new binoculars help

[gr8fuldoug]

There is a reason that all comparisons are vs the Swarovski SLC.

With that said, if you are not going for the Swarovski the 2 next best options, IMO, are the Meopta Meostar and the Kowa Genesis
It would be my pleasure to chat optics with you if you've got the time to give a call, 516-217-1000
Doug

 

[Clubhunter]

Definitely Swarovski

 

[commandoNate]

Seems like you never really hear anyone who has or has used swarovskis say they would rather have something else. All the conversation here seems to be what is second to Swaro. Some like this one, some like that one but none are chosen over swarovski it seems. That tells me something. Buy once, cry once. Not to hijack the thread but I've been considering the same purchase and wondered if anyone has experience with warranty on any of these upper end optics as the second owner, not original purchaser. That will factor heavily in my decision to buy new or used.

But for now I'll just keep with my borrowed SLC's from pops.

 

[CaseyD]

Swarovski fanboy here!!!!!

Without a doubt...… 10X42 Swarovski.

Totally agree. I think they preload deer into these things. Amazing glass

 

[Ndbowhunter]

i should cycle back through and just copy and paste long story.

Meopta meostar at this price point and potentially any price point. they control chromatic aberration better then SLC’s

I had swaro EL’s and they didn’t do it for me. The view was really cold, fealt like my eyes were strained after hours of glassing (yes I know how to set diopter), and when glassing medium range hillsides say 300 yards, I found the field flatness to be really annoying and distracting.

In alpine environments say glassing for tahr in NZ for my eyes at least its striking the difference between how well Meostar’s control CA vs the SLC’s.

No opinion on kowa

spent heaps of time with zeiss conquest.. they just don’t have the resolution the meopta’s do. It’s real apparent at 1000+ yards and you can distinctly tell if tahr are Worth chasing or not with the meopta’s. Great colour rendition.

Leica doesn’t have a tripod mount.. out for me.

One thing I will say about the SLC, is that if I wasn’t going to use them in high contrast areas, they do control flare or veiling glare a wee bit better.

and as a whole because the Meopta’s use a silver applied coating instead of the dialectic applied coatings in the SLC’s, the SLC’s do have a more neutral or “perfect” colour hue. The meostars are a bit warmer and have a very slight bluish hue.

 

[Newtosavage]

Seems like you never really hear anyone who has or has used swarovskis say they would rather have something else. All the conversation here seems to be what is second to Swaro.

Okay, I'll say it.

(donning flameproof suit...)

I've now owned two mint SLC's and sold them both. I realize that's heresy on this forum, but SLC's don't work for everyone. I find them to be chunky and poorly balanced in the hands and they have one of the worst focus wheels I've used on binoculars at any price. Both of mine were sticky and the one knock you'll always hear about Swaros are their sticky focus wheels. Why Swaro hasn't addressed this common issue (you read about it all the time) is beyond me. The other issue is the focus wheel is very close to the eyepieces and you nearly have to touch your forehead to use the focus wheel.

Image quality isn't everything. On that point alone, they stack up well vs. just about anything else, but there are other features that become increasingly important the longer you use a pair of binoculars. Eye relief, handling, weight and balance, eye cup size and shape and material, focus wheel position and direction and speed and smoothness, etc.

For my eyes, Conquest HD's resolve as well and perhaps even slightly better than SLC's. Again, that's to my eyes. I conducted extensive tests side by sided on tripods at multiple targets over many days to finally reach this conclusion. Bright light, dim light, dawn, dusk, fog, rain. I had both the SLC's and a pair of Conquest HD's (both 10x42) for weeks while I was doing all my testing last year. The Conquests stayed and the SLC's were sold. I liked the handling, the image and the focus wheel better on the Conquests.

If folks like their SLC's and think they are the bomb, then I'm happy for them. They are great binoculars. But not everyone - given the chance to test a bunch of competitive bins - will choose them, for a variety of reasons.

I think one reason Swaros are so well regarded is (well a couple reasons) - 1) they are superb instruments, 2) they are generally the most expensive and people for better or worse relate quality to price, 3) they have a following so that leads people to think there is no reason to try anything else, and 4) because they are often the 1st pair of really good quality binoculars anyone tries, and the "wow" factor sticks with them.

Those are my thoughts based on a year of buying and selling and testing about 20+ pairs of $600-$1600 binoculars. I don't expect folks to agree and that's fine, but that is my own personal experience.

 

[realunlucky]

Okay, I'll say it.

