Swaro 8x32EL SV vs Zeiss 8x40 SFL (1 Viewer)

[Upland]

I’ve owned both and have my opinion. But since it’s just an opinion I’m going to keep it to myself. Compared them and keep the ones you like best.

 

[Bentley03]

I like the SFL's. A lot. I also have opportity to pickup a nice SV 8x32 for attractive price (?) and in great condition.
The specs are actually sort of similar.
139m/1000 SFL vs 141m. SV
641g SFL vs 580g SV
Both get excellent reviews.

Does anyone actually own both or have had the opportunity to compare side-by-side?

With your experience, I reckon you'll know almost instantly how you feel about the EL's, and how they feel compared to the SFL's. Of course, certain characteristics of a binocular only make themselves known once you've used them in all conditions, and that does take time.

Like Dennis, I've owned and said goodbye to x40 SFL's (nothing wrong with them, they just didn't really add anything to the collection), but I've kept the finicky x30's, which I really enjoy. We have 8x32 SF's and NL's plus others at our disposal, but the binoculars which live on the shelf next to the front door to be grabbed on the way out are a pair of 8x32 EL's and a pair of 10x32 EL's (mine). I wear glasses, the other person doesn't, but if we could only own one pair of binoculars each, these would be them (a conclusion drawn by each of us independently). It's the combination of the way they handle, the way they fit us, and their optical characteristics which set them apart. I think the point is that we very rarely, if ever, wish we were carrying a different binocular.

To use a favourite phrase from some of our favourite reviewers, they come highly recommended. My 10x32's still wow me every day.

 

[MiddleRiver]

With your experience, I reckon you'll know almost instantly how you feel about the EL's, and how they feel compared to the SFL's. Of course, certain characteristics of a binocular only make themselves known once you've used them in all conditions, and that does take time.

Like Dennis, I've owned and said goodbye to x40 SFL's (nothing wrong with them, they just didn't really add anything to the collection), but I've kept the finicky x30's, which I really enjoy. We have 8x32 SF's and NL's plus others at our disposal, but the binoculars which live on the shelf next to the front door to be grabbed on the way out are a pair of 8x32 EL's and a pair of 10x32 EL's (mine). I wear glasses, the other person doesn't, but if we could only own one pair of binoculars each, these would be them (a conclusion drawn by each of us independently). It's the combination of the way they handle, the way they fit us, and their optical characteristics which set them apart. I think the point is that we very rarely, if ever, wish we were carrying a different binocular.

To use a favourite phrase from some of our favourite reviewers, they come highly recommended. My 10x32's still wow me every day.

Thx! Knowing you wear glasses and hearing which bins you own, makes the ‘recommendation’ very useful ;-)

 

[Dennis Mau]

With your experience, I reckon you'll know almost instantly how you feel about the EL's, and how they feel compared to the SFL's. Of course, certain characteristics of a binocular only make themselves known once you've used them in all conditions, and that does take time.

Like Dennis, I've owned and said goodbye to x40 SFL's (nothing wrong with them, they just didn't really add anything to the collection), but I've kept the finicky x30's, which I really enjoy. We have 8x32 SF's and NL's plus others at our disposal, but the binoculars which live on the shelf next to the front door to be grabbed on the way out are a pair of 8x32 EL's and a pair of 10x32 EL's (mine). I wear glasses, the other person doesn't, but if we could only own one pair of binoculars each, these would be them (a conclusion drawn by each of us independently). It's the combination of the way they handle, the way they fit us, and their optical characteristics which set them apart. I think the point is that we very rarely, if ever, wish we were carrying a different binocular.

To use a favourite phrase from some of our favourite reviewers, they come highly recommended. My 10x32's still wow me every day.

The 10x32 El's are nice binoculars, but only have a 6.9 degree FOV with edge CA and glare. Once you look through a Zeiss SF 10x32 with it's 7.5 degree FOV with no glare and no CA, you are spoiled forever.

 

[gweller]

The 10x32 El's are nice binoculars, but only have a 6.9 degree FOV with edge CA and glare. Once you look through a Zeiss SF 10x32 with it's 7.5 degree FOV with no glare and no CA, you are spoiled forever.

Assuming you can put up with the tricky eye placement and the warm colour cast. I ended up selling mine after a year or so and replaced it with the 10x40 SFL which I found I could get on with better.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Assuming you can put up with the tricky eye placement and the warm colour cast. I ended up selling mine after a year or so and replaced it with the 10x40 SFL which I found I could get on with better.

The SF's are a little warmer than the NL and SFL's, but I prefer it. Eye placement depends on your eye socket depth and diameter in relation to the eye cup length and diameter and eye relief of the binocular, so one binocular might work for you and it might not.

The SFL's have a bigger eye box than most binoculars, so they have more tolerance for different users, which can make for easier eye placement.

