I think the LGR's are very favorable in comparison to the ELs,FLs. Leupold could put a $1500 price tag on them and people's phycie would have said their as good as anything else. People automatically accociate price with quality. In general this is true up to a point. Remember it coast no more for Zeiss,Swaro.,Leica to produce binos, than it does Leupold. Your paying import fees,Euro vs Dollar, that sort of thing,and lets not forget a name; although they have it for a reason. Know this, binos of the same make and model will have differences, so this is subjective. Three 10x42s of the same make and model may be different, one has better color, resolution, less glare, you get the point. Back to your question. To my eyes the ELs or SLCs offer the best overall image. The Zeiss is probally as good in the center, but fall short near the edges. The LGRs remind me more of the Swaros. They have a flat image with a high resolution. When I said the color wasn't on par with my Leica or FLs, I meant they have sort of a dead view, so to speak, in compairson. But so does my ELs. The LGRs feel very robust in their construction, very solid. They have decent eye relief, and the 10's have a huge FOV, 65 degrees. As you can probably tell, I really like the LGRS. My opinion is it's really a toss up between them and the ELs. I like them both. Best price I have found is at DNRSports.com. P.S. Don't forget about Nikon!
. Which is it?
