What is Swarovski up to? 18x56 soon (1 Viewer)

[Mr.Bill]

Hey guys,
as a new owner of an Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure I would like to share some interesting theories I concluded from owning an researching before purchasing the 14x52. First, the binocular is stellar and and absolute joy to use. Pretty much perfection and usual issues with glare and eye placement are not as pronounced as some people make them out to be, or atleast they are not bad for me.
But going through all the hard specs of the bino some things stand out significantly. Mostly why the hell are they 14,31x by 52mm? One could regard it as a "nice to have" feature from a well respected company that does not have to rely on marketing every little detail. I mean Swarovski does not even advertise HD glass in some as their optics as it has just become standart for Swaros, not even worth mentioning. But are we not at a point in time where every company has to maximize value for a given developement effort? Most binos hit the round magnification numbers dead on by 0,05 mag. The developement of the eyepiece for the 14x52 bino must have been some of the most complicated ever in their companies history. The very large eyerelief (18mm withiout eyecups, 17mm with them) with that enourmous field of view while having a housing diameter of only 33mm would be the wet dream of many astro eypiece designers.
That all concludes me to state that I am pretty sure swarovski will release a 18x big binocular aimed at the western hunter marked pretty soon. The reason being that the eyepiece magnification would hit the 18x mag on the proposed big chassis. They just happened to land on the 14,31x mag on the 52mm chassis. The 10x52mm NL pure hits the 9,97x mag a normal 10x bino might have.
Seeing that companies like Maven and Vortex have several 18x bino in their lineup already, a company like swarovski that allways straddles the line between birders and hunters cant let a marked like a propper high power tripod bino left unattended for too long. Especially as Swarovski allways seems to be at the innovative end of the developement cycle. The 14x52 seem very strongly pushed towards the handheld-abbility. The objective diameter of 52mm is uncommon, the headrest is a smart choice but not needed for tripod use and the chassis has exposed ridges for the focus mechanism. Those ridges expose the edges of the rubber armor to peel up and the only reason would be that they tried to save every gramm by keeping the diameter of the barrels small. The ridges add no grip and do not feel like an ergonomic feature. The 14x52 seems to be not at all designed to mainly live on a tripod like the 15x56 SLC might have been. In addition the newly release NL Pure tripod adapter is very quick to use but not really that sturdy looking of a mechanism. So wouldthey really try to use it for a 56mm class bino with 1300grams too? I dont think so and the proposed big chassis class they would release soon might have an integrated arca swiss mount in the bridge or something.

I tould gladly like to listen if some of you feel also quite strange about the 14x52 NL Pure as a weird product.
Greetings from Germany

 

[wllmspd]

It would be a weighty brute that would need steady hands to use productively. I enjoy my ultrawide 30x70 views, but I don’t try handholding them and trust a tripod to provide rock steady views.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Surely it would be a tripod bound bino. But has the 15x SLC ever been a true handheld piece? I tried it once, and though I have steady enough hands for the 14x NL, the SLC is not made for that. Especially the main marketshare of long distance hunters would not use it freehand. From what I understand it is used as a surveying tool for hourlong glassing sessions. I would love a high power bino, around 1.5kgs or less for bird watching. Get a glance freehand, but 95% of the time its on the tripod. Basically get an advantage from carrying tripod/optical Instrument separate. I tried it with my Swaro 17-40x STC, just pirate scoping and a Tripod and no Binoculars. Works for birds of prey in the mountains better then exspected. But that was before the 14x NL pure joined the family

 

[DRodrigues]

After using 15x56 binoculars for many years I changed to a 18x50 IS bino and I've seen the IS light! One of Swaro wish list items for me is a NLI 20x62 - I for IS... 🦆

 

[Mr.Bill]

After using 15x56 binoculars for many years I changed to a 18x50 IS bino and I've seen the IS light! One of Swaro wish list items for me is a NLI 20x62 - I for IS... 🦆

It would probably be a massive compromise to integrate the IS system. It's one of these thing's where one needs to think what the differing lines of binoculars means from Manufactures. NL pure I allways understood as maximum field of view, edge to edge sharp. Not allways the perfekt centre or lowest flaws. Not bad by any means, but compromised by field of view. IS systems often have a lower field of view as you have to have a bigger field of view in which you stabilize a smaller one. So I would expect and Swaro IS bino, but not in the NL Pure line. Did you have the Kite Optics APC 50? If you do, how did you like it? I was thinking of recommending it to a friend instead of a small spotting scope.

