Shouldn't a 1,700$ pair of binos be perfect?

[lvn600]

I've decided that if I can get a pair of binoculars that are an improvement particularly in sharpness and depth of field over my $300.00 swift roofs I will do so.Unforunately I have heard complaints about focus wheels, fringing, and rattling in the supposed top 3 brands. I've also run in to people who have chosen other brands claiming that they picked brand x because they were actually better than the top 3 brands. Does anyone out there have a serious argument that there are better roof binoculars that are better than Zeiss, Leica or swarovski? If I'm going to shell out big money I want the best I can get and get discouraged when I hear comments about the top 3 having flaws.

[chartwell99]

I've decided that if I can get a pair of binoculars that are an improvement particularly in sharpness and depth of field over my $300.00 swift roofs I will do so.Unforunately I have heard complaints about focus wheels, fringing, and rattling in the supposed top 3 brands. I've also run in to people who have chosen other brands claiming that they picked brand x because they were actually better than the top 3 brands. Does anyone out there have a serious argument that there are better roof binoculars that are better than Zeiss, Leica or swarovski? If I'm going to shell out big money I want the best I can get and get discouraged when I hear comments that the supposed best really are the best?

"Better" in the case of binoculars is to a large degree subjective. That said, I would add the Nikon LX/HG bins to your short list. If robust mechanical aspects are the deciding factor all else being equal I would choose Leica.

[lvn600]

I'll add that to the list -There's no reason why I would descriminate.

[Curtis Croulet]

If I'm going to shell out big money I want the best I can get and get discouraged when I hear comments that the supposed best really are the best?

The question here is, are they "better" for you. Go to an optics dealer and try them for yourself. Questions about focus wheels or whether you perceive the top brands as being better optically or whether that difference is important to you can only be answered by trying them out. Note that cheap binoculars can get a smooth focus by using looser tolerances and lots of grease. Leica (for example) uses no lubricant. Their agenda is different. They want the binocular to be usable in extreme conditions, and they're willing to sacrifice a bit of smoothness to achieve it.

[lvn600]

Of course I'll be testing them.My biggest concern is that I'll find a pair that seem great at the dealer then I'll notice the flaws when i'm out in the field.

[Sailcat]

It would be extemely prudent to compare warrantees and understand their terms before you buy. The service a company provides after the sale is an important part of the package. There are significant differences in how the manufacturers stand behind their products, and the price of the binocular is not necessarily any indication of the quality of the service or of a comprehensive warrantee.

[lvn600]

It would be extemely prudent to compare warrantees and understand their terms before you buy. The service a company provides after the sale is an important part of the package. There are significant differences in how the manufacturers stand behind their products, and the price of the binocular is not necessarily any indication of the quality of the service or of a comprehensive warrantee.Which of the manufacturers have some of the best warranties in your opinion?

[bradshrike]

Which of the manufacturers have some of the best warranties in your opinion?

Ivn, in the US I've found that Swarovski has much better customer service than Leica. On the other hand Leica's ruggedness is legendary. For my eyes and hands the 7x42 Ultravid is as good as it gets with the 8x42 a close second. I agree that it's wise to look at a bin purchase as a total package... durability, ergonomics, after purchase service and, of course, image!

[Sailcat]

Nikon, for example, has a twenty-five year no-fault warrantee on its binoculars, and they have service centers in the US at which they repair and adjust their products. Some companies offer warrantees that cover manufacturer defects only, and their service center could be in the manufacturer's home country. It would be wise to check their warrantees and perhaps visit their websites for more information.

[Pileatus]

I've decided that if I can get a pair of binoculars that are an improvement particularly in sharpness and depth of field over my $300.00 swift roofs I will do so.Unforunately I have heard complaints about focus wheels, fringing, and rattling in the supposed top 3 brands. I've also run in to people who have chosen other brands claiming that they picked brand x because they were actually better than the top 3 brands. Does anyone out there have a serious argument that there are better roof binoculars that are better than Zeiss, Leica or swarovski? If I'm going to shell out big money I want the best I can get and get discouraged when I hear comments that the supposed best really are the best?


