Swarovski EL - Overhyped?

[Reed104R]

Swaro ELs and similar level optics can't be appreciated with a quick "look through."
They earn their keep when doing detailed glassing at distance and into/through brush. The increased detail that is available when glassing under trees for bedded animals or into timber from the opposite side of a canyon is simply amazing. That's where they shine. Until you see that first hand, you simply can't appreciate them really.

That said, all of the alpha glass manufacturers have a different feel when looking through them and your eyes will absolutely like one more than the rest. If you have the room on your credit card, order the Swaro, Zeiss, and Leica and return the two you don't want.

Excellent advice!!! Also compare in low light.

 

[Marshfly]

Excellent advice!!! Also compare in low light.

Yes. Many times it has been well before shooting light. Dark really. And I have put my 10x42 ELs up and found animals in a meadow that simply weren’t visible to the eye. Really nice to know what you will be spooking BEFORE walking out into the open before dawn.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[fatrascal]

Saving up my Cabela credit card points for NL's. Did have EL's from 2004. Upgraded to the range finding EL's. But i do not like the optic quality when compared to non range finding EL's. Have looked through the NL's several times and they are amazing.
With that being said, you need to compare and see what YOU like. Take a trip to a town that has a store with all of the optics you are interested in. Take them outside and time your store visit about 30 minutes before sunset/night time. This is how you find out which binos are for you. I've made several trips to towns over the years to do comparisons. Usually driving several hours. Its worth the trip. Fatrascal.

 

[Mojave]

The 8x42 EL Tracking Points kick ass. I think the same glass as the Pure's though not the same build. They are one of the moste expensive binoculars on the planet. They ought to really shine.

 

[Tl15]

Well, after glassing around with the SF’s for the last few days, it’s fair to say that optics at this level are mind blowing. Especially coming from mid-grade stuff. I still want to do a good comparison with the EL and NL, but man, I don’t know if it can get meaningfully better.

 

[duckhunter175]

I went to the Outdoorsmans several years ago and had a great experience with them-- we went outside, put ALLLLLL the optics up on tripod and glassed a far hillside with hikers on it. Prior to this my binos were Viper HD 10x42s.

ELs, SLCs, Zeiss, Leica and Razor HD (UHD not out at the time)

It was great to get an understanding of many of the optical clarity terms thrown around here and see them first hand in as close to a true field side by side of those optics.

For me the ELs were a clear winner and then going 10 vs 12 I opted for the 12x50s and haven't looked back since.

Haven't looked through the Razor UHDs yet and I'd love to get them side to side with my EL12s (anyone in DFW??) but I have a really hard time believing they can hold a candle especially given how poor the prior Razors looked compared to all the others.

 

[BrentVA]

I’ve had my El’s since about 2006 and I love them. I haven’t found anything I would trade them for that’s better. They are amazing for low light spotting. They have been with me all over the USA and Canada and never failed me.

 

[JrCaps]

I still use my 10x42 UHD for Eastern/Texas hunts after upgrading to 10x42 NLs. The NLs outperform the UHD in Colorado/Western hunts, but hunting out East the UHD work just fine as I am seldomly viewing anything over 300-400 yards and I am up in a tree stand usually. The extra ruggedness of the UHD add a piece of mind also.

Still pack my Razor HD spotter with the UHD binos when not hunting out West, when I am it is NLs and 85mmBTX all day.

 

[roweraay]

Agree with all this but I’d say:

NL>Zeiss SF=EL=Noctovid

I personally feel the Zeiss SF (which came years after the EL) is certainly a step above the EL, including a wider FOV than the equivalent EL. In fact, handling wise, some like the Zeiss SF even more than the NLs.

I personally would restate the ranking as: NL>= Zeiss SF > EL = Zeiss SFL = Noctovid

 

[Spiral Horn]

I personally would restate the ranking as: NL>= Zeiss SF > EL = Zeiss SFL = Noctovid

Is that ranking from personal experience with each of these binoculars or just info posted on the web?

 

[roweraay]

Is that ranking from personal experience with each of these binoculars or just info posted on the web?

I say a combination of both. The NL, the Zeiss SF, the EL and the Noctovid, I have personal experience with. The SFLs are from info posted on the web from people whose opinions I value.

 

[JohnJohnson]

I personally feel the Zeiss SF (which came years after the EL) is certainly a step above the EL, including a wider FOV than the equivalent EL. In fact, handling wise, some like the Zeiss SF even more than the NLs.