 

[GrumpyBuzzard]

I would be surprised if they went the IS route, highly unlikely. The hunting market in US seems to have big enough potential and those guys use Big Eyes like the Kowa Highlander and even cobbled together spotting scopes. Adams Adapters in Arizona is way ahead of the curve, I bet he's caught attention of big players as it's revealed many of those hunters are willing to drop serious money.

I've never tried it but he has the new Kowa 55s in a dual setup and his older work has two Swarovski STS HD with 20-50 WA zooms. I bet those are amazing.

 

[GrumpyBuzzard]

Can you explain why 18x ?

I would have though 25x would be the range needed for that market. Also wishful thinking.

I'd like to see a proper Swarovski Big Bino, maybe weld two of the ST Vista 30 x 95 together 😁

 

[wllmspd]

Swaro have an IS patent with sample optical specs that look very like the ATC, ie 17-40x(from memory) and (57-70degree apparent field).
Proper big binos are available from people like oberwerk and APM, give you a choice of eyepieces, but are not the lightest and feature individual eye focusing…. Unlike the more convenient centre focus of normal binos and the BTX.

 

[GrumpyBuzzard]

17 -40 x with NL tech. Lightweight and fairly compact vs most big eyes though aperture means they'll not fare as well in low light. Very cool option for those with deep pockets.

 

[Mr.Bill]

Can you explain why 18x ?

I would have though 25x would be the range needed for that market. Also wishful thinking.

I'd like to see a proper Swarovski Big Bino, maybe weld two of the ST Vista 30 x 95 together 😁

I was just guessing with the 18x. Could be 20x but the field of view of the competitions 18x Binos. The whole theory mostly hinges on the weird magnification number of 14.31x and that they changed if from the prototype numbers. I think first models tested by select people was around 14.7x. To low to be a real 15x attempt. As if they tried to hit a very specific mag number, but not on the 52mm chassis. It would be interesting to know how often manufactures reuse eyepieces in differing chassis sizes. Like 8x in 32mm becomes 10x in 42mm chassis due to higher base focal lenght. Can't imagine that this does not happen.

 

[quincy88]

I kind of doubt that they will make an 18x56. Maybe they will, Swarovski does stuff that is not obvious to me. I'd consider buying a pair if they did though. I like big binoculars.
I use my SLC 15s hand held a lot. Not for extended viewing, but for quick and detailed looks. I enjoy using them that way quite a bit. I'd do the same with a pair of 18s.

 

[DRodrigues]

...
So I would expect and Swaro IS bino, but not in the NL Pure line. Did you have the Kite Optics APC 50? If you do, how did you like it? I was thinking of recommending it to a friend instead of a small spotting scope.

I know that would be a different series but I meant a series with the NL AFOVs and image quality, with IS...
I don't have neither tried the Kite. I went for the Canon because, besides not being a fun of non circular lenses, I wrongly memorised that the 18x model had a lower AFOV than the Canon, so didn't considered it... From what I read, the IS is better on the Kite, but the Canon is better optically, except CA. The Kite also has more useful eye-relief for those using eye-glasses, like me.
I wish Canon would improve the 50mm series - could even increase aperture, although I don't complain with lack of light for my birding.

 

[TheBlackGrouse]

Hey guys,
as a new owner of an Swarovski 14x52 NL Pure I would like to share some interesting theories (...)

I tould gladly like to listen if some of you feel also quite strange about the 14x52 NL Pure as a weird product.

Now I would not call it weird but I see your point.

These binos are not exactly built for monopods or tripods, the shape of the barrels makes it almost impossible to fit them on adapters with rubber bands. The Swarovski tripod adapter is a worry, you easily hit the glass when attaching and it already failed once, luckily I did hold the binos at that moment.

In a hide it's not easy to lay them down, right now I'm using the plastic caps for that but some sort of 'shell' would be very welcome. So if something is weird, it's the shape of these binos. They are not meant for handholding and you're totally dependent on the tripod adapter. Swarovki kept the shape of the 10x binos, it's beautiful of course but tripod based binos are something completely different.