(donning flameproof suit...)

I've now owned two mint SLC's and sold them both. I realize that's heresy on this forum, but SLC's don't work for everyone. I find them to be chunky and poorly balanced in the hands and they have one of the worst focus wheels I've used on binoculars at any price. Both of mine were sticky and the one knock you'll always hear about Swaros are their sticky focus wheels. Why Swaro hasn't addressed this common issue (you read about it all the time) is beyond me. The other issue is the focus wheel is very close to the eyepieces and you nearly have to touch your forehead to use the focus wheel.

Image quality isn't everything. On that point alone, they stack up well vs. just about anything else, but there are other features that become increasingly important the longer you use a pair of binoculars. Eye relief, handling, weight and balance, eye cup size and shape and material, focus wheel position and direction and speed and smoothness, etc.

For my eyes, Conquest HD's resolve as well and perhaps even slightly better than SLC's. Again, that's to my eyes. I conducted extensive tests side by sided on tripods at multiple targets over many days to finally reach this conclusion. Bright light, dim light, dawn, dusk, fog, rain. I had both the SLC's and a pair of Conquest HD's (both 10x42) for weeks while I was doing all my testing last year. The Conquests stayed and the SLC's were sold. I liked the handling, the image and the focus wheel better on the Conquests.

If folks like their SLC's and think they are the bomb, then I'm happy for them. They are great binoculars. But not everyone - given the chance to test a bunch of competitive bins - will choose them, for a variety of reasons.

I think one reason Swaros are so well regarded is (well a couple reasons) - 1) they are superb instruments, 2) they are generally the most expensive and people for better or worse relate quality to price, 3) they have a following so that leads people to think there is no reason to try anything else, and 4) because they are often the 1st pair of really good quality binoculars anyone tries, and the "wow" factor sticks with them.

Those are my thoughts based on a year of buying and selling and testing about 20+ pairs of $600-$1600 binoculars. I don't expect folks to agree and that's fine, but that is my own personal experience.

I had the conquest and sold them and got the SLC to me they aren't even in the same conversation. Compare and test what binoculars will work for you and then decide what your willing to compromise on it's the only way to know for sure. I will say Swarovski will hold thier value the best of any in thier class.

Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

 

[Ndbowhunter]

yeah ur the outlier for saying zeiss conquest HD can our resolve the SLC

Unfortunately I can be fairly transient and or forgetful so carrying around 2k bino’s isn’t an option for my lifestyle.

I’d give a go to maven’s demo program if you can’t get hands on with any bino’s. That said a lot of shops allow returns no problem so if ur card can handle get s bunch and do a good hard 3-4 day test and pick one and live with it..

They are all a compromise of sorts. There isn’t truly a best.

 

[Newtosavage]

Compare and test what binoculars will work for you and then decide what your willing to compromise on it's the only way to know for sure.
Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

Absolutely! Which is why I spent a year buying and selling the best binoculars I could get my hands on. Just comparing in the store is good, but having them at your house for a week or more and taking them on a few hunting trips is even better. But it can get expensive to conduct all those tests!

In the $1800 class, the SLC will hold their value best, and in the $1K class, the Conquests will hold their value best.

I don't put the SLC and the Conquest in the same price class because they aren't.

 

[Newtosavage]

yeah ur the outlier for saying zeiss conquest HD can our resolve the SLC

From what you'll read, that is surely the case. But how many people have owned them both at the same time, and objectively tested them side by side on tripods in multiple conditions over multiple targets? Probably not many. It's tough to be truly objective about gear. We all get drawn toward certain brands for a variety of reasons. Wanting to "be taken seriously" or give others gear envy or simply feel the need to have a big name brand to reassure us is are powerful things.

One of my favorite pairs of binoculars are a pair of Cabelas Outfiiter HD's that were discontinued a long time ago. For the longest time, I had no idea how such a little-known optic could perform so well against just about anything I threw at it. Then after quite a bit of research, I learned they were made in the Kamakura factory in Japan, which is the same factory that makes a lot of well-known binoculars including - some say - the Conquest HD's. (yes, to be considered "made in Germany" only a small amount of the process has to be completed there). Then I realized why these unknown binoculars are so good. But most folks wouldn't give them the time of day. I couldn't care less what brand my gear is if it works and I'm happy with it.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

You are barking up the wrong tree here mate.

I bought the zeiss for my mate in NZ off eBay. I had em in my possession from probably early December to about the middle of January when I flew over for the rest of the winter.

