Home
are the EL's worth the extra money?
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
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.

What is the "rolling ball effect"?
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......
Yep, well said and couldn't agree more.
Originally Posted by taz4570
What is the "rolling ball effect"?


^
What he said...
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
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.

Originally Posted by Timberbuck
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.
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.
Originally Posted by huntsman22
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...
That's awesome Travis
Originally Posted by angv350
That's awesome Travis


That is a good observation, nobody has an ego like Shrap.

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!










There isn't a nickel's worth of difference optically between the two, so go with the one that feels better in your hands.
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.
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.
© 24hourcampfire