no warranty info for the EL SV on the US site ... there is a page but no content.
http://www.swarovskioptik.us/en_us/products/binoculars-el-42-swarovision/warranty
but there is for the Worldwide english site
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/en/products/binoculars-el-42-swarovision/warranty
The english language warranty is in this PDF
http://www.swarovskioptik.com/upload/media/media/34/garantie_el42sv_en[1411].pdf
and says 10 years.
So clearly something is wrong somewhere (I presume on the web site for the SV).
