Binocular Magnification

[RadSav]

Its funny that you say that about Leica....  I baby my stuff and have to send my Leica Geovid HDs in to have the objective lenses replaced from numerous cleaning scratches.  I have never scratched the lense of a Swaro.

Well, that is not good news.  I have not had a pair of Leica binos.  Glass on my rangefinders wore very well!  The Leitz I had were almost 30 years ago.  So I really have only second hand knowledge on how they compare these days.  The Canadian guides I know swear by them so I thought I'd try after the recent Swaro failures.  Could be just as bad or worse, I just don't know yet   I have been warned about the Geovid breaking!  That's why I'm giving the 7X Ultravid a try instead...we'll see, I guess.

[northwesthunter84]

I have the 10x42's and love them!

sent from my typewriter

[Magnum_Willys]

10x42's.   The 10x50 are a lot heavier.  Can you get 12x42's ?  Those would tempt me.  Definitely not 8x42.

Viper HD's look great.

[bobcat]

I just got the 10x42 Vipers. I'll post next week how I like them. Plan on getting out sometime in the next few days and try to find a bear. If I don't see any bears, surely I'll at least be able to look at some blacktail deer with the new binos.

[RadSav]

I've never heard anyone say that about Swarovski glass?   I've still got my first pair from 2001 (10x50 SLC) and they are still amazing.   I've owned 10 pair including the pair that I received today and they have all been incredible pieces of glass.   I just got done playing with my 15x56 HD and there is nothing in that power range that compares - WOW! is all I have to say.

Why would someone buy $20,000 worth of binoculars if the first $2,000 pair was that good?  No slam, just curious  

Even though I am happy with the B&L's I get drawn in by how freakin' orgasmic the new glass is that first year.  So I've got suckered in over and over again only to be disappointed a year or two later.  After $6K spent on a single brand I'm done and moving on to try something else!  Could have saved myself a crud load of cash if I had found just one single pair that kept that new car smell for more than a couple years
 

Likewise. I've looked through 10 and 20 year old Swaros that look as good as they did new. Sure, the newer glass may be a bit better than the older glass (better coatings, etc.) but I've never seen a pair degrade with age. What is the science behind this degradation?

That is beyond my expertise in science.  As mentioned I do not know what the reason behind it is or what the source of the degradation is.  Just that my personal experience and that of guys I know that spend a lot of time in the field each year seem similar with the newer products.  No Windex, no ammonia and no paper towels, nothing different that has been used on the B&L for over 20 years and the Leitz before that.

[huntnphool]

I keep spending big bucks on quality glass.  Yet I usually find myself going back to an old pair of B&L 7X35's (The old ones when B&L meant something).  Unless I'm hunting goats and need some long range evaluation of size I have no use for 10X.  Though it is getting harder and harder to find 7 or 8 power quality glass anymore.

Bought the wife some Swaro 8X last year.  The breakdown in quality from last year to this year is astonishing.  At this rate they will be as good as a pair of $200 Bushnell's in another two years.  Maybe Hoover or Dyson needs to start making binoculars as the newer glass seems to last about as long as a modern vacuum    I just continue growing more and more disgusted with all the binocular manufacturers.  Paying down payment on a house type of money and getting vacuum cleaner quality and longevity really chaps my ^$$!

I've got a new pair of Ultravid's on the way.  If they wear out in a year or two I expect I'm done buying new glass.  The old B&L will probably last until I'm too broken to hunt anyway.

I've never heard anyone say that about Swarovski glass?   I've still got my first pair from 2001 (10x50 SLC) and they are still amazing.   I've owned 10 pair including the pair that I received today and they have all been incredible pieces of glass.   I just got done playing with my 15x56 HD and there is nothing in that power range that compares - WOW! is all I have to say.

 I've never had a issue with my EL's, they are still clear and sharp afyer years of use.

[pope]

These will be my only binocs and used for both open county sage and east slope timber country.

Greater magnification is an advantage in open country, so consider the 10x option. It is my understanding that lower-magnification lenses perform better in low-light conditions, so for example, 8x42 should perform better than 10x42 in the woods as darkness approaches.

[RadSav]

These will be my only binocs and used for both open county sage and east slope timber country.

