Just noticed you posted this so I did a little research. I haven't personally used any Leupolds recently, but overall specs don't look to be as good as the Bushnells yet the price tag is higher. Field of view is inferior across the board. Every power/aperture configuration is narrower than the corresponding Forge or Engage configuration. They have phase coated prisms, but that's pretty standard for roofs of this price range, so nothing special there. No mention of dielectric coatings. That would be a big consideration for me and is largely why I went for the Bushnells because this typically isn't something you see except in very high end roof prisms. Getting a dielectric diagonal for my telescope was a game changer. It reflects noticeably more light than without it. Having both phase AND dielectric coatings at this price point makes the Bushnells a no brainer IMHO. Most of the "features" on the Leupolds sound like brand trademarks rather than actual optical industry jargon so that would turn me off.I appreciate all of the replies. Anyone seen the Leupold BX-4 HD's?
Just noticed you posted this so I did a little research. I haven't personally used any Leupolds recently, but overall specs don't look to be as good as the Bushnells yet the price tag is higher. Field of view is inferior across the board. Every power/aperture configuration is narrower than the corresponding Forge or Engage configuration. They have phase coated prisms, but that's pretty standard for roofs of this price range, so nothing special there. No mention of dielectric coatings. That would be a big consideration for me and is largely why I went for the Bushnells because this typically isn't something you see except in very high end roof prisms. Getting a dielectric diagonal for my telescope was a game changer. It reflects noticeably more light than without it. Having both phase AND dielectric coatings at this price point makes the Bushnells a no brainer IMHO. Most of the "features" on the Leupolds sound like brand trademarks rather than actual optical industry jargon so that would turn me off.
I remember Leupolds being synonymous with top notch when I was a kid. They seem to have faded into a somewhat obscure brand today. Not saying they make crappy binoculars by any means, on the contrary, they're solid offerings, but they just don't seem to be one of the more popular brands, so you gotta wonder if that's for a reason....as in not that special for the price.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Monarch 7 and Vortex Vipers are the best of the $500 and below price point. I have looked through many bins below this price point and not found any that hang with these two including by Bushnell, Vanguards, Leopold, Alpen, and Zeiss Terra. I find Monarch 7's wide field of view appealing and Vortex's warrantee and light weight appealing. Optically they are very close.
I think the "rage" with the Vipers is the quality for the price. And the Vortex name which really took off in the hunting community due to a lot of sponsor support and warranty.
I don't consider Vipers mediocre. I consider them the benchmark for that price range. Some will be better, some worse, but Vipers are a very solid value for the $ spent IMO.
If the MIC models don't hold up you can just send them to Vortex and they will send you a new pair.I've always really liked the Viper HD series, and many of my wildlife colleagues seem similarly impressed. They are very robust and provide very good central performance in all aspects, e.g. sharpness, control of CA, and brightness. The narrow FoV was their biggest flaw, but the new MiC models do not have this issue. I do not know if they will hold up, long-term, as well as the MiJ models but I will not fault them solely for that difference.
I agree. Leupold has always had excellent customer service.If the MIC models don't hold up you can just send them to Vortex and they will send you a new pair.