Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Which binoculars for all around use

I need to get some binoculars. I had 10x42 SLC before and liked them. I had them before the EL series came out. Now that I am in the market for a replacement, and I can go in any direction, I'd like some advice. Cost is not a factor. Best tool, period. If they were all on the table, and you were to pick one to take home free, which one.

Basic fundementals...
8 vs 10 magnification.
30s or 40s for objective lense.

Leica

Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD
Leica 8x42 Ultravid HD
Leica 10x32 Ultravid HD
Leica 10x42 Ultravid HD

Rangefinder
Leica 8x42 Geovid HD
Leica 10x42 Geovid HD


Swarovski

Swarovski 8x32 EL
Swarovski 8.5x42 EL
Swarovski 10x32 EL
Swarovski 10x42 EL

Swarovski 8x32 SLCnew
Swarovski 8x42 SLC HD
Swarovski 10x42 SLC HD


Zeiss

Zeiss 8x32 Victory FL
Zeiss 8x42 Victory FL
Zeiss 10x32 Victory FL
Zeiss 10x42 Victory FL

Rangefinder
Zeiss 8x45 Victory RF
Zeiss 10x45 Victory RF


I tend to lean to the 10x42. Without running these side by side, I think I'm considering the Leica 10x42 Geovid HD so I can eliminate the need for a seperate/additional tool in the backpack. I have no idea if the rangefinding binoculars are as clear as the non. I plan on running a test, but I'd like to have the list down to no more than 4.

Thanks in advance for the help.

Zeiss 8x42 or 8x45. Personally I prefer to have a separate rangefinder. 8x magninfication is all you (at least I) need.

8x42 or 10x42 SLC HD. Ergos are flat out fantastic as is the glass. I'd compliment it with a Leica crf 1200 or Swaro 8x30 laser range finder. If I had to have an all in one I'd pick the Geovid 10x42 HD.

Reasons for SLC HD (since you gave us a list):
Zeiss FL is flat out awesome, but felt like a brick in my hands.
Swarovision can actually make you nauseous while scanning the horizon if you're susceptible to the "rolling ball" from the field flattener lenses.
Swaro has the best service in the business, with possible exception of Leupold.

BTW, there's nothing wrong with any of those you listed. This is just my opinion.

Leica 10x42 Geovid HD

I'm a Leica fan. Because they extensively test their stuff to the Nth degree before selling it and do whatever it takes to get it right. I have never seen any proof that anybody matches their standard.
I especially like the lenths they go to to make a really reliable glass.
I suspect the optical or image clarity difference between the Geovid and the standard Ultravid is pretty small. By all means, try them out.
I'd also recommend that you try a 10X and an 8X. Afterall, what I'd do and be happy with might not please you.
I'd also recommend that you check out the latest and best from Nikon. E

In the 32's, I'd pick the Leica U-vid HD 8X32. In fact, I did just that. Superb little bino! The view makes you forget you're using such a compact midsize bino.

In the 42's, it would be a tough choice between 8X42 SLC HD or 8X42 Zeiss FL.

I prefer 8X over 10X for an all-around bino. 8X gives you wider FOV, more depth of field, a "brighter" image, a more comfortable view with less eye fatigue, and optical aberrations are less noticeable with less magnification. The greater depth of field means you're fiddling with the focus knob less while in the field because more stuff is in sharp focus. When viewing objects at long range, I can see almost as much detail with 8X as 10X because hand tremors are less noticeable with less magnification.

I own both 8X and 10X binoculars, and I almost always grab my 8's when I carry binos.

I don't particularly want a combination rangefinder / binocular, because electronic devices are much more likely to fail than an all-mechanical optic. Then, you have a binocular that's much bulkier and more complex than it has to be by virtue of the added RF feature. I much prefer to by a compact rangefinder and carry it separately. I'm not spending anywhere near as much time behind the RF as I am the bino, so why have an overweight bino to house something I won't be using most of the time? Plus, I'm pretty sure that adding the RF has a slight negative impact on optical quality.

Swarovski 10x42 EL

Not a bad one in the bunch.....

Leica 10x42 HD Ultravid.

Personally, I would go with the Swaro 8x42 SLC HD. Swaro has managed somehow to sharpen the resolution of the new top end over the previous EL and SLC by another arc second or do. They are down to 2 arc seconds, which is more than eyes can use. If you go with the SV EL be SURE you try first, that flat field business has made rolling ball an issue for a significant amount of people . Don't worry if it will be an issue, you will know it real quick. I have never had an issue with it until I picked up the new SV EL. For me the rolling ball makes the new EL unusable. It may or may not affect you. For my money the SLC HD is the best binocular on the market.