Greater magnification is an advantage in open country, so consider the 10x option. It is my understanding that lower-magnification lenses perform better in low-light conditions, so for example, 8x42 should perform better than 10x42 in the woods as darkness approaches.

I've always looked at it a different way.  In open country I might spend six to twelve hours a day behind the glass.  Where in timber I rarely spend more than three or four hours a day glassing.  So for me the 7-8.5X glass leaves me less strained and loopy at days end.  No question I would rather have 10X quality glass over 7X cheap glass, but quality being the same I personally prefer the medium power and reduced eyestrain.  And if I need to take a close look at something at the top of that mountain...that's what spotting scopes are for!

Also, I was always taught that power has almost nothing to do with low light performance.  Low light performance is about coatings and exit pupil diameter.  Meaning that if you have two pairs of binoculars of equal construction and coating low light performance is directly related to exit pupil size.  The average human eye dilates to a diameter of 5mm.  So if you have a pair of 8X20 bino's the exit pupil will be 2.5mm and you can not get enough light to the fully dilated eye.  If you have a pair of 10X50 binos the exit pupil will be almost equal to the full dilation of the eye at 5mm.  Thus the 10X50's will be brighter than the 8X20 or even a pair of 8x32.  This also states that you will get no more or no less brightness from an 8X42 than you would from an 8X50 of similar make and coating.  So be careful of falling into a trap thinking just going lower power is going to improve your low light performance.

[Bigshooter]

These will be my only binocs and used for both open county sage and east slope timber country.

Greater magnification is an advantage in open country, so consider the 10x option. It is my understanding that lower-magnification lenses perform better in low-light conditions, so for example, 8x42 should perform better than 10x42 in the woods as darkness approaches.

I've always looked at it a different way.  In open country I might spend six to twelve hours a day behind the glass.  Where in timber I rarely spend more than three or four hours a day glassing.  So for me the 7-8.5X glass leaves me less strained and loopy at days end.  No question I would rather have 10X quality glass over 7X cheap glass, but quality being the same I personally prefer the medium power and reduced eyestrain.  And if I need to take a close look at something at the top of that mountain...that's what spotting scopes are for!

Also, I was always taught that power has almost nothing to do with low light performance.  Low light performance is about coatings and exit pupil diameter.  Meaning that if you have two pairs of binoculars of equal construction and coating low light performance is directly related to exit pupil size.  The average human eye dilates to a diameter of 5mm.  So if you have a pair of 8X20 bino's the exit pupil will be 2.5mm and you can not get enough light to the fully dilated eye.  If you have a pair of 10X50 binos the exit pupil will be almost equal to the full dilation of the eye at 5mm.  Thus the 10X50's will be brighter than the 8X20 or even a pair of 8x32.  This also states that you will get no more or no less brightness from an 8X42 than you would from an 8X50 of similar make and coating.  So be careful of falling into a trap thinking just going lower power is going to improve your low light performance.

You are right about pupil diameter.  And the human eye at best is 5mm.  But where lower objectives do let in more light is when you compare equal objectives that are less than 50mm.  When you go less than 50mm the lower power will let more light in.  For example 8x42 (5.25mm) will let in more light than a 10x42(4.2mm).  But the 8x42 will not let in anymore light than the 10x50.  Because your eye can not let in more than 5mm.

[mburrows]

Absolutely love my Nikon monarch 12x42's.

[jjhunter]

I've never heard anyone say that about Swarovski glass?   I've still got my first pair from 2001 (10x50 SLC) and they are still amazing.   I've owned 10 pair including the pair that I received today and they have all been incredible pieces of glass.   I just got done playing with my 15x56 HD and there is nothing in that power range that compares - WOW! is all I have to say.

Why would someone buy $20,000 worth of binoculars if the first $2,000 pair was that good?  No slam, just curious  

Even though I am happy with the B&L's I get drawn in by how freakin' orgasmic the new glass is that first year.  So I've got suckered in over and over again only to be disappointed a year or two later.  After $6K spent on a single brand I'm done and moving on to try something else!  Could have saved myself a crud load of cash if I had found just one single pair that kept that new car smell for more than a couple years

C'mon Rad   

What has Swaro done in the past 13 years?

