Contributors to this thread:
If you haven't looked into (pun intended) optics recently, there are some great ones out there.
This photo was taken through a spotting scope at 75 feet.
I think the scope is north of $4,000. It is a high end Swarovski. However, there are also some great improvements in optics at the price ranges where most of us live.
Beyond popular belief, Swaro does not own the optics field anymore.
Say what you will, but there is a reason the top-shelf optics cost so much. I recently compared my Swaros to my buddy's Vortex binos. There really was no comparison. Both were sharp in the center of the FOV, but around the edges is where the Swaros shined.
Out here in the west, quality optics are a must. Early in my hunting career, I tried to make do with middle tier optics. I thought the headaches I got after a long day of glassing were normal. Then I purchase a set of Leicas, and realized how much easier they are on the eyes. I'll never skimp on optics again.
Matt
Optics, bows, firearms, gear. You get what you pay for...buy once cry once. I've learned it the hard way with multiple generations of cheap stuff. I do have a lot of backup gear that gets passed along to my kids though..
You cannot compare a mid level optic of brand A to a top level optic of Swaro and expect to get a realistic conclusion.
I have a pair of Swaro CL's and a pair of Sig Zulu 5's and am a little more partial to the Sig's. But those are MY eyes, not yours and that is all that matters in the optics world; what your eyes like.
Straight —» Arrow's Link
hardly an apples to apples between the CL and Zulu 5. I have actually found a really good source of binocular and spotting scope information and good well done reviews and rankings. It's a bird watching site of all places but they have a lot of pretty up to date information.
Straight Arrow I'll have to call you out on the bow. A few years ago I won 1,800 bucks in a big buck contest. I spent months shopping for a new bow. Every brand was on the table cause money was no issue. I wound up buying a mission ballistic for I think 499 or 599. It has done everything a bow hunter could ever want out of a bow for a fraction of the cost of a high end bow. The little bow is a flat out killer.
"You cannot compare a mid level optic of brand A to a top level optic of Swaro and expect to get a realistic conclusion."
I disagree. I think the obvious conclusion is mid-level optics are inferior to top-level, and their price reflects that.
The original post suggested that more affordable optics have come a long way. I've heard several people suggest that Vortex, Nikon, Steiner, etc...are comparable optically to Swarovski and Leica. That simply isn't true, if you objectively compare them side-by-side. I've never looked thru Sigs, so I can't comment on them.
I recently upgraded my old trusty Bushnell range finder to the Leica Rangemaster with angle compensation. The difference in optics is like night and day, once again proving that when you buy sh*t cheap, you get cheap sh*t.
Matt
My statement about mid and high was supposed to be that if you look through a pair of mid level of one brand and then compare them to a high level pair of Swaro's and then say that Swaro's are superior, well duh! Of course they are.
You need to compare the mid level Swaro to the mid level other brand. Will there be a difference? Likely. But not enough for a 4 figure price difference.
As far as reviews go, that is only a buyer's guide of what things to look for.
I once looked through equal magnification and objective lense size binos for Leica, Swaro, Burris, Zeiss, and one other. MY conclusion for ME was I would not buy the Leica.
Bottom line, get the optics that do best for your eyes, not someone else's and don't worry about winning the biggest dick contest because you paid more for "higher end" stuff.
To the original post, yes, there are alot of good options out there today that will work for everyone's budget which is why I said Swaro no longer owns the market for good optics anymore..
one of the three big dicks should come out on top or your eyes are f'd up.
"If you haven't looked into (pun intended) optics recently, there are some great ones out there."
.
"there are also some great improvements in optics at the price ranges where most of us live."
The message is no matter your price range, it might be worth taking a look at the newer options.
Today's $300 might buy what it took $2,000 to get just a few years ago.
We were in Cabela's in Billings. I was looking through a pair of high-end binoculars when my wife walked up. Without saying a thing, I handed them to her. She took one look through them and told me I should buy them.
I think they were about $2,300. I told her that and she said "You use them a lot and they are definitely better than the ones you have now."
I appreciate her encouragement, but I have to buy in a range where I am comfortable using them however I want to (ab)use them.
I think that was about 8 years ago and I'm still using the ones I had. They work, but .....
I've been running Pentax DCF's for 10 years. For my eyes, they are the best value. Often in professional reviews they only give up field of view and not optical quality. I've looked and shot through a bunch of high end glass. If I were to buy a spotting scope today, it would be a Nightforce. Bino's would still be the DCF ED's.
I bought a pair of Zeiss 10X40s 32 years ago when the dollar to duechmark rate was in our favor (I paid about $600 for them). It is THE best investment I've ever made.
I also have been using the Pentax DCF for a long time. There are better binos, but maybe not for the price.
"your eyes are f'd up."
Bulls$#t. If I didn't know any better, looks like we have a Kool Aid fanboy.
Until you know what I see, best hush...
I had an older set of the Pentax DCF WP (early 2000s). I was on a budget and searched reviews for several nights before buying. They were fantastic for the price. They weren't like the big 3 but noticeably better than similar priced binos. My buddies both had Leicas and we passed them back and forth quite often. I ran them over in the garage 4-5 years later and the newer model didn't work as well for me.
I have binoculars that were on a destroyer in 1942. My Navy uncle gave them to me and they are fantastic. I don't take them in the woods since I just don't want anything to happen to them and they are big and heavy. The military has the best optics in the world. Look at the pictures they take from satellites. I have some Pentax binoculars my wife gave me and they suit me. They are waterproof.
No offense intended H. Like many here I'm a fan of the mid priced optics too and own several. I like both Pentax DCF WP and Nikon Monarch who were in this niche early...but like Henry points out it's a new world. Lots of really good stuff that pushes the old big three to even better optics. It's simply a matter of how much money you want to spend and when you personally reach the point of diminishing returns. So I agree with you. It is totally subjective and a judgement on price vs. the perceived value of performance. I do buy a lot of high end rifle scopes though and I know that you for sure get what you pay for there and it's the same with all glass. Once I bought a good one I wanted to throw the rest of them away and have gradually replaced them all. I am realizing as I type that it is strange that I will put a $1500 scope on a rifle but I won't spend the same on binoculars. I'm going think about that while in the tree stand next week. I'm going to take my pentax DCF WPs.....the leaves are coming down and I will be able to see again.
I think where and what you hunt is also a big factor in optics selection. When I go to Kansas to whitetail hunt, I could get by with cheaper binos, because I simply don't use them very often out there.
Here in Colorado, it's not uncommon for me to spend 8 hours a day looking thru binos or a spotter. That's when you really appreciate top-shelf optics.
Matt