Why doesn't Swarovski make an NL Pure 10x42 IS and a NL Pure 14x52 IS binocular? (1 Viewer)

[Dennis Mau]

Why doesn't Swarovski make an NL Pure 10x42 IS with a 7.6 degree FOV and a and NL Pure binocular 14x52 IS with a 5.3 degree FOV ? With their technology and optical expertise, I know they could, and they could do it quite quickly. I think the reason is they know if they produced two binoculars like that they would cannibalize all their other binoculars because even if they cost $5000 it would be the only binocular people would buy because it could replace all their other binoculars for hunter's and birders. A birder would just need one binocular, the NL 10x42 IS, and a hunter could replace all their binoculars and spotting scopes with the NL 14x52 IS. I think the major negative with all stabilized binoculars is the relatively small FOV and sub-alpha optical quality. All the Sig Sauers and Kites and other IS binoculars have excellent stabilization and pretty good optics, but they have too small of a FOV, which handicaps them when compared to a regular alpha level binocular.

Stabilization is a major advantage, no doubt, but nobody has really been able to combine a big FOV with the brightness and edge sharpness of regular alpha binoculars with an IS system also. The Canon 10x42 IS-L with a 6.5 degree FOV is probably the closest, and it is about equal to a $1000 price point normal binocular optically. The Canon 10x30 IS II at 6.0 degrees and 315 feet is another pretty good IS binocular, but the rest of them fall short of a regular alpha binocular in FOV and optical quality. FOV is very important for birders and hunters because it allows you to scan bigger areas at a time and makes it easier to find your target, especially close up but if somebody could combine all the features of an alpha level binocular with IS it would be a game changer and I know Swarovski could do it.

 

[Ignatius]

Ask them: [email protected]

 

[jan van daalen]

Patent rights.

 

[tenex]

Also, how large and heavy would IS bins with NL's FOV be?

 

[Dennis Mau]

Patent rights.

But couldn't Swarovski develop their own IS technology? Kamakura didn't copy Canon's IS technology when they developed their own IS system for the Sig Sauer and Kite IS binoculars. Why couldn't Swarovski do the same. I feel in the next year to 18 months, Swarovski will introduce a WA IS binocular using their own technology because stabilized binoculars are becoming more popular especially in the hunting sector with Sig Sauer and Kite introducing many new models aimed at hunter's. They are not going to miss out on this opportunity in this developing, stabilized binocular market.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Also, how large and heavy would IS bins with NL's FOV be?

Here is the generated AI answer to the question, which agrees with your point. Possibly technology has to increase with IS so the mechanics are smaller and lighter and more powerful than they are now to compensate for a larger FOV. A good example of how big and heavy an IS binocular needs to be with even a reasonably wide FOV is the Canon 10x42 IS-L with 6.5 degrees and from what I have heard the mechanics inside the Canon are packed extremely tight to get the binocular to even a reasonably usable size and weight.

"The reason there aren't many stabilized binoculars with a large field of view (FOV) is primarily due to the technical limitations of image stabilization technology, which requires more power to compensate for a wider view, making it difficult to fit into a compact and portable binocular design while maintaining good battery life; essentially, a larger FOV often needs higher stabilization power, resulting in larger and heavier binoculars with shorter battery life. "

 

[jgraider]

Tech limits, narrow FOV's, relying on batteries for an optic to work is a terrible idea, the market is miniscule for products with these characteristics.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Ask them: [email protected]

Why doesn't Swarovski make an NL Pure 10x42 IS with a 7.6 degree FOV and a NL Pure binocular 14x52 IS with a 5.3 degree FOV ? Why have you never made an IS binocular, and do you plan to in the future with the increasing popularity of IS binoculars? Thanks!

"Good Morning Dennis,

Swarovski Optik does not make image stabilized binoculars in any configuration currently. As far as I am aware there are no plans to manufacture such a binocular.

Best Regards,

David Eickelmann
Customer Service

SWAROVSKI OPTIK North America
2 Slater Road
Cranston, Rhode Island 02920
United States
Tel. +1 800 426 3089
[email protected]
SWAROVSKIOPTIK.COM"

 

[Dennis Mau]

Tech limits, narrow FOV's, relying on batteries for an optic to work is a terrible idea, the market is miniscule for products with these characteristics.

Don't you think stabilized binoculars are becoming more popular, especially in the hunting market, with all the Sig Sauers and Kite stabilized binoculars?

 

[Hermann]

Tech limits, narrow FOV's, relying on batteries for an optic to work is a terrible idea, the market is miniscule for products with these characteristics.

So you still use smoke signals for communication, right? Relying on batteries for a communication device to work is a terrible idea. The market for cellphones must be miniscule ... 😁

Hermann

 

[Hermann]

Why doesn't Swarovski make an NL Pure 10x42 IS with a 7.6 degree FOV and a NL Pure binocular 14x52 IS with a 5.3 degree FOV ? Why have you never made an IS binocular, and do you plan to in the future with the increasing popularity of IS binoculars? Thanks! [snip]

Swarovski Optik does not make image stabilized binoculars in any configuration currently. As far as I am aware there are no plans to manufacture such a binocular.