I thought we settled this long ago. The only perfect binocular, the 8X32 Nikon SE, costs much less than $1700. In fact, you can get one for $550 from Eagle Optics.

If you can live with second best, choose from the many models offered by the companies you mentioned. Since you won't be using an SE, you won't know what you're missing!

Best wishes

John

[lvn600]

I'll take a look at those too.

[bradshrike]

"Perfect" involves a lot of details... the SE isn't waterproof so isn't "perfect" for me, good glass though it may be.

[Pileatus]

"Perfect" involves a lot of details... the SE isn't waterproof so isn't "perfect" for me, good glass though it may be.

Brad,

It was a bit of humor to break the never-ending debate over what is and what isn't perfect. Nikon, Zeiss, Leica, and Swarovski produce fantastic binoculars enjoyed by many, but none of them are perfect.

The real question is do you get more for your money when you spend at the top end? I believe you do.

John

[Wehr]

"Perfect" involves a lot of details... the SE isn't waterproof so isn't "perfect" for me, good glass though it may be.

I agree. The SEs are good porros, optics are very good but not perfect, the rest is far away from what is feasible. I rate them recommendable but not for everybody.
May be they were especially designed for John Traynor. 3:-)
Because John got one Nikon discontinued them.

Walter

[Otto McDiesel]

What is "perfect"?

[bradshrike]

Since there is no perfection in this life the real meaning of "perfect" is probably "ideal"... that, of course, vary's person to person according to their needs, tastes and prejudices. Everything is a compromise weighted in one direction or the other and everyone makes that compromise differently.

For me "perfection" would be a 7x32 Ultravid... course they don't make it so it will probably just remain an ideal!

[Bubbs]

Since there is no perfection in this life the real meaning of "perfect" is probably "ideal"... that, of course, vary's person to person according to their needs, tastes and prejudices. Everything is a compromise weighted in one direction or the other and everyone makes that compromise differently.

For me "perfection" would be a 7x32 Ultravid... course they don't make it so it will probably just remain an ideal!

I tested a pair of £829 Leica Ultravids today and the focus wheel felt as though it was revolving around sandpaper....no thanks. I'll stick to the Rolls Royce of focussing wheels...Nikons HG's.

John.

[bradshrike]

I tested a pair of £829 Leica Ultravids today and the focus wheel felt as though it was revolving around sandpaper....no thanks. I'll stick to the Rolls Royce of focussing wheels...Nikons HG's.

John.

John, as has been posted here many times the reason Leica's feel "gritty" is they don't use any lube in the focus gears... the reason is to keep them viable in temperature extremes. Since I sometimes use my bino's in the field in sub-zero temps (farenheit) I appreciate this design compromise Leica has made. Is it "perfect?" Maybe not for all prople but for my needs the Leica is "ideal"... that is, it's the best set of compromises.

[Swedpat]

A "perfect" binocular is in my understanding: Comfortable to hold, waterproof, wide FOV, long ER, complete sharpness and flat field over the entire FOV, good depth of field, total loss of CA, total loss of ghost images and inner reflections...are there ANY binocular existing which fulfil all these demands? I have not had the possibility to seriously compare the high end binos, but when I tried the Swarovski SLC 7x42 I think they belong to them who are quite near.

Patric

[bradshrike]

A "perfect" binocular is in my understanding: Comfortable to hold, waterproof, wide FOV, long ER, complete sharpness and flat field over the entire FOV, good depth of field, total loss of CA, total loss of ghost images and inner reflections...are there ANY binocular existing which fulfil all these demands? I have not had the possibility to seriously compare the high end binos, but when I tried the Swarovski SLC 7x42 I think they belong to them who are quite near.

Patric

Patric, if you're like me, when you pick up the 7x42 Ultravid you'll know what "perfect" is :D: !

[henry link]

A "perfect" binocular is in my understanding: Comfortable to hold, waterproof, wide FOV, long ER, complete sharpness and flat field over the entire FOV, good depth of field, total loss of CA, total loss of ghost images and inner reflections...are there ANY binocular existing which fulfil all these demands?

Patric,

No.

