Binocular choice

[Riflehunter1776]

In addition to my own EL's, I just ordered a pair of Leica 8x50's for my kid, and I've had other optics and a rangefinder of theirs. And I hear the noctivids are very good. A very astute optics guy whose blog I read prefers them also- but he tends to be a little biased toward Leica with everything.

But.....their CS is not good at all. Even a basic call to ask about the difference between the HD and HD + left me with an uneasy feeling.

"well the HD is fine if you're just looking at a huge beast like a deer; you should be able to see it fine with those" uh, see it fine? ok. Under ideal conditions I might see it fine with a tasco pronghorn or even a paper towel tube with celophane stretched over the ends, but that wasn't really my question. Thanks anyway, buddy. Oh, and a 10 year warranty you say???

I have heard many horror stories about Leica's warranty if there are problems. And that is a concern on binos which are in this price range. Swarovski has excellent cs. I just had them service an old Kahles scope and I'm about to have my old CL's cleaned. No charge, no questions.

 

[One Hole]

There are standard optical test methods (ASTM, UL, CIE...) to quantitatively assess optics products without bias. Among the most critical attributes for sporting optics are; light transmission, optical distortion, color shift and reflectance/glare. Reputable manufacturers reference these test methods. When comparing different products check to see if they are tested to the same methods. this is the best you can do when buying without viewing.

if you have different products side by side the simple test I like to perform is to select some text/object on a wall. Now walk away until the text/object becomes indiscernible. Repeat with option B, C... Which one allows you to clearly discriminate the sample at the furthest distance? This method effectively combines the critical attributes into what is really important - seeing detail at distance.

many years ago I tried this test with pair of steiner military marine 12x50s (top drawer glass at the time) and a pair of "new" swaro 8x30s. I could see better detail at longer range with the swaros even though they were lower magnification. this due to better optical clarity which is the result of higher purity lenses and better polishing.

hope this helps!

 

[Tesoro]

Leica Noctivid, easily beats out the EL. You dont even have to try to see the difference in brightness, depth of field, and ease of viewing. Best in the world. Absolutely amazing.

I am ready for a pair of 10x. I was going to the EL but will check these out. thx

FYI a good place to check out bino reviews & comparisons is on the bird nerd forums. They get real serious about things as thats their only 'weapon'. The uk ones are the best.

 

[Tesoro]

The bino nerds tests pretty much held the swaro leica and zeiss the same for optics.

If you wear glasses you dont have to do anything with the El. The leica needs the eyecup to pop out one click for many wearing glasses. That could be a pita. The EL field has better strap attachments by far. Size/weight/fov is pretty much the same.

The EL already has the name and resale value in our world. I think the dexterity and overall fit/feel for your size hands is what it should boil down to for the big 3 as they are all contenders. The Zeiss is no slacker either.

 

[Tesoro]

I did some more reading and a consensus in the bird world is that the new Zeiss Victory 10x42 SF is 'the one' vs the EL and Leica. But they are all so good that it can boil down to personal preference.

Notes I picked up:
-Z has more fov than the El
-Z is better balanced for extended hand holding as zeiss changed prisms in the SF to make it more rear weighted. It feels lighter than it is.
-Z has better placed focus knob and more ergonomic to hold
-Z is lighter
-Z has faster focus control
-Z has better warranty. 5 years unlimited damage and lifetime for defects.

-El has .5x more magnification at 10x than the others
-El has slightly flatter field on edges but not really more than the Z and L to make any points.

Cost for all 3 is about the same.

 

[Riflehunter1776]

Allbinos test site rates the Swaro sv EL's higher than the Zeiss Victory SF.

I own more zeiss glass than swaro, and wouldn't hesitate to take the Victory. That being said, In the case of binos I like the swaros better. And after looking through my new Leicas, I like the Swaros better than them, as well.

But of those top 3, for all practical purposes it's too close to call.


review of the Victory SF
....Still the overall image is worse than that of the Victory HT model because its loss of blue light was significantly smaller. It might be caused by Abbe-Koenig prisms which don't demand any reflective coating but also by simpler optical system – in the Victory HT you deal with one element less in the optical axis.

