• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Swarovision 8.32 v. Swarovision 8.5x42 (1 Viewer)

Hi Brock,

EDZ talks about the importance of strict control of coating thickness, which got me thinking of something one of our optical coatings guys told me a couple of years ago. It went something like this:
if we take two substances A and B that can be used to create a multi-layed lens coating in a say five layer combination of A, B, A, B, A; then simply through minute variation of the thickness of each of those layers, one can create either a fantastic antireflexion coating (say 0.3% loss) or an almost perfect mirror (say 90% reflection). If production and quality control are not up to speed or careless then there can be wild variation between the theoretical effect and the real-world performance of the coating.​

Happy birding
Dale

Hi Dale,

At the premium price point, buyers should expect a high degree of QC and consistency. However, machine operators and the machines themselves are not perfect, so it's up to the QC inspectors to check for defects. They are the last line of defense between the manufacturer and the customers, because most stores don't check for sample variation.

I bought a Nikon 10x42 LX/HG on eBay (demo model), and I tested both barrels as I do with all the bins I purchase, and I immediately noticed a loss of contrast on one side. I took the bin inside and looked through the objectives and found that the side with the lesser contrast had a layer of coatings missing!

I'm not sure how QC inspectors measure coatings that are thousands of an inch thick to make sure they were properly applied. Even if there was a device that could do this, it would probably be costly and time consuming to inspect the coatings of every binocular and spotting scope coming off the line.

They might do "spot checks" now and then to check for consistency, I don't know, but this Nikon HG received a "passed" sticker despite the fact that it was missing a multi-coated surface, which was easy enough even for a non-techie like me to find.

OTOH, testing if focusers turn properly should be part of a QC inspector's checklist since it's something he can do by hand.

I've learned from personal experience with three different Swaro bins, and from reading reports of others who have either tried or bought Swaros with sub par focusers, including fellow birdforum members, one of whom tried three samples of the same model in a store, that not all Swaro focusers are consistent.

Most turn smoothly, but some turn smoothly in one direction and harder the other direction, and a few are "coarse" or "sticky".

Unlike measuring coating thickness, it should be an easy task for a QC inspector to pick up the bin and turn the focus wheel both ways and check to make sure the focuser is turning smoothly in both directions before giving it his stamp of approval.

So I'm perplexed as to why I keep reading reports about Swaro bins with focuser issues. For a time, I kept reading reports about hard to turn focusers on Nikon Monarchs, but those are relatively inexpensive bins made in China, so you expect sample variation. Same thing with Sightron II roofs. But it's not what you expect from an alpha bin.

Out of the three Swaro bins I tried myself, one turned smoothly in both directions, one turned smoothly in one direction and harder in the other, and the third was so coarse it took two fingers to turn. The last sample was nearly a decade old, and the grease might have dried out, but the other samples were new.

Some buyers don't seem to mind if the focuser turns harder in one direction than the other. I do a lot of close-in birding and that requires quick and fine focusing.

Focusers that are "coarse" or "sticky" are usually sent in for repairs.

The nice thing is that I found a local Swaro dealer, who is a BF member. So I can "try before I buy". The "buy" part is harder since Swaros are so expensive these days.

I'd like to see Swarovski develop a line of full sized bins at the mid-tier price point similar to the Leica Trinovids, Zeiss Conquest HDs, and Nikon Premiers for those who appreciate high quality optics but who don't have deep enough pockets to afford the top of the line.

I gather that was the idea behind the CL Companion model, but that's only available in the midsized configuration, and the FOV could be a bit wider.

Now that Leica has the new Trinovids, Zeiss has Conquest HDs, and other companies are offering competitive products in the mid-tier price segment such as the Meopta HD, Pentax ED, Alpin Rainier HD, and Vortex Razor HD, there's a niche that Swaro could also fill.

Brock
 
Last edited:
If your neck is giving you problems, the small one is the easy choice. But, what if sometime in the hopefully distant future your legs start acting up, and won't carry you for the hour minimum necessary to object to the big one around your neck? You might wish for the big one back then. But then, in the even more distant future, if your eyes start to go, or your hands get shaky, you might not be able to see the difference any more anyhow, and then you'd want the small one.

True, Ron. I already have the onset of jitters covered with an IS bino. Looming senility and forgetfulness can be countered by leaving elite binos all over the house, so I never have to remember where I left them. And mobility issues have already been solved years ago by a suggestion from Steve, to wit, a bath chair with a Kowa Highlander mounted on the front.

Sancho,

If you can afford to hold on to both of them for a year, as you suggested above, it would appear that keeping both is not a financial issue, but a philosophical one?

Brock

Sir Brock, there is Philosophy, and there is Marital Philosophy. But perhaps my purchase will be forgotten as quickly as the Brownie Points I earn, which expire fairly rapidly.

