- Product Dimensions: 6 x 8 x 8 inches ; 2.5 pounds
- Shipping Weight: 3.5 pounds
- ASIN: B007Q4QSB8
- Item model number: 32118
- Average Customer Review: 3 customer reviews
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,287,845 in Sports & Outdoors (See Top 100 in Sports & Outdoors) Product Warranty: For warranty information about this product, please click here
Swarovski 8x32 EL Swarovision Binocular (Tan)
We don't know when or if this item will be back in stock.
- Enter your model number to make sure this fits.
- Snap Shot Adapter
- Field Bag
- Eyepiece Cover
- Objecive Lens Cover
- Lift Carrying Strap
What other items do customers buy after viewing this item?
Customers also shopped for
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Have a question?
Find answers in product info, Q&As, reviews
Please make sure that you are posting in the form of a question.
Do you want a smaller binocular with exceptional technology? Weighing only 20.5 ounces and measuring 5.3 inches tall by 4.3 inches wide, the EL 32mm Swarovision is the perfect answer. This generation of the EL binocular comes with revolutionary new innovations to provide virtually even images with razor-sharp clarity and outlines. Improved coating technology sets new standards for brilliance and image definition and guarantees optimum contrast in low light situations. Factor in the phenomenal field of view offered by the EL 32 Swarovision and you have a binocular that will garner the appreciation of the most demanding user.
Would you like to tell us about a lower price?
Top customer reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
the build quality of these EL's is superb, that is part of what u are paying for.
The image quality is excellent, contrast is impressive for such small exit pupils.
The focus and diopter adjust is very cleverly designed. Focus control is decent, not great.
The AFOV (angular view of image circle of the exit pupil) is prob. close to 55 - 60 deg, (no specs on this??) which is quite good for small binocs. Not quite on par with Canons 10x42L AFOV at 65 deg, but the size difference is significant.
There is only two things about these binocs I find annoying.... which was hard to ding a point, but I did, as they don't half a point dings
the eye cups on both ends are poorly designed and not captive. They seem poorly designed for such expensive binocs.
Since the inter-ocular distance of the objective lenses are equal to the IPD of your eye spacing. This creates a FLAT, or 2d effect when viewing objects of relatively close distance. For example, viewing a tree at 80ft, I had a hard time deciphering which branches were in front of each other, it appears like a cardboard cut out of the image (2d image). The reason is... the view of the tree through the binocs is equivalent to viewing the tree with the unaided eye at 10ft. To maintain the same stereoscopic spacing when you move back to 80ft, u would have to double the Interoc. distance as you doubled the view distance, (linear relationship) so it would require an inter-ocular spacing of 8x to maintain the same stereoscopic spacing u saw with the unaided eye at 10ft. Using simple values, 2.5" avg IPD spacing, would equal 20" interocular objective lens spacing to produce the same stereoscopic images projected on the retina (i.e. binoc view at 80 ft, vs. unaided viewing at 10ft, u would have the EXACT same images on your retinas) Now, 20" interocular spacing is not realistic in binocs, its just an explanation of the math and general premise....
Now, the same view through Steiner Commanders which have Porro prisms, so the objective lens centers are spaced 6" apart, the same view, at the same magnification from the same 80ft position yielded very natural depth of the tree. Even though 6" is less than the optimal 20" objective spacing, it is more than sufficient for our brains to interpret the stereoscopic cues on our retinal, to interpret depth. Everyone has different depth perception variables...those with wide IPD spacing are way more sensitive to this issue vs. those with very small IPD spacing, due to brain training that comes with different eye spacing. I have avg IPD spacing for a man, 65mm, and above avg. depth perception.
I want to be clear, this issue relates to the type of binoculars, i.e. two straight-through monoculars vs. a Porro prism binoc which spaces the objective lenses much wider than the eye pieces. I also think the field flatners introduced into these optics is adding to this effect, as this is the flattest I have ever seen a pair of binocs. But that is speculation.
Now, when viewing very far objects, likes 300+ yards, the objective lens spacing becomes a non issue, as the stereoscopic effect is diminished by the limitations of the resolution of our retinas... those with better visual acuity will still sense depth at further distances than those with reduced visual acuity. So the distance u are viewing subjects matters, assuming depth perception is important to you, such as in birding where subjects are relatively close. But when viewing far subjects .5miles +, it all looks the same, i.e. we have no true stereoscopic cues delivered to our retinas, our brain then uses other 3d cues to advise us of of the relative placement of subjects (i.e. what subject is closer/ further) . I used to view with large binocs, 100mm objective lens diameters, 20x, with objective lens spacing of 12", and the depth perception was truly remarkable. Of ocurse, these binocs weighed 33lbs.
For this price, u want to be assured the binocs meet your expectations, so try a few pair side by side to test this and image quality, mainly contrast and AFOV, see which features are most important to you. Binoculars are very personal, as our eyes vary so much from person to person, and of course by age, which has a huge impact on binocular selection as our eye pupils do not dilate very wide as we age. I wrote extensively about this on my Amazon review of the Canon 10x42L binocs if you want more information on these details...
Hope this helps your buying decision.