Sat on many a mountainside and used the zeiss or the Meopta looking for tahr since then.

Without a doubt the meopta is superior in resolution and CA control in the sample size i’ve Had.

 

[Newtosavage]

You are barking up the wrong tree here mate.

I bought the zeiss for my mate in NZ off eBay. I had em in my possession from probably early December to about the middle of January when I flew over for the rest of the winter.

Sat on many a mountainside and used the zeiss or the Meopta looking for tahr since then.

Without a doubt the meopta is superior in resolution and CA control in the sample size i’ve Had.

I'm not barking up any tree. You like what you like, and I like what I like. Neither of us are wrong!

Like someone else said, never forget that you bring your own set of lenses to the optics game.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

I was referring to your first paragraph.. about how many people have looked through them side by side and objectively.

can say absolutely that meopta’S can resolve if a tahr is a nanny or (or a small bull I guess) or a bull at about 1600 yards whereas the zeiss won’t. And that’s across a couple different sets of eyeballs at that. Good to know before you set out on a 3 hour mission and they end up being nannies. Woopsy

 

[CLibka]

Thanks for the helpful comments everyone. I just looked and it seems between cabelas and scheels they should carry at least the 4 I mentioned . So I’m going to make the trip to check them out luckily the stores are only 40 minutes apart. I’ll have to try out maven demo program as well.

While it isn't THAT important in the grand scheme of highish end glass it is worth saying that the Maven demo program will charge you a shipping fee, and if you decide you want them, but would like a custom or new set, they will hit you again with the shipping charge. Again, immaterial to the entire cost probably, but don't be fooled into thinking Maven's demo is completely "risk free". I also enquired if they would waive the second shipping fee if I did a custom set, and they didn't confirm they would, but acted like they might.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

Call Doug and ask him about a return policy..

Using glass inStores just won’t give you enough beta about what’s good or not especially comparing same price point glass.

 

[willfrye027]

Some guys have issues with the conquest’s fast focus. It can make it difficult to achieve the perfect in focus image esp considering the relatively shallow depth and flat curvature of field. The benefit/trade off of the field parameters is a best in class FOV (at least in 10x42). The fast focus I could personally do without which is how I ended up with some mavens even though I felt the Zeiss were optically superior.

In the end, it’s unlikely that your choice in binocular will change the course of your hunt when you’re talking $1000 glass. But hey this is Rokslide and guys get pretty into their gear and defensive of their OPINIONS...

 

[willfrye027]

I was referring to your first paragraph.. about how many people have looked through them side by side and objectively.

can say absolutely that meopta’S can resolve if a tahr is a nanny or (or a small bull I guess) or a bull at about 1600 yards whereas the zeiss won’t. And that’s across a couple different sets of eyeballs at that. Good to know before you set out on a 3 hour mission and they end up being nannies. Woopsy

This is hard to believe honestly. I don’t think an EL vs something in the $500 range could do that given same magnification off a tripod..

 

[Ndbowhunter]

Say whatcha want, Havent brought a spotter in the bush in years

Caught this rock wren one morning in the hut.. but up in the saddle on the upper left just below snow line could distinctly tell it was a mob of bulls that morning. Grabbed the spotter from the truck and it confirmed.. Didn’t make a push because the river was way up through the main channel. That’s private land too but i’m mates with the farmer so woulda been fine.



I can’t google earth screen shot it with the ruler thing present but it says it’s 1.5 miles.

 

[Ndbowhunter]

Here’s an ibex billy at almost exactly 1 mile through meopta’s


And a nanny tahr at 700



She came home with me

 

[Newtosavage]

I was referring to your first paragraph.. about how many people have looked through them side by side and objectively.

can say absolutely that meopta’S can resolve if a tahr is a nanny or (or a small bull I guess) or a bull at about 1600 yards whereas the zeiss won’t. And that’s across a couple different sets of eyeballs at that. Good to know before you set out on a 3 hour mission and they end up being nannies. Woopsy

You can say it, but I'm not sure that makes it true. I'm not trying to be argumentative - Hear me out...

Do either of us know what the limit is of the human eye to resolve detail? Is there a chance that several pairs of binoculars operate beyond that limit? If so, then we may "think" that one binocular resolves more/better than another but there are actually other factors influencing that opinion, like color balance, light gathering, distortion, etc.

Until I know what the limits of the human eye/optic combination are, I'm not ready to rule out any binoculars as not being "sharp enough" etc.

I hope that makes sense.