• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Super-bins Shoot-out: Zeiss SF8x42 meets Swarovski 8.5x42 (2 Viewers)

The Economist disagrees with your marketing analysis.

At last, a proper recovery -All sorts of Americans except Brock are feeling more prosperous

So do the CEOs and presidents of companies and heads of economic development groups I interview each week for the business paper (some have had more than 45 years in business!).

Of course, there are still pockets where the recovery has been slower than average, not my town, which never dipped below 5.5% unemployment during the recession -- the second lowest in the state.

But in my town where the average age is 25, it's hard to get a good paying job if you are middle aged, because 25-year-olds will work cheap for the experience. My new editor is 24.

Not sure which insider you got your info from, but he must have mixed up the U.S. with Greece.

As Adrian used to say: Here's what happened. Just like any "hot" new product, the SV EL was "selling like hotcakes" (to quote one member) when it first came out. Those being the 8.5x42 and 10x42 and later the 8x and 10x32s. Then the 50mm line launch in Extremadura caused a second wave of buying. This was during the recession, but deep pocketed birders and hunters didn't seem worried by the fact that 8 million Americans got laid off from their jobs. Apparently, their jobs and money was secure.

Then came the reintroduction of the SLC with HD glass at a slightly lower price. Then the 56mm SLCs followed. Swaro had one launch after the other to keep the momentum (and the sales) flowing.

So like any sales cycle, you get a peak at the launch of a product, another bump if the product turns out to get rave reviews, and then a gradual leveling off in sales, with seasonal peaks and troughs.

Summer is a trough for binocular sales since birders are not preparing for the spring return of songbirds nor are hunters preparing for deer/elk/moose season. So discounts help bring in sales when they seasonally dip.

I think that's what's going on, just as it did last year at this time. I don't think it has to do with the SF. Or if it does, that's on top of the normal seasonal sales cycle.

Brock

Interesting stuff Brock.

What did the business leaders in the binoculars / sports optics business say about current business and future prospects?

You are of course correct that cyclical effects affect the market and companies respond to this.

Do I understand you to say that US birders only buy bins in readiness for spring migration? And they don't buy bins for summer holidays or in readiness for autumn migration? And nobody else buys bins except spring-migration-fixated birders?

All interesting stuff.

Lee
 
jgraider seems to have gone off his meds. Could a moderator please clean this up. Most of us don't come here for politics, certainly not for political ranting.
 
I just tried the Victory SF 8x42 and the EL SV 8.5x42 side-by-side today. iThe one issue I did note is that I found the Zeiss to create a more uncomfortable image when panning. I assume this is what some refer to as 'globe effect.' From what I had read, I was expecting the EL's to have noticeable Globe effect, but to me it seemed that the Zeiss had more. Have others found this to be the case?

From an ergonomics perspective, the Zeiss feel lighter and the positioning of the focus wheel is better, in my opinion. However, while the EL's felt heavier and less "ergonomic," I must say that they had a premium feel to them - more so than the Zeiss.
 
Last edited:
....I don't stay in touch with hunting products but didn't the EL Range models get a 'refresh' earliler this year? Maybe the ELs will get a similar makeover......
Lee

The new EL Range 8x42 and 10x42 have a new and interesting way the objective covers are attached. Also, a new style eyepiece cover and a different way the neck strap is attached to the binocular. I'm not sure whether there has been an upgrade in the optics from the previous version. http://www.swarovskioptik.com/hunting/blog/the_new_EL_Range_binoculars

I'm seriously considering acquiring the new EL Range 10x42.
 
The new EL Range 8x42 and 10x42 have a new and interesting way the objective covers are attached. Also, a new style eyepiece cover and a different way the neck strap is attached to the binocular. I'm not sure whether there has been an upgrade in the optics from the previous version. http://www.swarovskioptik.com/hunting/blog/the_new_EL_Range_binoculars

I'm seriously considering acquiring the new EL Range 10x42.

No there weren't any. Just "cosmetic" upgrades like a better placed range button.

Jan
 
I just tried the Victory SF 8x42 and the EL SV 8.5x42 side-by-side today. iThe one issue I did note is that I found the Zeiss to create a more uncomfortable image when panning. I assume this is what some refer to as 'globe effect.' From what I had read, I was expecting the EL's to have noticeable Globe effect, but to me it seemed that the Zeiss had more. Have others found this to be the case?

From an ergonomics perspective, the Zeiss feel lighter and the positioning of the focus wheel is better, in my opinion. However, while the EL's felt heavier and less "ergonomic," I must say that they had a premium feel to them - more so than the Zeiss.

You from Joisey? I'm from Joisey. Aside from Joe Piscopo, people from Jersey actually do pronounce the "r" when they say the name of the Garden State.

How to Have a Jersey Accent

You are at least the second person who reported seeing RB in the 8x42 SF but not in the 8.5x SV EL, which is very strange since the SV EL has way less pincushion than the SF.

Looking at Holger's chart, the 8.5x SV EL is as about as low you can limbo with angular magnification distortion (AMD) without having at least some pincushion (click on chart below).

At first I thought the reason some people are seeing RB in the SF and not in the SV EL, as you might expect, might be due to the larger apparent field of view he SF (67.6* vs. 64.6*). Bins with AMD and larger apparent fields of view are more likely to show RB in those individuals susceptible to it. But 3*? Would that be enough to make such a critical difference? I dunno.

What I do know is that Dale Forbes, Swaro rep., recently posted, and unfortunately, I forgot to bookmark it, that someone (at Swaro?) found that the pattern of distortion is also a factor in why some people see RB, not just how well or poorly the AMD and k-value match (k-value is a term for how much pincushion your eyes naturally have, which varies from individual to individual). Holger has a home test for this on another webpage.

