Ah, fresh victims for the ever growing army of the Green! ||
Yeah ... even though it's kind of an ugly green.
-
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.
Super-bins Shoot-out: Zeiss SF8x42 meets Swarovski 8.5x42 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Troubador
- Start date
Theo98
Eurasian Goldfinch
Swaro green is an engineering Triple Hi-Tech Environmental\Security Solution design...It's a GREEN environ-friendly product, has Built-In Theft Protection (ugly):bounce:, but is loved by All Birds, Fauna and Wildlife!!! :-O
Ted
Last edited:
OMG, there's an infinite monkey on my keyboard and he is typing:
"There are more things on Bird Forum, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy".
Hmmm, how true :smoke:
Lee
I think you deliberately missed a word in your sentence
"I am aware that they are not the only great bins on the planet"
brocknroller
porromaniac
Originally Posted by Troubador...
Because the focus issue is trumped up by a professional complainer (also a non-owner) and rolling ballers are few and far between. My wife's 8X32 SV exhibits different resistances and she never complains about it even when asked. I believe if a 115 pound senior citizen can turn the focus hour after hour then it's working. A 70-year old grandma sporting a 10X50 SV was enough motivation for me to try one. Best bin I've had the pleasure to use. Then again these are merely the opinions and experiences of people who actually own and use the products in question. Half-baked, baseless diatribes do, however, garner more hits than posts from satisfied owners.
I consider myself an informed communicator rather than a professional complainer, and although I don't own a Swaro, I have used six samples, and excluding the 20-year-old sample, which was not WP and probably had a different focusing mechanism than the modern roofs, FOUR out of FIVE modern samples had focuser issues, from taking two fingers to turn in one direction to a "sticky" focuser with high stickion spots to harder to turn in one direction than the other (two samples, one worse than the other). Only one, an 8x32 EL WB, had a focuser that turned smoothly in both directions, though I was looking at shorebirds and BOP riding the thermals over a mountain ridge so I didn't use it for close in birding, which is the true test of focuser speed and smoothness.
In addition, I have owned at least 30 bins and used nearly 50, so I know the difference between a smooth focuser and one that does not turn smoothly. Whether or not a less than optimal focuser bothers any individual is another matter. I have never touted my experience as universal.
But I am FAR from being the only BF member who has reported focuser issues with Swaros. Most of the others who have pass your litmus test of being owners. The reports are plentiful and easily found for those without blind spots.
The fact that you ignore/deny complaints about Swaro focusers and single out mine because I am not an Swaro owner has earned you a special place on my Defenders of Absam Ignor(amus) List, because I don't care to read posts by closed-minded provincials who think that their experience (and relatives') is universal.
<B>
Because the focus issue is trumped up by a professional complainer (also a non-owner) and rolling ballers are few and far between. My wife's 8X32 SV exhibits different resistances and she never complains about it even when asked. I believe if a 115 pound senior citizen can turn the focus hour after hour then it's working. A 70-year old grandma sporting a 10X50 SV was enough motivation for me to try one. Best bin I've had the pleasure to use. Then again these are merely the opinions and experiences of people who actually own and use the products in question. Half-baked, baseless diatribes do, however, garner more hits than posts from satisfied owners.
I consider myself an informed communicator rather than a professional complainer, and although I don't own a Swaro, I have used six samples, and excluding the 20-year-old sample, which was not WP and probably had a different focusing mechanism than the modern roofs, FOUR out of FIVE modern samples had focuser issues, from taking two fingers to turn in one direction to a "sticky" focuser with high stickion spots to harder to turn in one direction than the other (two samples, one worse than the other). Only one, an 8x32 EL WB, had a focuser that turned smoothly in both directions, though I was looking at shorebirds and BOP riding the thermals over a mountain ridge so I didn't use it for close in birding, which is the true test of focuser speed and smoothness.
In addition, I have owned at least 30 bins and used nearly 50, so I know the difference between a smooth focuser and one that does not turn smoothly. Whether or not a less than optimal focuser bothers any individual is another matter. I have never touted my experience as universal.
But I am FAR from being the only BF member who has reported focuser issues with Swaros. Most of the others who have pass your litmus test of being owners. The reports are plentiful and easily found for those without blind spots.