It fills a niche though, it's the right magnification for a monopod. No video head needed and without any tricks (special foot) it's very easy to get a stable view. These are the perfect binos for raptor watching or shore birds for instance. And I wonder if this stays the same at 18x.

The main advantages are: portability, easy setup, easy viewing and fast scanning while still seeing many details. Yes, a spotting scope has higher magnifications but is not ideal for scanning. In fact you miss many birds while using it, unless you change between 8-10x binos and the scope. Then you need a tripod or you have to hold the monopod while using the binos. That's possible but not very comfortable.

Maybe it's me but looking through a spotting scope for half an hour is really tiring while using the 14x52 for an hour is a constant joy. In fact I returned my Swarovski STC 17- 40 and bought the 14x52 binos. These are both fantastic optical instruments but the high power binos better suit my birding style.

 

[rodneyAB]

The main advantages are: portability, easy setup, easy viewing and fast scanning while still seeing many details. Yes, a spotting scope has higher magnifications but is not ideal for scanning. In fact you miss many birds while using it, unless you change between 8-10x binos and the scope. Then you need a tripod or you have to hold the monopod while using the binos. That's possible but not very comfortable.

Maybe it's me but looking through a spotting scope for half an hour is really tiring while using the 14x52 for an hour is a constant joy. In fact I returned my Swarovski STC 17- 40 and bought the 14x52 binos. These are both fantastic optical instruments but the high power binos better suit my birding style.

...This is a different tune I'm hearing, Interesting on your choice for the 14x. I have the 12x on the tripod adapter/monopod, and alternately the STC,
But I have wondered how the 14x would work for me.

 

[TheBlackGrouse]

...This is a different tune I'm hearing, Interesting on your choice for the 14x. I have the 12x on the tripod adapter/monopod, and alternately the STC,
But I have wondered how the 14x would work for me.

Switching between the binos and the STC takes time, it's especially a problem with distant birds, the reason why you need the STC anyway. Often they've changed position and you can't find them anymore.

Besides, holding the monopod with STC in your arm while looking through standard binos has lots of disadvantages. Things get tangled up easily, there is a risk of dropping something, you can't move. Of course, you can lay down the monopod with the scope but that takes even more time, other birders may trip over it etc.

Therefore I opted for binos with higher magnification, the Swarovski 14 x 52, as the all-in-one solution on my monopod. Because of the binocular summation effect the 14x effectively becomes a 22 - 25 scope. For me at least, with my former 10x Leica Ultravid I was able to see the same details as with the STC at 17x. You can't measure it exactly but it gives an idea.

It's a compromise: ease of use, more views on target versus losing magnification

 

[Mr.Bill]

Having directly compared the NL pure 14x52 with the STC 17-40x56 I could get similar felt resolution at 20x with the STC while viewing with the NL 14x. But let's not kid ourselfs, its not true magnification. Reading rings of birds still gets better at the higher mag. It's just about getting an impression of higher details but it does not magnify more. For bird colorations, details in beak shape, slight contrasts between feathers it works, but counting lines on a birds back, reading ringnumbers, the magnification still wins out. I heard in an extensive astro podcast about the bino vs mono topics that they calculate from 25% to 35% felt increase in magnification when using both eyes. Depends on the person and how their brains and eyes work.

 

[tenex]

17 -40 x with NL tech. Lightweight and fairly compact vs most big eyes though aperture means they'll not fare as well in low light. Very cool option for those with deep pockets.

Is it really possible to adjust the magnification in both tubes exactly the same, for this to work? And how long does it take?

 

[Mr.Bill]

Is it really possible to adjust the magnification in both tubes exactly the same, for this to work? And how long does it take?

I have read many user reviews about this thing and I believe from what i have gathered that one would put it either on 17 or on 40 without checking. For a longer viewing session in guy I found put it on 35x by using the numbers on the barrels. Suposedly its not a big proplem at all

 

[Owlbarred]

18x56 binoculars? A chiropractor's dream. Like using a bazooka during hunting season, with the steadiness of a greased anvil.

A future testimonial in BF:

"I can hold my 18x56's steady in a hurricane and count the number of primary feathers of a hummingbird at 2 miles. No tripod needed, and using the included neck brace is only a slight inconvenience."