If the SF's didn't work for you and were tricky for eye placement, I can understand not liking them. A lot of binocular choice is personal preference.

I was just testing my SF 10x32 for CA, and it has the lowest CA in the center and on the edge of ANY binocular I have ever tested. Even slightly better than the former CA champion, the Zeiss FL.

Zeiss must use some expensive Schott ED glass in the SF. The low CA leads to a sharp on-axis almost crystalline view that is unmatched by any Swarovski I have tried, including the NL.

Allbinos agrees the SF 8x32 had the lowest CA of any binocular they ever tested. They are correct.

Carl Zeiss Victory SF 8x32 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

 

[Bentley03]

The 10x32 El's are nice binoculars, but only have a 6.9 degree FOV with edge CA and glare. Once you look through a Zeiss SF 10x32 with it's 7.5 degree FOV with no glare and no CA, you are spoiled forever.

I find the 10x32 SF's to be virtually unusable. No thanks.

 

[Bentley03]

Curious why? Difficult eye placement and black-outs?

To answer your subsequent post quoted above, which for some reason you decided to delete shortly after posting, YES! I won't elaborate further, because I've already made my feelings clear about this particular binocular elsewhere on BF, it will only serve to unnecessarily drag this thread further off topic, which would be unhelpful to @MiddleRiver.

 

[Richard D]

Without getting too much into personal preferences. 8x32 ELs and 10x32 ELs are my most used binoculars and I like them a lot. I find eye placement easy, CA very low, optical performance very good and personally don't find glare intrusive. I can't get on with SF eye placement but don't dispute they're an excellent alternative if they suit you. SFL I've only briefly tried so can't draw real conclusions other than I thought the 8's were much better than the 10s.

 

[Maljunulo]

I will always remember my first look through an 8X32 EL SV, it was stunning.

It had what I call the “open window effect” and was of a perched Red-tailed Hawk.

 

[dries1]

"Never tried the EDG's but I can't get over the black plastic "

What black plastic?

 

[dries1]

All mine are fine, they are taken care of. Love my EDGs.

 

[Richard D]

CA really bothers me and the EL's do have some edge CA and that is why I have switched to the SF. It has a much bigger FOV, no CA and less glare, but if eye placement doesn't work for you that is a deal killer.

The ELs do have easy eye placement because of the large eye box.

Have you ever tried the Zeiss FL 8x32 or 10x32? They don't have the sharp edges of the EL, but they do have less CA and less glare than the EL's and they also have easy eye placement.

To get the full FOV I get the BROD with SF that you find with the SFL - other than that they seemed decent enough bar the eyecups. Not knocking Zeiss in general - I use and really like the 8x30 Porros. I really don't find glare a problem with the ELs, and the CA is extremely minimal (and far towards the edge) so haven't felt the need to try the old FLs.

 

[Richard D]

Try the FL's. Compare the on-axis resolution to the EL's. The FL's are sharper than the EL's because they have less CA and Zeiss concentrates on center field resolution rather than edges like Swarovski.

I'm sure I remember you posting about how important a wide view with sharp edges were.

How is the colour cast - murky green like the SF or bright and neutral like SFL / EL?

 

[Maljunulo]

How is the colour cast - murky green like the SF or bright and neutral like SFL / EL?

Where did we get that the SF is "murky green"?

Is someone using it under water?

 

[ukorim]

It is not plastic, but it is kind of cheesy MIC looking, don't you think? I think it will scratch easily.

I read some time ago (can't recall where) that the EDG badge is ceramic. It's certainly not plastic and does not scratch in my experience.

 

[Richard D]

Where did we get that the SF is "murky green"?

Is someone using it under water?

I thought I'd follow the exaggeration of the thread.

They do lack the cool clarity of EL and SFL to my eyes with a distinctly slightly greenish cast. I could get used to it, but prefer cooler or neutral casts.

Maybe I ought to throw away my ELs and Habichts and try these apparently superior FLs.

 

[Paultricounty]

Where did we get that the SF is "murky green"?

Is someone using it under water?

I certainly wouldn’t call it murky green, but it definitely has that greenish color hue. It’s definitely different than FL’s or HT’s. I do believe these coatings that give it the greenish hue , also enhances certain objects detail, and is why imo they are the top of Zeiss’s lineup.

The SF’s do on occasion exhibit the BROD (Blue ring of Dennis), but it’s not prevalent and only under specific conditions and lighting angles, kind of like glare in all binoculars under certain conditions. I haven’t experienced the blue ring in the SFL’s, at least in the half dozen I’ve had the pleasure of using.

I’d also ad there certainly is CA under specific lighting conditions with the SF, more in the 10’s of course. I was out with both the SF and EL 8x32’s today and there are conditions where the SF exhibits slightly more CA on edge than the EL, and Vice versa depending on the object, background and lighting angle.

