Swarovski 10x42
EL SV (SWAROVISIONTM) Review
A well-known reviewer has written that
he doesn’t consider it worthwhile reviewing Premium binoculars anymore because
they are all so close to perfection. When I read that my first reaction was an
expletive, because I couldn’t disagree more strongly.
I remarked in my review of
the Leica 12x50 Ultravid HDs that such an expensive
binocular was still no better (in some ways worse) than Nikon’s fifteen-year-old
12x50 SE. Specifically, the Leica HDs (and Zeiss Victory FLs and
HTs) still fail to deliver flat fields and sufficient eye relief in some
models, still suffer quite noticeable chromatic aberration, despite their HD
lenses.
This was precisely the point I was
making in my “Open Letter to the Alpha Bino Makers” which you can
read here.
The first manufacturer to move towards
the kind of wide-field, aberration-free binocular I was asking for was
Swarovski with its SWAROVISIONTM
version of their premium and well-liked EL range, so let’s see if this latest
version of the classic 42mm EL is getting closer to a “perfect” binocular, as
the specs suggest they might be.
At A Glance
|
Magnification |
10x |
|
Objective
Size |
42mm |
|
Eye Relief |
17.3mm |
|
Actual
Field of View |
6.4
degrees |
|
Apparent
field of view |
60 degrees |
|
Close
focus |
5m |
|
Transmissivity |
91% |
|
Length |
160mm |
|
Weight |
840g |
Data from Swarovski
What’s in the Box?
Design and Build
I first encountered Swarovski’s EL
binoculars when I was living in Switzerland. A colleague who was a deer-hunter
and birdwatcher swore by Swarovski optics and had a pair of older SWAROBRIGHTTM 8.5x42 ELs. I used the ELs several
times watching birds on Lake Geneva and really liked the wide bright field and
good eye relief, but noted the following negative points:
- Noticeable
false colour (more than the modern HD designs).
- Some
field curvature towards the edge, but no worse
than Zeiss or Leica.
- A
rather warm tone to the image.
- A
somewhat slow and imprecise focuser.
- A
rather utilitarian look to the armour and body.
The new Swarovsion version of the EL on
test here boasts a number of technical improvements to address these issues.
Body and Ergonomics
The most obvious thing about the new
ELs is that Swarovski have addressed my last and most trivial point: they look
nicer than the old ones. The dark green armour is pleasantly warm and textured
to hold, has a classy embedded Hawk badge and is supposed to be hypoallergenic
too. They have extended the armouring into the bridge area, which look better
and should be warmer to hold. I still think they look less elegant
than Leica HDs, though, but that’s just my taste.
Other than those minor tweaks to
improve the look, the body is the same open-bridge design as before, pioneered
in the ELs, but now much copied. For comparison, the body is slimmer, but
slightly longer than the Zeiss Victory FL and heavier than some other
premium models (the new copycat Zeiss SF included), at 840g without the caps
and strap. The open-bridge design is comfortable to hold, allowing me to wrap
my hands around the barrels.
Swarovski claim use of magnesium alloys
in the body and as you would expect the ELs are sealed against water to 4m.
Compared
to Swarovski’s 56mm SLCs, the ELs are very compact.
Cutouts on
the back make the ELs comfortable to hold.
Focuser
The focusing action has been improved
for the SWAROVISIONTM EL
and it is now mostly smooth and very precise, about on a par
with Leica and Zeiss.
Swarovski claim two turns lock-to-lock,
but mine measure just under two and a half. That might sound a bit
slow, but in general use this is a fast focuser, taking just one turn
to go from a few metres to infinity. The reason full focus travel takes two
and a half turns is that these have a very close focus distance of 1.5 metres
at one extreme and lots of travel out beyond infinity at the other to
compensate for those with less than perfect vision. Note (2015): specs suggest the latest version of the SWAROVISIONTM EL may differ in close-focus
performance and the speed of the focuser.
Focuser with
click-out dioptre adjustment.
Optics - Prisms
The
Swarovsion ELs use conventional roof (Schmidt-Pechan) prisms that incorporate mirrors, unlike
the Abbe-König prisms used
in Zeiss Victorys and Swarovski’s own 56mm HD SLCs. This means they transmit a
bit less light than those models (3-5% less) due to scattering by those
mirrors. However, the mirrors are of the latest multi-layer dielectric type
which are as good as they can be.