I started with the SLC and Swarobright, then we got SLC Neu, then we got SLC HD, then we got Swarovision and the EL range.   On the spotting scope side, we got 'TS, then 'TM, now TX.

We also got 10x50 and 12x50 on an EL frame.   I have to try them all in different combinations - I think I have owned up to 4 at one time.   

 

[RadSav]

C'mon Rad   

What has Swaro done in the past 13 years?

On the spotting scope side, we got 'TS, then 'TM, now TX.

I don't know what they have done but they sure don't hold up like they use to.  Wife's 8X's are the third ones I've bought in the past eight years. Her pair started to fade before the year was over!  All were fantabulous the first year and rapidly deteriorated after that. My good poro pair was bought in 1988 or there about!  They were absolutely bullet proof.  Bought them from the sales rep who had carried them as sales samples for at least a year and routinely dropped them from balcony's and other elevated points as proof of their toughness.  They weighed 10# but those were great binos!!

I have yet to hunt with a quality guide anywhere that used anything other than Swaro spotting scopes.  I'm not much versed in those, but it appears all I know agree Swaro is the brand to have in spotters!

[jjhunter]

The ATX/STX spotters are the leader of the pack, but before that, I believe that Kowa held the top spot, optically.   

Did you ever contact Swarovski about those issues?   I know a lot of optics nuts and mule deer guides and I have never, ever heard of this?   I'd bet you $100 that Swarovski would make whatever issue(s) you and your friends had, right.    The Swarovision is the best binocular glass on the planet - it would be a shame not to use it if you are already spending that kind of $$.

I will tell you that the Ultravid HD is not on par, optically.   We may be splitting hairs, but there is a noticable difference.

[RadSav]

The ATX/STX spotters are the leader of the pack, but before that, I believe that Kowa held the top spot, optically. 

I will tell you that the Ultravid HD is not on par, optically.   We may be splitting hairs, but there is a noticable difference.

I've never even seen a Kowa so I'm clueless about those.  Can't even remember reading any reviews on them.  I knew they were suppose to be good, but didn't realize that good.  Again I'm not well versed in spotters, obviously.

As far as Swarovski making things right.  They do...for a price.  Though I prefer to have no need to send them off in the first place.  Never had to on the old ones and never have had to on the B&L and old Leitz.  Sort of like a truck, even if the dealership keeps fixing my truck for free I'm not going to buy another one when the two before and all my friend's of the same brand break down every year or two.

I honestly have zero vested interest in one brand of binocular over another.  I really could care less what others use or enjoy.  That is pretty much their deal and all I hope is that they find a product that makes them happy.  I honestly do not know if there is a great deal of difference between the glass on a Swaro and the glass on the Ultravid HD.  What I do know is, for me personally, I never stick with a company after the third strike.  And if you go by friends of mine who make their living behind their glasses that is a lot of strikes between the lot of us.  Those respected friends made the change to Leica so I figured it was at least worth the try for me too.  Maybe I'll just be throwing away another $2,300   But at least I won't be flushing it down the same toilet I have been over the past eight years.

The fact that I was able to get 7X from Leica was another big plus in my book.   I got nostalgic and almost bought the throwbacks with the leather instead of the armor coated just to feel like I was stepping back to the old days with my Leitz. Those were my "Good Ole' Days"   I realize I am the strange uncle at the Thanksgiving binocular table.  But I absolutely love the 7X!  I think if more folks would try them they would like them too.  Depth of field makes focusing a rare event, images seem almost as if they jump to life in 3-D, field of view is much better and I like being able to close my eyes after a full day of glassing without needing muscle relaxers to stop the pain at the back of my eyes.  And other than trying to field judge a mountain goat a mile away I have never felt under powered with the 7's.  Doesn't mean everyone has to do it my way.  Obviously 10X is more popular and that's fine with me. 

[MountainWalk]

I guided for deer and elk for six years in ID and MT, and hunted westside WA, all with the same Swaro SLC"s, 7x30, late 90"s vintage.. Never ever felt at a disadvantage. Tens are just too heavy. Elk are big animals. Sevens are plenty for me.