Henry

[Jaeger01]

I've decided that if I can get a pair of binoculars that are an improvement particularly in sharpness and depth of field over my $300.00 swift roofs I will do so.Unforunately I have heard complaints about focus wheels, fringing, and rattling in the supposed top 3 brands. I've also run in to people who have chosen other brands claiming that they picked brand x because they were actually better than the top 3 brands. Does anyone out there have a serious argument that there are better roof binoculars that are better than Zeiss, Leica or swarovski? If I'm going to shell out big money I want the best I can get and get discouraged when I hear comments that the supposed best really are the best?

I have several and they're all decent, for my final bins of my life, I chose 8x30 SLC's, not because they're perfect, but because I really like them and have wanted a pair for years and finally found them at a price I could buy them at (still couldn't afford, but wanted badly and used the price to rationalize my purchase).

Jaeger near Chicago

[bradshrike]

I have several and they're all decent, for my final bins of my life, I chose 8x30 SLC's, not because they're perfect, but because I really like them and have wanted a pair for years and finally found them at a price I could buy them at (still couldn't afford, but wanted badly and used the price to rationalize my purchase).

Jaeger near Chicago

Jaeger, can't argue with any of that!

[lvn600]

Why do people prefer 8x30 or 32 over 8x42? Is it a matter of feel and weight or is it something to do with the view?

[bradshrike]

Ivn, I'm a birder but also a backpacker and elk hunter. Just yesterday I was at over 8,000 feet chasing elk with a heavy pack, rifle and a long hike out of the montains in the snow. My binoculars are always around my neck... an 8x32 is a lot more preferable than an 8x42 at the end of the day. They're lighter and less bulky while doing anything I need for the hunt.

[iporali]

Why do people prefer 8x30 or 32 over 8x42? Is it a matter of feel and weight or is it something to do with the view?
For those, who do prefer smaller (there are many who prefer larger objectives) I think it is mostly a matter of feel, weight and size. Sometimes x30s also have wider fields of view.

Ilkka

[WmCCO-5]

What is the "perfect" binocular? Well, I have enthusiastically used Leicas for 20 years. I now consider the Zeiss 8x42 FL to be superior both optically and in terms of construction and durability to my old Leica "children". No contest! A couple of trips around vastly different portions of Africa (on foot) and an extended hunt in the Brooks Range has provided reasonable test regimes for both the Leicas and Zeiss. Trust me, those were not outings in the local park observing birds and returning home to read forum banter.



Best,

Bill

[Pileatus]

Patric, if you're like me, when you pick up the 7x42 Ultravid you'll know what "perfect" is :D: !


Brad,

I see you do understand binoculars. Hanging next to my SE is an Ultravid 7X42.

John

[Swedpat]

Patric, if you're like me, when you pick up the 7x42 Ultravid you'll know what "perfect" is :D: !

Brad,

Thanks for the tip. I will try 7x42 Ultravid when I can. Likely there are not any dealer in my neighborhood who carry them, so it will be when I go to the south of the country.

Patric

[postcardcv]

Why do people prefer 8x30 or 32 over 8x42? Is it a matter of feel and weight or is it something to do with the view?

Generally an 8x32 will close focus siginificatly better than it's 8x42 equivilent, this can be a big plus if you are interested in insects too.

I'd agree with others that there is no 'perfect' binocular available, you just need to find the right one for you. I am sure that any of the big four will be a noticable improvement on your Swifts. Make sure you spend as much time as you can trying them out, and do so in different light conditions.

To my eyes the Leicas deliver the truest colour, the Zeiss, although very bright, appear to have a colour cast. I do not like the feel in the hand of the Swarovski ELs - I'm not sure why but I just can't get on with them (though have to say that the optics are amazing and they have a great reputation for looing after their customers). I liked the feel and optics of the Nikon HGs (esp the 8x32s), but could not get on with the highly geared focussing.

I ended up going for 7x42 Ultrvaids, nice wide FOV, very bright - initially I thought the focus wheel seemed a bit 'notchy', but within a hour of testing I didn't notice it. Do be aware though that the focus on ultravids seems to vary from pair to pair, so make sure that if you go for them you test the actual pair you're buying.

[bradshrike]

Brad,

I see you do understand binoculars. Hanging next to my SE is an Ultravid 7X42.

