Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics How fancy a binocular do I really need?

Some binoculars that retail now for $500 that are good or even better than the best from the 1980's.

Yes, all binoculars have improved in the past 25 years, but the lower end has improved the most, by far. Anybody who doesn't believe that hasn't looked through enough recent binoculars.

I have several recent "alpha" binoculars, and they are great. I especially use my Leica 8+12 Duovid for open-country glassing, but also use my 10x42 Swarovski EL a lot, and have a Zeiss Victory 8x32 that's great for closer glassing. But I also have around 30 other lower-priced binoculars that also work very well, some so close to the "alphas" that there's almost no practical difference.

One of my buddies is a total Swarovski slut, and is always talking about how they're the ONLY binoculars (and scopes) to own. If somebody has that kind of money, why not? But he has also been blown away by the quality some of my lesser-priced binoculars. I don't think he's going to switch anytime soon, but he doesn't talk about how Swarovskis blow away everything else nearly as much anymore.

That is great news for a guy like me - without the unlimited budget. What I'm trying to do is sort out the best thing I can for $500-$700. I really don't care what the name on the package is - the only one I need to impress is me. I do want a nice quality rig that will last me for a few years and not feel like I'm missing something that a 'better' bino would provide. Thanks for your inputs.

for 500-700 id get either a meostar or conquest hd

I have a pair of the zeiss HD conquests in a 8x42 and I really like them. I gave my Leica 8x32 ultravids to my wife to use

Sitting in a deer stand in the Connecticut woods hoping for the first legal buck isn't quite as demanding as other types of hunting.

Just saying...

Cabelas Euro HD

Why am I not surprised that the extent of hunting for that buffoon is a treestand in suburbia? Why am I further not surprised that he would be in Connecticut?

Shrapnel?

A couple years ago we bought my dad a set of Swaro 10x42 SLC NEU from shrapnel for Christmas at a great price. He was absolutely blown away, as his previous top glass was a set of Aus Jena 10x40s from the early 1980s. The next fall we were out hunting in West River country of SD and we were watching a herd of mule deer about a mile off when the rancher's son and grandson pulled up, wondering what we were looking at. We pointed out the white butts in the distance and the grandson put up his obviously cheap 8x Bushnell binos and stated, "I think there's about four deer over there, but I don't see any horns." I said to him, "There are six deer, three big does, two yearlings or fawns, and one nice 4x4." He looked again through his binos and disagreed with me. I said, "Here, let's trade." We both looked through the swapped binos and said, "Holy schitt!" for absolutely different reasons. He drives a brand new Chevy HD pickup and uses a nice rifle, but spent $80 on binoculars. Oops. He quickly wanted to know what kind of binoculars those were and where he could get some. Last fall he had a set of olive green binos with a silver hawk on the housing hanging around his neck...

I've owned several Swarovski bin's... I liked them, and I think Swarovski is a very good company, that makes a very good product, which also happens to have the very best marketing of The Big Three, as well as the best after sale Consumer Service (something which prices Swaro several hundred dollars more than Leica or Zeiss).

They're smart in that they ignored going with the traditional black color, going primarily green instead. Then they engineered their bins with a unique open shape to make them stand out all the more. Then they give them to guides and industry people at dramatically reduced cost, further cementing the idea that guides think "they're the best."

The consumers follow along like sheep.

For me, Swarovski lost their way with Swarovision. The human eye doesn't work like the flat field of the Swarovision does, and to many of us it's an unpleasant experience. A flat field is something all mfg's know how to do, they're just smart enough to not do it (apart from a few in the Nikon lineup).

To me, it's yet another gimmick on Swarovski's part to set themselves apart from Leica and Zeiss... however this time, for many of us, it's a failure.

And their objective covers, unlike the previous SLC covers, completely suck..

YMMV.

ive never looked thro swaro binos. just dont c how they can be a thousand bucks or so better than a meopta meostar

For the sake of complete honesty, I purchased the Zeiss ClassiC 10x40 binos that shrapnel had up for sale in December for a great price. A couple of weeks ago I got together with dad and mom for lunch and I told him to bring along his Swarovski binos. We ate lunch then went out to a nearby city park and then a wildlife management area. We couldn't discern a noticeable difference in clarity or optical quality between the two. My main criticism between the two is that the Swaro twist-up eye cups are very sweet and much more convenient than the fold down rubber cups on my Zeiss. Dad simply salivated at the Zeiss binos, as he is 72 y/o now and has always been certain that Zeiss are the absolute best, but he also loves the Swaros that we bought him. I would be happy with either one. The other comparison we had for glass was a set of Zeiss Telexem 6x24 that were made in 1936 and I purchased for $40 shipped and then I paid NRC Optics $87 to go through them and clean them up. In good daylight, the 6x24 binos are just as good as the modern binocs, though I'm sure they aren't waterproof, shockproof, fogproof, and in the evening and morning they simply aren't as bright as the 10x40 Zeiss. I just sent the OP a link to the classifieds that a guy is selling a set of 8x32 Swaro SLC NEU for $625 shipped.

I have spent what I felt was a good bit of money on touted binoculars in the past. No - not Swaro or Leica money but the pair du jor. I will actually admit still being caught up in some inexplicable want to justify owning a pricey new pair.

That said, I find I can just not get past what fraction -of-the-cost low excitement porros give me instead. If a comfortable and technically apportioned 7x35 porro ever comes out I would likely never buy after that again.

Doesn't mean I wouldn't gush over someone else's Swaro EL's but- there you have it.

Well why not go look through some $300-500 binos and see what you think? I got a pair of Weaver Grand Slam 8.5x45 binos that are really all I need for $200 on sale a couple of years ago and have been very satisfied with them.

I'm a gun and boot nut more than a fancy optics snob....



That and I'm afraid to really use a nice set of bino's....grin

Not 'use' so much in the hunting sense, more along the lines leave in the pickup, get dirty, scratched up. Theft, puppy dog chew toy, etc..

Thinking about it my hunting bino's have become truck bino's this Winter...


Only pair I've bought and used in the last 6-7 years.


$300 pair of Nikon ATB's.


To my poor eyes a fresh set of contacts makes more difference in being able 'to see chit' than a $$$ set of bino's.

I used to not worry about binos too much, but a while back I made the mistake of trying out a Leica Trinovid and that was that for me. So I saved some money for a good while and wound up with a Meopta Meostar.

Overall feel, seems like it would be the deciding factor. That and an obvious 'good' view.

Same goes for high end scopes too.

I love my Minox HG 8x33 MIG. Got them from Cameraland for $647.