Time to Upgrade Binos

[flyfisher117]

Not sure what your work discount is on Vortex but don't forget about Sierra and their refurbished optics. UHDs for the price of HDs.

 

[Spiral Horn]

It’s made in the same factory sooo..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s a common misunderstanding. Today’s OEM manufacturers make products to the customer’s specifications. The quality of components and design specifications vary a lot from contract to contract.

For example, a lot of manufacturers tout their optic contains Schott Glass. But not all Schott glass is created equal, they make many different grades of glass at different stages from blanks to finished lenses and everything in-between. It is also sourced from Zeiss plants all over the world. So, just because it wears the Zeiss Glass label doesn’t mean they are all equal.

Case-in-point - both Maven and Zeiss Conquest both contain major components sourced from Japan (likely from the same plant), yet picking each up and just a quick glance will confirm they offer a very different optical and device experience.

 

[nobody]

It’s made in the same factory sooo..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

To echo Spiral above, and Having owned the Razor UHD and the Maven B2 in the past, I can tell you that the views between them are VERY different, same factory or not.

 

[Flyjunky]

I would go look through them all.... BUT also look through a set of Sig Zulu 6... I have been a swaro snob... I sold my Els after they sat for the entire hunting season last year. I couldn't go back to something that is not image stabilized. Ready for other brands to throw there names in the hat of IS binos!

I guess I don’t understand the whole IS in a binocular. I can kind of understand an advantage if just quickly scanning but that’s the only advantage I see.

To me it’s just one more potential fail point I have to worry about.

 

[Cant hit em]

Id buy the Nikon HG’s in the classifieds


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ez_willie]

Zeiss conquest 10x42 HD still $599 at eurooptics plus can always find $10/$20 off codes. I have some en route.

 

[WRO]

That’s a common misunderstanding. Today’s OEM manufacturers make products to the customer’s specifications. The quality of components and design specifications vary a lot from contract to contract.

For example, a lot of manufacturers tout their optic contains Schott Glass. But not all Schott glass is created equal, they make many different grades of glass at different stages from blanks to finished lenses and everything in-between. It is also sourced from Zeiss plants all over the world. So, just because it wears the Zeiss Glass label doesn’t mean they are all equal.

Case-in-point - both Maven and Zeiss Conquest both contain major components sourced from Japan (likely from the same plant), yet picking each up and just a quick glance will confirm they offer a very different optical and device experience.

There are differences in price levels etc, but at a relatively similar price point they are very similar in performance, form factor, and weight.

Maven and Vortex are made by LOW, Zeiss conquests are made by Komakura.

The only schott that matters comes from Germany.

 

[Alpine4x4]

The image stabilization is an awesome feature I will admit. Interested in looking through a pair of the Zulu6 HDX Pros. They're about the same weight as the UHD.

A friend of mine has the 16x50 HDX pros and I have the 16x42 HDX. We compared them this last weekend. The Pros are noticeably larger and heavier. The Pros have a noticeably wider FOV when swapping back and forth, it gives the illusion the regular HDX actually has more magnification when it doesnt. Glass quality is dang near the same with the HDX Pros putting out slightly better color and slightly better clarity at the edges, but not a drastic difference imo. For the size and comparison I am happy with the 16x42's, albeit a bit jealous of the FOV the Pros have.

 

[mrwilsn24]

A friend of mine has the 16x50 HDX pros and I have the 16x42 HDX. We compared them this last weekend. The Pros are noticeably larger and heavier. The Pros have a noticeably wider FOV when swapping back and forth, it gives the illusion the regular HDX actually has more magnification when it doesnt. Glass quality is dang near the same with the HDX Pros putting out slightly better color and slightly better clarity at the edges, but not a drastic difference imo. For the size and comparison I am happy with the 16x42's, albeit a bit jealous of the FOV the Pros have.

That’s good to know. I’m not surprised the HDX Pro is heavier. They’d entice me more if I was ultralight running and gunning without a tripod, but with as much time as I spend glassing I think I’d rather put the weight into higher quality glass.

 

[WRO]

That’s good to know. I’m not surprised the HDX Pro is heavier. They’d entice me more if I was ultralight running and gunning without a tripod, but with as much time as I spend glassing I think I’d rather put the weight into higher quality glass.

I feel like I am on a boat anytime I run image stabilizing binoculars for any period of time,

 

[Timberline001]

I love glassing through maven B level glass. Currently have B1.2s and the 25-50 spotter. I’ve bought and sold pretty much everything in the price class as well as a few different old models of alpha glass (swaro and Leica). I landed on the mavens because I felt they were the best quality in the class and the best I could afford without making the step up to modern alpha. All that being said I’m really considering switching to vortex razor as much as I grimace at the thought. I’m really hard on gear and broke both optics last fall. The binos were dead on impact while the spotting scope limped through until January occurring more injury’s along the way. I shipped them both out in January and havnt gotten them back yet. When I broke my razor spotting scope it was replaced in a week and my binos were repaired and back in 2 weeks. Side by side the mavens definitely better but I’m starting to think the slight edge maybe isn’t worth having to go without them for long periods. Just food for thought.

