Which one do you like better, the SLC or the SV. (1 Viewer)

[jan van daalen]

I read all the glowing reports of the SV on this beautiful forum, highlighting its sharp edges. Went to the local optics shop, where I was presented with an SLC. Saw it had only one edge, bought the thing in a heartbeat.
Then after a few weeks my SLC’s edges came alive. Spider’s webs, left and right!
Dear birders, do you sometimes feel lonely, out in the field? I don’t.

Renze

This is as close focus as a bin can get.
I take everything back I ever critiziced the SLC for:eek!:r.

Jan

 

[kabsetz]

Renze,

That is a nice pair of photos you have. I was admiring the same view when I had the big SLC's for testing last fall. It is an interesting reflection coming off the prism edges. To me, it looks like the non-roof edges that don't play part in image formation have been lightly rounded. Perhaps Henry can comment on this? I haven't seen anything like it in other binoculars as far as I recall.

As to the op's question, I like both the SV's and the SLC's, own neither, and am unwilling to elevate one above the other. One comment, though. One poster said he thought the 8x32 SV was considerably brighter than the 8x42 SLC. My experience with these binoculars does not in any way support such a view.

Kimmo

 

[Torview]

Renze,

One comment, though. One poster said he thought the 8x32 SV was considerably brighter than the 8x42 SLC. My experience with these binoculars does not in any way support such a view.

Kimmo

It was me Kimmo, I was`nt alone with the pair we sampled that day, we all remarked on the fact the SV was brighter than the older SLC HD.

I`m happy to rank the SV above the SLC without slighting the SLC in any way.

 

[Malloot]

I read all the glowing reports of the SV on this beautiful forum, highlighting its sharp edges. Went to the local optics shop, where I was presented with an SLC. Saw it had only one edge, bought the thing in a heartbeat.
Then after a few weeks my SLC’s edges came alive. Spider’s webs, left and right!
Dear birders, do you sometimes feel lonely, out in the field? I don’t.

Renze

These are SLC 8x56, so you are forced to prefer the SLC, because the EL aren't available in 8x56.

But in the end, the EL might have sharper edges and forget the rolling ball effect of the EL, I still prefer the SLC for there better ergonomics. I really hate open bridge designs. Only those EL 8x32 are nice to handle, the bigger EL x42 or x50 are horrible to handle.

This said, every binocular is a personal matter. So you can't tell if the SLC or the EL are better.

For me the SLC 8x56 are the binoculars I really like to use these days. Nice big binoculars which provide me a lot of light for my badgerwatching. Nice smooth focusknob and overall a great natural image.

But if I didn't had new glasses I probably still used my Swarovski Habicht 7x42. Great handling, great optics for a great price. These are the most underrated binoculars in the market.

 

[elkcub]

It was me Kimmo, I was`nt alone with the pair we sampled that day, we all remarked on the fact the SV was brighter than the older SLC HD.

I`m happy to rank the SV above the SLC without slighting the SLC in any way.

Some folks are reluctant to draw strong conclusions from single samples. However, it is possible that coating improvements have been introduced since the SLC-HD was introduced, so a more meaningful assessment would be to compare date-equated specimens. Additionally, there is a physical reason why the SLC should be brighter, e.g., the lack of a field flattener lens.

Ed

 

[Renze de Vries]

I haven't seen anything like it in other binoculars as far as I recall.
Kimmo

It was my first encounter as well. However, I checked the SLC 8x42 HD and the prism reflections can be found there too, be it less pronounced.

Renze

 

[elkcub]

I read all the glowing reports of the SV on this beautiful forum, highlighting its sharp edges. Went to the local optics shop, where I was presented with an SLC. Saw it had only one edge, bought the thing in a heartbeat.
Then after a few weeks my SLC’s edges came alive. Spider’s webs, left and right!
Dear birders, do you sometimes feel lonely, out in the field? I don’t.

Renze

:hi:Welcome back from your travels, Renze. Is it possible you brought back a critter from ... where was that? ... oh, Spain?

I can't replicate the interesting phenomenon, incidentally. Not that it isn't there, of course, but then I can't see field spiders over the bridge of my nose either.

Ed

 

[Renze de Vries]

:hi:Welcome back from your travels, Renze. Is it possible you brought back a critter from ... where was that? ... oh, Spain?
Ed

Ed,

Oh you think SLC stands for Sinister Little Critters? I thought it meant Spiders Living Comfortably.

