Contributors to this thread:
10x42 Binos Zeiss Conquest or Swaro SLC?
Zeiss Conquest HD $900 or Swaro SLC at $1600? Which would you choose and why? EL's are not a consideration.
Talk me out of Meopta Meostar HD's. Thanks guys!
Neither! Zeiss victory sf. I really like the SLC too but the Zeiss are so light and crisp.
Agreed, those would be better but we're getting closer to the EL's in price point which is a non-starter for me.....Even the SLC's are a stretch for me to justify but I spend a TON of time behind my glass so I guess I can justify it!
Have you considered Swaro EL’s?
Just kidding. I’m a Swaro guy, don’t have any experience with those zeiss. I think Swaro SLC would be hard to beat all things considered. I also really Leica, but it sounds like you are already narrowed to these 2. My buddy has some Leicas (unsure model) that were in the $1k range that are very nice.
I have a pair of Swaro EL's and a pair of Cabelas Euro HD's, which i believe is basically the Meoptas. I have used them side by side at daylight and dusk. IMO there was very little difference. My vote goes to the Meopta and put the money you save to another tag. Good luck!
Demo ( read new) conquests will be 800 to 850 from a place like redhawk rifles. You can get SLCs for 1500 shipped if you call around to places like camera land.
I have owned both. I currently have the newest SLCs in 10x42, I have owned Zeiss Conquests in 8x32 and 10x42. Also for perspective have or had ELs, Geovids and Zeiss SF and HT
I think the conquests are the best sub 1K glass you can possibly get when you consider performance/ weight / ergonomics. Meostar B1 is on par with the conquests however I felt the ergonomics of them sucked.
Back to the conquest Hds vs SLC, I like the SLCs better in all categories except they haven’t been as robust as I would like. I think the have better total edge to edge clarity the the conquests, the center they will very close to the same. I think the SLC are brighter and have slightly better resolution. Both will have decent resale. Conquests can be had used for 550 ish and SLCs 1300 ish for a year or two old version
If I was scoring 1 -100....I would give SLCs about 85- 88 ish and Conquests about an 80. I think if you use them side by side you will see a slight edge to SLC. It’s Totally up to you if the extra money is worth for a little bit of performance increase.
I'm with you Trial on the Meopta's. The optical quality of the Meopta is awesome, especially at their price point. As I have used them more they have lost their appeal based upon the ergonomics for me personally, YMMV on the Meoptas. I can sell them for good resale potentially and move to one of the others if the optical quality is the same but the ergonomics are better it's a win for me. I spend hours and hours behind them mule deer hunting and ergonomics is a concern. I'm probably splitting hairs but its the offseason so I need something to think about! Great overall comparison, thank you!
I've had both and Trial is pretty much spot on.
For me the Conquests were great. I could have used them the rest of my life and been happy. I had one issue with them and that was that, if I didn't have them positioned perfectly, they'd black out on me. I ordered the extended eyecups for them and it helped, but didn't solve the problem. This, coupled with my realization that I much prefer 8x over 10x was enough for me to get rid of them. I bought them right, as demos, took care of them, and 5 year of use cost me <$100.00 to own.
I now have 8x SLCs and absolutely love them. I'll never get rid of them. To my eye the glass is a definite step up (though not huge) from the Conquests. I'd say the ergonomics for me are not quite as good, but certainly not bad. My main complaint is that the focus knob feels like something that you should get with a $28.00 pair of Tascos. I can live with all of this, though. The first time I watched a hen turkey walk by with the SLCs was absolutely jaw dropping. I'd never imagined detail like that.
To sum it up, I was happy with the Conquests. I'm even happier with the SLCs. They were worth the additional money for me. That said, I think you can do better than the prices you listed for both. Definitely call Cameraland and talk to Doug.
I'd find a store that had all the models I'm interested in, then go actually handle and look through each to determine which one you like. Pay special attention to the clarity of the outer
edges of the FOV. That's what separates good glass from average glass, and is also what eliminates eye strain after several hours of glassing.
When I bought my ELs, I took them, Zeiss, Leicas, and a few mid-level models outside. I found a distant road sign to glass, and placed it at the very edge of the FOV of each model. Optically, the big 3 were all comparable, and the mid-level models were a noticeable step down. So, it all came down to ergonomics between the big 3. I liked how the Swaros felt in my hands, so that's what I bought. Buy once, cry once...
I’m a Swaro guy. Quality aside their customer service is second to none. They don’t blink an eye at a repair and will replace if needed.
Shop around and get a good pair of used ELs. Service with Swaro on a second-hand pair was still 2nd to none and I saved a ton from buying new, like less than what you have listed for the new SLCs. If you're spending that much time behind glass, you won't be disappointed.
I've have used both of those a lot, freehand and on a tripod. They are VERY similar and you won't go wrong with either. The Conquest slips in and out of a chest harness easier, due to the "tackier" surface on the SLC. The SLC has a sweet spot that is about 50% larger for my eyes (yours may be different). Also, the SLC will allow you to see 10 minutes or so further into the dark.
You'll be happy with either. Only you can decide if the SLC is worth twice the price. Trial has a solid point about buying demos. I bought new SLCs on ebay about this time last year for $1,300.
not sure if it is a comparison or not, I had the old Ziess Classics, sold them to but the SLC when they were all the hype years ago,,, wish I had the Ziess back!!! bownutco
When buying used, check on warranty transfer. Warranty coverage is usually how "customer service is second to none"...
Buy once cry once! Trying to save a few hundred dollars on something you will use as often as you say and for many years will be worth the extra $$. I put off swaro for years. when I finally pulled the trigger I was so pissed I wasted all that time with less than glass. Especially if you’re already gonna spend close to $1,000 anyways. Don’t risk having any regrets!! It’s a game changer and the best hunting $ I’ve spent. I can tell you I’m not looking back wishing I had the additional $600 in my pocket right now, very happy with my purchase and zero regrets. They are worth it if you are gonna be on them a lot.
If price is not a factor , then the only thing that is worthwhile is for YOU to go try them out. What I think, though I own Zeiss, is largely irrelevant. Both are excellent glass, but only you can tell which is better for you. TMBB
I was recently needing a new pair of binos. I was about to pull the trigger on swaro 10x42el used for about $1500-1600, but then I got to reading about Maven. After a great deal of research, a pair of Maven B1 10x42 popped up on eBay for $700. Maven has an unconditional lifetime warranty and an image that most guys couldn't tell weren't alpha glass (top line swaro, Zeiss, Leica). The bird guys rave about the Maven, particularly the B2 9x45. So far I'm happy. But really, you just have to try binos in person, ergonomics are very important too. Happy shopping!
I have not tried the high end Swaros, but Lieca is hard to beat even in their lesser line up. That said I just bought a pair of Meopta Meostars and for my money they by far the best bang for the buck and I looked through tons of glass. Shawn
I've had both- SLC's were hands down better to my eyes both on and off the tripod. Wish I would have saved the $900 I'd spent on the Conquest and I would have just done w/o bino's until I had the $ for the SLC's.
I have a little better than 20/10 in both eyes so unless the glass is great I get headaches in short order.
I'm sure the high end Zeiss are much better than the Conquest- I haven't had an opportunity to look through them however.
Good luck on your search!
Its a toss-up, more important is a high end rangefinder, bought a Leica, unreal difference over junk Chinese made ones!
Swarovski. Just do it and move on. No need to overthink this. Enjoy the best.
As Charlie says....."All Swaro, all the time!"
That's right, isn't it? :^)
For the money and in my opinion, the ziess conquest binos are tough to beat. You are getting very little ROI on each dollar you spend beyond the cost of the conquest 10 by 42s. I have an older pair of top end ziess binos and a new pair of Lieca's, I replaced a very very old pair of ziess binos my dad had with a new pair of Conquest 10 by 42's when I bought my liecas and they hold up against any glass I've ever looked through including the high end ziess and swaros. I can't see a scenario where you would ever have an issue with the 10 by 42 conquests.
Be sure to check prices at Cameraland new york that where we bought our Swaros
When I was in the market I tried the Swaro SLC and EL side by side. For my eyes there was no comparison. I went with the EL 10x42s.
As a side note, I bought mine at Cabelas 5 or 6 years ago. The ELs were $2,500 regular price and between sales and coupons I walked out with the EL for $1,800. My point is look around, you might be able to upgrade for a little more. As stated earlier,Cameraland NY does have some good prices on Swaro. I bought a few Swaro rifle scopes from Doug for 20% off.
Still no regrets buying the ELs!