Swavorski 8x42 SLC HD - since $$$$ is no object!

Swarovski EL 8.5x42

I would seriously consider an 8x42 over a 10x42 if I were you.

And my number one pick at this time would be the new Swarovski SLC HD. Its a toss up between The SLC HD and the Zeiss VIctory FL as far as optics go but the SLC HD has better build quality.

But, you could save quite a bit of money by buying the Zeiss-A demo or lightly used one-see them go for around $1200 quite often.

Spend the rest of the money on a separate range finder.


As good as the range finding binos are they are not quite as good as the flagship binos. (zeiss, Leica)

Or the 8's. Either one are awesome.

IMO, the Swarovski EL 10 x 42 are hard to beat. If I were to go to the newer Swarovision, I might consider the 8.5 x 42.

donsm70

Lieca 8X42 Ultravid, but the Swaro 8X's would work too....

For all day, all around use,the 8X's are steadier for me than 10X.

Hand's down my choice. 8x32 EL my second choice. I have no third choice and would not be happy with a Zeiss 8x32Fl after having owned one.

I've used 8x30-ish glass for twenty five years and have never found a need for 42mm glass. I use my binoculars every day and have had the chance to compare my 8x32 Leica's against a Swaro 10x42 on game (on a daily basis) for the last year... I can't find any reason, having compared them constantly, to chose a 10x42 of any kind.

The 8x42 is good stuff and offers a very slightly more relaxed view, but not enough that I'd want their extra weight or bulk.

The 8x32 Leica is the compromise I make... and rest assured, any binocular is a compromise weighted in one direction or another.

I have run Swaro 8x32's HARD and my Leica 8x42 even harder. I use my glasses year round in all kinds of weather. I am working with some Swaro 10x50's as well and am not nearly as impressed with them as I am the Leicas in the same class. The Swaro 8x32's and the Leica 8x42's are beat up and have been ridden down the mountain NUMEROUS times over the last 12 years. I have dropped them on the pavement in my driveway more times than I can remember. I have dropped them in the rocks up hunting, filled them full of dirt and mud, drowned them in rivers and lakes and they just keep going.

I used to really like Zeise, but the eye relief/field of view was not as large and clear as the other two brands. I would go with the Leica 10x40's with a close second to the 8x42's. Flinch

I bring them home and wash them off in the sink with dish soap and a tooth brush. They get a lot of the dirt and grit in focus nob and eye cups after a hard hunt. I don't baby my glass, but I do take care of the lenses. I want to see what holds up, because my success and the success of my hunters depends on good glass. Both have been through hell and back. For my eyes and money, Leica is a better product over Swarovsky by quite a bit. I was a diehard Swaro fan until I ran Leica. This is not meant to ruffle feathers, just my personal findings with a lot of experience in the field with both. Leica's are a bit heavier, but I fully believe it is due to better innards. The Swaros have lost a bit of clarity, perhaps due to wiping the lenses off with a shirt sleeve so many times in the field ;o) They are also substantially looser in the adjustments. The Leicas have absolutely been flawless and amazing in every way and have taken MUCH more abuse than the Swaros. Flinch

I do like the Swarovski El's. I also just bought a set of the Steiner Peregrine XP's and I am supprised for almost half the cost I think I like them more then my swarvos.

Don't remember if it was here or another forum but I posted after trying the Leica Geovids. Not really a review so much as a need to profess the pure visual elation that came from the 8x42 Geo HD's. I have some of the best glass for the money bin's (Nikon SE's, Zen's ED and Fujinons, KOMZ BPO) and have tried the Leica Ultravids, which didn't agree with my eyes, but those GEO 8x's were REALLY something.
After some looking I found that the coatings applied to maximize the laser recovery pushes the view to the red or blue, (don't remember exactly) end of the spectrum thus enhancing certain color renditions and making it (to my eyes) freakin' awesome (for lack of better words).
The 10x's seemed a bit constricted. No less brilliant but the psychological effect, to me, deterred from the enjoyment.

Thanks for the honest reply. I own Leica 8x32 Trinovids and 8x42 Ultravid HD's. I cannot say anything better about them than you have. My money is on Leica. I also have a pair of Meopta 12x50's that seem to be some darn good glass in a tough package at a more than fair price. Certainly no bad choices here.