Optics – Objectives
The
new ELs must now be one of the most complex designs around with 12 optical
elements per side, which may explain why they feel heavy for their size
(Swarovski’s cut-away view show them fairly packed with glass).
One
of the most important optical upgrades is the use of HD lenses to
rival Zeiss and Leica. HD lenses contain high-fluoride glasses
to reduce chromatic aberration (false colour fringes) the way
an apochromatic telescope does. In these ELs, the lenses appear to
have at least four elements, incorporating a large air gap.
Coatings
include the new SWAROCLEANTM technology that rivals Zeiss’
“Lotutec” to provide a surface that resists water and marks.
Complex
multi-element objectives include high-fluoride glass for ‘HD’ performance.
Optics - Eyepieces
Swarovski sales literature has made
much of the field-flatteners in the new ELs. Field flatteners are not new:
Nikon’s HGs, Prostars and SEs have had them for decades, as
have Fujinon’s FMT line. But the new ELs are a first among recent
“Alpha” birding binos to have a field flattener and it’s been a
somewhat controversial move.
Holger Merlitz has gone into
the issues with very flat fields in binoculars at considerable length here and
I would refer you to him for the technical ins and outs. Here suffice to say
that the human eye introduces some distortion into the view that gives a
“rolling ball” effect when panning. Most binoculars have some pincushion distortion
to relieve this, but such binoculars also often have off-axis field curvature
and astigmatism that spoil the static view a bit, especially
for astronomy.
A
binocular with field-flatteners, like these Swarovsions ELs, eliminates these
off-axis distortions, giving a perfect view to the edge. But this comes with a
price when panning – it supposedly makes some feel sick.
Field of view on the SWAROVISIONTM 10x42
EL is 60° apparent, which translates to 6.4° actual field width. That’s a
decent figure by alpha binocular standards, but class-leading if you consider
that the whole width is usable by all (thanks to the good eye relief and that
flat field).
The eye lenses are very large on the
ELs – about the largest I’ve seen on binoculars at about 25mm diameter and
steeply dished. They remind me of the eye lens on a premium astro’
eyepiece. The eyepieces come with click-stop adjustable cups to accommodate
different eyes and specs.
I have long been moaning about eye
relief, because you need plenty of it to make binos comfortable to
use with glasses. The “Alpha makers” were (and still are) routinely offering
too little (13mm, when 16mm is really the minimum in my opinion). Swarovski
originally claimed 20mm for the SWAROVISIONTM
ELs, but have now dropped that figure to 17.3mm for the 10x model (the 8.5x model
has 2mm more). According to my measurements it’s actually a bit less than that,
more like 15-16mm. That’s enough – just – but not the super-generous eye relief
that the original sales literature suggested. It’s also (oddly, I thought) less
than the 10x50mm ELs and new 10x56mm SLC HDs.
Big eye lenses remind of a premium astronomy
eyepiece
Accessories
The early version I tested here came with a decent stay-on
case, but newer versions have the excellent padded field case that is much
better than the cheap-looking cordura job that comes with a pair of Zeiss
Victorys.
The latest ELs are essentially identical to these optically,
but come with Swarovski’s new ‘FieldPro’ cap and strap system that I haven’t
tested yet. The older version tested here has conventional caps and strap.
In Use – Daytime
Ergonomics and Handling
The new ELs are a bit heavier than
the Zeiss Victory FLs and slightly longer, but much slimmer. They are
significantly heavier than the new Zeiss SF open-bridge model.
The open bridge design and deep thumb
recesses on the bottom make them easy and comfortable to hold. The armour in
the bridge area eliminates the cold spots of the old ELs (great for frosty
days). The focuser sits easily under the forefinger.
it’s worth noting that someone with
larger hands may find the ELs difficult to hold, as they are so slim and the
bridge gap small. The message is that if you have big hands, try a pair first.
The focuser is generally excellent,
though I noticed some “stiction” now and then, as with other greaseless
focusers and the action is not quite as oily-smooth as a Nikon HG (nothing is).
The View
Although I prefer the 7x42 format as a
general purpose daytime binocular, I have to admit that the new EL has a
state-of-the-art view for a higher-powered binocular. Indeed, you have to take
these outside and use them for a while to realise how great the view is:
because these have so few aberrations of their own they show up every
imperfection in a window.
