Swarovski SLC 7x50 or 8x50 ? (1 Viewer)

[Omid]

Gentlemen,

Having moved to southern Florida, I want to treat myself to a new pair of binoculars! I am not an avid bird watcher, rather I love binoculars per se! Hunting and wildlife watching are two applications that I use them for but the field-worthiness is secondary to good view and optical quality.

Now, what do guys think of Swarovski 8x50 and 7x50 binoculars in the New SLC range? It seems that the 7x50 has a very narrow field of view but how does it actually look when you look through them? Would you call it a "tunnel vision" or an "OK" view? I would love the 7mm exit pupil, huge depth of field and comfortable hold of 7x50s (I have used Fujinon Polaris before) but I haven't cheked roof 7x50s. If you guys experinced a tunnel vision looking through 7x50s, then I would go for the 8x50 which has a better field of view.

I look forward to your comments.

 

[chartwell99]

Gentlemen,


Now, what do guys think of Swarovski 8x50 and 7x50 binoculars in the New SLC range? It seems that the 7x50 has a very narrow field of view but how does it actually look when you look through them? Would you call it a "tunnel vision" or an "OK" view? I would love the 7mm exit pupil, huge depth of field and comfortable hold of 7x50s (I have used Fujinon Polaris before) but I haven't cheked roof 7x50s. If you guys experinced a tunnel vision looking through 7x50s, then I would go for the 8x50 which has a better field of view.

I look forward to your comments.

The 7 x 50 SLC is arguably the sharpest and brightest binocular Swarovski currently makes, with amazing depth of field and superb color fidelity. It is also very well balanced and surprisingly comfortable to use, despite its size and weight. The field of view is considerably narrower than the SLC 7 x 42 but is not a tunnel view and is not objectionable - to my eyes the view is actually very reminescent of several classic 7 x 50 porros (Zeiss and Fuji, for example). The real concern, ironically, is not the field of view, but rather the extraordinarily long eyerelief. The supplied eyecups offer several intermediate positions and are probably fine for a wide spectrum of eyeglass wearers, but for my eyes, the eyecups were simply not long enough to accommodate the eyerelief for use without glasses and presented persistent blackout issues. Swaro solved the problem for me by fitting rubber eyecups over the existing eyecups, and the fix works great, but I would strongly encourage you to try before you buy. Hope that's helpful.

 

[zurtfox]

If you guys experinced a tunnel vision looking through 7x50s, then I would go for the 8x50 which has a better field of view

Hi,

The 7x50 has an apparent fov of 50° and the 8x50 56°. Whilst neither could be called a 'tunnel' view, bear in mind that a pair of 10x50 SLCs has an apparent fov of 63° and you will see that there is a marked difference, both numerically and, more importantly, at the eye.

If those two were the only choice, I would go for the 8x50 (I own the 10x50, which is an absolutely superb bino, despite my preference for 8x binos).

For a comparison of all three, go to:

http://www.swarovskioptik.com/index.php?c=produkte&l=en&nID=x4353cf970b8548.35919267&css=

Cheers

Chris

 

[FrankD]

May I ask why you have singled out the 50 mm version of this fine series of binoculars? I know low light viewing is important for hunting/wildlife watching as that is the optimal time for movement but the trade off of size/weight versus optical improvement might be negligible. I would think no more than 5-10 minutes more of actual viewing time because of the extra 8 mm in objective size. In which case I would suggest you consider the 7x42 mm model. It is lighter than the other two configurations, offers an exceptionally wide field of view, excellent depth of field and a significantly wide "sweet spot" where a majority of the image is in focus. The 6 mm exit pupil should provide superb low light viewing opportunities.

Sorry if I did not necessarily follow the track you suggested but I thought it worth mentioning regardless.

 

[Omid]

Thanks a lot for your contributions gentlemen! I already have a Nikon 8x32 HG (LX in US) and that comes out with me anywhere I go hunting or hiking. Obviously this bino covers %95 of any observational needs that I -or any one else- might have. It's also very hard to beat it's wide field of view and compact size.

As I said, just wanted to get myself a new pair of binoculars to a) celebrate my moving down to Florida and b) complement my 8x32.

You see, it's so hard to beat the darn 8x32 HG in any aspect! All you can do is to improve something (brightness, depth of field, etc.) by a few percent while loosing on so many other factors by a huge margin!