The fact that you ignore/deny complaints about Swaro focusers and single out mine because I am not an Swaro owner has earned you a special place on my Defenders of Absam Ignor(amus) List, because I don't care to read posts by closed-minded provincials who think that their experience (and relatives') is universal.
<B>
Last edited:
I think you deliberately missed a word in your sentence
No not deliberately at all Subzero, and I am happy to accept your extra word.
I don't know how many times I have posted this but here we go again: At this level, all of the models available from all manufacturers are like fine wines. Different people prefer different flavours, but they are all fine wines. Is that clear enough?
I'll go a step further: here are my favourite non-Zeiss bins (and yes there are other great bins out there too. Sheeesh.) Leica Ultravid HD 7x42 and Swarovski EL 8x32.
Lee
Last edited:
Brock
The 'add a quotation to your post' function isn't working correctly.
The quote above was not posted by me.
Lee
Steve C
Well-known member
Brock,
If I may offer a simple observation or two...
For Pete's sakes...enough OK? While I tend to agree with you up to a point, ie no binocular is perfect and nobody should ever project perfection to a human designed invention, that some indeed do. While you have pretty much lost relevance with regard to never ending rolling ball, you are right in its concurrence, as I can personally attest. I have no notion that I am in any sort of majority, nor do I profess to have any idea of what sort of a minority I am in either. However, Swarovski has made some changes, the newer versions definitely present a different image that the 2010-11 introductory models. The edges are not as sharp (but sharper that nearly anything else) as the original. I still get RB on the SV 8.5 early model, but not on the current ones. The image is different, not better or worse, just different. EDIT: Just different to me, maybe not everybody. Side by side it is there, taken separately, RB aside, it may not appear to be different.
I'm going to further waste my time with this dammed focuser nonsense. I realize as a Journalist, you come from a profession that survives largely on making objective news from anecdotal observations. The fact is, and will always remain, regardless of how many syllables you are up to throwing at it (or throwing at me for that matter), any number of anecdotal observations will NEVER equate to any sort of objectively valid database. What we see with the endless litany of focus complaints on any binocular ever manufactured by human hands, is an illustration of endless variation in the sphere of the users of those focus wheels. Not a proven example of focus defects. Do defects occur, sure they do, but not to the extent you would have us believe. Your five out of six defective Swarovski focusers is just proof that you and a swaro are not meant to match, particularly since you are focuser (among other things) obsessive. Not all users share obsessions equally.
I have used far more than six Swarovski binoculars and the focus works just fine. Maybe focuser complaints are in the same level of occurrence as rolling ball, there for some, maybe not (probably not) for the greater majority.
Somehow the story of a little boy crying wolf keeps coming to mind.
If I may offer a simple observation or two...
For Pete's sakes...enough OK? While I tend to agree with you up to a point, ie no binocular is perfect and nobody should ever project perfection to a human designed invention, that some indeed do. While you have pretty much lost relevance with regard to never ending rolling ball, you are right in its concurrence, as I can personally attest. I have no notion that I am in any sort of majority, nor do I profess to have any idea of what sort of a minority I am in either. However, Swarovski has made some changes, the newer versions definitely present a different image that the 2010-11 introductory models. The edges are not as sharp (but sharper that nearly anything else) as the original. I still get RB on the SV 8.5 early model, but not on the current ones. The image is different, not better or worse, just different. EDIT: Just different to me, maybe not everybody. Side by side it is there, taken separately, RB aside, it may not appear to be different.
I'm going to further waste my time with this dammed focuser nonsense. I realize as a Journalist, you come from a profession that survives largely on making objective news from anecdotal observations. The fact is, and will always remain, regardless of how many syllables you are up to throwing at it (or throwing at me for that matter), any number of anecdotal observations will NEVER equate to any sort of objectively valid database. What we see with the endless litany of focus complaints on any binocular ever manufactured by human hands, is an illustration of endless variation in the sphere of the users of those focus wheels. Not a proven example of focus defects. Do defects occur, sure they do, but not to the extent you would have us believe. Your five out of six defective Swarovski focusers is just proof that you and a swaro are not meant to match, particularly since you are focuser (among other things) obsessive. Not all users share obsessions equally.
