Before getting down to this review I should say that I’ve been a Leica user for the last twenty years, and had Swarovski not very generously provided us here at 10,000 Birds with binoculars and telescopes to use I would probably have stuck with my Leicas (which I reviewed - and how fast has time passed? - almost four years ago) for the foreseeable future. Why? You know, I really don’t have a good reason - I guess it’s a bit like supporting a certain sports team: you have an affection for the brand, you know what you’re going to get (through the good and the bad times), and it seems almost disloyal to look elsewhere.

Which doesn’t make a lot of sense really. Whilst I still believe that there’s very little on the market to challenge the ‘Big Three’ of Swarovski, Leica, and Zeiss if you’re looking for the very best birding optics available, there’s not actually that much to separate the three in terms of build quality, optical quality, or (certainly the least tangible) ‘pride of ownership’. When it comes to choice it’s exactly that: choice. All three are solidly-built and will last forever, all three provide extremely sharp images in all lights, and all three are brands backed up by (reputedly) good service.

All three are also expensive (prices and offers vary by so much it’s hardly worth giving a figure here, but you are looking at at least 800GBP+). They’re investments rather than a casual purchase - which is what makes buying any of them something to be taken very seriously of course. I wouldn’t take at face value any review of binoculars at this price without going down to a store and trialling as many different models as possible, seeing how balanced they feel in the hand, whether they’re too heavy for you, how they feel round your neck…It sounds obvious, but I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve spoken to birders who’ve spent 900GBP or more on a pair of binoculars because of a review without trying other models or makes and are now wondering if they’ve done the right thing…

Which isn’t to say that reviews don’t help potential purchasers by offering an opinion, so - with the caveats above in mind - what do I actually think of my brand new Swarovski SLC 7×42Bs?

To be totally honest, when I unwrapped the package Swarovski sent me I was a little disappointed. Rather than being the unconventionally-shaped but very distinctive Swaro ELs (the ones with the ‘hollow’ bridge), the ones I’d been sent looked less distinctive, perhaps - dare I say it - less ‘classy’. I’d not seen these being used in the field before and - and I absolutely hang my head in shame to admit this - a little cheated: if I was going to shelve my beloved Leicas I wanted the very best Swaro had to offer…

They were beautiful to be sure, though, finished in a gorgeous ‘forest-green’ textured rubber with the Swaro ‘eagle’ logo stamped high on the left barrel. In the hand they felt very solid and substantial, the weight excellently distributed, and were obviously extremely well-made. Like all recent Swaro binoculars they have the (unique?) depressions in the barrels for your thumbs which are placed to make handling them even more comfortable - perhaps I’m showing my ‘Leica’ roots, but I do find I just as often align my thumbs ‘up and down’ the barrels rather than rest ‘across’ them in the depressions, but they’re a very nice touch and proof that the design team at Swaro really understand what it’s like to use binoculars for long periods of time.

And using them, is of course, what it’s all about. A quick scan from my front-door was impressive: razor-sharp images, excellent colour fidelity, and no ‘barrelling’ as I scanned across the horizon (a form of distortion that I’ve always found when I’ve used Zeiss binoculars in the past, though it’s been at least ten years since I’ve used a pair and new models may be different). I must say I was immediately impressed, but, you know, they weren’t Leicas, they weren’t even the ELs…

Okay, scanning over a garden is one thing, but hardly a basis for a review! So let’s move on three months. I’ve now used these “new” re-designed Swaros in good light, poor light, dawn and dusk, the rain, in high temperatures and low temperatures, in the UK, Panama, South Africa, Kenya, and India - and optically they are unconditionally, absolutely superb. Colour fidelity is absolutely incredible (thanks, according to Swarovski, to the ‘SWAROBRIGHT’ lens coating): some people, myself included, feel that sometimes Leicas give a very slight yellow cast to the image and Zeiss a slight blue one, but the Swaros - to my eyes - are totally neutral. I’ve had no distortion or fringing under all the conditions I’ve used them in either, and (yes, like Leicas and Zeiss I’ve used) somehow manage to make the image in the glass at dusk or in poor light (in eg a thick forest) brighter than the one you see with your own eyes. (Yes, it’s down to a 6mm exit pupil and to the ‘SWAROTOP’ and ‘SWARODUR’ lens coatings of course, but I still don’t really understand how coatings intensify available light hence the ’somehow’).

