Steve C
Well-known member
This review will cover both the 8x42 and 10x42 binoculars. The binoculars were supplied by Leupold. I will add that they contacted me.
First, there seems some confusion over prices as they are currently listed from $519.99 to $759.99, no two places seemingly with the same price. They will sell for $599.99 for the 8x42 and $619.99 for the 10x42. They come with Leupold’s world famous bomb proof warranty. They told me it was a legal department requirement they use the term limited lifetime, to seemingly place the warranty coverage to the original purchaser. While you can go online to register your Leupold, they will never ask you for any proof of purchase. I can state from long personal use of Leupold products, that they take a backseat to no one in their service. If you need your McKinley repaired, Leupold has state of the art facilities and trained people, so they can take it apart and fix it.
These showed up at an opportune time. We had our local big show, the Winter Wings Festival here last weekend, so there were chances to get them side by side to several competitive binoculars.
The first thing that will hit you right between the eyes when you open the box is their unquestionable similarity to the ZEN Prime HD. On one hand they seem to be the same basic binocular. On the other hand, they also have significant differences. It is basically the same size and general outline as the recently discontinued Leupold Gold Rings. It is however, some four ounces lighter, but if you have held a Gold Ring you have a good idea of how the McKinley will feel.
I’m waiting to hear back from Leupold on my query about an x32 version of this binocular. I’ve got a couple of QC questions I need to ask them too.
Image Performance:
This has a very sharp, high contrast image, with only a very slightly warm bias. Resolution leaves nothing for my eyes to desire. For a roof prism binocular, the apparent depth of field and 3-D effect is first rate. Colors seem very natural. The warm tint is not visible to the eye looking through this binocular. It only shows looking backwards though the instrument at a bright, pure white surface.
Field Performance:
The binocular presents a wide, bright, relatively deep, and flat field of view. The binocular I have first hand experience with that is brighter is the Zeiss FL. While not necessarily FL bright, it is almost still too bright. It has snowed here the first two days of the week, and the sun is now out, and the world here is bright. Yesterday when I scanned our black cattle on their newly snow white pasture, I had to crank the eye cups down and use the binoculars with my sunglasses. Low light performance is very good. Glare is nicely controlled. While I realize I am not the best person to comment on color fringing, I can induce none, no matter what target I use. I can only get it in out of focus situations.
The edges here are quite sharp, not perfect, but as good as you can find for less than $2,000+. The field is also very flat. I can see a bit of a hint of curvature. It is more of a peripheral sensation for me. As I look to the edge to see it, my eyes evidently accommodate and it goes away. So we are dealing with a very wide, sweet spot at least 90% of the field, and very immersive view. It is a very easy view too. There is no hint for me of Rolling ball either.
Ergonomic Performance:
This is a large binocular and its size will likely lessen its appeal for some people to some degree. I have pretty big hands, and they are about right for me. They have a large diameter ocular design similar to the ZEN Prime HD. Leupold has gotten at least the start of a fix here, particularly on the 8x. The eye cups on both the McKinley’s have more taper than the Prime. The 8x has a longer eye cup, and the edge of the eye cup is more rounded than the 10x. Both feel better to eye and nose than the Prime, and the 8x McKinley is an improvement over the 10x. The eye relief gives them some leeway in the eye cup design than the 10x, but Leupold told me they are working on getting the same eye cup design on both. The ergonomic impact of the slight eye cup redesign is substantial.
The McKinley focuses counterclockwise to infinity. The focus movement is, I think, a decent balance of easy to move and stiff enough to stay where you put it until you move it. The focus moves through just less than 1.5 turns. I can stand up and focus on the tip of my shoes, about 4’. One turn takes the focus from there to 25’. Another one quarter turn takes the focus to infinity. There is one quarter turn past infinity. Cold temperatures do not seem to greatly affect wheel travel. There is a typical right eye diopter arrangement. It does not lock in place and there are no click stops, but it is stiff and should not pose a threat to move without user input.
There is a nearly imperceptible slack movement when changing focus directions. It is less than one degree. I do not see it unless I stop looking through the binocular and concentrate on nothing but focus wheel tension. I do not notice it in field use of the binocular. At some point in my life, I would have assumed nobody else would have paid any attention to this either, but not anymore. It is my opinion that the McKinley has a smooth and highly usable focus system, one that is free from unnecessary slack movement.