I personally would restate the ranking as: NL>= Zeiss SF > EL = Zeiss SFL = Noctovid

I owned both the Zeiss Victory SF 8x42 and Swaro EL 10x50 at the same time and ended up selling the Zeiss. From a handling perspective if you're handholding your binos most of the time the Zeiss are probably the way to go over the ELs since their balance point is much more towards the ocular in comparison. But my binos go on a tripod 95% of the time so I don't really care. I didn't notice the Zeiss glass (for lack of a better word) to be any better than the ELs.

 

[roweraay]

From what I know, the Zeiss SFs (when announced) leapt over the equivalent ELs in terms of the handling balance, the wider FOV, the deliberate introduction of optical aspects that would minimize the rolling ball effect in an instrument with field flatteners etc. This was of course prior to the NL Pures being announced.

The NLs then leap-frogged over the SFs in many ways (including even wider FOV), and Swarovski then concurrently lowered the price of the ELs to significantly below that of the SFs. Handling wise, I felt the SFs were superior to the ELs and even the NLs.

I have an NL 12 on the way, as an aside, since I am fine with the trade-offs of the NL, vis-a-vis the SF, in addition to the fact that the NL is a 12.

The Zeiss SFLs (seemingly built in Japan, as opposed to the SFs that are German manufactured) have gathered high praise, and even though I have not tried them yet, certainly intrigues me. Relatively light, have 40mm objectives , and have sublime build quality......and going after the NL 32s, from what I heard.

 

[Fritz D]

I have the 10x50 EL that I’m very happy with. A bit heavy but rides in the harness nicely? I picked up mine about a year ago new and for a good price. Strongly considered the NL but the price was a bit much for me.
I don’t want to look through an NL cuz I know I will want one!
Who says that ignorance isn’t bliss?

 

[roweraay]

I have the 10x50 EL that I’m very happy with.

I love the 10x50 EL and between this and the 10x56 SLC HDs that I was looking at, my choice was always the 50 EL, due to it being petite and light. The 56 SLCs were brighter than the 50 ELs (in both daylight and at dusk), showing it had top-notch optics in a big-eye binocular, but of course being a 56, makes it larger than the 50 EL.

The price of the 50 ELs are very close to the NLs…..if the price of the 50 EL was more reasonable (2700-2800) I would probably have opted for that, in lieu of the NL 12s.

 

[IdahoBeav]

The price of the 50 ELs are very close to the NLs…..if the price of the 50 EL was more reasonable (2700-2800) I would probably have opted for that, in lieu of the NL 12s.

Maybe they'll go on sale soon like the 10x42s have. I can't help but chuckle at the current used prices for EL 12x50s. A year ago, before the Swaro 10% increase, you could find them used for $2,000-$2,200. Now people are asking $2,500-$3,000.

 

[JohnJohnson]

A year ago, before the Swaro 10% increase, you could find them used for $2,000-$2,200. Now people are asking $2,500-$3,000.

Yeah that was odd. I got my 10x50 ELs from EuroOptic as a like-new demo for $2200 when I bought them.

 

[Fritz D]

I love the 10x50 EL and between this and the 10x56 SLC HDs that I was looking at, my choice was always the 50 EL, due to it being petite and light. The 56 SLCs were brighter than the 50 ELs (in both daylight and at dusk), showing it had top-notch optics in a big-eye binocular, but of course being a 56, makes it larger than the 50 EL.

The price of the 50 ELs are very close to the NLs…..if the price of the 50 EL was more reasonable (2700-2800) I would probably have opted for that, in lieu of the NL 12s.

I haven’t had the occasion to try the 15x56 SLC? That said, it sounds very nice and one I might buy at some point?
I glass a lot in higher draws and bluffs. Sagebrush, junipers and some firs, but fairly open country which makes me sometimes wish that my 10x50s were 12 power?

My dream bino assortment would look something like this:
Zeiss SFL 8x40 for general use-hunting, hiking, even Mountaineering?
10x50 ELs for elk and mule deer-my chest harness bino.
15x56 Swaro? In my pack for long distance glassing.

Someday, maybe?

PS. I paid 2500 for my EL 10x50s. My dealer had a 10x42 EL for 2000. He didn’t have NLs in stock but I would have had to pay pretty close to MSRP?
Pretty easy choice really.

 

[TheWhitetailNut]

Been using the same pair of 10x42El's since 2006 on 4-6 hunts per year plus year round scouting. All those guys with Vortex's brag about how great the warranty service is, I would never know. Wanted to buy a pair of Vortex glasses for my wife and daughter and skipped over them both times.

 

[13bonatter69]

Last pair I bought was about 6 years ago so take that for what its worth. I went to a guys house and looked through both late in the afternoon until it was completely dark. To me the SLC was the winner. I just liked they way they looked better, and when you consider how much cheaper they were, that made it a no brainer. I will also ad, I went there fully expecting to buy the EL's......lol