John

LOL, John looks like most of us agree regarding the 7x42 Ultravid... when I picked up a pair for the first time they nearly took my breath away, seriously! I'm thinking any improvement over that bin will be marginal and certainly think it's the current high water mark. Obviously having one less glass element than the 8 or 10x42 helps.

I've sure enjoyed this discussion...

[hinnark]

I tested a pair of £829 Leica Ultravids today and the focus wheel felt as though it was revolving around sandpaper....no thanks. I'll stick to the Rolls Royce of focussing wheels...Nikons HG's.

John.

John,

from my experience I would say that sample variation is a topic not only for the optics but also for the mechanics of almost every manufactorer. Focus mechanics for example seems to be a serious issue in binoculars as well as in scopes. I don´t doubt your findings about the Ultravid and HG but I tried lots of Ultravids with a smooth working focus wheel. I also tried a 32 Nikon HG-L with a focus that moves too easily. Just a little touch with the forefinger let it change its adjustment. Those small bins don´t have much space for one´s hands so it´s not so easy to avoid a touch. With other HG-Ls this problem didn´t occur, the focus was stiff enough.
"Try before you buy" is an often heard recommendation which I second. But I would add: Don´t try only one sample (and shop).

Steve

[Swissboy]

John, as has been posted here many times the reason Leica's feel "gritty" is they don't use any lube in the focus gears... the reason is to keep them viable in temperature extremes. Since I sometimes use my bino's in the field in sub-zero temps (farenheit) I appreciate this design compromise Leica has made. Is it "perfect?" Maybe not for all prople but for my needs the Leica is "ideal"... that is, it's the best set of compromises.

Leicas don't have to feel gritty. There ARE Ultravids that have VERY smooth focus. Therefore, I don't accept this argument. To me it is still a matter of unsatisfactory quality control.

[chartwell99]

Leicas don't have to feel gritty. There ARE Ultravids that have VERY smooth focus. Therefore, I don't accept this argument. To me it is still a matter of unsatisfactory quality control.

I could not agree more, and am genuinely surprised at the number of complaints garnered by the Ultravids. Leica (and its predecessor, E. Leitz) have relied on the natural lubricating properties of brass and aluminum for years for both lens helicoids and binocular focusing mechanisms in order to ensure component longevity, consistent performance in climate extremes, and to a large degree, to avoid the problems associated with lubricants drying out over time. My Trinovid Ultras differ to some degree in focusing smoothness (with the 10 x 50's being the best of the bunch), but none are gritty, and none are objectionable.

[bradshrike]

Personally, I've never said they are gritty, just responding to a guy who thought they were. Perhaps the pair he had WERE gritty...

[Swissboy]

Personally, I've never said they are gritty, just responding to a guy who thought they were. Perhaps the pair he had WERE gritty...

One of the two pairs I had a chance to test WAS very gritty (which is why I repeated your wording); to the point where it was impossible to fine-focus! The other pair was as silky smooth as one could possibly wish for. Both were x42s. My 10x25 Ultravids are very good too. But it seems that the complaints concern only the larger Ultravid models. The older Trinovids seem to be fine in this respect as well.

[Pileatus]

One of the two pairs I had a chance to test WAS very gritty (which is why I repeated your wording); to the point where it was impossible to fine-focus! The other pair was as silky smooth as one could possibly wish for. Both were x42s. My 10x25 Ultravids are very good too. But it seems that the complaints concern only the larger Ultravid models. The older Trinovids seem to be fine in this respect as well.


I heard that the titanium axis shaft used only in the Ultravids is the culprit. Apparently, if you have one with very tight tolerances, it breaks in quite slowly. When it does, it's very smooth.

I prefer a rather heavy feeling, smooth and fluid focus. At this point, my Leica is very close to that ideal.

John

[Bubbs]

I have tried several pairs of Leica's. My partners 8's were always a bit 'notchy' on the foucussing wheel and the pair I tried recently were dreadfully 'gritty'.

The focusussing on my trusty old Zeiss B'gts knock these pretenders into a cocked hat.

I wouldn't like to think that I had just parted with £800+ thinking..."they'll be alright when they bed in". My partners never 'bedded in'!

I just think for the price they should be perfect.


John.