I have used far more than six Swarovski binoculars and the focus works just fine. Maybe focuser complaints are in the same level of occurrence as rolling ball, there for some, maybe not (probably not) for the greater majority.
Somehow the story of a little boy crying wolf keeps coming to mind.
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
It's funny how rare the reports of focus issues on - say, an FL series Zeiss are in comparison to that other brand.[like a tenth as many]
What does it mean, or is it as anecdotal and [therefore] as meaningless as the anecdotal reports of issues from that other brand?
What does it mean, or is it as anecdotal and [therefore] as meaningless as the anecdotal reports of issues from that other brand?
Besides satisfied owners being labeled as "fan boys", I love ( not really) how some jump in and make not one post, but many posts in a thread about binoculars they neither own, or maybe have never even handled. Is their right to do so, but I fail to see the purpose of help to others.
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Mal,
I certainly don't, and I would think it should be obvious to the regulars who are the Swaro fanboys and who are the real deals. There's two ways to find out for sure: (1) Look at my posts and watch who posts right after me if I dare criticize their brand - FANBOY! or (2) Ask me to send you a copy of my Ingore List, 90% on the list are Swaro fanboys.
Swaros are my second favorite brand after Nikon. Don't like the focuser issues, which are far too common at this price point, and the RB in the SV EL, that's something that most don't see or see but will adjust to, so while it's not a "non-issue," it's also not a deal breaker for most buyers, and even less important now that buyers have an equally good alternative in the Zeiss SF.
Of course, if they didn't want an open bridge and could stand to lose that last 5% or so of edge sharpness (which is squished on the SV EL, anyway, due to AMD), the SLC HDs provide almost as big a sweet spot, particularly the 10x42 model, so they can even stay with Swaro rather than jump brands.
IMO, it's the fanboys that ruin it for the rest of us by not giving a "fair and balanced" appraisal of their bins and the brand. I'm not the only one who's turned off by this, but perhaps the most "vocal" about it.
I hadn't heard about Sawro's "fragile" EPs before this and was surprised to read that. I wonder if this issue is prevalent or if the samples mentioned above were damaged during shipping? Mishandle any bin, and something will break. EPs are the most vulnerable because they contain the most glass and are air spaced and/or glued and are at the end of the bins. Now if this were happening in the field during normal use, that would be something to get alarmed about.
True about the marketing, they are the best at it, but I can't fault them for that, every company wants to sell as many bins as possible, but they are not willing or able to go to the extremes (Extremadura) or give their bins away to hunting guides, etc. like Swaro is.
Rest assured, it's not all marketing mumbo jumbo. Swarovski makes fine optics, I haven't tried one I haven't liked or thought wasn't well built or had subpar optics.
My only real gripe with the company besides the focusers is their prices, which are exorbitant. When you see the steep discounts stores give during sales, it gives you an idea of how high the markup is. I guess if I had deep pockets, I wouldn't be complaining about that (unless I became a "professional complainer" and got paid to
, but it would be nice if, like Zeiss, Swaro created an affordable line of bins for the huddled masses yearning to buy a quality brand bin that wouldn't bankrupt them. As Mike Jensen explained, it's also good for the company. They get entry level buyers, who if they like what they bought, are more likely to stay with the brand and become "move-up buyers" when they are earning more money or have paid off their car loan, student loan, etc.
The Terra ED shows that an alpha optics company can be successful making entry level roofs. Will Swaro pick up the gauntlet? I don't think so. The are not "hungry" enough because their current marketing strategy is working well for them. As to me and my ilk, let them eat cake! :eat:
Brock
Last edited:
And..... On, and on it goes- Ad nauseam.
And I am pretty sure I am on Brock's ignore list ( like I care) ever since I asked him about if he ever tried out a SV before a couple years ago when he was going on about this same stuff. Maybe he should put himself in a time out.
And I am pretty sure I am on Brock's ignore list ( like I care) ever since I asked him about if he ever tried out a SV before a couple years ago when he was going on about this same stuff. Maybe he should put himself in a time out.
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Well James,
If you count one hundred reports coming from one guy as one hundred reports, you have a pointB
and then I don't take into consideration that in the FL period sales were 100 EL's against 1 FL.Jan
Last edited:
Do I recall 1.5 meters being put forth?
Last edited:
