T
timmy
Guest
85 and you are exactly right I get tired of lugging it around. It’s probably 6 years old or so.
Point of diminishing returns
- Thread starter JGJohnson
- Start date
Dinkshooter
Well-known member
Keep the faith, they told me Dec 2nd when I sent in mine right about October 1st. It was 2 weeks or so early. I imagine every wanker like me in the US is sending in their broken crap between August and December now. Pro tip, Don't leave your tripod unattended in the wind, it wouldn't buff out.
Yes but in all fairness it was your EL VS the second generation Geovids. Looking into the low sun was not even close between them. I am sure the non-range finder units are better but without doing a side by side it's anyones guess how much. Things like looking into a sunset or sunrise is one thing people forget to test when comparing optics. To me that is a bigger factor than just clarity. My eyes are not good enough to see much difference at high sun on a sunny day between a 700 vs 2k bino but when it comes to edge clarity and low sun I can see differences. That is why comparing inside a cabelas store is useless. Glassing a hillside into a low sun is the best way to compare binos.Leica is dogshit compared to Swarovski eL. Even without the range added in. Where is @schmalts to confirm ?
Last edited:
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
Hard to go wrong with the Swar 10x42SL, but if you want to keep poking around, I think the top end Mavens are an amazing value. Also, if you are really particular about your binos, the bird watching sites are more discerning than the hunting sites if you ask me.
In general I have not been impressed in the Maven stuff I've looked through, but the set of 9x45's I fondled were pretty outstanding. If I were shopping for binos I'd take a hard look at them.
I have 8x42 Nikon Monarch ATBs. I snatched them up for about $50.00 when Cabela’s had them listed wrong on their website. I thought they were pretty nice until I bought a pair of Zeiss Conquest HDs. After getting used to them, I couldn’t even look through the Nikons anymore. The difference was stunning. I’ve since sold the Conquests and upgraded to 8x42 SLCs and couldn’t be happier. I still have the Nikon ATBs. I borrow them out when friends need something to use. I’m set for life with my SLCs. I’ll never get rid of them.
The Swaro rangefinding binos do not have the same glass as the regular ELs. I’d not recommend sacrificing glass quality for a rangefinding feature that will eventually be obsolete.
D
Deleted member 16014
Guest
To me a good value in glass is a used alpha. Zeiss and Swaro glass work best with my eyes, and I get a rolling ball with the field flattened models. I'm with Dink, I'd downgrade rifles long before going backward in glass quality.
TimeOnTarget
Well-known member
Like most everyone else has said, Grab some Swaro EL's and never think about it again.
Cornell Cowboy
Well-known member
I feel like this question gets asked a lot. Here's my response from a previous thread again (based on my own experiment a few years ago): https://www.hunttalk.com/threads/compare-swarvoski-slc-10x42-binos-with.290805/page-2#post-2850497
I bought the SLCs 10x42, Zeiss Victory T* FL 10x42, Nikon Monarch 7 8x42, and the Vortex Viper HD 10x42 all at the same time and spent a little over a month off and on in the field under varying light conditions. The Vortex was okay, but clearly not as good as the other three. The Zeiss and Swarovski were the best, so most of the month was spent comparing them. I ultimately picked the Zeiss and have never looked back. In the lowest light, the Zeiss are brighter; the SLCs may have had slightly better contrast. The biggest difference I saw was during bright light glassing towards the sun: the Zeiss had much better internal baffling to stop the reflective flashing. The Nikon's cost $1000 less than either the Swarovski or Zeiss but the difference between them was VERY small. I ended up keeping them too because I thought they were such a good value relative to their performance. In short, from what I've looked at, Zeiss is the best... but you would struggle to see the difference from a $400 pair of Nikon Monarch 7. So even though I use Zeiss, I recommend the Nikon's to most everyone I meet.
It was actually hard not to choose the Swaros just because of "peer pressure" from hunting forums like this, but the reality was that Zeiss was better (from a scientific perspective, their lens system yields the best light transmission...period.) Most birding forums agree with this as well. Still, I really doubt that you need it--from the point of diminishing returns, buy the Nikon Monarch 7.
I bought the SLCs 10x42, Zeiss Victory T* FL 10x42, Nikon Monarch 7 8x42, and the Vortex Viper HD 10x42 all at the same time and spent a little over a month off and on in the field under varying light conditions. The Vortex was okay, but clearly not as good as the other three. The Zeiss and Swarovski were the best, so most of the month was spent comparing them. I ultimately picked the Zeiss and have never looked back. In the lowest light, the Zeiss are brighter; the SLCs may have had slightly better contrast. The biggest difference I saw was during bright light glassing towards the sun: the Zeiss had much better internal baffling to stop the reflective flashing. The Nikon's cost $1000 less than either the Swarovski or Zeiss but the difference between them was VERY small. I ended up keeping them too because I thought they were such a good value relative to their performance. In short, from what I've looked at, Zeiss is the best... but you would struggle to see the difference from a $400 pair of Nikon Monarch 7. So even though I use Zeiss, I recommend the Nikon's to most everyone I meet.
It was actually hard not to choose the Swaros just because of "peer pressure" from hunting forums like this, but the reality was that Zeiss was better (from a scientific perspective, their lens system yields the best light transmission...period.) Most birding forums agree with this as well. Still, I really doubt that you need it--from the point of diminishing returns, buy the Nikon Monarch 7.
deer_shooter
Well-known member
I have the 10x42 SLC's and after using them exclusively for the last few years, I accidentally grabbed my pre-upgrade binos - a ~$500 pair from a popular manufacturer and the difference was night and day. What I once thought were really good binos was like looking through two coke bottles compared to the Swaros. When I went to upgrade, for me it came down to Swaro and Zeiss. I chose the former but I don't think I would have been disappointed with the latter.
sbhooper
Well-known member
A friend of mine was a hunting magazine editor for a few years. He did an honest side, by side comparison with several spotting scopes. He was critical of the Swarovski, over the other options at last light. He published the comparison and Swarovski got mad and pulled $28,000 in ad money. They told him that their products are built more with the bird watchers in mind, anyway. THAT is why you take everything that you read in a magazine, with a grain of salt. Money talks and it dictates a lot of the results with so-called "evaluations".
Personally, I have never felt like I spent enough hours glassing, to justify the extreme expense of some of this glass. I have used the lower-cost stuff, like Nikon Monarch and Vortex Diamondback with no issues and plenty of good viewing at last light. Now, if I was a guide, or spent long hours every day glassing, I am sure that I would try some of the high-dollar stuff.
Personally, I have never felt like I spent enough hours glassing, to justify the extreme expense of some of this glass. I have used the lower-cost stuff, like Nikon Monarch and Vortex Diamondback with no issues and plenty of good viewing at last light. Now, if I was a guide, or spent long hours every day glassing, I am sure that I would try some of the high-dollar stuff.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
I recall trying the (then new) Swarovision HD EL's at the Dallas Safari Show. They were especially clear and bright looking down the aisle toward the Brazilian Chartered Fishing bling models..not a fair assessment according to old fogey schmalts...but it was enough to tip my scale. Started with Swaro's by lucking into a steal on some fogged SLC's. Freight and free repair & they were good as new...parlayed them into a fair value trade for the EL HD years later. The SLC's were, IMO, a miniscule degree lower than the EL's.
A pair of used non HD SLC would be a damn good buy IMHO.
A pair of used non HD SLC would be a damn good buy IMHO.
idahohuntr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2013
- Messages
- 345
Interesting. Between a good friend and a neighbor I got my hands on both Swaro EL Range and Leica HDB3000 for a side by side comparison. I live on a hillside looking due West into a mountain range where I can spot deer and elk just about every day. Knowing the mid-day or inside the store comparisons were not a good test, I would get up before light and glass for deer and elk every morning (10 min pre shooting light and 30 minutes post)...evenings I would do the same. It was almost hair splitting on clarity in these low light conditions. I would give the nod to the Swaros on clarity, but I wouldn't describe it even close to how you guys saw it...very close performance, biggest advantage was looking at the edge of the glass. But for spotting deer and elk 1200-3000+ yards away, or counting tines on bucks/bulls at some distance in low light...I wouldn't describe one as garbage and the other superior. I went into the comparison biased towards Swaro's...I wanted to find a reason to eliminate the Leica's...but for a RF bino, under the conditions I compared, and given the features I previously mentioned...Leica was the winner for my eyes and wants/needs. I mostly post this in case anyone else is considering a similar purchase and finds value in other's experiences. I did not do any side by side comparisons with other alpha glass...just the Swaro's and Leica's. In general I basically had these pro's/con's:
Swaro EL Range: Slight advantage in clarity, no practical advantage though. Better ergonomics, slightly smaller/lighter, better focus adjustment, better resale value, better warranty/repair
Cons: more expensive, left side range button, min range distance 33 yards,
Leica HDB 3000: Lower cost, Right side range button (only an advantage to RH bowhunter; LH bowhunters would have the opposite view of Swaro v. Leica), RF superior in all aspects (info, ballistics capability, readout display, etc.) although most of the features - for my hunting - did not offer any major practical advantages in rifle hunting. I do think if you are a muzzy hunter or bow hunter - the Leicas offer very practical advantages - with archery, I want to be able to range 10, 20, 30 yards. For muzzy hunting, being able to input ballistics and get a readout of holdover amount right from my binos...very helpful to quick and accurate shooting IMO.
