Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Ask The Gunwriters "Cheap" binoculars

I like my 30+ year old 7x35WW Stieners.

They are armored and might need to be re-coated if they still do that.

Got them from the Father in law one year fir Christmas.

yukon254,

While I never said all "cheap" binoculars are close to Big Three Alpha in quality, I have seen several instances where Asian binoculars were definitely better than SOME alphas. A couple of instances included a 2003 mule deer hunt in the Missouri Breaks where I was a sort-of back-up guide to an outfitter friend who was guiding an Eastern friend.of mine named Pete, who'd just purchased an alpha 10x42. I happened to have brought along a Japanese 10x42, which I already knew was a little better than the alpha--because I'd been running tests with it for several months, including "blind" tests with other people. While we were glassing late one day, Pete was getting frustrated because he wasn't seeing all the same deer the outfitter and I were (can't recall exactly what binocular what the outfitter used, but it was good). I finally handed Pete my Japanese glass, which cost about half as much as his alpha, and he then COULD see more deer through it.

The other example took place in Alaska in 2009. I was bear hunting with a young guide who'd just spent around $1200 on a new 10x42 of another alpha brand, while I had the first Chinese-made binocular I was really impressed with. After a couple of days the young guide was too, again because I was out-spotting him, and then handing him my binocular. In fact, at the end of the hunt I gave him my "cheap" binocular (which cost less than half of his, and he then used it for sheep guiding that fall.

Now, there are more relevant details. First, even alpha binocular manufacturers make different "grades," and both the alphas in these examples were then the "lowest" grade from each manufacturer. Plus, within the next year each alpha manufacturer brought out a new and improved version of the same binoculars that was out-performed by Asian glass. They then were probably at least as good, or even better than the Asian binoculars.

But the major point, which I thought was made in the article pretty plainly, was that ALL binoculars have continued to improve rapidly over the past 30 years, basically since phase-correction coating was introduced in roof-prism binoculars, finally making them the optical equal of Porro-prisms. Some of the Asian binoculars have matched or surpassed certain alpha binoculars made at the same time--and the alpha com-panies responded by improving their products.

But anybody who firmly believes ALL binoculars of any alpha brand are far superior to ANY binoculars made by "lesser" companies has been mistaken for several decades. In fact, some Nikons and Japanese Bausch & Lombs made in the early 1990's were basically alphas--though they cost just about as much too. And some European brands not usually considered in the "alpha" group are also just as good, or very close, to some alphas, including Kalhles, Meopta, Minox and Steiner--and Meopta binoculars in particular have the reputation of being as tough as any hunting binoculars available.

I Can understand why many guides buy alpha glass. It's one way to be sure they're getting top optical quality. But it isn't the only way, and hasn't been for a while now.

John,

Thanks for the detailed post.

In a story too long to tell, but involving Leupold graciously replacing a "knockabout" 10x50 Porro-prism I clumsily knocked out of alignment with a much more expensive 10x50 roof-prism I will not risk to "knockabout" use, I find myself in need of another "knockabout" binocular. Leupold has clearly earned some loyalty from me, and based on your experience I am going to buy a Yosemite Porro-prism.

Finally, my question. I feel the 10 x 30 are a bit small in exit pupil. The 6 x 30 have a great exit pupil, but may be a bit down in magnification for me. You often mention the Yosemite 6x30. I am considering the 8x30. Do you have any experience with that model? (It seems that sometimes one size in a model line for some reason ends up "better" than its siblings. Hence, my question.)

Thanks so much,
Gun Doc

Once I'm satisfied with the quality of view of a bino and spotter, I ask myself three things: Do I think the glass will hold up? Do I think the company will be around years from now?, And is the warranty and CS is as good in practice as is often claimed in the advertising?

Case(s) in point: My beloved 1st gen Bushnell Custom 7x26's are plumb wore out, the lens coatings are scratched and/or flaking, the faux leather is cracked, the damn medallion on the focus wheel even fell off. David Bushnell may not have started the outsourcing to Asia thing, but he probably perfected it. In the intervening 37 years since I bought the 7x26's, Bushnell has changed hands twice and when that happens any possibility of repairing my Customs are long gone. Luckily, I purchased a LNIB identical pair about 15 years ago.

On the flip side, when my 15 year old 2nd gen 7x30 SLC's began growing the Dreaded Crystals, a phone call to Swaro's repair facility--located right here in the USA--resulted in my 7x30's being entirely updated and landing on my front porch three weeks later.

When my 25+ year old 1st gen 8x30 SLC's focus became notchy, they were sent off to Swaro and three days after I put them in the mail I received an email from Swaro laying out two options; Swaro would restore the binocular back to original condition for free, but the email pointedly mentioned that the 1st gen SLC's "were not up to current Swarovski standards", or I could have a full update, including the latest prisms--for $500.

Now, I could have probably found a pair of Asian semi-alphas for $500, but the fact that Swaro has demonstrated to myself and friends the quality of their CS and warranty, and their business model that continues to include the ability to update previous optics makes the choice easy for me. Plus Swaro has gone to the effort of a fullhouse repair facility right here in the USA.

Most of the "new" optics companies are more of a re-seller of Asian optics than a company who makes optics (and yes I am aware the alphas make use of the other manufacturers also), but there is a lot more assurance that some of these optics companies will be around and servicing their optics when others may not be.

