I wanted to do a field of view comparison for some time now between a pair of binoculars and rifle scope with similar specs. Until I recently purchased my new Swarovski EL Swarovision 10x32 binoculars, I didn't really have anything of similar specifications for a fair test. Now I could try out my new Vortex PST alongside the Swarovski at 10x, both optics have 32mm objectives.
The manufacturer's site states the following:
Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 = 10.9' @ 100 yards
Swarovski EL 10x32 = 36' @ 100 yards
The Swarovski SV EL is a top of the line binocular with an MSRP of $2,488, it boasts a larger than average FOV and in no way am I comparing the image quality, the compact camera simply does not do it justice. The Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 is a new model which was launched in 2013 with an MSRP of $799. The PST's XD glass isn't bad, as the chromatic aberration is well controlled compared to my Leupold MK6 3-18x44 which I also took pictures of the same sign to show the purple fringe in another post.
Anyway back to the topic, I spent a good amount of time ~10-15 minutes behind each optic to find a the best adjustment of focus and placement of camera behind the eyepiece. After taking several shots I reviewed them on my computer and selected the best one. The images were taken with manual settings, albiet slightly too dark. I did not edit any of the images and kept them at full size. The forum however does resize them to a smaller format.
Using a Bushnell Scout rangefinder, it placed the white and black sign at exactly 32 yards. The camera I used was a Sony RX100, which is a high end compact. It has a large lens (for its size) that could fit behind the eyepieces.
Vortex PST set at 10x
Swarovski EL SV at 10x
You can immediately the HUGE difference in field of view. The Vortex was almost like a tunnel compared to the Swarovski at same magnification. It seems even bigger than the published numbers advertise. In fact since I took the picture from only one barrel, when viewing through both barrels of the binoculars, the FOV should be even wider since it combines the images of both eyes into a Venn Diagram effect. Too bad my camera simply cannot capture the entire image of the Swaro from top to bottom. I can see why hunters always carry a set of binoculars even if had a scope on their rifle. One last item to note is the difference in minimum focal distance. At 10x the Vortex scope could only focus down clearly to about 20 yards while the Swaro was clear all the way down to about 6 feet. I would have to set the magnification all the way down to about 3x to match the binos at 10x for minimum distance.
Even on high end scopes such as my Premier 5-25x56 the image quality / resolution is still a step away from the binoculars. If only one day they could incorporate a binocular's large field of view, image resolution, and compactness into a rifle scope...perfection!
The manufacturer's site states the following:
Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 = 10.9' @ 100 yards
Swarovski EL 10x32 = 36' @ 100 yards
The Swarovski SV EL is a top of the line binocular with an MSRP of $2,488, it boasts a larger than average FOV and in no way am I comparing the image quality, the compact camera simply does not do it justice. The Vortex PST 2.5-10x32 is a new model which was launched in 2013 with an MSRP of $799. The PST's XD glass isn't bad, as the chromatic aberration is well controlled compared to my Leupold MK6 3-18x44 which I also took pictures of the same sign to show the purple fringe in another post.
Anyway back to the topic, I spent a good amount of time ~10-15 minutes behind each optic to find a the best adjustment of focus and placement of camera behind the eyepiece. After taking several shots I reviewed them on my computer and selected the best one. The images were taken with manual settings, albiet slightly too dark. I did not edit any of the images and kept them at full size. The forum however does resize them to a smaller format.
Using a Bushnell Scout rangefinder, it placed the white and black sign at exactly 32 yards. The camera I used was a Sony RX100, which is a high end compact. It has a large lens (for its size) that could fit behind the eyepieces.
Vortex PST set at 10x
Swarovski EL SV at 10x
You can immediately the HUGE difference in field of view. The Vortex was almost like a tunnel compared to the Swarovski at same magnification. It seems even bigger than the published numbers advertise. In fact since I took the picture from only one barrel, when viewing through both barrels of the binoculars, the FOV should be even wider since it combines the images of both eyes into a Venn Diagram effect. Too bad my camera simply cannot capture the entire image of the Swaro from top to bottom. I can see why hunters always carry a set of binoculars even if had a scope on their rifle. One last item to note is the difference in minimum focal distance. At 10x the Vortex scope could only focus down clearly to about 20 yards while the Swaro was clear all the way down to about 6 feet. I would have to set the magnification all the way down to about 3x to match the binos at 10x for minimum distance.
Even on high end scopes such as my Premier 5-25x56 the image quality / resolution is still a step away from the binoculars. If only one day they could incorporate a binocular's large field of view, image resolution, and compactness into a rifle scope...perfection!
Last edited:
