Point of diminishing returns

J

JGJohnson

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2018
Messages
41
Location
Western Nebraska
The binoculars I have currently are okay, but far from great. They were what I could afford at the time. The lower quality is very noticeable at dawn and dusk, so basically when all the critters are moving. Thus, I am contemplating upgrading possibly this coming year, or for sure the next. I am willing to spend some coin this time around to get a quality set. However I am having a hard time discerning the difference between $500, $1200, $2000, and $3000. At what point do you feel you are no longer getting more bang for your buck? Where do you think the best value falls?

I would be looking at a 10X42/10X50 or possibly a 12X. Main uses would be glassing with some small amounts of still hunting. Western Nebraska, Colorado, and Wyoming for now. Deer, antelope, and elk.
 
You'll think you cannot tell the difference in glass, until you have excellent glass, use is a lot, and then have somebody hand you a pair of their "good, but not as expensive" glass to look through... Learned that in the 90s. Went Swarovski and never looked back. The 10x42 ELs are about untouchable in my opinion. The 8.5s would be a contender. There'd be no diminished return.
 
I once read a birdwatching article, where many binocular reviews are done, where experts were convinced that the mid price range binoculars ($1,000 range) were not worth the money, compared to the Nikon Monarch ATBs for around $300. They concluded that you have to go to the very top to get significant improvement over the Nikons. You’ll notice a big difference in decreased eye strain and low light capabilities with the Swarovski’s. I have the ELs and they are phenomenal.
 
JGJohnson said:
The binoculars I have currently are okay, but far from great. They were what I could afford at the time. The lower quality is very noticeable at dawn and dusk, so basically when all the critters are moving. Thus, I am contemplating upgrading possibly this coming year, or for sure the next. I am willing to spend some coin this time around to get a quality set. However I am having a hard time discerning the difference between $500, $1200, $2000, and $3000. At what point do you feel you are no longer getting more bang for your buck? Where do you think the best value falls?

I would be looking at a 10X42/10X50 or possibly a 12X. Main uses would be glassing with some small amounts of still hunting. Western Nebraska, Colorado, and Wyoming for now. Deer, antelope, and elk.
Click to expand...

The difference comes in low lights conditions. The difference between $700 Vortex bino's and my Swaro 10x50 EL's is huge with 20 minutes of shooting light left.
 
I could see the difference between my Leica 12x50bn and meopta 12x50 Hd. Meoptas “popped” for lack of a better description.
 
I’m there too with the Swarovski’s. If you’re making up your mind to go for European glass, check Zeiss too.
 
If you are a serious about glassing, the lower end binos will cause eye fatigue. I’ve had Swaros for around 20 years. Son has a pair of Nikon Monarchs that are good for the cost.
 
Most companies have good light transmission these days, but for enhancing contrast in low light, particularly browns and grays(fur colors) the Europeans still have the rest of the market beat. Top end Leupold is right there on their heels. The Japanese manufacturers are still behind in those aspects in my opinion.
 
I've been looking for a higher end range/bino for a while, finally settled on the Leica Geovid HDB 3000 rangefinding binos...I really wanted to go with Swaro EL range, but the 33 yard minimum range and left side range button were not something I could overlook as a right handed bowhunter. So far, I'm very impressed with the Leica glass...not even close to any lower cost Bino I've owned - and the rangefinder is awesome. Probably the only downside is the size...they are a fair bit larger than other 10x42's I've owned, only slightly larger than the Swaro EL range binos though.
 
The Leica binos I've looked through seemed ok but every Leica spotter I've looked through was just a touch better than a Tasco I thought. I call them Lickas to my buddy, as in they Licka my ba#&#.

Bought my Swaro SLCs in 2003. Bought a Swaro spotter I shared with my brother until he moved away then bought my own. I'd rather forget my rifle than my Swaros when headed out the door. YMMV.
 
Last edited:
Swaro 10x42 SLC’s for me. I love them and have never regretted spending the money. It really blew my mind how much earlier pre dawn you can start picking things out. After a few hunts where I glassed a lot I knew it was time to upgrade
 
I will add that I did have to send my swarovski’s in for repair this year. They received them 10/10/2019 and I still haven’t got them back. Sure have missed those things. A little annoyed at the wait time but the glass is worth it.
 
Greenhorn said:
When it comes to spotters the Zeiss is great. Binocs not bad.
Click to expand...
I have a zeiss diascope the lower magnification is great but I’m not that impressed at the higher magnification. If they weren’t so expensive I would move on from that spotter.
 
timmy said:
I have a zeiss diascope the lower magnification is great but I’m not that impressed at the higher magnification. If they weren’t so expensive I would move on from that spotter.
Click to expand...
Is it a 65 or 85? Really like my 12 year old 85, except when my fat arse gets tired of packing it around. Still worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Bulldog0156
Zeiss Conquest HD vs Swaro EL: My observations
Replies
12
Views
3K
kiwi hunter
K
W
WTS Seekins Havak Custom Bartlein Carbon 300wm
Replies
2
Views
913
Wind Gypsy
W
T
Deadfall and Deadlegs
Replies
5
Views
1K
thomas89
T
tomengineer
Optics Best Value and Key Price Points
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
schmalts
S
G
Long term application strategy
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
WapitiBob
W

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
113,675
Messages
2,029,345
Members
36,279
Latest member
TURKEY NUT

Share this page

Back
Top