 

[mrwilsn24]

While we're at it, might as well open a related can of worms. I mainly hunt Central/Eastern Idaho. Lots of open terrain and draws. I really like the high FOV of the 8x42s, but would I be missing out when compared to a 10x42 or 12x50 in the same glass, say the UHD for example? What mag do you run?

 

[alderchokedhellhole]

While we're at it, might as well open a related can of worms. I mainly hunt Central/Eastern Idaho. Lots of open terrain and draws. I really like the high FOV of the 8x42s, but would I be missing out when compared to a 10x42 or 12x50 in the same glass, say the UHD for example? What mag do you run?

I grapple with the 10x42 vs 12x50 UHD all the time.

I’m leaning towards the 10x42 UHD, while I don’t mind the size of the 12x, it just seems overkill to pack in a chest rig on a 5+ day backpack hunt.

I don’t feel like I’d be giving up too much with the 10x42 UHD paired with a decent spotter.

For reference, I hunt southern BC, mix of alpine and lower open country/timber.

 

[nobody]

While we're at it, might as well open a related can of worms. I mainly hunt Central/Eastern Idaho. Lots of open terrain and draws. I really like the high FOV of the 8x42s, but would I be missing out when compared to a 10x42 or 12x50 in the same glass, say the UHD for example? What mag do you run?

I’m a 10x50 guy and not a 10x42 guy. I have lots of reasons for why, so I’ll apologize in advance for my long winded reply.

Handheld binos, for 99% of people, consist of 4 options: 8x42, 10x42, 10x50, and 12x50. Sure some guys back east hunt with 6’s and some he-men swear they can handhold 15’s, but those are almost always the 4 combos compared. What you select all depends on your use case and where you hunt, but for me (high country mule deer and elk), I’ve unquestionably settled on the 10x50’s. Here's my justification:

Exit Pupil (diameter of the column of light that exits the ocular lens and enters your eye).
8x42 - 5.25mm
10x42 - 4.2mm
10x50 - 5mm
12x50 - 4.1667mm

The human eye optimizes around an exit pupil of 5mm. Much smaller and you're leaving light on the table, much more and you're carrying extra bulk that your eye can't use. So 10x42 and 12x50 are out.

12x is too hard to handhold. Lots of guys will say you can, but whenever guys say "buy a 12x50, it's still possible to handhold effectively," the inflection in their voice sounds almost as if they're even trying to convince themselves that what they're saying is true. It's not true across the board obviously, but objectively, lower mag = easier to handhold, especially one hand while bow hunting. I don't want separate binos for rifle vs. bow hunting, so the 10x and 8x win out again. here

So we've already eliminated the 12x50 from contention. Exit pupil is too small, and too hard to handhold. That leaves 8x42, 10x42, and 10x50. The 10x42 is eliminated here because of the small exit pupil (relative to the two other choices).

The magnification is a personal choice thing. The exit pupils between the 8x42 and 10x50 are effectively the same, with just a 0.25mm difference. But the additional 2 magnification of the 10x vs 8x does the same thing that jumping from a 10x to 12x does, but you're not giving up light. Basically, it gives the best tradeoff of FOV, light transmission, hand-hold-ability, and magnification you could hope for in a dedicated western hunting optic.

If I ever hunted back east, I might consider the 8x42. But I live in the rocky mountains and am an unapologetic western hunter, so the 10x50 is my huckleberry. My family and the guys I've hunted with have all jumped on the train as well and have become believers.

This is just my opinion, keep in mind. I'm sure lots of guys will argue an opposing viewpoint, and that's ok. But that's my justification of a 10x50 for dedicated western hunting.

 

[mrwilsn24]

I’m a 10x50 guy and not a 10x42 guy. I have lots of reasons for why, so I’ll apologize in advance for my long winded reply.

Handheld binos, for 99% of people, consist of 4 options: 8x42, 10x42, 10x50, and 12x50. Sure some guys back east hunt with 6’s and some he-men swear they can handhold 15’s, but those are almost always the 4 combos compared. What you select all depends on your use case and where you hunt, but for me (high country mule deer and elk), I’ve unquestionably settled on the 10x50’s. Here's my justification:

Exit Pupil (diameter of the column of light that exits the ocular lens and enters your eye).
8x42 - 5.25mm
10x42 - 4.2mm
10x50 - 5mm
12x50 - 4.1667mm

The human eye optimizes around an exit pupil of 5mm. Much smaller and you're leaving light on the table, much more and you're carrying extra bulk that your eye can't use. So 10x42 and 12x50 are out.

12x is too hard to handhold. Lots of guys will say you can, but whenever guys say "buy a 12x50, it's still possible to handhold effectively," the inflection in their voice sounds almost as if they're even trying to convince themselves that what they're saying is true. It's not true across the board obviously, but objectively, lower mag = easier to handhold, especially one hand while bow hunting. I don't want separate binos for rifle vs. bow hunting, so the 10x and 8x win out again. here

So we've already eliminated the 12x50 from contention. Exit pupil is too small, and too hard to handhold. That leaves 8x42, 10x42, and 10x50. The 10x42 is eliminated here because of the small exit pupil (relative to the two other choices).