The SV EL has a "mustache distortion," that is, pincushion and AMD change over the field of view and at some point about 70% from center, there's an abrupt changeover, which some people experience as the "Absam Ring" (a circle of blurriness about 70% from the center). For some people this mustache pattern causes the image to start rolling, for others, it doesn't.

I haven't read what the distortion pattern looks like with the SF, but the implication in Dale's post is that it's different than the SV EL, and that some people might be more susceptible to RB with the SF (particularly the 8x42 model) due to the way Zeiss mixed the AMD and pincushion over the field of view.

First time I heard about this, but given what you reported and at least one, perhaps two others reported the same susceptibility to RB in the SF over the SV EL, obviously there's more going on than the overall distortion level of the SF, which from the chart is near the border of the "modern Globe Effect possible" and "moderate distortion (the latter suits my eyes better).

The nature of RB is such that most people who see it eventually adapt it it over minutes, hours or days. So if you like the Zeiss better, but are bothered by the RB, find a store that has more than a two-week return period (so far two weeks has been the maximum time needed to adjust to RB, though it's usually much less).

If you adjust to it, then it's unlikely that you will ever see it again with the SF or at least with the 8x42 model. You might have to go through the same adjustment period with the 10x42.

I did not adjust to the RB in the 8x42 or 10x42 Nikon HG, and I used both for at least a month. Steve (mooreorless) saw RB in the HGs, but adjusted to it in less than a minute. Only a trial over time will tell you whether or not you adjust to it.

If you don't adjust to the RB (i.e., it doesn't go away), you will probably always see it and will have to decide whether or not it's something you can live with.

Brock
 

Attachments

  • newk_s.jpg
    newk_s.jpg
    69.9 KB · Views: 29
Last edited:
You from Joisey? I'm from Joisey. Aside from Joe Piscopo, people from Jersey actually do pronounce the "r" when they say the name of the Garden State.

How to Have a Jersey Accent

You are at least the second person who reported seeing RB in the 8x42 SF but not in the 8.5x SV EL, which is very strange since the SV EL has way less pincushion than the SF.

Looking at Holger's chart, the 8.5x SV EL is as about as low you can limbo with angular magnification distortion (AMD) without having at least some pincushion (click on chart below).

At first I thought the reason some people are seeing RB in the SF and not in the SV EL, as you might expect, might be due to the larger apparent field of view he SF (67.6* vs. 64.6*). Bins with AMD and larger apparent fields of view are more likely to show RB in those individuals susceptible to it. But 3*? Would that be enough to make such a critical difference? I dunno.

What I do know is that Dale Forbes, Swaro rep., recently posted, and unfortunately, I forgot to bookmark it, that someone (at Swaro?) found that the pattern of distortion is also a factor in why some people see RB, not just how well or poorly the AMD and k-value match (k-value is a term for how much pincushion your eyes naturally have, which varies from individual to individual). Holger has a home test for this on another webpage.

The SV EL has a "mustache distortion," that is, pincushion and AMD change over the field of view and at some point about 70% from center, there's an abrupt changeover, which some people experience as the "Absam Ring" (a circle of blurriness about 70% from the center). For some people this mustache pattern causes the image to start rolling, for others, it doesn't.

I haven't read what the distortion pattern looks like with the SF, but the implication in Dale's post is that it's different than the SV EL, and that some people might be more susceptible to RB with the SF (particularly the 8x42 model) due to the way Zeiss mixed the AMD and pincushion over the field of view.

First time I heard about this, but given what you reported and at least one, perhaps two others reported the same susceptibility to RB in the SF over the SV EL, obviously there's more going on than the overall distortion level of the SF, which from the chart is near the border of the "modern Globe Effect possible" and "moderate distortion (the latter suits my eyes better).

The nature of RB is such that most people who see it eventually adapt it it over minutes, hours or days. So if you like the Zeiss better, but are bothered by the RB, find a store that has more than a two-week return period (so far two weeks has been the maximum time needed to adjust to RB, though it's usually much less).

If you adjust to it, then it's unlikely that you will ever see it again with the SF or at least with the 8x42 model. You might have to go through the same adjustment period with the 10x42.

I did not adjust to the RB in the 8x42 or 10x42 Nikon HG, and I used both for at least a month. Steve (mooreorless) saw RB in the HGs, but adjusted to it in less than a minute. Only a trial over time will tell you whether or not you adjust to it.

If you don't adjust to the RB (i.e., it doesn't go away), you will probably always see it and will have to decide whether or not it's something you can live with.

Brock

Brocknballer: it will be interesting to find out if you disparage the rolling ball in the Zeiss SF with the same intensity as the rolling ball on the Swarovision line. I await your impartial observations on your carefully measured views through both!
 
Brocknballer: it will be interesting to find out if you disparage the rolling ball in the Zeiss SF with the same intensity as the rolling ball on the Swarovision line. I await your impartial observations on your carefully measured views through both!

When pigs fly. He's never seen an SV, he will never see an SF, but he will post boatloads of...stuff...about both of them. :-O

Mark
 
Given the fact that the USA is/has been run by white collar thug,liberal retard politicians the past several years, I think it's still an affordability factor. The US has national debt we can't pay, the average US consumer has credit card debt they can't pay, the cost of living increases every year despite what the bottom feeding politicians say, we have a real unemployment rate of at least 18%, those that do work make wages that barely, if ever, keep up with inflation. Let's face it....high end binoculars are a luxury item for those with some disposable income. The vast, vast majority of US consumers don't have any disposable income.

WRONG FORUM MR. TRUMP.

Okay guys, enough about politics and back to the topic thread pleasel

Whoops. Sorry. After I made the post and kept reading down I found that a moderator had all ready been by. Peace.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top