Zeiss vs Swarovski Binoculars

Sako308

Well-Known Member
I have decided to move down a size in binocular from my older Conquest 8x40s, just find them to heavy and bulky for stalking. Narrowed it down to the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32 or Swarovski CL 8x30. Will get a chance to look through them both in the next few weeks but in the mean time anyone who has experience with these I would appreciate any thoughts.
 
I would look for a second hand pair of Swarovski 8x30 SLC's or 8x32 EL's . There have been a few pairs around recently as people have been selling to fund deals on Leica Rangefinders. I thought about selling mine but can't justify the extra cashat the moment.
 
I highly recamend the 8.5x42 EL Swarovski binoculars. There was a chap on here thinking of selling his old pair speak to Paul'O on here if your interested.
 
I have Swarovski 7x42 slc and 8x30 slc


both are great in daylight but after light has gone the 8x30 loose definition. Example:- you can't tell if a roe has antlers over 100m
 
Both good, both will do an excellent job. don't be swayed by others go and look through both and make your mind up. I went thinking I would buy zeiss and came out with Swarovski. It's personal choice.

BE
 
I've had Zeiss 10x40 T*P* and Leitz 8x20 and currently have Leica 7x42 Trinovid, 8x42 Trinovid and, for my son, Leica 7x42 Ultravid HD. And Leica 10x25. I have tried them side by side in daylight against 8x32 or various makes. My opinion is that whilst there isn't much benefit that 10x40 offer over 7x42 (or 8x42) indeed a lesser field of vision and depth of field is the "price" of 10x40 they are all much much better than any "x30" currently available.

Personally I think that the "x30" are neither as good as "x42" nor as handy as the "x25" or "x20" (and "x20" is just impractical) that are out there. I think they are a niche and for me won't do what I want. So a waste of money as not practical enough whilst at the same time not handy enough.

Sorry it's not positive but that's my 2p worth.
 
Last edited:
I've had Zeiss 10x40 T*P* and Leitz 8x20 and currently have Leica 7x42 Trinovid, 8x42 Trinovid and, for my son, Leica 7x42 Ultravid HD. And Leica 10x25. I have tried them side by side in daylight against 8x32 or various makes. My opinion is that whilst there isn't much benefit that 10x40 offer over 7x42 (or 8x42) indeed a lesser field of vision and depth of field is the "price" of 10x40 they are all much much better than any "x30" currently available.

Personally I think that the "x30" are neither as good as "x42" nor as handy as the "x25" or "x20" (and "x20" is just impractical) that are out there. I think they are a niche and for me won't do what I want. So a waste of money as not practical enough whilst at the same time not handy enough.

Sorry it's not positive but that's my 2p worth.

That's what I was getting at ! :cool:
 
Interesting points, I'm really looking for binoculars with most of the performance of my 8x40s but with less of the bulk and weight. They would be my main stalking binocular and worn round the neck. Hence looking at x30/32s. I appreciate I will lose some low light performance. Hadn't really looked at x20/25 as not after a pocket option.
 
Both good, both will do an excellent job. don't be swayed by others go and look through both and make your mind up. I went thinking I would buy zeiss and came out with Swarovski. It's personal choice.

BE

Excellent advice - everyone told me to buy 8.5 x 42's and I did and it was a massive mistake as I now have 10 x 42's and they suit my eyes perfectly, I also put the leica's and Swaro's sided by side and wandered round the shop looking through them to see what was better and I found the Swaro's were much better suited to my eyes, I then went and bought the eye cups which improved it even more!

Regards,

Gixer
 
If you are going the "x30" route try someone like Cley Spy in Norfolk and enquire about 6x or 5x binoculars in the "x30" option. If weight really is an issue have you considered the half binocular (as I call it) that was popular when optics were hugely, relatively, expensive?

Cley Spy have an huge, maybe one hundred plus, stock of used optics plus new and you can try out the back out to two hundred yards distance. Which is where I realised that 8x30 were not up to what I needed poor field of vision BUT still bulky enough to not be a true pocket option.
 
Last edited:
I use Swarovski 8x30 ELs,they're all you'll ever need. Used to use 10x42 SLCs and I don't miss them a bit,especially not the extra weight and Swarovski warranty/customer service is second to non,been waiting for an email back from Zeiss UK for a couple of days now.
 
Just a personal opinion, the old Zeiss 7x42 BGATs were beautifully made, but modern Zeiss bins feel, well just cheap and plasticky whereas the Swarovski feel really solid and landrover proof. Ditto for scopes. Zeiss have a slight edge in the actual optics, but I would go swarovski.
 
I agree with HEYM. Zeiss have cheapened what was once a quality marque. Just as Parker-Hale cheapened the "Midland Gun Company" brand peddling crap under someone else's (good) name, they had purchased, to use it solely to peddle crap that Parker-Hale were not upstanding enough to put their own name on.

But I'd never choose Swaros.

The real reason I "don't like" about Swaros...and sell one if I get one on a rifle....or won't even pick up such to try....is....is that stupid bloody bird emblem...all it does to me is recall the comedian Bo Selector and his pet "Kes" the kestrel. There, I said it. I've "come out of the closet" and I feel strangely liberated by this public admission of it.
 
Last edited:
Went with the 8x32 Conquests, to my eyes nicest glass of the ones I tried. Perfect size and weight as well. Appreciate all the advise.

image.jpg
 
Back
Top