Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Why do you buy Alpha binos.?

maybe we should define alpha binoculars....
if an alpha binocular is one that cost in excess of a certain dollar amount, then there are only three , four , five.
if an alpha binocular is one that takes your breath away and gives a stunning, near perfect view, then there are dozens.

Yep.

But one of the things I have found interesting in the past few years is how many hunters pursue the latest, tiniest increments in performance--and are willing to spend a bunch of bucks to do so.

Sure, many binoculars in recent years will beat anything we could buy, at whatever price, 20 or more years ago. But a really good 1990 binocular will still be a really good 2011 binocular. If it's been taken care of and we know how to use it, why switch?

Optics are like that. My 1988 vintage Nikon 300 f/2.8 EDIF gives up very little--if anything--to the latest Nikon 300 f/2.8 ED auto focus lenses. And that's comparing Fuji Velvia transparencies of test patterns under 20x loupes.

I have a Nikon porro-prism 7x35 from the mid-1980's that is just as sharp and bright as any roof-prism of similar size made today. But the binoculars made today are often tougher, more waterproof and, well, stylish. But I bought the Nikon 7x35 for under $100, which even in 1985 wasn't very cool.

I'm fixing your quote just to make me feel better as once in a while I worry that I'm "missing out."

I don't think stacking lining up binocs works that well because ones eyes focus and adjust to each particular binoc , and stay focused as the next binoc is looked thru.. It takes a little time for things to settle down in the eye.. By the time you look thru several different binocs several times your eyes can be so screwed up it doesn't mean much. Using a model in varying conditions over lots of time tells much more.I hunt with way too many buys who think they have a "good as" binoc and it soon becomes obvious they are not coming close to seeing what I am as far as distance and definition...That is why I stay with my Swaro.My binos ride around in an airplane at 43000 feet unpressurzed baggage at -57 degrees C and take it again and again.. Not sure many could do that.

I have several pairs of Alpha glasses. However , my go to glases are an OLD pair Zeiss 8x28 roof prisms. Small and light very good glass any coating differences are minor.
The best thing is I can unbutton 1 button on my shirt and tuck them inside shirt, out of weather and keep lens fairly clean while hunting.
Cisco

+1 on JG's and Mule Deer's "thumbs up" on Leupold Gold Ring binoculars.

I'm running a pair of Leupold Gold Ring 10x40's in open country and Yosemite 6x30's in the woods.

The GR's are very sharp with great color saturation and contrast and are built like a tank. They compare very well side by side with the European alphas to my eye. I bought them on the classifieds here in as new condition for less than a quarter of what a Zeiss or Swaro would cost.

The Yosemite's are much less sturdy but are surprisingly useful, easy to sit behind, sharp, light weight and cost $79. They've held up great for two years now.

They're different horses for different courses, but I like them both. If I miss game, it's not their fault. You don't have to spend an arm and a leg these days to have a great view of critters.

+1. Alpha should be model specific, instead of associated with one particular brand. I consider Nikon SE alpha. But their Monarch is just another expensive mediocre binoculars.

Hawker,



I totally agree. Therefore this is a good statement.