Nikon 8x42 EDG or Swarovski EL8.5x42 Swarovision (1 Viewer)

[Val & Rex]

Hi all.
As my 3 score years and ten draws near,I have persuaded Val that we should update our Binoculars for the latest models, as they say you can not take it with you when the grim reaper pops in to see you o.
For the past 25 years I have used my Zeiss 10x40 BGAT,s they have served me well and Val as been using her 10x40 Optolyth Alpin,s
After reading countess reviews on the 8x42 EDG and the 8.5x42 EL Sworovision, What It says to me is that an old punter like me would not be able to see any difference and as the price is about the same, Please say which I should buy,
Val totally refuse,s to let me pay any more than £600 on her replacement so she as picked out the Nikon 8x32 HG L DCF, as anyone got a view on these,
I really would appreciate your thoughts for our last binoculars.
Best regards
Rex:t:

 

[HertsPhil]

Hi Rex,
I have had the opportunuty to look at both the edg and the swarovision as a friend had both but in the higher power 10x32 EDg and 10x42 EL. I imagine the optical performance is very similar. For ease of handling and overall optical excellence I would go for the Swaro. Definition is much the same but the image in the Swaro was very vibrant and super sharp right out to the edge of the field. Nikon UK after sales service is rubbish whereas Swarovski take that aspect very seriously and are as excellent as the glasses themselves. Hope that helps
Phil

 

[PYRTLE]

The Nikon 8 X 32HGL that you're good lady has chosen are fantastic, given the price and I'm sure she will be most pleased with them. They have been a great optic for many a year. As well as reviews, please please please do try them out before purchasing them. Written reviews aren't worth the paper if when you pick them up and use them you cannot get on with or don't like them.

 

[takitam]

I can only comment on the NIkon 8x32 HGL. Its a great binocular which has top marks in my book for quality and ease of view. Great contrast, resolution and slightly warm/rediish but vibrant and pleasant colours. Plus a nice flat field. I liked it better than the 8x32 SE. But it has one serious flaw - CA (chromatic aberration) and if it does bother you I strongly recommend to try it out. If you're not bothered by it you will most likely be pleased. 8-P

 

[Val & Rex]

Thank you all for your help and advice,it is the user that we all should take note of,for the truth,in whatever interest we follow.
I will be going to the retailer next month to get the ones we will try out.

Thanks again.

Rex :t:

 

[jacquot]

I have the 8x32 HG's and they are great, less the CA issues which can usually be ignored. Can't comment on the others, but I love the 32 format generally for light weight.

 

[[email protected]]

Thank you all for your help and advice,it is the user that we all should take note of,for the truth,in whatever interest we follow.
I will be going to the retailer next month to get the ones we will try out.

Thanks again.

Rex :t:

2nd that opinon on the CA problem with the Nikon HGL's. Truthfully optically the Zen Ray 8x43 ED's are way better. As are the EDG's, the Swaro's, Leicas BN and up, Zeiss FL's and almost any other alpha glass.

 

[ceasar]

You have both been using binoculars for many years so I suppose you know whether or not you are afflicted with CA. Most people aren't I would guess. I've never seen a woman birder post here to complain about it. Perhaps it is a recessive trait that bothers only a part of the male population?

But I digress. I am not one of those poor souls and I can assure you that the Nikon HG L/LX L does not have excessive CA and I own both the 8 x 32 and 10 x 32. And after getting on this forum on a daily basis I can assure you that I "look" for it. Bet on that! Not a day goes by when someone here does not complain about it in some binocular. The only place I ever see it is along sunlit edges of brightly lit buildings and sometimes along the tops of mountain ridges and only if I look for it. I think I even look for it when I am shaving! I also own a 10 x 32 EDG and it is even better at disguising CA than the LX L's and SE's are in the conditions I described above.

Bob

 

[elkcub]

You have both been using binoculars for many years so I suppose you know whether or not you are afflicted with CA. Most people aren't I would guess. I've never seen a woman birder post here to complain about it. Perhaps it is a recessive trait that bothers only a part of the male population?

But I digress. I am not one of those poor souls and I can assure you that the Nikon HG L/LX L does not have excessive CA and I own both the 8 x 32 and 10 x 32. And after getting on this forum on a daily basis I can assure you that I "look" for it. Bet on that! Not a day goes by when someone here does not complain about it in some binocular. The only place I ever see it is along sunlit edges of brightly lit buildings and sometimes along the tops of mountain ridges and only if I look for it. I think I even look for it when I am shaving! I also own a 10 x 32 EDG and it is even better at disguising CA than the LX L's and SE's are in the conditions I described above.

Bob

Bob,

I agree with every point you made! The 8x32 LX L that I own displays no more lateral CA (color fringing) than the 8x32 SE or the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT, which I also own — actually less. Unfortunately, the accusation seems to have grown legs, and rightly or wrongly will probably dog the LX-L around forever.

For those with an open mind, however, it remains a cost-effective opportunity to get top quality optics at a modest price. IMO, it also provides a spectacular view for birding under all conditions.

Ed

 

[NDhunter]

Bob,

I agree with every point you made! The 8x32 LX L that I own displays no more lateral CA (color fringing) than the 8x32 SE or the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT, which I also own — actually less. Unfortunately, the accusation seems to have grown legs, and rightly or wrongly will probably dog the LX-L around forever.

For those with an open mind, however, it remains a cost-effective opportunity to get top quality optics at a modest price. IMO, it also provides a spectacular view for birding under all conditions.

Ed

You have both been using binoculars for many years so I suppose you know whether or not you are afflicted with CA. Most people aren't I would guess. I've never seen a woman birder post here to complain about it. Perhaps it is a recessive trait that bothers only a part of the male population?

