Timberbuck,
Glad you enjoyed the view. You make some interesting comments, but the best one you made is the "IMO". That is what it gets down to. The more I look through more and more binoculars the more convinced I become, that dissecting differences is more or less akin to discussing things like "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" I have just about lost interest in that debate.
The comparisons of newer less expensive glass versus the more established, recognized alpha glass will never go away, and will probably never be solved. I have pretty plainly stated that I think the alpha class is a little better. I personally think the new SLC-HD is the best binocular ever produced. I would follow that with the Steiner Peregrine XP, newer non-swarovision EL, then the Zeiss FL. I wouldn't pay $2,400 for a Swarovision EL because of the effect the rolling ball has on me. I have also pretty plainly stated that I don't think the alpha (IMO) is worth the price for the improvement. You obviously think differently and that is fine by me.
You ask about my time afield with a high end glass and that's is good and quite reasonable question. I started looking for an alpha glass that said "buy me" in about 2005. I have been able to use both the Zeiss FL, Swarovski EL, and the Steiner Peregrine XP for stretches of at least a month to six weeks or more. I use a binocular every day for something, even if nothing else than "for just because it's there to use". So that amounts to more hours than I can account for. I also acknowledge that is less time than some have had with the same things. But I do realize the inherent dangers of taking a quick look at an optic and drawing review level conclusions based on that experience. I also think I have had at least as much time behind both alpha class and the better end of the best mid price stuff than many, if not most. I am still looking for the alpha glass than can separate far enough from the better mid price stuff to make me spend that much money on one single glass. The more I look, the more convinced I become that there is no real reason to spend more than $500 on a binocular. I will repeat that in all this looking, I have been looking for the rigt alpha too. The guys satisfied with their alpha will never quite grasp that, so the debate won't end, and that too is just fine by me. I'll probably add some more wood to that fire when I post the review of the Kruger Caldera later today and when I add my comments on the Steiner Predator Xtreme.
So my question to you becomes this. Since you tell me I made a mistake in not buying a Zeiss FL, can you tell me how much time you have had directly comparing the two, and just how does the Razor HD fall behind your Zeiss FL? Actually there are two questions, since you tell me that the Minox APO HG is a competing almost alpha comparison to the Razor HD, how does your experience with comparing the Razor HD compare to the Minox APO HG tell you the Minox is competitive? I've never seen the Minox and would really like to get my hands on one. They are certainly interesting on their face value, which seems to indicate this is a valid comparison. I'd be curious on your actual comparative comments.