Now, on second thought, may be I should go highr on the magnification scale and get a 12x or 15x bino (Lieca 12x50, SLC 15x56)?

I used to have a pair of 12x50 BN a few years ago. I used them in the shooting range as a spotting scope! I sold them to a very nice hunter called Joe Martindale in Australia and he is having so much fun with them:
http://www.control.toronto.edu/~omidj/Outdoors/Hunting.htm

What do you guys think? A pair of 8x32 and a pair of 12x50 or 15x56 would make a good complementary set, wouldn't they?

Thanks for being with me in this confusing topics!

-Dr. Omid Jahromi

PS. I think I should change my id too, I am "only" 34!

 

[Tero]

The 12X and 15X have some limited uses. Astronomy maybe. But you need a tripod. Most people go the spotting scope route. If you do not have one, check them out.

 

[FrankD]

I tend to agree with Tero. Most folks require some form of additional stabilization in order to hold 12x-15x bins steady enough to actually get any additional detail from the image.

If you were looking for something to compliment the 8x30 then a 10x42 is often suggested.

 

[Omid]

Frank, are you saying that I should go for a Nikon 10x42 HG?

 

[Tero]

Swarovski 10x42 WB?
Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL?
there are lots of ways to spend on 10x42

 

[Omid]

Swarovski 10x42 WB?
Zeiss Victory 10x42 T* FL?
there are lots of ways to spend on 10x42

OK, thanks. Now, let me ask you guys a question about 10x42s. Based on my experience, they are VERY sensistive to focusing (=very shallow depth of field). Even when looking at something several handred yards away, you still have to focus carefully!

a) Is it just my eyes or you have noticed such a problem with 10x42's too?

b) How does depth of field changes from 10x32 to 10x42 to 10x50?

 

[jedku]

If you are concerned about depth of field, I dont know why you jumped from 7-8x to 10-15x!
Maybe you should think more about how you intend to use the bins before selecting?
I lived in FL recently for 2 years. I remember the light was usually very harsh there. Relentlessly clear skies and the southern latitude give a high sun for much of the day and year. Looking at a bird, often there was this combination of blinding light and pockets of shadow -- strong contrasts. Intense heat and humidity really limit the amount of weight you will want to carry around. I think I would always prefer the HGs in FL for their lightweight. You won't need great light gathering ability in FL.
I think the SLC 7x50s would be a nice addition if you want to do stargazing or crepuscular investigations, owling by moonlight, etc. They don't quite have the field of view to be great woodland birding bins, for that you should choose the 7x42 SLC. But, truly, a scope is the better compliment to those HGs.
12-15x? I agree with the others, definitely invest it in a scope and tripod.

 

[josika]

An 8*32 and a 10*42 make a very good combination. I have the Leica 8*32 BA and the Swarovski 10*042 EL. If I were looking for more light I would look to Zeiss 8*56 FL or the Ultravid 10*50 as they have good fields of view for their designations.

 

[FrankD]

Omid,

I am going to take a stab at this from a different perspective but will comment on your questions regarding 10x as well.

It seems you are in much the same boat as I was recently. I have a pair of the 8x42 LXs which I am very fond of. I was looking for a second bin to compliment these. On at least two occasions I have made the attempt to find a 10x bin that met all of my criteria in terms of image quality, handling and price. The problem I continuously run into is that the shallow depth of field and relatively narrow true field of view of the 10x bins on the market (even the high end ones) tends to take away, for me, from the total viewing experience that I receive from my 8x LXs. The only 10x's that came close to what I wanted were the Swaro 10x50 SLC and the Meopta Meostar 10x50. The latter, I found later, had too much CA for my intended application and the former was just out of my price range for now.

So, I was left rethinking exactly what I wanted in a binocular. With price in mind I looked at several bins from a few different popular US retailers. I ended up ordering a pair of the 7x42 Leica Trinovids and must say that they are now my "go to" bin. There are multiple reasons for this. One, the brightness is exceptional. Only a handful of other bins that I have tried either meet or exceed their brightness level (7x Ultravid, 7x and 8x FL, 10x SLC). Two, their depth of field is superb. I can focus on hawks two miles away and yet still have bushes 25 yards in front of me in focus. Even closer focusing points require only minor readjustments. Three, the actual field of view is quite wide at 420 feet which means I can track moving objects much more easily. Lastly, and directly related to three, the size of the sweet spot is exceptional. Only a few bins, like the Nikon LXs and SEs, match or exceed it. Put these all together and you have an extremely relaxed image whether you are scanning big areas of the sky or trying to focus on a bird in heavy foliage.