This binocular gives off the feel of being built like the proverbial tank. It is something that looks and feels like the rugged product Leupold tries to produce. This has more armor around it than the Prime, and also has thumb indents.
The McKinley looks like you could knock it off the pickup tailgate into the weeds with a baseball bat, pick it up, clean it off and go use it.
How does it compare:
ZEN Prime HD
The obvious and frankly unavoidable impression is that this is the same binocular as the ZEN Prime HD. Having said that, I don’t know the source of the McKinley. It has some differences to the Prime. The eye cup design is one difference. The field is sharper at the edge than the Prime and the field is flatter than the Prime and the image is just a bit brighter than the Prime. It has more rubber armor than the Prime, it has thumb indents and a different diopter ring.
Kruger Caldera
The Caldera is possessed of slightly less color, and the contrast of the McKinley is better.
ZEN ED 3
The McKinley is flatter and sharper at the edge than the ED 2 or 3. The eye cup of the ED series will likely appeal some people more than the McKinley. The center field sharpness may be a bit better in the McKinley
Vortex Viper HD
The Viper is smaller than the McKinley, nearly as bright, but has an obviously narrower, less immersive viewing experience.
Vortex Razor HD
This may be a bit brighter than the McKinley, but I have had more time with the latter. The Razor is smaller overall and has less massive oculars and will probably present an ergonomic preference to some people. Sharpness and apparent contrast is pretty close in the two. The Razor HD is twice the price of the McKinley too.
Zeiss Conquest HD
Let’s just say there is an astonishing physical, ergonomic, and optical similarity between the Conquest HD and the Razor HD. Frankly it is the same sort of similarity seen between the Prime and the McKinley. This is simply an observation, nothing more.
Put a perfectly focused Conquest and a Razor HD alongside a McKinley and you better get out the nit picker and the magnifying glass if you want separate anything of significance in the image of the three.
So in short, this seems a good binocular for a choice to provide excellent optics at a good price. There is really no point in spending more money. That is, unless you are driven by material things.
Hey, even the solid company guys at the Swarovski booth were impressed.
Now I am having fits with my camera not wanting to work right and my computer not wanting anything to do with recognizing connected cameras, so I will post pictures as I am bale to do so.
First, there seems some confusion over prices as they are currently listed from $519.99 to $759.99, no two places seemingly with the same price. They will sell for $599.99 for the 8x42 and $619.99 for the 10x42. They come with Leupold’s world famous bomb proof warranty. They told me it was a legal department requirement they use the term limited lifetime, to seemingly place the warranty coverage to the original purchaser. While you can go online to register your Leupold, they will never ask you for any proof of purchase. I can state from long personal use of Leupold products, that they take a backseat to no one in their service. If you need your McKinley repaired, Leupold has state of the art facilities and trained people, so they can take it apart and fix it.
These showed up at an opportune time. We had our local big show, the Winter Wings Festival here last weekend, so there were chances to get them side by side to several competitive binoculars.
The first thing that will hit you right between the eyes when you open the box is their unquestionable similarity to the ZEN Prime HD. On one hand they seem to be the same basic binocular. On the other hand, they also have significant differences. It is basically the same size and general outline as the recently discontinued Leupold Gold Rings. It is however, some four ounces lighter, but if you have held a Gold Ring you have a good idea of how the McKinley will feel.
I’m waiting to hear back from Leupold on my query about an x32 version of this binocular. I’ve got a couple of QC questions I need to ask them too.
Image Performance:
This has a very sharp, high contrast image, with only a very slightly warm bias. Resolution leaves nothing for my eyes to desire. For a roof prism binocular, the apparent depth of field and 3-D effect is first rate. Colors seem very natural. The warm tint is not visible to the eye looking through this binocular. It only shows looking backwards though the instrument at a bright, pure white surface.
Field Performance:
The binocular presents a wide, bright, relatively deep, and flat field of view. The binocular I have first hand experience with that is brighter is the Zeiss FL. While not necessarily FL bright, it is almost still too bright. It has snowed here the first two days of the week, and the sun is now out, and the world here is bright. Yesterday when I scanned our black cattle on their newly snow white pasture, I had to crank the eye cups down and use the binoculars with my sunglasses. Low light performance is very good. Glare is nicely controlled. While I realize I am not the best person to comment on color fringing, I can induce none, no matter what target I use. I can only get it in out of focus situations.