It’s kind of curious for me in that I like the warm color saturation of Leica bins, and the neutral color appearance of Swarovski. The Zeiss greenish is different from both, and is not my favorite, but without a doubt the SF’s have phenomenal optical performance in all categories. I will say regardless of how good they are , they’re my third choice when I grab for an 8x32, after the EL and Ultravids.

 

[Paultricounty]

The FL's really don't have any greenish hue but are slightly warmer than Swarovski's but less warm than Leica's

I have never experienced the BROD (Blue Ring of Death) in the SF's, but I certainly have in the SFL's. I saw it in both the SF 8x40 and SFL 8x30 when I had them.

As many here have opined, it has a lot to do with physiology. You seem to have some very quirky physiology and oversensitivity to glare and CA (as noted in hundreds of your posts) that a large percent of the majority don’t suffer from. You are the outlier on these issues. I would remind you that you have stated numerous times that the NL is the best birding binoculars by far and you listed all the reasons. 🤷🏼‍♂️

It is probably a type of CA or glare that not everybody sees and is dependent on how the binoculars fit your eye sockets and interact with your facial structure.

The SF's for me remain the best binocular I have ever used for CA control and no matter the condition I have found them to be superior to the EL and NL, especially on the edge.

The EL and NL control CA good in the center, but I have never had a binocular like the SF and FL that control it on the edge as well.

That is just personal preference when it comes to what kind of color saturation you like.

Some people like the somewhat exaggerated colors of a Leica, whereas, others prefer the neutral color of a Swarovski.

I actually like them both, the real life neutral image quality of the Swarovski, and the color saturation of Leica’s. Both of which i enjoy more that the SF.

Zeiss SF's and FL's are in between a Leica and a Swarovski when it comes to color. They are warmer than a Swarovski and less warm than a Leica.

The SF's are slightly greenish because the eye's sensitivity peaks around 589nm which is greenish, so the coating is optimized for low light use, rather than for color accuracy.

And yet the EL’s appear brighter, not only in bright lighting but also under lower light conditions.

What binocular you like between a UVHD, EL or SF depends on your priorities.

If you like saturated colors, don't mind a smaller FOV and can tolerate considerable edge, CA the UVHD is your binocular.

If you like sharp edges, don't mind a smaller FOV, don't mind glare, are prepared to send your binoculars in to Swarovski for new armor in a couple of years and can put up with edge CA the EL is your binocular.

The FOV on the EL and the SF is almost not noticeable unless you really look for it.

If you like an extremely sharp on-axis binocular with no CA, no glare and a huge 7.5 degree FOV, the SF is your binocular.

SF If you like the dimmer feeling and the slightly artificial image quality. If your willing to give up beautiful Leica image richness and/or real life color image of Swaro, for the almost imperceptible improvement in CA, and don’t mind the occasional blue ring , then the SF is for those🤣😉.

 

[Dennis Mau]

As far as glare in the NL goes, it looks like Holger Merlitz, Binomania and I all have the same very similar quirky physiology because we all see glare in the NL and EL.

What color saturation you like is personal preference. If you prefer the Swarovski and Leica over the Zeiss, that is just your preference. A lot of binocular choice is just preference.

Both the EL 8x32 and SF 8x32 have 90% light transmission, so if the EL's appear brighter, it probably is the neutral color saturation that makes them seem brighter for you.

The EL 8x32 has an 8 degree FOV and the SF 8x32 has an 8.5 degree FOV. The EL does have sharper edges which would make the FOV appear bigger, but that is usually a pretty noticeable difference in FOV.

Fortunately, I don't see the blue ring in the SF. Transmission in the Leica, Swaro and Zeiss are all about the same, so brightness should be about the same. Liking the Leica color image richness and real life color image of the Swaro is just a preference for that type of color saturation.

What I do like about the SF 10x32 is it's 7.5 degree FOV, which is way bigger than either the Leica UVHD 10x32 6.7 degree FOV or the Swaro EL 10x32 6.8 degree FOV and the improvement in CA performance especially on the edge which I feel aids the on-axis resolution because all the light is converging into one point.

We just have a difference in our priorities and preferences when it comes to choosing binoculars. There is nothing wrong with that.

My biggest priority is FOV, CA, brightness and on-axis sharpness while yours is your definition of image quality or richness which depends heavily on color saturation. and you will give up a little FOV to get that quality.

It sounds like you fall into the Leica camp, and there is nothing wrong with that and I understand because I like the beautiful color saturated Leica image also but the Leica UVHD+ 8x32 never worked well for me having eye cups too short for the ER and I felt the Noctivid was heavy for a 8x42 and the 7.7 degree FOV was too small.

Leica's in general do have a lot of pop and contrast, and the image is beautiful because it so color saturated. All of them are that way, with the Noctivid being even better.

That is why it is good that Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica and Nikon make a lot of different binoculars to suit all of our tastes. It is pointless to argue over which one is best because what is best for you is not best for me.