Renze

 

[NDhunter]

These are SLC 8x56, so you are forced to prefer the SLC, because the EL aren't available in 8x56.

But in the end, the EL might have sharper edges and forget the rolling ball effect of the EL, I still prefer the SLC for there better ergonomics. I really hate open bridge designs. Only those EL 8x32 are nice to handle, the bigger EL x42 or x50 are horrible to handle.

This said, every binocular is a personal matter. So you can't tell if the SLC or the EL are better.

For me the SLC 8x56 are the binoculars I really like to use these days. Nice big binoculars which provide me a lot of light for my badgerwatching. Nice smooth focusknob and overall a great natural image.

But if I didn't had new glasses I probably still used my Swarovski Habicht 7x42. Great handling, great optics for a great price. These are the most underrated binoculars in the market.

Malloot:

I find yours an interesting post. The Swarovski EL open bridge design
has to be the most comfortable design I have found. Look at all those
that have copied it.

I do not see any issue with RB as some do, but it seems the very few 5% of the population that are bothered are quick to point it out on a thread like this.
I do like to point this out, as I feel the rolling ball thing has had way too much emphasis, when the masses who enjoy binoculars would wonder what you are talking about, and would just get along just fine.

About badgers, we have had a warmer than normal winter lately, and the
badgers are normally hibernating over winter. This past week I found
one has been busy on my north driveway, and has been digging and throwing dirt. I do not go out at night though to observe, however.

I am sure that big 56mm SLC is just the ticket for that specific purpose you mention.
I suppose you use them for an everyday carry, as you would not want to
limit them to nighttime use.

Jerry

 

[[email protected]]

Either the SLC or the SV are excellent binoculars. I wonder which one Swarovski sells more of. Probably the SLC because of the big price difference. The SLC's are really an excellent bargain for an alpha.

 

[elkcub]

Ed,

Oh you think SLC stands for Sinister Little Critters? I thought it meant Spiders Living Comfortably.

Renze

... that's Spooky Like Crazy.

Ed

 

[Holger Merlitz]

I read all the glowing reports of the SV on this beautiful forum, highlighting its sharp edges. Went to the local optics shop, where I was presented with an SLC. Saw it had only one edge, bought the thing in a heartbeat.
Then after a few weeks my SLC’s edges came alive. Spider’s webs, left and right!
Dear birders, do you sometimes feel lonely, out in the field? I don’t.

Renze

I have seen the same phenomenon with a 10x56 SLC I tested last year. I am sure that what we see here are edges of the Abbe-Koenig prism, since I have seen the same thing with an old Hensoldt Dialyt which also used Abbe-Koenig. These structures do not degenerate the image quality, since they do not seem to interfere with the exit pupil. Instead, they seem to appear when light enters trough the eyepiece, then being reflected back. Observed with both eyes, they seem to float above the eyepiece like a hologram, and I suspected some secret message being hidden there A Zeiss HT, also with Abbe-Koenig, did not show these structures. Perhaps they can be eliminated by blackening the prism edges, just a guess ...

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Holger Merlitz]

The 50 and 32 serie SV.
The 42 serie SLC if the closefocus wouldn't be on the cheapest Chinbin level.

Jan

Jan, this statement seems misleading, because the equation is not as simple as "better closefocus" = "better performance". I regard the closefocus a dangerous parameter: It is so easy for the marketing to sell it as a performance parameter, but in real life it asks for lots of compromises from the optical and mechanical design. I have discussed this point a few times before, but the currently rather common focuser problems, showing up with all kinds of high end binoculars, are just one side effect of the closer focus range. Others demand compromises with image sharpness (since the designer has to find a compromise that covers a wide range of incident ray angles), additional aberrations (or, for their compensation, additional glass) and naturally higher costs.

Hence, I believe that the close focus should not be implemented on every high end binocular, only on a subset of them for those users who really need that feature.

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Malloot]

Malloot:

I find yours an interesting post. The Swarovski EL open bridge design
has to be the most comfortable design I have found. Look at all those
that have copied it.

And still many manufacturers don't copy it. Why, some many people, so many preferences.

I do not see any issue with RB as some do, but it seems the very few 5% of the population that are bothered are quick to point it out on a thread like this.
I do like to point this out, as I feel the rolling ball thing has had way too much emphasis, when the masses who enjoy binoculars would wonder what you are talking about, and would just get along just fine.