Hi Sancho, I am no "tekkie", but the colour of the coatings seen from the objective side means almost nothing - each of the antireflexion coatings on each of the lens surfaces in both binoculars is uniquely designed to play its little part in the entire system.......Hope you have a good time in China,

Dale

Thanks Dale. Yes, there is no perceivable difference to my eyes in the colour rendition, etc. between the two binos. I mention the coatings only because I noticed the colours, now that I have become a fully-fledged BF bino-obsessive, and as people often mention coatings, I thought I should throw it in (just to demonstrate how observant I have become...;))
Beijing is hot, and today I used the new Swaro SV 8x32, which gave superb clarity even in the dusty haze over the city. I saw exactly one swallow, one house sparrow and two feral pigeons. The SV 8x32 slipped perfectly into my gilet pocket, as easy to use while strolling around Tiananmen Square as a pair of compacts.
 
Brock

Swaro do seem to have problems with focusing wheels. I bought a pair of EL 8.5s in April 2004 and within a few months there was detectable slack in the focussing action at the same time as a feeling of an increase in effort needed to turn the wheel plus a sensation of roughness. The bins were sent back to the factory and when returned were vastly improved but not cured.
Zeiss FLs came out, I tried a pair and was smitten. By November the Swaro ELs were gone and a pair of FLs obtained.

Lee
 
Brock

Swaro do seem to have problems with focusing wheels. I bought a pair of EL 8.5s in April 2004 and within a few months there was detectable slack in the focussing action at the same time as a feeling of an increase in effort needed to turn the wheel plus a sensation of roughness. The bins were sent back to the factory and when returned were vastly improved but not cured.
Zeiss FLs came out, I tried a pair and was smitten. By November the Swaro ELs were gone and a pair of FLs obtained.

Lee

Lee,

(spoken in the loud, nasally voice of Ross from "Friends") THANK YOU!

Sounds like this "red herring" turned into an "albatross" that became too burdensome to bear and caused you to switch brands.

I was surprised to hear that Swaro was unable to "cure" the problem. I guess for most people "vastly improved" would have been enough (not for me unless the focuser turned smoothly in both directions w/out any "play").

For others who returned their Swaros because of focuser problems, the repairs seemed to have worked, either that or they are less fussy than we are. If you returned the EL again, they might have replaced it with a new unit.

In any case, I'm glad to hear you found another bin that suited you better. As fine as the Swaro ELs are, they are not everybody's cup 'o tea, but the same could be said of the Zeiss FL.

However, now that Swaro has two top models to chose from -- the EL and SLC-HD -- it gives people more ways to join the "Swaro family of optics".

When I hit the Power Ball, I'm going to commission Swaro to make a custom binocular - an 8x32 SV EL without the compound distortion, which would amount to an EL WB with ED glass. No RB, lower CA. Who could ask for anything more besides an 8x30 Habicht with a smooth internal focuser?

Once I compare the Habicht to the baby SV EL, I'll decide which I want them to modify. Meanwhile, I'll keep playing the Power Ball and hope I get a sizable chunk of that $20 million.

Brock
 
Swaro do seem to have problems with focusing wheels. I bought a pair of EL 8.5s in April 2004 and within a few months there was detectable slack in the focussing action at the same time as a feeling of an increase in effort needed to turn the wheel plus a sensation of roughness. The bins were sent back to the factory and when returned were vastly improved but not cured.

I've noticed this on my SV 8.5x42 as well. I was rotating around bins and on returning to them (after using the FL and EDG) I noticed how much worse (stiff, asymettric and "gritty") my SVs are.

Need to to send them back to Swaro to see what they can do about them. Otherwise I really like them.

And the EDG I 8x32 hinges are too loose to retain IPD in the field and it suffers some diopter offset. So they need to go back too.

What is it with premium bins (or premium bin users?) :)
 
Where ya been Kevin? If you haven't been using those binoculars during the periods you have been missing here maybe the grease in the focusers dried up?

The hinges on my 10 x 32 EDG I are still nice and tight. Diopter is still good too.

Bob
 
Brock

Maybe Swaro could have cured the problem if they had tried harder. I loved the ELs at the time for their close focussing which was a real game changer for me as I am interested in flowers, butterflies,dragonflies, freshwater life, seawater life etc and using bins for nearby stuff opened a new world for me.
However I wasn't an unbiased Swaro convert at that time as I had spent 18 years with a pair of Zeiss Dialyt 10x40BGA previously so when the FLs came out with close focussing I ran back 'home'.
Perhaps another guy would have sent the Swaros back again and been rewarded by the result.
I am looking forward to trying HTs in a weeks time but will be sure to try Swaros SVs at the same time.

Lee
 
Brock

Maybe Swaro could have cured the problem if they had tried harder. I loved the ELs at the time for their close focussing which was a real game changer for me as I am interested in flowers, butterflies,dragonflies, freshwater life, seawater life etc and using bins for nearby stuff opened a new world for me.
However I wasn't an unbiased Swaro convert at that time as I had spent 18 years with a pair of Zeiss Dialyt 10x40BGA previously so when the FLs came out with close focussing I ran back 'home'.
Perhaps another guy would have sent the Swaros back again and been rewarded by the result.
I am looking forward to trying HTs in a weeks time but will be sure to try Swaros SVs at the same time.