The magnification is a personal choice thing. The exit pupils between the 8x42 and 10x50 are effectively the same, with just a 0.25mm difference. But the additional 2 magnification of the 10x vs 8x does the same thing that jumping from a 10x to 12x does, but you're not giving up light. Basically, it gives the best tradeoff of FOV, light transmission, hand-hold-ability, and magnification you could hope for in a dedicated western hunting optic.

If I ever hunted back east, I might consider the 8x42. But I live in the rocky mountains and am an unapologetic western hunter, so the 10x50 is my huckleberry. My family and the guys I've hunted with have all jumped on the train as well and have become believers.

This is just my opinion, keep in mind. I'm sure lots of guys will argue an opposing viewpoint, and that's ok. But that's my justification of a 10x50 for dedicated western hunting.

That makes complete sense. You've definitely got me thinking now. I really appreciate all the input.

 

[WRO]

I’m a 10x50 guy and not a 10x42 guy. I have lots of reasons for why, so I’ll apologize in advance for my long winded reply.

Handheld binos, for 99% of people, consist of 4 options: 8x42, 10x42, 10x50, and 12x50. Sure some guys back east hunt with 6’s and some he-men swear they can handhold 15’s, but those are almost always the 4 combos compared. What you select all depends on your use case and where you hunt, but for me (high country mule deer and elk), I’ve unquestionably settled on the 10x50’s. Here's my justification:

Exit Pupil (diameter of the column of light that exits the ocular lens and enters your eye).
8x42 - 5.25mm
10x42 - 4.2mm
10x50 - 5mm
12x50 - 4.1667mm

The human eye optimizes around an exit pupil of 5mm. Much smaller and you're leaving light on the table, much more and you're carrying extra bulk that your eye can't use. So 10x42 and 12x50 are out.

12x is too hard to handhold. Lots of guys will say you can, but whenever guys say "buy a 12x50, it's still possible to handhold effectively," the inflection in their voice sounds almost as if they're even trying to convince themselves that what they're saying is true. It's not true across the board obviously, but objectively, lower mag = easier to handhold, especially one hand while bow hunting. I don't want separate binos for rifle vs. bow hunting, so the 10x and 8x win out again. here

So we've already eliminated the 12x50 from contention. Exit pupil is too small, and too hard to handhold. That leaves 8x42, 10x42, and 10x50. The 10x42 is eliminated here because of the small exit pupil (relative to the two other choices).

The magnification is a personal choice thing. The exit pupils between the 8x42 and 10x50 are effectively the same, with just a 0.25mm difference. But the additional 2 magnification of the 10x vs 8x does the same thing that jumping from a 10x to 12x does, but you're not giving up light. Basically, it gives the best tradeoff of FOV, light transmission, hand-hold-ability, and magnification you could hope for in a dedicated western hunting optic.

If I ever hunted back east, I might consider the 8x42. But I live in the rocky mountains and am an unapologetic western hunter, so the 10x50 is my huckleberry. My family and the guys I've hunted with have all jumped on the train as well and have become believers.

This is just my opinion, keep in mind. I'm sure lots of guys will argue an opposing viewpoint, and that's ok. But that's my justification of a 10x50 for dedicated western hunting.

I hand hold 12x42nls and came from 12x50 els, the nls handhold much better, I honestly don’t feel like you gain much handholding until you get to the 8x42s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[nobody]

I hand hold 12x42nls and came from 12x50 els, the nls handhold much better, I honestly don’t feel like you gain much handholding until you get to the 8x42s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Like I said in my post, it’s a 99%-ish thing. There’s people who can handhold 12’s or even 15’s, but IME lower power=easier handholding, even if it’s just a little easier. It’s all a balancing act and tradeoffs, and everyone has to arrive at their own conclusions.

I would also argue that your perception is likely skewed with the insanely wide FOV in those NL’s, which helps hide the shake most people get from handholding. While I’m not a fan of the NL’s, I wouldn’t be surprised if that increased FOV helps diminish the effects of higher magnification. Not trying to argue, I believe YOU 100% can handhold your 12’s effectively, but very few people can do so effectively for extended periods of time, which is why I said what I did in my post.

 

[WRO]

Like I said in my post, it’s a 99%-ish thing. There’s people who can handhold 12’s or even 15’s, but IME lower power=easier handholding, even if it’s just a little easier. It’s all a balancing act and tradeoffs, and everyone has to arrive at their own conclusions.

I would also argue that your perception is likely skewed with the insanely wide FOV in those NL’s, which helps hide the shake most people get from handholding. While I’m not a fan of the NL’s, I wouldn’t be surprised if that increased FOV helps diminish the effects of higher magnification. Not trying to argue, I believe YOU 100% can handhold your 12’s effectively, but very few people can do so effectively for extended periods of time, which is why I said what I did in my post.

I don’t do extended periods, maybe 25% of the time.

Of the 12s they’re by far the easiest to hand hold.