They are undeniably rugged too. I try not to swing expensive optics into trees or drop them down rocky ravines so I can’t say for certain that they’re indestructible, but they are definitely waterproof, I’m pretty certain that they’re never going to let in dust or dirt, they clean easily under a tap (according to the company’s website, “The non-stick effect of the SWAROCLEAN coating on the outer surface of the lens makes cleaning objective and eyepiece lenses considerably easier”), and so far I’ve not scuffed the rubber armour despite having a rather laissez-faire attitude towards them when I’m a bit jet-lagged (amazing how blase you get when you know you’ve a pair of Ultravids sat on a shelf at home that aren’t being used).

I’m also going to have to say that I really love the wide neoprene strap that the Swaros come with. Not only does it make the binoculars extremely comfortable to wear, but it’s a cinch to fit and has a remarkably innovative system of ‘locking’ the strap to the required length: trust me, you’ll be as impressed as I was by the attention to detail when you see it. I also genuinely like the way the eyecups twist or screw in and out (small things seem to matter to me sometimes). Some reviews I’ve read have mentioned that they occasionally ’stick’ if grit gets trapped in them. Maybe they do, but mine haven’t so far, and - I feel a little shaky writing this - compared with the Leicas ‘push down/lift up’ eyecups these feel far more luxurious and better-made.

Talking of little details, each pair of Swarovski binoculars comes with a specially-made Swaro ’snapshot adaptor’ which fits to one of the lenses and makes taking a digital image easier - I’ve not used it so I can’t comment on how well it works but I suspect it works well: Swarovski aren’t going to risk their reputation on a single circular piece of plastic. Even the rainguards are innovative incidentally, being ‘hinged’ hard plastic that fit very smoothly over the exit lenses…

I like pretty much everything about these binoculars, and feel rightly ashamed to have ever questioned their ‘classiness’. So am I now and out and out Swarovski fan? The one criticism I do have concerns the close-focus (the focussing-action itself is excellent incidentally: smooth and fast and going from close to very distant in not much more than a full turn of the focussing knob). I used these in South Africa standing next to a birder who was using a pair of Nikons which were half the price and we started talking about close focussing. I was looking at a leaf three or four metres away (which was an okay performance) and was astounded when he said he could focus on the ground right in front of him (about half as close)! I didn’t believe him, but tried it for myself and he was absolutely right. If you’re just into birds that hardly matters (they rarely get that close, at least not when I’m birding), but many birders I know - including myself - like to get very close views of butterflies or moths or even flowers, and the Swaros aren’t really as good as they might be. But then, neither are my Leicas which have a comparably average close-focussing distance and I survived…

I suppose too, that if I’m really pushed I feel a little uncomfortable using binoculars made by the same company who make world-leading rifle-scopes, as their website proudly proclaims, but you can probably over think these things: Swarovski do have several very important conservation programmes up and running and are the Species Champions for the Sociable Lapwing (as Corey will very soon be explaining in his typically exuberant and wonderful style now that he’s back from Kazakhstan). If my green credentials were that impeccable I don’t suppose I’d drive a car or work for an airline either - if Swarovskis’ full product-line impacts on your purchasing decisions then that’s your decision to make and yours alone.

The real question is, would I now buy a pair of Swarovski binoculars (if I hadn’t been so generously given a pair and if my Leicas had been lost or stolen or fallen down that rocky ravine I mentioned before)? Surprisingly - to me anyway - I haven’t missed my Leicas. Both the Ultravids and the SLCs are on the ‘chunky’ side (they’re not lightweight), they cost similar amounts, are at the pinnacle of optical excellence, and I’ve not noticed a diminution in enjoyment in my birding since I’ve been using the Swaros. I can’t criticise the image in any way at all, they’re comfortable, robust, and they look darn good round my neck…The honest answer is that, yes I may well. Which for a life-long Leica fan is quite a thing to say; but all pointless loyalties aside the Swaro SLC (new) 7×42 Bs are a superb pair of optics and I really can’t imagine anyone regretting buying them.

There are other pertinent questions to ask of course. Is 7x magnification right for you? My Leica bins are 8x magnification and I originally chose them over the 10x as the image was slightly brighter. Personally I have no problem at all with 7×42s, but I suggest trying different sizes before buying a pair so you’re not wondering, “What if..” instead of enjoying them. Would I buy the SLCs instead of the ELs? That’s a question I really can’t answer I’m afraid as I’ve not used the ELs anything like extensively and can’t make any worthwhile comparisons at all. The SLCs are less expensive (’cheaper’ is not a word I’d ever use to describe optics in this price bracket) so that might be a deciding factor, and I do wonder whether there can be that much optical difference when the SLCs are so good anyway, but I just don’t know to be able to say definitively. Perhaps Swaro would like to help me answer the question by sending me a pair of ELs, but I’m not going to push my luck by asking them…