Well, they still make a lot of money selling muggle binoculars. Why should they change anything now?

But when Chinese manufacturers start to make stabilized binoculars with good optics it will be too late.

Hermann
(who believes the European
manufacturers are still fast asleep)

 

[GrampaTom]

Dont cameras, (mostly), in all their configurations have these now? Seems one of those is at least as complicated a device as a bino and they find room... To Hermann's point, then to doesn't the iPhone have a version?

 

[jgraider]

So you still use smoke signals for communication, right? Relying on batteries for a communication device to work is a terrible idea. The market for cellphones must be miniscule ... 😁

Hermann

If you like binoculars with 70% of the FOV as traditional glass, knock yourself out. Bino/rf binocular problems with inadequate ranging capabilities, especially when it's cold, are pretty common, which defeat the purpose of the unit in the first place. Comparing that to cell phones is apples and oranges, but you likely knew that already.

 

[GrampaTom]

Why doesn't Swarovski make an NL Pure 10x42 IS with a 7.6 degree FOV and a NL Pure binocular 14x52 IS with a 5.3 degree FOV ? Why have you never made an IS binocular, and do you plan to in the future with the increasing popularity of IS binoculars? Thanks!

"Good Morning Dennis,

Swarovski Optik does not make image stabilized binoculars in any configuration currently. As far as I am aware there are no plans to manufacture such a binocular.

Best Regards,

David Eickelmann
Customer Service

SWAROVSKI OPTIK North America
2 Slater Road
Cranston, Rhode Island 02920
United States
Tel. +1 800 426 3089
[email protected]
SWAROVSKIOPTIK.COM"

With all respect to Mr Eickelmann, its not clear that customer service folks in Rhode Island are privy to the work back in Tyrol. Swarovski is notoriously protective of its inner workings as is evidenced in other conversations here about them. Need to know, you know? In fact wasn't there a thread here a year or so back, discussing a rather large spending on a new facility we thought dedicated to R&D? Indeed wasn't there some musing at least, this was working on "futuristic" next gen stuff like IS?

 

[GrampaTom]

If you like binoculars with 70% of the FOV as traditional glass, knock yourself out. Bino/rf binocular problems with inadequate ranging capabilities, especially when it's cold, are pretty common, which defeat the purpose of the unit in the first place. Comparing that to cell phones is apples and oranges, but you likely knew that already.

Isn't solving issues like this the stuff of R&D? Or are we thinking this an insoluble issue?

 

[Foss]

@ Dennis post #1: Love the thread. Though obviously not a direct comparison, Zeiss 20x60S does without any power at all, so don't give up hope. (But I think $5,000 would make a nice down payment on what you described).

 

[Dennis Mau]

So you still use smoke signals for communication, right? Relying on batteries for a communication device to work is a terrible idea. The market for cellphones must be miniscule ... 😁

Hermann

Good one! Many hunters already use range finding binoculars, and they use batteries, even the Swarovski's.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Well, they still make a lot of money selling muggle binoculars. Why should they change anything now?

But when Chinese manufacturers start to make stabilized binoculars with good optics it will be too late.

Hermann
(who believes the European
manufacturers are still fast asleep)

I already think that Sig Sauer and Kite are taking a lot of the sales away from Swarovski in the hunting market. Many hunters are buying these higher power stabilized binoculars because they don't have to carry a tripod or a spotter with them, and they are quite good optically, although not equal to alpha glass yet optically or in FOV size.

 

[Dennis Mau]

@ Dennis post #1: Love the thread. Though obviously not a direct comparison, Zeiss 20x60S does without any power at all, so don't give up hope. (But I think $5,000 would make a nice down payment on what you described).

I had a Zeiss 20x60S because you know I have to try EVERY binocular there is! It was very good optically, though it had a fairly narrow FOV, and it stabilized small body vibrations well, but it didn't counteract large movements as efficiently as the electronic IS binoculars. There was always some swaying when I used them. Also, they didn't function well in a vertical position, so they weren't that great for astro use. Of course, they were very big and heavy. For those reasons, I sold them. I purchased them for $3500 like new and sold them for $3500 very quickly.

 

[Dennis Mau]

With all respect to Mr Eickelmann, its not clear that customer service folks in Rhode Island are privy to the work back in Tyrol. Swarovski is notoriously protective of its inner workings as is evidenced in other conversations here about them. Need to know, you know? In fact wasn't there a thread here a year or so back, discussing a rather large spending on a new facility we thought dedicated to R&D? Indeed wasn't there some musing at least, this was working on "futuristic" next gen stuff like IS?

I agree. I have a suspicion Swarovski is working on IS binoculars in Tyrol right now and will introduce them in a year to 18 months. Swarovski has nothing against electronics in their gear. They use it in their range finding binoculars and the AX Visio.