10 x 42 Swarovision

[triggermag]

I'm a little confused, I have a pair of leupold 10 x 50 pinnacle Binos and have now upgraded to the new Swarovski Swarovision 10 x 42 EL's.

1. I can not see/detect any brighter image through the new binos.
2. Yes there is definately a sharper image with the new Swaros, but its not like night and day difference.
3. I do not see any difference in brightness of image at dawn or dusk.
4. the new swaros have definately a better image around the outside of your view.

Am I missing something here or did I just waste a bunch of Money.

 

[Ryry]

I just got the 10 x 42 slc and love them. I already had Leupold Gold Ring 10x28 and Nikon 12x42. I never tried the El model. I couldn't afford the extra coin. I can see a difference in mine but maybe because of the bigger field of view than my GR.

 

[GLEDEASY]

I know the frustration. I recently dropped the coin on a pair of Minox binos. I had never spent that much on binos and thought I would see a big difference between what I had. I was able to notice some differences but not enough for me to justify the money I spent and like you, I was very frustrated thinking I just wasted my money.
With that being said the more I've been able to use them and have compared them to other binos the more I am liking them. I don't know how long you have had your pair, I've had mine about a month, but I would say give them a chance. The more you allow your eyes to "adjust" to them and forget about the hit in the pocket book the more you may appreciate them when looking through something else.

 

[bigwop69]

i agree, just use them. have had leupold cascade's and vortex razor's and the swarovisions blow them away. looking at dusk across a field i am amazed. try to mount them on a tripod to really see them shine. you made a great purchase!

 

[kawboy]

I had the same fear when I bought my zeiss binos. Comparing them to my nikons for the first little bit seemed very close. However after only looking through the zeiss for a couple months and then trying to go back to the nikons I could finally see the night and day difference. Get used to your swaros then look back, you will see the difference.


I'll tell you who it was . . . it was that D@MN Sasquatch!

 

[swivelhead]

Low light will reveal he difference. A year from now you'll laugh about your current concerns.

 

[jarheadhunter]

Well I had the Euro's before mine and I can tell a difference. I don't think that you can put Swarovski and wasting money in the same sentance. I agree with everyone else go out and use them. You just feel bad because you can't justify spending the money. Don't worry about it the feeling goes away. I go out with people all the time that have different bino's and when they tell me there is a difference and want to look through mine I know they are worth it.

 

[Timberbuck]

Give them time-you will see the difference when using them in the field under varying light and atmospheric conditions.

 

[dryflyelk]

One thing you need to remember is that you're not comparing apples to apples.

You need to take exit pupil and objective size into consideration. The leupolds have a 50mm objective and the swaros a 42mm objective. Exit pupil is 5 vs 4.2. That's considerable. A better comparison would be the 10x50 leupold to the 10x50 swaro.

That said, I'd bet a ham dinner that the swaros are still brighter. You'll get clearer, crisper images in all conditions. Looking into the sun, at dusk and first light, and every time in between. Chromatic aberration would also be quite a bit different.

You should also consider field of view. Even with the smaller objective, the FOV on the swaros is 336 feet. The leupolds is 262. That means less panning for you and the ability to let your eyes roam within the picture to pick out what you're looking for.

Also, on the swaros, the whole image is the sweet spot. Try looking at some distant twigs with your leupolds, then move to the side. They'll become blurry.

You also can't discount that you've got a lifetime of awesome customer service and a bino that's built for abuse and use. I've used mine a ton and I know swaro stands behind their stuff. I'm sold.

You made the right choice. Don't look back.

 

[BPKHunter]

I don't have the new Swaro's, I have the old 8x30's and 15x56's, which where an upgrade from 10x42 Nikons at the time. I felt the same at first, but the bottomline is you will find MORE game, especially if you get them true and steady, at min alway on a solid rest(shooting stix/pack) but optimally on a tripod. The improved resolution and color help you find the hidden and far one's and your brain will begine to build confidence that it did not have before at that level of detail/distance.

 

[triggermag]

I've been using them quite a bit and can definitely see the advantages.
I now see that they are coming out with 10 x 50 EL's. Now I'm wondering if I should have waited to buy them instead of the 10 x 42 EL's. I just hate it when they come out with new stuff. What to do?

 

[cbeard]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-11 AT 06:55AM (MST)[p]IMO the 10 x 50's are more of a specialized tool for certain applications than the 10 x 42s given their size/weight. Unless you are glassing extreme distances on a tripod (i.e. Coues deer hunting) I think the 42s in 8x or 10x are the obvious choice. In fact,I wonder about the practical application of the 10x 50's at all-it seems to me with that large of an objective the magnification should be 12 or 15 power.

Just my 2 cents....

 

[jarheadhunter]

>LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-11
>AT 06:55?AM (MST)
>
>IMO the 10 x 50's are
>more of a specialized tool
>for certain applications than the
>10 x 42s given their
>size/weight. Unless you are glassing
>extreme distances on a tripod
>(i.e. Coues deer hunting) I
>think the 42s in 8x
>or 10x are the obvious
>choice. In fact,I wonder about
>the practical application of the
>10x 50's at all-it seems
>to me with that large
>of an objective the magnification
>should be 12 or 15
>power.
>
>Just my 2 cents....



They are comming out in 10 and 12 power.

 

[triggermag]

Any other opinions on the 10 x 42. Vs the 10 x 50 EL 'S
Thanks

 

[Foreman4x4]

>LAST EDITED ON Jan-25-11
>AT 06:55?AM (MST)
>
>IMO the 10 x 50's are
>more of a specialized tool
>for certain applications than the
>10 x 42s given their
>size/weight. Unless you are glassing
>extreme distances on a tripod
>(i.e. Coues deer hunting) I
>think the 42s in 8x
>or 10x are the obvious
>choice. In fact,I wonder about
>the practical application of the
>10x 50's at all-it seems
>to me with that large
>of an objective the magnification
>should be 12 or 15
>power.
>
>Just my 2 cents....


+1