For a start the optics are
pin-sharp in both barrels, in a way I have only previously seen
in Leica’s 12x50 HDs. Focus snap is so precise that the tiniest
movement on the wheel defines it: a sure sign in my experience of the very best
optics.
We’ve established that the claimed eye
relief gives a false idea of how these actually perform, but the good news is
that whatever the true numbers (like horsepower in a Rolls Royce) eye relief
is sufficient: I can see the whole field with my glasses
on, but only just. Unlike other binoculars with long eye relief,
the 10x42 EL SVs are pleasingly free of blackouts (spherical aberration of
the exit pupil).
Brightness is very good, seemingly on a
par with other premium roofs, but not quite as good the Zeiss FLs with their
higher-transmittance Abbe-König
prisms, or Nikon’s
10x42 SEs with their porro-prisms. Colour rendition is very cool and neutral,
though, better than the Nikon’s warmer tones (at least to me).
Resolution is exceptional – probably
about the best I’ve ever experienced in a hand-held binocular for daytime use.
The reason is the superb optical quality and the freedom from chromatic
aberration (on which more anon) and unfocussed light that the HD lenses impart.
As I explain in the next section, flare
and ghosting are as good as the best (i.e. Leica’s HDs) and better
than the rest (e.g. Zeiss Victory FLs).
The
daytime view is among the best I’ve seen in a 42mm binocular.
Flat field?
The field is very flat, as claimed,
with very little distortion in daytime viewing right up to the field edge. You
could I.D. a bird even when bisected by the field stop (well, as long as it
wasn’t just the legs!)
I really, really like the flat field,
coming from the direction of astronomical telescopes as I do. However, if I am
completely honest it does make panning less comfortable than with
say Zeiss FLs or HTs, though it’s not nauseating for me. Having said
that, though the field curvature of the Zeiss FL is acceptable to me in
the 7x42 format because the field is so huge, it is less so on the 10x42 model
and I prefer the SWAROVISIONTM
compromise in the high-power format.
Chromatic Aberration
A trace of chromatic aberration can
still be found when using the new ELs ... but you have to go looking for it and
it’s mostly off-axis. Comparing them side-by-side with Zeiss Victory
FLs and Nikon’s SE, the New ELs are the best by a small but significant margin.
They are on a par with the 10x HTs I tried, but not quite as good as the very
best (Swarovski’s own SLC HDs).
The roosting Jackdaws in a high tree
across the way from me are a long term binocular frustration –
most binos just produce too much CA between the black Jackdaws and
branches and the bright sky to make the view enjoyable. The new ELs are one of
the few binoculars that give a view of my Jackdaws that’s close to a small APO
refractor.
In Use – Dusk
Dusk performance is good for a 42mm binocular and without any
of the skyglow washout which affects some binoculars. That said, the slightly
brighter view through the Victory FLs with their Abbe-König prisms makes for
slightly deeper dusk reach.
In Use – The Night Sky
A good pair of 10x42s should be good
for astronomy and the ELs certainly are. Star images are very tight on all but
the brightest stars and even then spikes are small. Star images remain
pin-point all the way to the field stop with very little astigmatism creeping in.
The HD lenses give good star colours
and contrast is excellent.
Both flare and ghosting are virtually
non-existent as only the finest binoculars are (the objectives are recessed a
long way), so you can view just to one side of a bright Moon.
Overall the new ELs deliver a great
view of the night sky, as good as you can get with 42mm, but their
smallish aperture mean I wouldn’t recommend them on their night-sky performance
alone. Unlike the unique Zeiss 7x42 with their huge true field that
nothing else matches, there are other binoculars for the price that would offer
more of the same than the ELs (Swaro’s own 15x56 SLCs, for example).
The Moon
These give one of my favourite
binocular views of the Moon – a hard crisp and 3D view with no ghosting at all
in-field. The Moon is very sharp and grey/white, with virtually no chromatic
aberration on the limb and none of the yellowish cast some optics (falsely)
give it. Quite a lot of Lunar detail is visible through these, evidence of the
excellent resolution.
