Rangefinder binos

[Litrfoot]

I just received the new Vector X range finding binos and am very impressed. I have the Revic blr10bs as well and really enjoyed them, but the Vector X glass is far superior. I think these are the two top units available right now for ranging/ballistic solving binos. I like the ability to Bluetooth to Kestrel with the Vector X as well.

I imagine there will be some good deals on used Revic BLR10Bs here as more of the initial orders of the Vector Xs get into people's hands.

I just got mine as well and I agree! I have a terrapin X that I have owned for years and it doesn't hold a candle to the Vector X. From my deck, across a lake, 3100 yards one touch, docks, boats and trees. Early morning, midday and dusk. Light rain and clear. No scanning! My terrapin X can only do it in scan mode early morning and dusk. Glass is good, and the display is fantastic. I have the 12X42 MSR-SMR. Also the App is really nice and easy to use! It also connect to your Kestrel and many other similar devices.

 

[Travis H]

No one uses the vortex fury 5000?

 

[Owenb2]

I have had Zeiss Rf 10x42 for three years and love them.

So much with glass is subjective- user's eyes and conditions.

The range finder and ballistics have worked great for me within hunting distances.

To my eyes they are very comparable to a pair of 10 El's I have, I don't feel like i am making a trade (image quality for convenience)

I change the battery out April 1, & Aug 30. Every year preemptively. And have had no issues with them or the app.

 

[RH300UM]

No one uses the vortex fury 5000?

I have some. With the Applied Ballistic. The glass sucks. Even compared to the viper level of vortex binos the Fury's are still blurry. No crispness. The ballistic solver is great. I bought these fury's for guiding thinking it would save me time when setting a Hunter up for the shot. They didn't work for my needs as 80% of my day was looking through binos to spot animals. After a hour my eyes would start to hurt along with my head. I ended up using my backup binos (vipers) and an sig rangefinder the rest of the season. The Fury's now sit in the shelf.

 

[JuddL]

My experience mirrors @RH300UM if you glass a lot they just aren't good enough. Ballistics were good and it was fine for stand hunting morning and evening but as a walk and stalk…not good enough.

 

[Hondo64d]

No one uses the vortex fury 5000?

I have the Fury 5000AB and have no complaints. To me, the glass is very good and the rangefinder is fantastic. Having one button push provide range and ballistic solution is priceless.

John

 

[FarmerMatt]

No one uses the vortex fury 5000?

Just you and me I guess. They work well for how I hunt…

 

[RockyRandy]

I have the Revic bino's with rangefinder and don't find any major issues with the glass. Are they as clear as my Swaro's were, no they are not. Are they good enough for 99 percent of the hunting I do, yes I believe they are. If you miss something it is not going to be because of the quality of the glass in the Revic bino's. You yourself stated you are not a sit and pick apart a hill side kind of guy. The Revic's are perfect for that kind of hunting and the rangefinder is fantastic. I couldn't agree more with with some of the comments, if you have the money the NL Pures and the BR4 rangefinder would be the ultimate set up, its just more glass than I need for the type of hunting I do and they come at a super premium price. If your spending hours and hours behind them and your well is deep, then that combo is definitely the way to go. If your looking for good glass with a great rangefinder you can't beat the Revic's. JMO

I agree 100% with your comment.

 

[RockyRandy]

Yes they did, the new Gen 2s got a glass upgrade and some other new features.

That only makes sense. In today's market you snooze you lose.

 

[elj1973]

No one uses the vortex fury 5000?

I have a pair of the Fury 5000AB as well. I have used them the past two seasons in Wyoming. Yes glass is a little less crisp as my 10x42 Viper hd's but not bad. The wind function is nice, I like the point and capture.I have had amazing results with them in cold weather still functioning and ranging down to -15 after being left out overnight. IMO pretty hard to beat for the price.

 

[RockyRandy]

"Too Powerful" is not how LRF logic works when figuring out range. It is more likely just averaging out multiple returns and then giving you the average.

905 lasers work by sending out thousands of pulses. Because they have to use a weaker laser (to be eye safer, and eye safe doesn't exist) they compensate by sending out thousands of pings. As you wobble around those get spread out. 905nm lasers are extremely close to our visual range (380nm - 700nm). This is the near-infrared wavelength. 650nm - 900nm is the range used for cold laser therapy and other medical devices due its penetration depth into the human body. Not good for eyes to say the least. So these are legally reduced in power. To compensate they range like this:

View attachment 604553
1550 lasers (more expensive range finders) are able to send out one single high energy pulse. Which is why they are both more accurate, and can range further. 1550nm is further from our vision and the energy is absorbed and dissipated in our eyes. Which greatly reduces the chances of causing harm.

The last issue to think about is the diode. These can be low or high quality. High quality tend to be more round and polished. Lower quality (cheaper) tend to be more rectangular. Which has an impact on your ranging quality. As you can imagine, getting a return on things around what you are lasing has to be filtered out by the algorithm in use. If the system is averaging to find "best" then some of those returns will be from objects around your intended target. Now couple that with the wobble from your hand as you push the button (no one is rock solid) and you can imagine what the system is having to do. More objects that around "the same" distance being averaged in.

If we are talking about targets further away, then the mass of that target will be significantly more different in range. Hitting grass, trees, and bushes behind a deer at 600 yards, can give you an easy 10 - 20 - 50 yard different for the algorithm. Hitting grass, bushes, trees, 2 - 3 yards behind the object would make it harder to discern those as "not intended" by the algorithm. Looking down at a deer from a tree stand, the difference in yardage from the deer to the background is only 1 - 3 yards. Looking out at a deer across a field, they can easily be 30+ yards and filtered out.

View attachment 604556

Thank you for educating us on the effects of the laser to our eye's. I've never heard of that before.

 

[azarcher10x]

If Swarvo Pures are Zeiss glass then Zeiss screwed up and gave Swarvo the best glass or coatings they have. I can't see that at all.

Zeiss needs to reposition their buttons and their app sucks.

The difference is in the coatings. Zeiss coatings are "Cooler", Swarovski are "Warmer". It's a personal preference. Their app isn't as comprehensive as others, but I've add no issues using it in actual hunting situations. I did have to learn to get the absolute pressure from the bino's when doing the ballistics in the app. If you try to go off of local weather, then the app and the bino"s won't agree.