The edges here are quite sharp, not perfect, but as good as you can find for less than $2,000+. The field is also very flat. I can see a bit of a hint of curvature. It is more of a peripheral sensation for me. As I look to the edge to see it, my eyes evidently accommodate and it goes away. So we are dealing with a very wide, sweet spot at least 90% of the field, and very immersive view. It is a very easy view too. There is no hint for me of Rolling ball either.
Ergonomic Performance:
This is a large binocular and its size will likely lessen its appeal for some people to some degree. I have pretty big hands, and they are about right for me. They have a large diameter ocular design similar to the ZEN Prime HD. Leupold has gotten at least the start of a fix here, particularly on the 8x. The eye cups on both the McKinley’s have more taper than the Prime. The 8x has a longer eye cup, and the edge of the eye cup is more rounded than the 10x. Both feel better to eye and nose than the Prime, and the 8x McKinley is an improvement over the 10x. The eye relief gives them some leeway in the eye cup design than the 10x, but Leupold told me they are working on getting the same eye cup design on both. The ergonomic impact of the slight eye cup redesign is substantial.
The McKinley focuses counterclockwise to infinity. The focus movement is, I think, a decent balance of easy to move and stiff enough to stay where you put it until you move it. The focus moves through just less than 1.5 turns. I can stand up and focus on the tip of my shoes, about 4’. One turn takes the focus from there to 25’. Another one quarter turn takes the focus to infinity. There is one quarter turn past infinity. Cold temperatures do not seem to greatly affect wheel travel. There is a typical right eye diopter arrangement. It does not lock in place and there are no click stops, but it is stiff and should not pose a threat to move without user input.
There is a nearly imperceptible slack movement when changing focus directions. It is less than one degree. I do not see it unless I stop looking through the binocular and concentrate on nothing but focus wheel tension. I do not notice it in field use of the binocular. At some point in my life, I would have assumed nobody else would have paid any attention to this either, but not anymore. It is my opinion that the McKinley has a smooth and highly usable focus system, one that is free from unnecessary slack movement.
This binocular gives off the feel of being built like the proverbial tank. It is something that looks and feels like the rugged product Leupold tries to produce. This has more armor around it than the Prime, and also has thumb indents.
The McKinley looks like you could knock it off the pickup tailgate into the weeds with a baseball bat, pick it up, clean it off and go use it.
How does it compare:
ZEN Prime HD
The obvious and frankly unavoidable impression is that this is the same binocular as the ZEN Prime HD. Having said that, I don’t know the source of the McKinley. It has some differences to the Prime. The eye cup design is one difference. The field is sharper at the edge than the Prime and the field is flatter than the Prime and the image is just a bit brighter than the Prime. It has more rubber armor than the Prime, it has thumb indents and a different diopter ring.
Kruger Caldera
The Caldera is possessed of slightly less color, and the contrast of the McKinley is better.
ZEN ED 3
The McKinley is flatter and sharper at the edge than the ED 2 or 3. The eye cup of the ED series will likely appeal some people more than the McKinley. The center field sharpness may be a bit better in the McKinley
Vortex Viper HD
The Viper is smaller than the McKinley, nearly as bright, but has an obviously narrower, less immersive viewing experience.
Vortex Razor HD
This may be a bit brighter than the McKinley, but I have had more time with the latter. The Razor is smaller overall and has less massive oculars and will probably present an ergonomic preference to some people. Sharpness and apparent contrast is pretty close in the two. The Razor HD is twice the price of the McKinley too.
Zeiss Conquest HD
Let’s just say there is an astonishing physical, ergonomic, and optical similarity between the Conquest HD and the Razor HD. Frankly it is the same sort of similarity seen between the Prime and the McKinley. This is simply an observation, nothing more.
Put a perfectly focused Conquest and a Razor HD alongside a McKinley and you better get out the nit picker and the magnifying glass if you want separate anything of significance in the image of the three.
So in short, this seems a good binocular for a choice to provide excellent optics at a good price. There is really no point in spending more money. That is, unless you are driven by material things.
Hey, even the solid company guys at the Swarovski booth were impressed.
Now I am having fits with my camera not wanting to work right and my computer not wanting anything to do with recognizing connected cameras, so I will post pictures as I am bale to do so.
Last edited:
