Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
SLC8x30 or ultravid 8x32 |
Post Reply |
Author | |
pahuntnut
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/20/2008 Location: Pa Usa Status: Offline Points: 65 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: March/22/2008 at 20:13 |
If you had to choose one for hunting and they were both the same price. Which woudl you choose?
|
|
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The main complaint about the Swaro 8x30mm SLC is that the focusing wheel is at the bottom of the center hinge rather than at the top, making it awkward to use.
You might take a look at the Swaro EL 8x32mm WB and compare the two. |
|
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Tough choice, both are great. I like Bird Watchers suggestion on the EL's.
|
|
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
|
pahuntnut
Optics Apprentice Joined: March/20/2008 Location: Pa Usa Status: Offline Points: 65 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I never thought of that. but optically then if it weer between the EL's or ultravids.
|
|
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD offers a 13.3mm Eye Relief not the greatest if you wear eyeglasses or sunglasses. FOV is 404'.
Swarovski EL 8x32mm offers a 15mm Eye Relief which is somewhat better. FOV is 420' which is slightly wider. One would think that the new Leica HD should have the edge over the Swaro, as far as optics, BUT, you never can tell until you look through both, in a side-by-side comparison. Edited by Bird Watcher - April/11/2008 at 15:00 |
|
Bartond
Optics GrassHopper Joined: July/22/2005 Location: Denver Status: Offline Points: 15 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
You should look through both binoculars before considering eye relief by the stated numbers. Different companies measure eye relief from different points and I believe Leica's stated "effective eye relief" will always be stated shorter than others though it it probably is very comparable.
Leica seemed to really increase depth of field with their new Ultravid HD and it is crazy bright and sharp. Gives very natural color rendition, too. The 8x32 HD is so small and lightweight, which might be the best feature of all. Both are great so you should look through both and consider all of the features before making a decision. |
|
Get outside...
|
|
Bird Watcher
Optics Master Joined: August/30/2006 Status: Offline Points: 1523 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Good advise. Manufacturer's specifications are not always 100% accurate. |
|
etc
Optics GrassHopper Joined: January/01/2008 Status: Offline Points: 26 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Why do you want a compact?
A full size 8x42 is much easier to use. |
|
birdhunter
Optics Apprentice Joined: November/14/2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 92 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I would pick the Swarovski in either ELs or SLCs myself simply for thier warrenty and their outstanding customer service. They really do stand behind each product they sell. Both Swarovski and Leica are top of the line but the Swarovskis just fit my eyes and hands better. You really need to try each of the two brands out to your eyes and handling. bird_hunter66
|
|
Birdhunter
|
|
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Technically, the 32mm objective binos are considered "mid size." I personally find a high quality 8X32 to be a very appealing configuration. The high-end 8X32's with good ED/FL glass and the latest dielectric prism coatings and broadband multicoatings are only slightly behind the 8X42's in low light performance, actually outperforming some lower quality 8X42's. In addition, the 32mm objective binoculars almost always have wider FOV than their 42mm siblings. All the reviews I've read of the high-end 8X32's such as the SLC and Ultravid (as well as Zeiss FL) the OP is considering have unanimously stated that they provide resolution, contrast, and edge to edge sharpness very close or equal to their 42mm counterparts. The smaller objective 32's may have slightly more pronounced aberrations, especially closer to the edges of the field, but the tradeoff is a much more compact, handier bino that can be very user-friendly and convenient when you're carrying them around your neck for long periods of time. I haven't found the really good 32mm bins to be any less critical on eye relief or viewing ease. The only significant sacrifices I see with the smaller 32mm binoculars vs. the full-size 42mm models is a slight loss of low light performance that may only translate to a few minutes in the early morning / late evening, and they may be harder for some to steady in the hands due to the smaller physical size and lighter weight. Overall, I think sacrificing a little bit of light transmission in some cases is a worthwhile tradeoff for lighter weight, more compact size, and wider FOV. Edited by RifleDude - April/14/2008 at 17:39 |
|
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
|
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |