Best 8x bins for $200 (1 Viewer)

[dries1]

Patudo,

Perhaps you should go take a dip in your seashore city, the water is nice and cold.

Andy W.

 

[Sterngucker]

...

Anyway, my condolences to the OP. But I happen to think, regardless of where they are made, the Vortex Diamondback HD 8x32 are absolutely delightful for $200 and punch WAY above their weight optically. And they are super compact and weigh only 450g naked. I can’t imagine a casual user not being blown away by them if they received them as a gift.

I have the older non-HD model (btw neither has any HD lenses or elements in them - it's just marketingspeak) and I can only agree with eitanaltman's assessment.

 

[dries1]

Lower priced optics are manufactured with a greater number of compromises (and more severe compromises) than so-called "Alphas".

There may involve materials, mechanical tolerances, choice of optical glass and other elements of design, coatings, and so on.

There is absolutely no way around this and to insist that lower-priced glass is "equivalent" or "as good as" or any other term in common use is just plain silly.

Celestron will never equal Zeiss, and Bushnell will never equal Swarovski, and to pretend otherwise is ingenuous.

Buy the best you can afford.

Thank you for this. My addition do not waste $200 on a binocular, save more $$ and get something better.

Andy W.

 

[Sterngucker]

Let us remind ourselves:

Any thoughts? My office is buying some SWAG for folks and I thought this would be a cool option. I've always liked the Travelites, but know they have been cheapened. Any thoughts on the 8x30 prostaffs?

Also needs to be readily available in US.

Reading that I firmly believe the man is not looking for 'alpha' binos at walmart prices. So droning on about 'alpha' quality not being available at his budget isn't helping anyone, especially not him. Plus: it is excruciatingly boring.


I still stand by the Vortex DB HD option.

 

[eitanaltman]

Lower priced optics are manufactured with a greater number of compromises (and more severe compromises) than so-called "Alphas".

They may involve materials, mechanical tolerances, choice of optical glass and other elements of design, coatings, and so on.

There is absolutely no way around this and to insist that lower-priced glass is "equivalent" or "as good as" or any other term in common use is just plain silly.

Celestron will never equal Zeiss, and Bushnell will never equal Swarovski, and to pretend otherwise is ingenuous.

Buy the best you can afford.

Thank you for this. My addition do not waste $200 on a binocular, save more $$ and get something better.

Andy W.

Respectfully, did you forget what the point of this thread was? This is an inexpensive gift for an office holiday party or something, the "you get what you pay for, spend more!" advice is not particularly useful or relevant here.

 

[cottonbase]

Respectfully, did you forget what the point of this thread was? This is an inexpensive gift for an office holiday party or something, the "you get what you pay for, spend more!" advice is not particularly useful or relevant here.

Indeed.

Lots of "I'm going to provide answers to questions that were never asked" going on in this thread.

Pathetic when grown adults make it "all about me".

 

[Upland]

Moderator: Please move or close this!

 

[dries1]

Hey Altman, weren't you on vacation?.. I sure don't need your advice to give mine, got it.

Andy W.

 

[eitanaltman]

The name's Eitan, and I like answering the question that was actually asked.

 

[Josh Exmoor]

If I was buying for myself I'd pick the Sightron Blue Sky, but for the purposes involved I think the Diamondback 8x32 is the right choice. Compact, durable, waterproof, good warranty, widely available, and the brand is known and well regarded outside of optics nerds.