I have heard Swarovski does not use their very best glass in the EL Range binos? I have no clue if that is true or not, but if so, were you comparing an EL Range to Leica HDB or were you comparing just an EL Bino (no RF) to a Leica? Perhaps that explains some of the differences we observed? It could also just be my unrefined Idaho eyes that haven't had a lot of experience looking through bino's that cost more than my first car
I think you miss my point. The part about looking INTO the sunlight, not just the low light from being early or late. When looking into the sun some optics have terrible wash out from coating quality and internal baffles that do not control stray light. Again, compare at a low sun, but looking into that sun as well and see how well you can see contrasting objects. My Geovids looked like a fog rolled in compared to the EL's. And again this is not about comparing 2 binos and more about what condition that you need to put yourself into when comparing. So when you say you look due west, in the early morning you are having the sun on your back doing the opposite of what I am advising to do. Me and Greenhorn compared binos earlier that afternoon and at that time I could not see a $$$ difference in image quality. As the sun was ready to dip below the same hillside I was glassing we switched again and Stevie Wonder could have seen the difference. I was advised by someone, qualified or not that the reason that earlier version of the ranging bino was so bad in this situation was because the laser had to enter back into the objective. So to keep the laser from not penetrating the objective a different coating was used. I cannot say if this is accurate but it sure sounds plausible. All I can say is I have had $400 binos out perform that version of Geovid in that situation.Interesting. Between a good friend and a neighbor I got my hands on both Swaro EL Range and Leica HDB3000 for a side by side comparison. I live on a hillside looking due West into a mountain range where I can spot deer and elk just about every day. Knowing the mid-day or inside the store comparisons were not a good test, I would get up before light and glass for deer and elk every morning (10 min pre shooting light and 30 minutes post)...evenings I would do the same. It was almost hair splitting on clarity in these low light conditions. I would give the nod to the Swaros on clarity, but I wouldn't describe it even close to how you guys saw it...very close performance, biggest advantage was looking at the edge of the glass. But for spotting deer and elk 1200-3000+ yards away, or counting tines on bucks/bulls at some distance in low light...I wouldn't describe one as garbage and the other superior. I went into the comparison biased towards Swaro's...I wanted to find a reason to eliminate the Leica's...but for a RF bino, under the conditions I compared, and given the features I previously mentioned...Leica was the winner for my eyes and wants/needs. I mostly post this in case anyone else is considering a similar purchase and finds value in other's experiences. I did not do any side by side comparisons with other alpha glass...just the Swaro's and Leica's. In general I basically had these pro's/con's:
Swaro EL Range: Slight advantage in clarity, no practical advantage though. Better ergonomics, slightly smaller/lighter, better focus adjustment, better resale value, better warranty/repair
Cons: more expensive, left side range button, min range distance 33 yards,
Leica HDB 3000: Lower cost, Right side range button (only an advantage to RH bowhunter; LH bowhunters would have the opposite view of Swaro v. Leica), RF superior in all aspects (info, ballistics capability, readout display, etc.) although most of the features - for my hunting - did not offer any major practical advantages in rifle hunting. I do think if you are a muzzy hunter or bow hunter - the Leicas offer very practical advantages - with archery, I want to be able to range 10, 20, 30 yards. For muzzy hunting, being able to input ballistics and get a readout of holdover amount right from my binos...very helpful to quick and accurate shooting IMO.
I have heard Swarovski does not use their very best glass in the EL Range binos? I have no clue if that is true or not, but if so, were you comparing an EL Range to Leica HDB or were you comparing just an EL Bino (no RF) to a Leica? Perhaps that explains some of the differences we observed? It could also just be my unrefined Idaho eyes that haven't had a lot of experience looking through bino's that cost more than my first car
Last edited:
idahohuntr
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2013
- Messages
- 345
I will give that a try. Did you see also see a big difference in lowlight conditions when you weren't looking into the sun...e.g., before sunrise or after sunset? What did you think of the rangefinder in the EL?
The Hedgehog
Well-known member
tip - if you're going to spend thousands on binoculars do not get a built in range finder.
T
timmy
Guest
For the applications I use mine for I wouldn’t buy a pair without range in them. I didn’t know there was that much difference in the glass of range and non rangefinding though that is interesting. To each their own I guess.
I had some mid-tier binoculars that I thought were pretty good and would hold their own against the "overpriced German glass" that I thought my buddies were foolish to have purchased. On a caribou hunting trip to Alaska in low and flat light conditions I learned why the German glass is worth the money. My binoculars were garbage compared to the two pairs of Swaros my hunting partners were toting. I saved my money and now carry Swaro 10x42 EL's and as I type have a 95mm ATX out for delivery on the FedEx truck. When I consider the amount of money I spend on gas, tags, rifles, ammo, etc the high end glass isn't hard to justify.
Not so much of a difference. But that day was an eye opener because after that I have a hard time using those optics anymore. It showed me what condition was worst case for some binoculars.