Venus
Flare and spiking are well-contained
even on Venus, though as with all the prismatic optics, the ELs can’t
completely deal with Venus and show a bit of unfocussed light that obscures the
disk (and hence the phase).
Jupiter
Jupiter delivers four pin-point Moons
and a perfectly round disk with no flare or spiking – up there with the finest
binoculars I have used
Deep Sky
The smallish aperture means faint DSOs aren’t an option for
these, but brighter clusters look superb with diamond dust stars and strong
stellar hues.
As I said, that flat field really shows its advantage with
extended objects like Milky Way star fields and wide open clusters like
Perseus, where the stars remain pin-point almost to the edge. This
is an area where binoculars with lots of off-axis astigmatism and curvature, like Zeiss' Victory
FLs, let themselves down – stars turn into tiny comets much past about 60% field
width, spoiling the view and creating a nasty tunnel-like sensation you just
don’t get with the SWAROVISIONTM
ELs.
Overall
night-sky performance is amongst the best I’ve experienced in a 42mm binocular.
Swarovski 10x42 EL SV vs Nikon
SE 10x42
The Nikon 10x42 SE was long a Better
View Desired reference standard and I have never found a 10x42 binocular that
really betters it, so a comparison seems in order:
·
The Nikons are significantly lighter
weight at 710g compared with 800g for the ELs on my scales.
·
The new ELs actually have a couple of
mm less eye relief than the Nikons, but less blackouts to compensate.
·
The ELs have a wider (6.3°vs 6°) field,
but this isn’t that noticeable.
·
The ELs’ field is even flatter than the
Nikons’.
·
The ELs have a slightly cooler colour
balance that is even noticeable if you project the exit pupil onto white paper.
·
The ELs have slightly less chromatic
aberration (though CA is not a problem with the Nikon’s as it is with
many binos).
·
The Nikons are slightly brighter and go
slightly deeper at night, due to their ~5% higher transmittance.
·
One clear win for the ELs is flare and
ghosting. The SEs show a bit of both on bright light sources, like the Moon or
a streetlamp; the ELs do not.
·
Depth of field is very similar in both.
·
The ELs focus closer.
·
The ELs are fully waterproof, the
Nikon’s are not.
Don’t think that the ELs are much better than the Nikons, they
aren’t: the differences are small and overall performance quite similar.
However, unlike the Leica HDs I tested earlier, the new ELs do (just)
beat the Nikon SEs in most areas except sheer brightness, if money is
no object (and given that the price differential is about 3x used, it wouldn’t
have to be).
Summary
You can tell that Swarovski have really
tried to move things forward with the new EL. For me they have succeeded. Carping
about the eye relief aside, the SWAROVISIONTM ELs
are among the very best binoculars I have tested.
When I bought them, I compared them against the then latest 10x42 offerings
from Zeiss and Leica and they were clearly superior in
almost every way, though the newer Zeiss SF is much stiffer competition.
The field is wide, super-sharp and
certainly very flat. That flat field doesn’t make me nauseous; I really like it
in the daytime and it’s great for astronomy because stars stay star-like right
to the edge (instead of turning into little comets like they do through Zeiss
Victorys, for example). Resolution and optical quality are
supreme for a hand-held binocular. Chromatic
aberration is still there, but at a lower level than any other roof prism
binocular I have tested (and much lower than in most binoculars). This makes a
big difference when trying to identify birds in branches and to the overall
quality of the view. The ergonomics and focuser are much
better than the old EL focuser, but the focuser does still stick a little
sometimes. My only other criticism is that they are quite heavy.
So, the SWAROVISIONTM ELs
are close to optically perfect for a 10x42. As I once wrote of the Nikon 10x42
SEs, if I had to have just one pair of binoculars it would be these (or their larger
siblings). They are a pleasure to use in every way, in every situation.
But one last
thought: the newer 10x50 ELs aren’t that much bigger or heavier, have more eye
relief and would work better at night because of their bigger lenses. They aren’t
much more expensive either. Buy these 10x42s mainly for daytime birding, the
10x50 ELs if you will mostly use them for astronomy or in low-light.
The SWAROVISIONTM 10x42 ELs are very highly recommended.
They are among the best binoculars I have ever tested, but seriously consider
the 10x50 model instead if you’ll be doing a lot of astronomy.
OR Buy Swarovski 10x42 EL from Wex here:
