Swarovski EL 8 x 32 non SV better than a good mid level 8 x 42 like Nikon Monarch 7? (1 Viewer)

[joes_gumpf]

Hi everyone.

It's a question I keep wondering recently, as the second hand market comes up with alot of good gear, whether a used set of alpha 8 x 32 would a better choice than a mid level 8 x 42 for the same money?

Both lightweight, but higher standard of glass (meaning possibly better light gathering), comparible field of view but better build quality of the Swaro might be a better choice than say a vortex viper hd 8 x 42, that will let in more light because of being a 42, but does not compare in build quality, ergonics, grade of glass, fov, accessories, warranty.

Hope that makes sense and would love to hear your thoughts.

 

[pbjosh]

In this concrete example, I would take the EL over a Vortex Viper HD or a Monarch 7, assuming the EL is in good shape.

If the comparison were a 2003 EL vs a recent Monarch HG or Conquest HD... hrm, I'd think about it probably.

 

[joes_gumpf]

If it was SV 32 would that make a bigger difference? Many people rave about that model. The Conquests and MHG are a similar price to the Swaros, new and secondhand respectively.

Weight is a big issue for me as I like to hike and bird, also love to watch behaviour/raptors hunting and that sometimes requires holding the bins up for a very long time. Thanks for your reply.

In this concrete example, I would take the EL over a Vortex Viper HD or a Monarch 7, assuming the EL is in good shape.

If the comparison were a 2003 EL vs a recent Monarch HG or Conquest HD... hrm, I'd think about it probably.

 

[master5]

EL 8x32 of the first generation since 2003, 30 years warranty, magnesium alloy body, open bridge, build quality, field 140m, pupil removal 15mm, weight 610 grams, better service, distortion is high, and chromatic aberration

Vortex Viper HD or a Monarch 7 -assembly China, polycarbonate body, 10-year warranty from Nikon and lifetime Vortex

SV 8x32 since 2012, 10 years warranty, magnesium alloy body, open bridge, build quality, field 140m, pupil removal 20mm, weight 595 grams, better service, chromatic aberration minimum, flat field.

If in very good condition and inexpensive then EL 8x32 of the first generation is probably better!

 

[eitanaltman]

Having worked my way up over the years at various price levels, I would definitely take a used previous generation “alpha” over a mid level, light 8x42. Especially if it’s a later production model which will have potentially better coatings (reducing the gap between the older model and the new stuff)

It strikes me though that the price difference is quite large between these two options. And as alluded to above, at an even price level I would be cross shopping that used “alpha” 8x32 with a more mid-premium, light 8x42 like the Monarch HG or Vortex Razor. Then the optical quality is a lot closer, and the added comfort of the large exit pupil could be beneficial for long scanning sessions and tip the scales.

 

[Elkhornsun]

The Monarch 8x42 has objectives with a surface area of 1385 sq mm as compared to a 8x32mm objective at 803 sq mm. So the 8x32 would have to be 72% more effective in transmitting light and no matter what glass is used or how it is coated that level of improved transmission is not going to happen.

In low light a 8x42 or even better the 10x42 Monarch 7 is going to provide a much larger image than a 8x32 or 10x32 bino. I have 4 Swarovski binos (8x25, 10x25, 8x30, 10x32) and two Nikon Monarch 7 binos (8x42 and 8x30) and the difference in real world viewing is not that significant, especially when the Nikon's sell for half or a quarter the price. But there is the element of wanting to have the "best" bino and if it costs a lot more than it must be a lot better.

 

[NDhunter]

The original EL 8x32 is a very good model, and should be in your plans if you can do it. I would recommend it over any of
those others mentioned. Vortex ranks very low on my want list, in fact it will not be there.

Jerry

 

[Rotherbirder]

Could I ask what your budget would be, say for an 'original' non-SV Swarovski 8x32EL?

RB

 

[tenex]

The Monarch 8x42 has objectives with a surface area of 1385 sq mm as compared to a 8x32mm objective at 803 sq mm. So the 8x32 would have to be 72% more effective in transmitting light and no matter what glass is used or how it is coated that level of improved transmission is not going to happen.

In low light a 8x42 or even better the 10x42 Monarch 7 is going to provide a much larger image than a 8x32 or 10x32 bino...

Improved transmission? Only in twilight. Larger "image"? No. It seems possible that you do know the facts involved (exit pupil etc) but they need to be expressed correctly to give advice.