Lee

It is nice to hear an open and critical review. I sometimes feel people call me a lair when I say the SV focus is too slow and gritty. And I own one!!!!! Yes the image is probably the best, but it doesn't blind my focus judgement. Mine is going back soon for repair.
 
NewfieG

Good luck with the repair, I hope it works out for you.
As well as wonderful optics (all the alphas do really) the EL is a terrific piece of external design, an absolute modern classic up there with the Audi TT sports car for example.

Mind you the soon-to-arrive Zeiss HTs look pretty elegant to me. I will be testing the HTs on June 16th and will let you know what I think.

Good luck
Lee
 
NewfieG

Good luck with the repair, I hope it works out for you.
As well as wonderful optics (all the alphas do really) the EL is a terrific piece of external design, an absolute modern classic up there with the Audi TT sports car for example.

Mind you the soon-to-arrive Zeiss HTs look pretty elegant to me. I will be testing the HTs on June 16th and will let you know what I think.

Good luck
Lee

Looking forward to that review. Thanks.
 
Was out with my SV 8x32 again today, have to report that the focusser is buttery-smooth in both directions.

Hopefully they fixed it in the new 32sv. My non sv 8x32 is fine. The 42 is not and now the diopter is skipping when I change the IPD. I am sure they will fix it, but it is going out very soon. Maybe I have a lemon. Optically it is amazing.
 
Was out with my SV 8x32 again today, have to report that the focusser is buttery-smooth in both directions.

I didn't want to say anything for fear of jinxing myself, but the replacement set of 10x32 SV Travelers I got are perfect focusing - even the rotation pressure is the same in both directions! And no grit!

I really have a feeling that the open bridge design requires very precise machining and assembly of the rear hinge / focuser / diopter parts, and if not perfect will result in what some of us have experienced.

My replacement set was manufactured 6 weeks after my first set that showed slight problems with the focus wheel, so maybe they learned something from the first releases.

John F
 
Hopefully they fixed it in the new 32sv. My non sv 8x32 is fine. The 42 is not and now the diopter is skipping when I change the IPD. I am sure they will fix it, but it is going out very soon. Maybe I have a lemon. Optically it is amazing.

Stopped at Bass Pro yesterday early afternoon, and played with the 8.5x42 SV again for a while. "Optically it is amazing" might be a bit of an understatement. I also played with 8x42 Ultravid, not quite as 'amazing' to my eyes.

John F
 
Was out with my SV 8x32 again today, have to report that the focusser is buttery-smooth in both directions.
Though not a SV my el 8x32 is superb! I have tried everything to make it fail!!! It has remained perfect??? Guess i will keep using it!!! 7x42 the same? Maybe it's an anamaly??? I must be the lucky one!!! ??? Come on man!!! (Let it be as the Beatles would say) !!! Bryce...
 
Last edited:
Stopped at Bass Pro yesterday early afternoon, and played with the 8.5x42 SV again for a while. "Optically it is amazing" might be a bit of an understatement. I also played with 8x42 Ultravid, not quite as 'amazing' to my eyes.

John F

Did you try the 7x42 ultravid hd? It has a nice wow similar to the 8.5 sv
 
My non sv 8x32 is fine...

Mine too, even after 8 years of hard birding! My pair must have been a 'cherry' sample. Optically and ergonomically, the 8x32 EL - even the non-SV - is a superb birding instrument. If the SV is significantly better, then it's arguably the best birding binocular in the world. If this is the case, then I'd better not get my hands on a pair!! ;)

LL
 
Another option with two binoculars is 8/8.5x42 and 10x32.

The 8/8.5s have the exit pupil, FOV and DOF for woods; and can be used as an all around binocular, while harnesses make them comfortable to wear.

The 10s have a relatively generous FOV for open birding, where the smaller exit pupil doesn't matter, and are lighter and smaller for travel or as a backup. I won't be upgrading from a Swarovski EL to the SVs, as the focus speed on the ELs is perfect, and there is no issue with blackouts.

OTOH, my wife prefers a Swarovski 10x42 EL for everything.

Mike
 
Another option with two binoculars is 8/8.5x42 and 10x32.

The 8/8.5s have the exit pupil, FOV and DOF for woods; and can be used as an all around binocular, while harnesses make them comfortable to wear.

The 10s have a relatively generous FOV for open birding, where the smaller exit pupil doesn't matter, and are lighter and smaller for travel or as a backup. I won't be upgrading from a Swarovski EL to the SVs, as the focus speed on the ELs is perfect, and there is no issue with blackouts.

OTOH, my wife prefers a Swarovski 10x42 EL for everything.

Mike

I'm in my 60's so figured the smaller exit pupil of the 10x32 SV's wouldn't hurt brightness, and I was pleased to find out that usability hasn't suffered at all as a result of the smaller exit pupil. I've spent plenty of test time with the 8.5x42 SV and the 10x42 SV, and have absolutely no issues using my 10x32's for extended birding sessions.

For a smaller glass, the FOV and DOF is terrific on the 10x32 SV's.
John F
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 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