Swarovski 7x42 SLC's, A Class Act - 08/22/07
The pair of Swarovski 7x42 SLC's I ordered from Cameraland arrived on Monday afternoon. It was raining then, so I didn't get out with them till yesterday.
I took two other pairs of binox along to compare, the 6.5x32 Minox and a pair of Zeiss 8x Classics.
I went to our rifle range and was fortunate to find no one else there. I sat at a bench looking at our 50 and 100 yard targets, as well as all of the surrounding trees. The range is totally surrounded by trees and brush. Alternating back and forth between the three sets on binox, I got a good feel for each one in comparison. I mostly looked at "things" at the 100 yard line and beyond. Our range only goes to 100. Since the leaves are still on the trees, I spent much time just observing leaves and tree branches, bending in the wind. The target backstop provided details too for comparing the three binox. The details provide the clues as to which binox delivers the best picture. All three will allow you see game animals; how well you see them is a different matter. While getting accustomed to each, I viewed all three out to the edges of their fields of view. Both the Minox and the Zeiss had some edge distortion , a slight band of waves circling the borders. The Swaro was perfectly clear all the way to the edge. And, the Swaro has a larger field of view which made them more user friendly. The one thing that stood out while doing the general viewing was the color rendition was better with the Zeiss and Swaro than the Minox, not to be unexpected with a $200 pair of binox compared to ones costing three to six times more money. There was target splatter on the backstop at the 100 line. This small target splatter showed up clearly, with detail, using the Swaro, and the Zeiss did well too. The Minox didn't show the detail like the other two did.
There were some dead pine limbs out about 75 yards, hanging high up in a tree along the edge of the range, with another dead pine limb behind about 25 yards further out. The needles were still on the dead limbs and they had died, turning to a pretty rust color. With the Swaro, the brilliant rust color jumped out, along with being able to clearly see the one 25 yards behind, with the depth perception not delivered by the Zeiss or the Minox. I could actually see into the space between the two dead limbs with the Swaro. The Zeiss showed a good picture, and I could see the dead limb behind, but I didn't get the depth perception I got with the Swaro. The Swaro has magnificent color rendition, better that the Zeiss, which isn't bad at all. With The Minox 6.5's, I could see both dead branches, but couldn't get into the space between the branches. It was a flat picture, with no depth of view, and the colors were subdued.
The Minox 6.5's are ok, but not in the same league with the other two. They don't deliver that crystal clear, brilliant image the others deliver.
The Zeiss was close to the Swaro, but no cigar. There is a depth of view, along with a magnificent, brilliant image that the Swaro's provide that the Zeiss came close to, but did not quite achieve. With the Swaro's there was the ability to view in three dimensions that differentiated them for the two. Again, the Zeiss was close, but not equal to the Swaro's, while the Minox delivered a flat picture, relatively speaking.
Weight of the Swaro, however, is higher than the other two, and those other two are better for long distance carrying. The Swaro weighs 33.5 oz and the others weigh 20 oz nominally. Knowing the weight of the Swaro's when placing the order, I ordered a wider carrying strap than the OEM strap that comes with the unit. That will distribute the weight over a larger area of the neck making them less tiring to carry.
Hands down, the Swaro delivers the image. The image jumps out at you, in full bloom, in three dimension.
Beyond the viewing clarity, the ease of use goes to the Swaro. They are just easy on the eyes; no eye strain at all, none, compared to the other two. I felt like I could look through them for hours without getting tired of the view. The other two were harder to hold steady too, given their lighter weight. And, the sweet spot of the Swaro was much larger than the Zeiss and Minox, adding to the Swaro's ease of use..
I did all viewing without glasses, using my newly installed eye lenses..
Diopter setting were close to zero on all three binox, just slightly negative on each, so my new eye lenses are close to each other. I do have slight astigmatism in my left eye, which no doubt caused the small diopter correction.
Don
I took two other pairs of binox along to compare, the 6.5x32 Minox and a pair of Zeiss 8x Classics.
I went to our rifle range and was fortunate to find no one else there. I sat at a bench looking at our 50 and 100 yard targets, as well as all of the surrounding trees. The range is totally surrounded by trees and brush. Alternating back and forth between the three sets on binox, I got a good feel for each one in comparison. I mostly looked at "things" at the 100 yard line and beyond. Our range only goes to 100. Since the leaves are still on the trees, I spent much time just observing leaves and tree branches, bending in the wind. The target backstop provided details too for comparing the three binox. The details provide the clues as to which binox delivers the best picture. All three will allow you see game animals; how well you see them is a different matter. While getting accustomed to each, I viewed all three out to the edges of their fields of view. Both the Minox and the Zeiss had some edge distortion , a slight band of waves circling the borders. The Swaro was perfectly clear all the way to the edge. And, the Swaro has a larger field of view which made them more user friendly. The one thing that stood out while doing the general viewing was the color rendition was better with the Zeiss and Swaro than the Minox, not to be unexpected with a $200 pair of binox compared to ones costing three to six times more money. There was target splatter on the backstop at the 100 line. This small target splatter showed up clearly, with detail, using the Swaro, and the Zeiss did well too. The Minox didn't show the detail like the other two did.
There were some dead pine limbs out about 75 yards, hanging high up in a tree along the edge of the range, with another dead pine limb behind about 25 yards further out. The needles were still on the dead limbs and they had died, turning to a pretty rust color. With the Swaro, the brilliant rust color jumped out, along with being able to clearly see the one 25 yards behind, with the depth perception not delivered by the Zeiss or the Minox. I could actually see into the space between the two dead limbs with the Swaro. The Zeiss showed a good picture, and I could see the dead limb behind, but I didn't get the depth perception I got with the Swaro. The Swaro has magnificent color rendition, better that the Zeiss, which isn't bad at all. With The Minox 6.5's, I could see both dead branches, but couldn't get into the space between the branches. It was a flat picture, with no depth of view, and the colors were subdued.
The Minox 6.5's are ok, but not in the same league with the other two. They don't deliver that crystal clear, brilliant image the others deliver.
The Zeiss was close to the Swaro, but no cigar. There is a depth of view, along with a magnificent, brilliant image that the Swaro's provide that the Zeiss came close to, but did not quite achieve. With the Swaro's there was the ability to view in three dimensions that differentiated them for the two. Again, the Zeiss was close, but not equal to the Swaro's, while the Minox delivered a flat picture, relatively speaking.
Weight of the Swaro, however, is higher than the other two, and those other two are better for long distance carrying. The Swaro weighs 33.5 oz and the others weigh 20 oz nominally. Knowing the weight of the Swaro's when placing the order, I ordered a wider carrying strap than the OEM strap that comes with the unit. That will distribute the weight over a larger area of the neck making them less tiring to carry.
Hands down, the Swaro delivers the image. The image jumps out at you, in full bloom, in three dimension.
Beyond the viewing clarity, the ease of use goes to the Swaro. They are just easy on the eyes; no eye strain at all, none, compared to the other two. I felt like I could look through them for hours without getting tired of the view. The other two were harder to hold steady too, given their lighter weight. And, the sweet spot of the Swaro was much larger than the Zeiss and Minox, adding to the Swaro's ease of use..
I did all viewing without glasses, using my newly installed eye lenses..
Diopter setting were close to zero on all three binox, just slightly negative on each, so my new eye lenses are close to each other. I do have slight astigmatism in my left eye, which no doubt caused the small diopter correction.
Don
![[Linked Image]](http://rap.midco.net/bald1/rear_tag_avitar.JPG)