You might think I would be satisfied at this point but I was offered a rather attractive price on a pair of the Leica 8x32 Trinovids and couldn't resist it. Though others have commented on their low level of eye relief it does not seem to bother me in particular. I am quite impressed with these bins. The image is directly comparable to the 7x42s but with more edge distortion. I have decided to make these my primary "daytime/go anywhere" bins because of their size. They will be replacing my 8x42 LXs at this point because I do not feel I am giving up any image quality but am really decreasing the weight level.

This is my primary combination for regular use. I find that both configurations compliment the other quite well without sacrificing anything. The 8x has some pluses in terms of overall size and weight for some specific types of applications while the 7x offers a more relaxed and brighter overall image which makes it ideal for other uses when size is not an issue. I make mention of this simply because I think it might save you some time and frustration in finding a bin to compliment your 8x32 LXs. In my opinion any of the 7x42 bins on the market compliment the 8x32s. In which case I would suggest the SLC, FL, Trinovid, Ultravid and Meostar but not necessarily in that order.

Being the binocular nut that I am still on the lookout for other bins for a variety of different applications but it will always be this combination that I come back to use first for any given situation.

Hope this is somewhat helpful.

 

[Tero]

Omid, yes you need to focus the 10x a lot. The depth of field has to do with brightness, I think, so get the brightest you can afford if you go that route. I have my oldest 10x that are a bit dim. I use them to look at ducks in water. The ducks are always fairly distant, so a focus setting will last a while. They are useless in the woods, except for very still birds that cooperate. An overall birding binocular is usually 8x, if you want to see some detail. For owling and hunting in dawn and dusk, maybe 7x50. Maybe some nice sunsets from your porch, if you have a good view.

You problem is familiar to all of us, and has kept me from investing big $$$$ on either 8x or 10x. I can't decide. Most of us want both, so a 7x and 8x or an 8x and 10x. If bird ID is not a big issue, get an 8.5x Swarowski or a combination of 7x and 10x. I confuse myself too much by bird size if I use 7x and 10x.

 

[Otto McDiesel]

I had every binocular that Swaro made at some point, except a few early models.
I owned the 7x50 and 8x50 SLC before i fought my demons and sold my collection.
They are amazing binoculars. The plus is the breathtaking view. The minus is the size. I can't imagine myself crawling through hot steamy brush with a 42 oz. monster artound my neck.
I prefered the 8x50 because it had a wider apparent FOV - if i remember correctly.

 

[Omid]

Thanks everybody (especially FrankD for his very detailed commets). You guys are being very reasonable and logical which is exactly why I have the problem in the first place! You can see from my first post that I am trying to scape logic as my "mind" keeps going back to the idae that 8x30s or 8x32s are the best all around binoculars so I don't need another pair. Yet, my "heart" wants to own another pair of Leica or Swarovski "masterpeice"s putting me in this whole confusion state..

alright. I'll probably make a last minute decision a few minutes befor buying the darn thing - either a reasonable 10x42 or an unresonable 7x50!

thanks all!

 

[Lou H]

If you are "too old to care", your pupils are probably too small to take full advantage of a 7x50 or 8x56 bin which have exit pupils of 7mm. My eyes' pupils max out at about 5mm. Bins with a larger exit pupil are only making it easier to align my eyes, not getting more light into the. With a 5mm pupil my eyes would only be using 40mm of objective at 8 power.

FOV is a function of eyepiece design and toleration of edge distortion. In you bins, in the image plane of the objective, there is an aperture with a circular hole in it called the field stop. The diameter of this is a tradeoff between having a wide FOV or unacceptable distortion at the edges. Fast lenses distort more, so often bins with smaller dia objs have wider fields of view.

 

[FrankD]

If you are "too old to care", your pupils are probably too small to take full advantage of a 7x50 or 8x56 bin which have exit pupils of 7mm.

I think he said somewhere above that he was 34 and a doctor to boot!

Omid,

I would kindly ask you to do me one favor if you would. When you do go to compare the various bins you mentioned just check out one of the 7x42s I suggested. Give them a fair shake while keeping in mind their size/weight and optical qualities in comparison to the other two configurations you mentioned. All of the configurations you mentioned have their pluses and minuses so I could see you walking out with any of them depending on your mood at the time.

Good luck and let us know what you end up with.