But I digress. I am not one of those poor souls and I can assure you that the Nikon HG L/LX L does not have excessive CA and I own both the 8 x 32 and 10 x 32. And after getting on this forum on a daily basis I can assure you that I "look" for it. Bet on that! Not a day goes by when someone here does not complain about it in some binocular. The only place I ever see it is along sunlit edges of brightly lit buildings and sometimes along the tops of mountain ridges and only if I look for it. I think I even look for it when I am shaving! I also own a 10 x 32 EDG and it is even better at disguising CA than the LX L's and SE's are in the conditions I described above.

Bob

Ed and Bob:

I will also pipe in here, as I have owned most of those mentioned here, LXL, the SE's and 2 models of the EDG.
What I like about the Nikons is the great edge to edge view, the LXL is a very
nice value here, the only thing I don't like about them, is the bit too fast focus. The EDG is better in this respect.
I do see CA, but in normal use any of these is a great pick.

What some may find interesting, is that the Nikon SE 8x32, still rises to the
top when I compare them to my others.
If it is pouring rain, cover them, or just take out one of your lesser WP models.

Jerry

 

[ceasar]

Jerry and Ed,
To pick the one nit about the LX L/HG L, I agree with you on their fast focus. It does take a little time (not much though) getting used to. The focus wheel is still firm and precise and is the standard of the industry when it comes to smoothness. The EDG has solved the speed controversy. The LX L/HG L are now known as "Premier" and their 10 x 32 is no more but the 8 x 32 remains, as you note, as a great, cost effective alternate with that wonderful Nikon edge to edge view!
Bob

 

[dogfish]

I think those who don't see a distracting amount of CA in their 8x32 HGLs are very fortunate. It's not something I look for, but there is more in these bins than any other in my collection (eg Zeiss 7x42 FLs, Leica Ultravid (non-HD), Nikon SE, Leica 8x50 BA).

It was interesting that my non-birding wife, who had never heard the term CA, complained while we were on holiday that she didn't like the fringing effect she was seeing. Not just the over-sensitive eyes of optics fanatics it would seem.

It has been suggested on this forum that the HGLs are worse in this respect than the original HGs, but I've not had the chance to compare the two models.

If you don't see the CA, you can have a superb binocular for the money.

Sean

 

[Bubbs]

You guys really do know how to put the buying public off new purchases. Stop over analysing optics and let them decide from basic info.

John.

 

[PYRTLE]

2nd that Bubbs - perhaps the C/A guys should take their differences elsewhere so as to not distract our 3rd Generation buyers from an issue that I think doesn't really bother them and is within their parameters.

 

[dogfish]

2nd that Bubbs - perhaps the C/A guys should take their differences elsewhere so as to not distract our 3rd Generation buyers from an issue that I think doesn't really bother them and is within their parameters.

Don't agree. I think the point of these forums is to give potential binocular buyers a range of informed opinion from experienced users, and suppressing opinions to suit one side of the division of opinion helps no one.
And I think deciding that CA 'doesn't bother them' is rather presumptuous. It might do, it might not. The buyer will decide that.
As ever, the golden rule is try for your yourself before buying (as someone said earlier in this thread...). It helps to be aware of any weaknesses (or possible weaknesses) in the model in advance but if you're happy after trying it, great.


Sean

 

[Bubbs]

Over the past 40 years I've used all the top four binoculars. I have no idea what Chromatic Abberation is and I thought the 'rolling ball' effect was something from the Lottery on a Saturday night.

The reason why I have no idea about the above is I simply don't look for it and just get on with life. If potential purchasers read all the posts from the 'experts' I'm pretty sure most binoculars would be left gathering dust on the shop shelves.

Somewhat surprised that America hasn't chipped in (yet) :t:

John.

 

[Bubbs]

2nd that opinon on the CA problem with the Nikon HGL's. Truthfully optically the Zen Ray 8x43 ED's are way better. As are the EDG's, the Swaro's, Leicas BN and up, Zeiss FL's and almost any other alpha glass.

But only through your eyes.

John.

 

[joannec]

Val totally refuse,s to let me pay any more than £600 on her replacement so she as picked out the Nikon 8x32 HG L DCF, as anyone got a view on these,
I really would appreciate your thoughts for our last binoculars.
Best regards
Rex:t:

Val: I've got these bins and I love them...........it's all completely subjective, of course but speaking as a female birder who is often out all day, size and weight are issues. While not the lightest bins around they do fulfil all the criteria for me; excellent optics and I can use them for hours without neck problems. But as everyone says, try them out for yourself.

You guys really do know how to put the buying public off new purchases. Stop over analysing optics and let them decide from basic info.

John.

Gotta have some sympathy with this point of view. Binoculars are a tool that we use, they are not an end in themselves, at least not to me and probably most birders.

 

[mooreorless]

My vote for the Nikon 8x32 HG, but try anything before you buy it. Nothing wrong with what you have. Might be harder for you to use 10x now though. I have the Optolyth 10x40 Alpin thanks to a very good friend and it is an excellent light wt. binocular.

I didn't want to disappoint Bubbs.:t: No problem with rolling ball here.

 

[Val & Rex]

Well thank you all again,
All you have passed on about the 8x32 H GL,s as been noted and will be looked into when Val test them out.
But the 8x42 EDG V the 8.5x42 EL Swarovision looks like it will be what suits me.
No problem with the choice to replace my old TSN4 with the new TSN 884 with the 20x60 zoom,and my old slick D2 is going to be replaced with the slick pro 713EZ carbon.But as you all know the pleasure that we get from been out with nature,and the excitement of finding a vagrant, that you have correctly Identified,makes the expense worth while, for an old birder and camper and lover of nature,
Thank you all again.
We shall be making the 85 mile trip up to Dursley,some time early February.
Thank you all again
best regards
Val & Rex.:t: