Guys I have a near new pair of Swarovski EL 8.5x42's and like them fine but find myself reading all the reviews on the top 3 (Swaro, Leica & Ziess). In all the reviews I've read, not one time did the swaro's come out on top. It seemed to be a tie between the other two.
My question is......I would like to hear from people that have one of the 3 and why? Maybe vote for your pick and lets see what the real world people think on here?
To be honest.......I was thinking of selling the Swarovski's just to try out one of the Leica's in a 8x42. Anyway.........help me out here guys and gals and vote for your pick.

Thanks everyone!!!!!!!

i've got leica 10x42's and swaro 10x42 els & find the swaros to be brighter and more definative than the leicas. everybody's eyes are different, so go by what you see, not what you read

Yes, the important thing is what you like and how well they work for you. I had Swaro´s in 8x56 and 8x30, but didn´t like them so they are sold. Bought Zeiss 8x20 Victory and Zeiss 8x30 Conquest. And now I am really satisfied with them. And with that follows the joy to use them.

I closely examined the Leica/Zeiss/Swarovski's side by side in the store and I ended up liking one of each depending on which size. I like the Ultravid 8x20's, the Zeiss FL 8x30's, and the EL 10x42's. I prefered the Swaro 10x42 EL's to either the Leica UltraVids or Zeiss FL's in that size/magnification.
I currently own a Pair of Zeiss Classic's and Swaro EL 10x42's. My EL's are noticably superior the Classics.
Overall within the big 3 the differences in the same size aren't enough to make me want to change. If I owned a pair of UltraVid 10x40's I wouldn't bother trading up to the EL's even though I liked the EL's better, there's not enough difference to bother with though there was enough of a difference to upgrade from the Zeiss Classics.
I would reccommend that you currently enjoy the fine glass you now own and if you want something new buy a different size to complement rather than replace what you now own.................................DJ

I looked at all 3 and went with the Ultravids in 7x42. I hunt N. Minnesota and the distances are shorter rather than longer. Plus I could not tell much of a difference in magnification bewteen 7x and 8x, but I did think the 7x were brighter. I prefer the magnesium body of the Leicas to the Zeiss FL, believing that the Leicas should be tougher. The ergonomics of the Swaros were the best and Leicas second. I thought both the Zeiss and Leicas were brighter than the Swaros. It was a toss up on clarity and brightness with the Leicas and Zeiss so based on my other points I went with Leica. I hunted in S. Texas this year for a week with them and even with long distances the 7x42s were awesome. I was looking at deer pre-light in the mornings that I could barely make out with the plain eye. I think the 7x is often overlooked and I would have done the same if the guy behind the counter had not showed them to me. Everyone goes with 8x as an all-around bino and maybe for a reason, but I seriously could see little difference in magnification but could see a lot in brightness which made them seem even crisper. The warranty on the Zeiss are fully transferable I believe which is a plus when selling. Not sure if the others have it, but Leica has a no-fault 3 year warranty so if you accidentally run over them with your truck, send them back and get a new pair. As the others do too, Leica has a lifetime warranty to the original buyer after they have been registered with Leica.