I'm decidedly middle class, even for the rural west, and it makes a difference for me to have a reasonable assurance for my investment (regardless if it's a $400 or a $2000 optic I buy) that companies will still be around and actually have somebody who speaks English to answer the phone.

My 30mm SLC's aren't as good as the 32mm Ultravids, Victorys, or ELs I've compared them to, but they are as good or better than the second tier "almost" alphas I've had a chance to look through. When it comes to optics, I have learned from personal experience and through experiences of friends the value of customer service and warranty. I think those things weigh significantly into the equation.

Casey,

All good points. In fact one of the Asian companies just mentioned, the one which sold the 10x42's I gave to my Alaskan guide in 2009, folded a year or so ago--because other, larger companies had "discovered" the same factory, and were now selling basically the same thing for a little less money.

However, when a friend (a very successful lawyer who still likes to save money) asked my opinion on bargain binoculars in 2012, I recommended a certain Asian brand. He looked through them, and looked through some alphas, and figured he could buy two of the Asians for less than one of the alphas. So he did, figuring the second was a good guarantee. He's still using the first one, and yes, he hunts a lot. (Oh, and the company selling the Asians is still in business, and offers a very good guarantee. I've never had to use it, while using several of their scopes and binoculars pretty hard.)

I've owned two of those older 30mm-SLC's, and eventually they did become second-tier--but unlike you, I had a chance to carefully compare them to many of what you call "second-tier" binoculars, and even 15 years ago they did not surpass them. But whatever.

Again, I've found it interesting that for many years Japanese cameras have dominated the professional photography business, where optics are far more often compared via the baseline of photo sales than by what hunters believe they see. Yet somehow Japanese-made binoculars can never equal those made by a very few companies in central Europe, and in fact some other binoculars made in central Europe by other long-time optics manufacturers somehow don't rate the same, even when they get great reviews on bird-watching websites, where binoculars are THE major tool of that sport--and some of those other companies have made parts, lenses and even complete optics for alpha companies.

But don't get me wrong. Three of the binoculars I have no intention of replacing, and hunt with often, are my Zeiss Victory 8x42, Swarovski EL 10x42, and Leica 8+12x42 Duovid. They all great glass, and if somebody can afford them, why not buy them? But I have had the opportunity, both in the field and under more controlled conditions, to test some recent, relatively inexpensive Asian binoculars with all three, and while the Asian stuff didn't quite match the alphas in some minor ways, they were very damned good. And certainly better than the best alpha stuff from 25 years ago.

MD, who makes the best 15X56 binocular?

At the moment, damned if I know. But wouldn't bet against Swarovski.

Are the Meopta’s close to Swarovski 15’s?

Yes.

I will keep my Swarovski's and Leica's. You only go around once. Binoculars are like chain saws. There are only a view brands that are worth buying.

I remember an article a few years back where Phil did some controlled testing throughout the season at his place. If I remember correctly he had everyone who came up that summer test the Alpha brands along with a few other brands of binoculars. Its been a long time ago that I read that but I think he said Zeiss was the overall winner.

DLSguide,

Good to know. Guess I'll quit testing various scopes, bullets, rifles, etc. based on the opinions of Campfire members who've never tried them.

John,

Have you called out any of the second tier binos that compare with the alphas in any of your articles or books? It would be great to compare some of the current offerings.

Concerning Japanese camera lens, I have learned--whether we're talking toys or tools--a company may make the best type of tool X, but not necessarily the best tool Y.
And Swarovski's 1st gen CL's are a good example of Swaro's attempt at a 2nd tier bino that didn't measure up to a LOT of other 2nd tier binos that cost less.

Casey,

I keep comparing all sorts of binoculars, and have been writing about such comparisons for over 25 years now both in articles and books. But apparently many people on this thread keep missing what I said in this post--that for the last 25 years optics have been in a state of constant flux. Which is why, after my first optics book appeared in 1999, I turned down a deal to write another book that would supposedly compare just about any hunting optics made.

My first book did have some comparisons, based on tests made by DEVA, the quasi--governmental German organization that tested a bunch of scopes. But any such comparison would be invalid "next year," the reason I turned the deal down. They talked somebody else into doing it, and the book immediately disappeared.

Instead, my first book described ways to test optics yourself, so hunters could go into a big sporting good store and make valid comparisons, other than what name was on the outside of the binocular. Which is why that book kept selling for years, though 15 years later I published another, to catch up with recent trends.

Yes, Japanese camera lenses vary in quality, as do binoculars with the same brand name on the outside. Which is exactly what I pointed out to others on this thread already. But apparently many simply can't comprehend that point, or choose to believe that even the most mediocre optics with a certain name on the outside are far better than anything else. Or the opposite, that anything NOT made by certain optics companies can't possibly be worth buying.

Excellent article and followup John. Too bad some cannot read what is written, as written.......

How does a WWI E L Lietz compare with others of its day.

I don't have access to many of the brands out there to test in person so what mid tier binocs that compete with the "alphas" are recommended by the crew here?

Mule Deer,

You have written a time or two about the favorable performance/price relationship of the Leupold Yosemite Porro-prism 6x30. Do you have any experience, knowledge, or opinion of the Yosemite 8x30 or 10x30? I'm currently thinking hard about the 8x30.

Thanks,
Gun Doc

Good thread

Good to know. I've never been able to afford Euro alpha glass.