|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 313
Campfire Member
|
OP
Campfire Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 313 |
are the EL's worth the extra money?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 445
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 445 |
I'm sure this has been dealt with many times, so I'll keep it short and sweet. If you want a clear, flat field of view, the EL SV are great, except those who experience the rolling ball effect. However the new SLC HD has a generous sweet spot and would be equally as clear in that sweet spot. Some used ELs are very reasonably priced in comparison with SLC HDs. With that said, the ELs still get my best, with SLCs being one of the best values in optics right now.
Russ
8x42 SLC HD
10x42 EL SV
15x56 SLC HD
Last edited by rj112275; 08/01/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802 |
I got rid of my Swarovision for the new SLC.
Could not tolerate the rolling ball any more.
IMO the SLC and Zeiss Victory HT are the two best glasses available at the moment. I would advise you to look through both.
The most recent SLC's have improved optics over the discontinued EL's, with HD lenses and upgraded coatings.I would swing the extra cash to get a new SLC over the older EL.
Last edited by Timberbuck; 08/01/14.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,881
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,881 |
What is the "rolling ball effect"?
"Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you're right."
Henry Ford
If it's tourist season, why can't we shoot them?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,897
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 22,897 |
Personally, I'd take the way the EL's fit my face and feel in hand, over the 'improved optics' of the battleship SLC's. Especially since the optics of the EL's don't take a backseat to anybody......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 231
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 231 |
Yep, well said and couldn't agree more.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 15,858
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 15,858 |
What is the "rolling ball effect"? ^ What he said...
There are 2 rules to success:
1. Never tell everything that you know.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,513
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,513 |
Rolling ball is an optical distortion that some people see when looking through Swarovision field flattening lenses. I haven't seen it, and most don't, but some describe it as looking like a rolling ball, or optical bubble, when panning, especially across areas with vertical lines (e.g. trees).
Eric
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802 |
Rolling ball or globe effect is caused by the lack of pincushion distortion at the edges of the FOV. Field flattening lenses are used to produce sharp images with no distortion at the edges with the trade off being rolling ball distortion when panning with the binocular. The current trend in premium binoculars is to add just enough pincushion to prevent rolling ball. In the past the manufacturers have used too much pincushion also.
The new Swarovski SLC and Zeiss Victory HT offer a great compromise. No rolling ball but reduced pincushion over previous models.
You will only see rolling ball or globe effect distortion when panning. When panning the images entering or leaving the FOV appear to be moving faster than the images in the center of the FOV.
Its about a 50% chance that a user would be bothered by the rolling ball in the Swarovision series of binoculars. The 10x models seem to have a little less than the 8x models.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,867
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,867 |
Rolling ball or globe effect is caused by the lack of pincushion distortion at the edges of the FOV. Field flattening lenses are used to produce sharp images with no distortion at the edges with the trade off being rolling ball distortion when panning with the binocular. The current trend in premium binoculars is to add just enough pincushion to prevent rolling ball. In the past the manufacturers have used too much pincushion also.
The new Swarovski SLC and Zeiss Victory HT offer a great compromise. No rolling ball but reduced pincushion over previous models.
You will only see rolling ball or globe effect distortion when panning. When panning the images entering or leaving the FOV appear to be moving faster than the images in the center of the FOV.
Its about a 50% chance that a user would be bothered by the rolling ball in the Swarovision series of binoculars. The 10x models seem to have a little less than the 8x models.
Timber: The Swarovision EL binoculars are the best selling of all the premium models on the market today. They are the top of the Swarovski line. The SLC HD's are also well regarded and either is a fine choice. The rolling ball thing is greatly exaggerated, and few users will even notice. And most of those bothered soon adapt and enjoy the great view. You mention 50% of users will be bothered, and that is simply not true. There is no way of knowing but it is minor under 10%. Otherwise how would these be selling and as popular as they are. I enjoy the view through mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 955
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 955 |
My 10x42 and 10x56 Swarovski's are about 10 years old so I don't know exactly what they are but I have compared them many times in Africa with EL's and I found them mostly to be total equals optically but the EL's were definitely light weight and a pleasure to carry.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,470
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,470 |
Personally, I'd take the way the EL's fit my face and feel in hand, over the 'improved optics' of the battleship SLC's. Especially since the optics of the EL's don't take a backseat to anybody...... Do this and don't look back. The rolling ball is like Zombies. There are people that haven't seen Zombies, but they still think they exist...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 911
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 911 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,867
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,867 |
That is a good observation, nobody has an ego like Shrap.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 43,813
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 43,813 |
It must come with being the Chuck Norris of MT?
Hell if I know.
I don't have a pair of EL's to compare(loaner pair hint Shrap...) but the SLC's(8x42) are nice!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 18,453
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 18,453 |
There isn't a nickel's worth of difference optically between the two, so go with the one that feels better in your hands.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 399
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 399 |
SLC a bit brighter, pin cushion distortion
SV EL better edges, flat image, possible rolling ball when panning
Ergonomics vary according to user
I compared the SLC, SV EL and HT last fall extensively. Not a bad bino in the bunch IMHO. I am not bothered by rolling ball so it was a non factor. Preferred the ergonomics of the SV EL over the SLC and HT. Swarovski seems to have a better customer service reputation than Zeiss.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802 |
Yes.
I prefer the ergos of the Zeiss HT the best but own the SLC also.
One 8x42 the other 10x42. Prefer the 8x for general use and the 10x in open country.
|
|
|
|
|
110 members (6mmCreedmoor, 35, 338rcm, 7x57Hunter, AGL4now, 160user, 15 invisible),
964
guests, and
733
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,190,221
Posts18,447,504
Members73,899
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/G9RDVKXr/DSCN4329.jpg)
