Is there any real alternatives to swaro binos?

Simjim33

Well-Known Member
This has probebly been done already but after borrowing a pair of swaro EL 8.5x42s I think. I can't believe how good they were. Now having looked at how much they cost new. I know that I will have to look for a pair of second handers. So here's my question is there any real alternatives?
 
Alot of people will say zeiss and leica but I think swaros will still edge them, i've been out with clients and the swaros were better by a fair margin. Personal choice I suppose but I know what i'll buy everytime!!
 
I have a pair of ELs, they are brilliant,bought a pair of Zeiss victory rfs for the range finding, also top notch, but cant bring myself to part with the ELs....
 
try london camera exchange got my el.s there they gave me a good price for old pair of slc,s as well
 
Maybe too big and heavy for stalking. I have some of the 15x58 ED's and they dont go out too much these days.
 
But do they work in low light? What I'm trying to get at is that if specifications are equal (coatings ect ect) surely the light gathering capabilities are due to the objective lens? There's is a limited way that you can alter a basic desing so what makes the swaros stand out. I worked in the fishing tackle trade and have seen many hi tec things that were sposed to be the mutts nuts, they all had one thing in common, the high price tag. But only 1% were actuly worth the price asked for. am I on the wrong end of the stick? how could you test the clarity in twilight? Swaros quote some type of standard code but it seams the no other makes seem too. So how do you tell the difference in performance between brands?
 
Am afraid I dont understand the technical details but I can say that the swaro bins I have are noticeably better in low light than the minox ones. I assumed that was because of the higher level of magnification.
 
It seam there is a coalition between objective lens and magnification values. In relation that a wider objective gathers more light due to the wider area of the lens. This leads to a wider filed of vieu allowing higher magnification lens to be used ( please correct me if I'm wrong). That should mean that a bigger objective lens should apper brighter than a smaller objective lens by weight of numbers alone. Maybe I should go to bed. I'm winding my self up in knots here
 
I have Swaro 10x42 EL and a new pair of Zeiss 8x42 Victory's. i use both and frankly i cant split them on optical quality. But if i am going into a woodland stalk i will always take the Zeiss. Based on price alone the Zeiss have to be the better deal though if you are only going to have one pair.

ATB with your quest
 
I have Swaro 10x42 EL and a new pair of Zeiss 8x42 Victory's. i use both and frankly i cant split them on optical quality. But if i am going into a woodland stalk i will always take the Zeiss. Based on price alone the Zeiss have to be the better deal though if you are only going to have one pair.

ATB with your quest

that's interesting. a comparison between binos with comparable objectives. that would suggest that magnification has no bearing on perceived twilight capabilities. at least now i can use my insomnia time to design a test to see if there is a difference between brands.
 
that's interesting. a comparison between binos with comparable objectives. that would suggest that magnification has no bearing on perceived twilight capabilities. at least now i can use my insomnia time to design a test to see if there is a difference between brands.

The suggestion is flawed in the beginning. Higher mag foreshortens the lens and therefore transmits less light to the subject lens - it's the equivalent of shutting down the aperture (f-stop) on a camera. That's why you get told to dial back the mag at last light as you get more light in your scope. Isn't the twilight factor simply the ability of the lens to transmit light through it?
 
"I have Swaro 10x42 EL and a new pair of Zeiss 8x42 Victory's. i use both and frankly i cant split them on optical quality."

The suggestion is flawed in the beginning. Higher mag foreshortens the lens and therefore transmits less light to the subject lens - it's the equivalent of shutting down the aperture (f-stop) on a camera. That's why you get told to dial back the mag at last light as you get more light in your scope. Isn't the twilight factor simply the ability of the lens to transmit light through it?

thats kind of what i'm getting at i think. it's the difference between 8x and 10x that is variable in this case but the objective diameter is the same. on that thought a 2/3/4x56mm would always be brighter than say a 8x56mm.
 
If you can't find or afford el's get some slc's - you'll shoot just as many deer.I havve el 8.5 x 42 which are exellent, used to have 30mm slc's which were also excellent. Recently compared some zeiss 10 x 50 against my el's and was very impressed by them. Swaro backup is second to none.
 
I don't want to cause offence by hijacking, but what would you all say was the best choice from the options below?

1/ Swaro (8.5 x42?) EL bins and a rangefinder?

2/ Leica 8x42 range-finding bins?

3/ Zeiss 8x45 range-finding bins?

Simon

Edit, There are some good deals on Leica which could sway my thinking, but i would love to know what the guys who use binoculars a lot will say. Thank you, and sorry if you do think this is hijacking!

S.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top