The only binoculars which can compete with the Victory SF on the market are the Swarovski EL Swarovision and the Nikon EDG. The Zeiss's field of view is wider than their fields but the slip-up with the reflections behind the eyepiece's diaphragm simply shouldn't have happened in a case of a top-of-the-range instrument. Still if you are not bothered by it the Zeiss is certainly recommendable in practically every other aspect.


Allbinos really likes the Nikon EDG, whereas most other sources do not rate them as highly as the Swaros and zeiss. It might be national bias against teutonic glass, considering their location, but who knows. Also, they have not yet rated the Noctivid.

And it must be remembered that birders and butterfly watchers do judge based on a different set of criteria than hunters.

 

[Tesoro]

Agree and for reasons the birders demand a diff bino than we do. Also one needs to be aware that the ratings are all so close that not one of the 3 is a clear winner.
The EL is made for birders and the SLC is made for hunters. The slc has faster focus and different coating for better contrast to pick out game. Its slightly brighter at twilight. It also has a built in tripod mount on the new ones - I think. It dosent have the flattening lens that the birders want or the ability to focus super close.
The EL has a more color neutral coating for the birders to be better able to id true feather colors. And the birders demand the super flat field thus the extra cost for that lens. Some people dont like the flatness when panning horzontally and get seasick aka rolling ball.

I am not sure if the new zeiss or the top of the line leica is primarily made for who and what they have or dont have for hunting applications.

Its starts getting complicated trying to make the right choice on a pair of binos that costs as much a a quality rifle!

 

[Tesoro]

I just ordered the EL 10x42. I just figured that if I dont buy them and get something else then I will always wonder if I should have got the EL's. Now I wont!

 

[mildot1960]

In terms of usability I bought a pair of Leupold Mk 4's 10x50s the Coyote coloured models with the Mildot Ret in them which are brilliant and a year or so back I bought the newer Leupold Tactical BX-2's with the "L" shaped Ret in them but I find the push pull eye cups annoying and the large Retical is just too big, The Mk 4's are extremely good, them my brother wanted a set so I got him a pair of 8x42 Leupold 8x42 McKinley's which are the BX-4's but they were awesome, Once you get up in to a certain price range it is hard to tell the difference between them, I would not get rid of the Mk 4's, So my pick would be the Mk 4's and the BX 3's 4's and the newer BX 5's, The 4's and 5's are right up there with the best of the foreign brands and about half to a third cheaper and they are American made.

 

[Riflehunter1776]

Leupold gets their high end glass from Japan and their low end stuff from China.

 

[mildot1960]

Leupold gets their high end glass from Japan and their low end stuff from China.

The Mk 4's are made in China and they are way better than most, just because they are made in China does not mean they are substandard, At the time of their release they cost around 6-700$ +, The Mk 4's made in China and have actually better glass and build quality than most brands and they are even than the made in Japan Tactical BX-2's, But the BX-4's are even better again (made In Japan),

I don't buy in to the Anti China prejudice BS, because every country makes good and bad gear and Leupold kept their hands on the pulse when it came to the Mk 4's, They are very worthy of the Leupold Name, Even the Molle Case/Bag that come with the MK 4's is the best Optic case I have ever seen yet the later BX-2 bag is a pig and totally unbalanced and flips upside down all the time if you use the neck strap yet it says Made in the U.S.A. on the front.

Leica Geovids are a prime example with "O"ring failures and fogging up not to mention getting them fixed under warranty is a real hasstle where some on here have been quoted over 800 bucks for Leica to repair them. And at $3000.00 a pop they should come with a Life time Warranty. Like the Leupold Mk 4's do.

It does not matter where anything is made as long as it is done right and the best of gear is used then that is all that counts.

Also the top 4 Camera Brands use Glass from Japan and S.E Asia and have done for decades.

 

[Tesoro]

Sad but true