Steve C
Well-known member
Review: Vortex Razor HD 8x42
I finally gathered up a bunch of optics I was no longer using and sold them. Instead of doing something useful with the money, I used it on more binoculars. I had about decided that I needed a bona fide alpha, if for no other reason that to serve as a reference standard against all of the binoculars I eventually wind up reviewing.
So this has been an effort of some scale for me and has involved a bunch of time, lots of binoculars, and a lot of head scratching. There has been as much comparison with as many alpha glasses as I could arrange to get my hands on. There are some pretty decent deals out there right now too.
So into the mix comes the introduction of the Vortex Razor HD, well not so much the introduction as the availability. Doing as much research as I could do without actually having one made it seem like this new glass was at the least worth a close look. As it happens, another glass I had been wondering about for some time also shows up ready for sale. That is the Kruger Caldera, which I’ll do in a separate review. So to start myself off, I now am the proud owner of one each of these binoculars in the 8x42 version. I chose the 8x for no other reason than that (and 7x) is my personal favorite. I was however able to get some fairly significant time with each in the 10x version before I bought.
The Vortex Razor HD
Vortex told me that they were confident this glass would compare very favorably to any of the alpha glass. There has been some internet skepticism about the new Razor HD’s price tag of almost $1,200. I decided to see for myself. Every indication I can see right now says that Vortex, amid all of the “HD” Market Hype, got the new Razor right. It most definitely is not the old Razor. There were few real flies on the original model as it was, but the new big brother has pretty well chased those off. The housing on the new one is completely different. I actually prefer the three finger gap of the original to the current two finger gap between the hinges. Anybody who has had a ZEN ED or a Promaster ELX ED in hand has a pretty good idea of how the new Razor feels. It is not quite the same, as the Razor is a little slimmer, and the ocular assembly is different too, and it is just a touch longer. I am noting only apparent similarity here, nothing more. I suppose another way to look at the housing is to say it resembles the new SLC-HD with a front hinge. This apparently is a very well made binocular, but it does not have quite the “finishing school” finesse to the feel of some alphas. But this will be largely a matter of personal preference. Suffice it to say it looks and feels like a $1,200 binocular should.
The accessories are pretty typical Vortex. There is a rather more substantial molded black nylon carrying case, standard Vortex neck strap, cleaning cloth, and carry strap for the case. There is a standard Vortex ocular cover and tethered objective covers. The objective covers are pretty snug and show no tendency to fall off.
The focus is counterclockwise to infinity. There is 1.5 total turns of the focus wheel. The close focus distance is 7 feet. One half (or 0 .75 turns) of the wheel goes from the close focus to 20 feet. The second 0.75 turns goes from there to infinity. There is no focus past infinity. The wheel movement is smooth and relatively easy and mine has no backlash. The diopter adjustment is on the center focus knob, for the right eye, and works by pulling the knob back to adjust, forward to lock. The focus wheel does not seem to get knocked out of focus and the diopter has not needed attention since I initially set the focus up.
With the eyecup fully extended there is 17.75 mm distance to the ocular lens. Fully collapsed, the lens is 2.00 mm below the edge of the eye cup. The eye cups have four click stop detents. The detents seem perfectly able to stay where they are put too.
It is a lot brighter than the original, gone is the original quite warm color bias. It is still a bit on the warm side of neutral, but I doubt anybody thinks this one is dim. This one is definitely sharper than the old. The new one retains the outstanding perceived depth of field of the original, a good thing from my viewpoint. The field of view is about the same, as is the feel of the focus mechanism. The image is full of contrast, has a very decent sweet spot, and is pretty easy on the eyes. There is some edge distortion present, some pincushion and a bit of field curvature, but the edge is as sharp as most, but maybe less than a few, notably the two new Swarovski’s. The edge is sharper than the Zeiss FL.
The binocular does a very good jon at controlling any sort of color fringing. I could induce none. Typically fringing does not bother me in routine use, but I can usually induce some when I go looking for it. Not here. I can get some glare. I have seen it once so far. This was just this morning as a matter of fact at 7:00 am. There was a frost last night and with the bright morning sun shining on the frost there was glare. The glare started about one fov width from directly underneath the low sun. It involved the whole fov right under the sun. The past few mornings at the same time, without the addition of the frost layer, there was no glare at all
So, the $64 question of “This is a Vortex, can it really be worth $1,200?” I think so. If the current alphas need to be purchased with amounts of $2k and above, this is certainly worth its price tag. With the proliferation of deals on deals on alphas, either from used demo lists from a couple of dealers and some stuff on various forum boards where the recognized alpha can be had for the same to a little more money, is it worth it? Dunno, that’s a tougher question. A lot depends on how many “deals” are left. I ultimately made my decision in favor of the $1,179 Vortex, instead of a Zeiss FL at around $1,400 or a non SV Swaro EL at about the same money. Why did I do that? There are a couple of reasons. First is that this Razor is about as close to an American made top tier glass as is available. It is a US design, developed and engineered by Vortex, not a modified off the shelf sort of thing. It happens to be made in Japan, but will be serviced by the excellent warranty and service philosophy Vortex is known for. The second is a “…the devil made me do it…” sort of a thing. I never have been one to think I need to have one of the latest “whatever” everybody else thinks is some great sort of equipment.
In comparing this Razor to the alphas I have been able to compare (some more than others), the Zeiss FL, Swarovski EL, Swarovision EL and SLC-HD, I conclude there is precious little difference. Yes, the recognized alpha is a “better binocular”, very little, but some differences can be found by some serious side by side comparison. I think dealers may be hard pressed to sell many new alphas when a new Razor HD is half the money. That is when the dealer stocks both. Smaller dealers who have to buy their stock may well decide to stock the Razor HD. But I really have no idea how that will turn out.
I always felt that Zeiss concentrated the ability of their glass to promote centerfield sharpness. This at some expense to sharpness at edge of field and with some lessened contrast due to their use of a bright, almost blue color bias. Swarovski seems to focus on a wide sweet spot, a warmer color hue, and better edges than the Zeiss. The new SV and SLC-HD are a little brighter than the older EL and SLCneu, and the edges are sharper. Leica has always concentrated on pretty neutral color balance and very definite, almost “enhanced” contrast, making the colors jump out at you. The Razor HD seems to me more like the Swarovski EL/SLCneu than anything else. The Razor does show some field curvature not as readily seen in the alpha glass and does have the feel of a very small degree of “not quite as bright”, particularly against the new Swarovski’s or the Zeiss FL. In truth what work I could do with resolution on various charts and other targets pretty much told me that what could be resolved by one could be resolved by all. Boosted tests may show the differences to a higher degree, but I am more interested in what my 1x eyesight tells me.
Forced to a decision, I’d give the alpha a 99 rating and the Razor HD a 98. I do not want to push this as a definite degree of separation. This merely illustrates that you need a steady hand, a discerning eye, and a damn sharp scalpel to separate out differences. I’m keeping the Razor for now. Time will tell the tale on how good this is.
I finally gathered up a bunch of optics I was no longer using and sold them. Instead of doing something useful with the money, I used it on more binoculars. I had about decided that I needed a bona fide alpha, if for no other reason that to serve as a reference standard against all of the binoculars I eventually wind up reviewing.
So this has been an effort of some scale for me and has involved a bunch of time, lots of binoculars, and a lot of head scratching. There has been as much comparison with as many alpha glasses as I could arrange to get my hands on. There are some pretty decent deals out there right now too.
So into the mix comes the introduction of the Vortex Razor HD, well not so much the introduction as the availability. Doing as much research as I could do without actually having one made it seem like this new glass was at the least worth a close look. As it happens, another glass I had been wondering about for some time also shows up ready for sale. That is the Kruger Caldera, which I’ll do in a separate review. So to start myself off, I now am the proud owner of one each of these binoculars in the 8x42 version. I chose the 8x for no other reason than that (and 7x) is my personal favorite. I was however able to get some fairly significant time with each in the 10x version before I bought.
The Vortex Razor HD
Vortex told me that they were confident this glass would compare very favorably to any of the alpha glass. There has been some internet skepticism about the new Razor HD’s price tag of almost $1,200. I decided to see for myself. Every indication I can see right now says that Vortex, amid all of the “HD” Market Hype, got the new Razor right. It most definitely is not the old Razor. There were few real flies on the original model as it was, but the new big brother has pretty well chased those off. The housing on the new one is completely different. I actually prefer the three finger gap of the original to the current two finger gap between the hinges. Anybody who has had a ZEN ED or a Promaster ELX ED in hand has a pretty good idea of how the new Razor feels. It is not quite the same, as the Razor is a little slimmer, and the ocular assembly is different too, and it is just a touch longer. I am noting only apparent similarity here, nothing more. I suppose another way to look at the housing is to say it resembles the new SLC-HD with a front hinge. This apparently is a very well made binocular, but it does not have quite the “finishing school” finesse to the feel of some alphas. But this will be largely a matter of personal preference. Suffice it to say it looks and feels like a $1,200 binocular should.
The accessories are pretty typical Vortex. There is a rather more substantial molded black nylon carrying case, standard Vortex neck strap, cleaning cloth, and carry strap for the case. There is a standard Vortex ocular cover and tethered objective covers. The objective covers are pretty snug and show no tendency to fall off.
The focus is counterclockwise to infinity. There is 1.5 total turns of the focus wheel. The close focus distance is 7 feet. One half (or 0 .75 turns) of the wheel goes from the close focus to 20 feet. The second 0.75 turns goes from there to infinity. There is no focus past infinity. The wheel movement is smooth and relatively easy and mine has no backlash. The diopter adjustment is on the center focus knob, for the right eye, and works by pulling the knob back to adjust, forward to lock. The focus wheel does not seem to get knocked out of focus and the diopter has not needed attention since I initially set the focus up.
With the eyecup fully extended there is 17.75 mm distance to the ocular lens. Fully collapsed, the lens is 2.00 mm below the edge of the eye cup. The eye cups have four click stop detents. The detents seem perfectly able to stay where they are put too.
It is a lot brighter than the original, gone is the original quite warm color bias. It is still a bit on the warm side of neutral, but I doubt anybody thinks this one is dim. This one is definitely sharper than the old. The new one retains the outstanding perceived depth of field of the original, a good thing from my viewpoint. The field of view is about the same, as is the feel of the focus mechanism. The image is full of contrast, has a very decent sweet spot, and is pretty easy on the eyes. There is some edge distortion present, some pincushion and a bit of field curvature, but the edge is as sharp as most, but maybe less than a few, notably the two new Swarovski’s. The edge is sharper than the Zeiss FL.
The binocular does a very good jon at controlling any sort of color fringing. I could induce none. Typically fringing does not bother me in routine use, but I can usually induce some when I go looking for it. Not here. I can get some glare. I have seen it once so far. This was just this morning as a matter of fact at 7:00 am. There was a frost last night and with the bright morning sun shining on the frost there was glare. The glare started about one fov width from directly underneath the low sun. It involved the whole fov right under the sun. The past few mornings at the same time, without the addition of the frost layer, there was no glare at all
So, the $64 question of “This is a Vortex, can it really be worth $1,200?” I think so. If the current alphas need to be purchased with amounts of $2k and above, this is certainly worth its price tag. With the proliferation of deals on deals on alphas, either from used demo lists from a couple of dealers and some stuff on various forum boards where the recognized alpha can be had for the same to a little more money, is it worth it? Dunno, that’s a tougher question. A lot depends on how many “deals” are left. I ultimately made my decision in favor of the $1,179 Vortex, instead of a Zeiss FL at around $1,400 or a non SV Swaro EL at about the same money. Why did I do that? There are a couple of reasons. First is that this Razor is about as close to an American made top tier glass as is available. It is a US design, developed and engineered by Vortex, not a modified off the shelf sort of thing. It happens to be made in Japan, but will be serviced by the excellent warranty and service philosophy Vortex is known for. The second is a “…the devil made me do it…” sort of a thing. I never have been one to think I need to have one of the latest “whatever” everybody else thinks is some great sort of equipment.
In comparing this Razor to the alphas I have been able to compare (some more than others), the Zeiss FL, Swarovski EL, Swarovision EL and SLC-HD, I conclude there is precious little difference. Yes, the recognized alpha is a “better binocular”, very little, but some differences can be found by some serious side by side comparison. I think dealers may be hard pressed to sell many new alphas when a new Razor HD is half the money. That is when the dealer stocks both. Smaller dealers who have to buy their stock may well decide to stock the Razor HD. But I really have no idea how that will turn out.
I always felt that Zeiss concentrated the ability of their glass to promote centerfield sharpness. This at some expense to sharpness at edge of field and with some lessened contrast due to their use of a bright, almost blue color bias. Swarovski seems to focus on a wide sweet spot, a warmer color hue, and better edges than the Zeiss. The new SV and SLC-HD are a little brighter than the older EL and SLCneu, and the edges are sharper. Leica has always concentrated on pretty neutral color balance and very definite, almost “enhanced” contrast, making the colors jump out at you. The Razor HD seems to me more like the Swarovski EL/SLCneu than anything else. The Razor does show some field curvature not as readily seen in the alpha glass and does have the feel of a very small degree of “not quite as bright”, particularly against the new Swarovski’s or the Zeiss FL. In truth what work I could do with resolution on various charts and other targets pretty much told me that what could be resolved by one could be resolved by all. Boosted tests may show the differences to a higher degree, but I am more interested in what my 1x eyesight tells me.
Forced to a decision, I’d give the alpha a 99 rating and the Razor HD a 98. I do not want to push this as a definite degree of separation. This merely illustrates that you need a steady hand, a discerning eye, and a damn sharp scalpel to separate out differences. I’m keeping the Razor for now. Time will tell the tale on how good this is.
Last edited:
. The best review I have seen of that one is Ilya Koshkin's. I don't have the Viper 6x32 at any rate. Since I made you buy it, I sure hope you like it