I compare the 8,5x42 with the old model 8,5x42 which I prefer above the new model. The RB effect is a dealbreaker for me. I can't follow a bird because of this effect. It irritates my eyes to much, which makes my eyes to get out of focus and I loose the bird.

About badgers, we have had a warmer than normal winter lately, and the
badgers are normally hibernating over winter. This past week I found
one has been busy on my north driveway, and has been digging and throwing dirt. I do not go out at night though to observe, however.

I am sure that big 56mm SLC is just the ticket for that specific purpose you mention.
I suppose you use them for an everyday carry, as you would not want to
limit them to nighttime use.

Jerry

I use my bins as a every day carry.

 

[Renze de Vries]

I compare the 8,5x42 with the old model 8,5x42 which I prefer above the new model.

Agreed. I've always loved the original EL's optics. To my eyes the SLC 8x42 HD is its real successor, a straight upgrade from the EL, preserving all its optical charms. The EL SV is an entirely different design.

Renze

 

[jan van daalen]

Jan, this statement seems misleading, because the equation is not as simple as "better closefocus" = "better performance". I regard the closefocus a dangerous parameter: It is so easy for the marketing to sell it as a performance parameter, but in real life it asks for lots of compromises from the optical and mechanical design. I have discussed this point a few times before, but the currently rather common focuser problems, showing up with all kinds of high end binoculars, are just one side effect of the closer focus range. Others demand compromises with image sharpness (since the designer has to find a compromise that covers a wide range of incident ray angles), additional aberrations (or, for their compensation, additional glass) and naturally higher costs.

Hence, I believe that the close focus should not be implemented on every high end binocular, only on a subset of them for those users who really need that feature.

Cheers,
Holger

Holger,

We agree on this matter, but when a brands slogan is "improve the best"......

IMO the decision on bringing the close focus to 3.5 meters is not one based on quality or customers need but one based on economics. Bring a cheaper model compared to the HT/HD/FL and that has nothing to do with improving the best.

Jan

 

[Renze de Vries]

I have seen the same phenomenon with a 10x56 SLC I tested last year. I am sure that what we see here are edges of the Abbe-Koenig prism, since I have seen the same thing with an old Hensoldt Dialyt which also used Abbe-Koenig. These structures do not degenerate the image quality, since they do not seem to interfere with the exit pupil. Instead, they seem to appear when light enters trough the eyepiece, then being reflected back. Observed with both eyes, they seem to float above the eyepiece like a hologram, and I suspected some secret message being hidden there A Zeiss HT, also with Abbe-Koenig, did not show these structures. Perhaps they can be eliminated by blackening the prism edges, just a guess ...
Cheers,
Holger

Holger,

Swarovski makes no secret of the nature of the phenomenon: it's prism reflections indeed. As said, the 8x42 HD, at least the original type, does show these reflections as well, just fainter. See the pics. This is however a Schmidt-Pechan, with notably different structures.

Ed,

Believe me, this is what's inside your 8x42 HD. If not, we've discovered Swarovski issued a special USA edition. With no critters. For the moment I'd say Swarovski used different species of critter for the 8x56 and the 8x42. The 8x56 then should be the Iberian variety.

Renze

 

[elkcub]

...
Hence, I believe that the close focus should not be implemented on every high end binocular, only on a subset of them for those users who really need that feature.

Cheers,
Holger

Brilliant idea!

Swarovski should re-implement close focusing on a subset of the newest 8x42 SLCs for birders who really need the feature.

Ed

 

[elkcub]

Holger,
...
Ed,

Believe me, this is what's inside your 8x42 HD. If not, we've discovered Swarovski issued a special USA edition. With no critters. For the moment I'd say Swarovski used different species of critter for the 8x56 and the 8x42. The 8x56 then should be the Iberian variety.

Renze

I found 'em. :t::t:

Ed

 

[Tobias Mennle]

The 8x42 SLC blows the 8x32 SV away contrastwise. Much blacker shadows. That´s why IMO its images may look darker then the 8x32. Now today my first impressions of using the 8.5x42 SV I dare say the 8x42 SV very clearly blows the SLC away. Very good contrast and way sharper especially in close up, plus absolutely spot on colour. WOW. I was really surprised how good that 8x42 SV is.

It seems to me the suppression of the blue spectrum in the SLC is an economic way to perceptually increase contrast. To build a better optics is the more expensive way. I think that is what the SV really is about. I´m impressed.

Will love to test on axis performance with Zeiss 3x12 against the 8x30 Habicht once the rain stops...