Poll: Point of diminishing returns (1 Viewer)

[ramsdude47]

For the sake of having a control, let’s consider price points for 8x42 binoculars in USD.

In your opinion, what is the MSRP price point where the performance gain no longer increases as dramatically as the price point? In the pictured graph, that would represent point #4. Obviously different manufacturers hit different price points in between what I have listed, so round up or down. Feel free to chip in with a specific model you like at the price point you choose.

I picked this random call center graph because IMO it is the best visual representation of my question, particularly because it has the numbers. The obvious substitutions are performance on the Y Axis and price on the X Axis. I have also posted this exact question on Rokslide, it should be interesting to see how the results vary.

 

[Jos Stratford]

As your location is not clear, I think you need to add a currency - a price point of 500 US dollars is 365 British pounds and 430 euro for example.

So if someone answers 500, this will be quite different in different currencies.

 

[ramsdude47]

Thank you for pointing that out, I failed to account for this forum not being as Western US centric as Rokslide is.

 

[Chosun Juan]

My vote is an approximation only - actually in the range $400 - $500, and you have to look around reasonably thoroughly to get a 'fit' to you.

** It refers to optical performance only.**
For this amount of coin you are at the top end of the budget/value models, and should be able to get a pretty decent combination of Fov, CA handling, brightness, sweet spot size, and view quality.

You could also get lucky at half that price point too and not notice any difference. The Bushnell Legend M springs to mind. Some very lucky folks even picked them up for half of that again !!

For mechanical precision /performance as well as that level of view - I think you need to ~ double that price point ...... say $900.
I'm thinking Nikon Monarch HG here.

My trusty sixth set of eyes - the Zen-Ray 8x43 ED3 ...... 10+ years and going strong.

I could equally be on board with folks who reckon that $2 - 3000 is where it's at !


Chosun 🙅‍♀️

 

[dries1]

I choose the 2 grand and up, because they will be around for a lot longer than any $900 glass. It is not just the optics, it is the design, materials of composition and craftsmanship.

 

[Maljunulo]

All you really have to decide is how many compromises you are willing to accept.

After that, it is easy.

ETA: I fail to see the economy in purchasing two (or a series of) $900 glasses instead of one $1800 glass which will inevitably be "better" whatever that word may mean to the individual.

 

[ramsdude47]

I guess my counter point to “2K glass being around longer than 900” would be by the time the $900 glass becomes “obsolete”, the new wave of $900 glass will be pretty comparable to the old $2k glass.

 

[dries1]

IMO binoculars have not evolved much in the last 25 years, your miles may vary of course, but you can keep the $900 glass, different folks for different folks. The $900 glass will never be built as well as a $2000 glass, one always gets what they pay for, not just binoculars.

 

[Chosun Juan]

Y'all are just shootin the breeze and not answering the OP's question.

The $900 glass will never be built as well as a $2000 glass, one always gets what they pay for, not just binoculars.

I'd argue that the Nikon MHG is 'built' every bit as well as the Zeiss SF - if not better. The only thing that differs is the spec of the optical componentry ....

It might be productive for the OP to chime in and define what they meant by "performance" - optical ? mechanical ? complete binocular ? or whole ownership experience - function, feels, financial investment /return, warranty, service etc ?

Otherwise it's just a big ol' d*ck measurin competition, and that's clearly not going to suit some of us ! 😆


Chosun 🙅‍♀️

 

[ramsdude47]

Definitely highest emphasis on optical quality, I know there is subjectivity to that as well but not nearly as much as all of the other aspects of performance.

 

[A2GG]

I based my answer on the whole binocular. If mostly optics, I would then choose the $900 tier.

 

[Steve C]

There are two different sides to the "you get what you pay for" argument posted above. The other side is "you can overpay for what you get". Neither answer is either intrinsically right or wrong, but it illustrates the divide between the two levels.

As to the OP, it is my opinion that the lower dot (point 4) on the central part of the curve is $500. The upper point (point 8) is $1,200, but I think the point sits a bit too high and the last point maybe a bit low..

 

[ZDHart]

My $900 Conquest HD 8x32 and 10x42 are certainly very high quality binoculars. Especially with regard to build quality and mechanical performance.

But that said, I can clearly see a significant bump in optical performance with my $2100 UVHD+ and $2400 SF bins.

I had been VERY content with the Conquest HDs, in every respect. Until I compared them to my newly acquired UVHD+ and SF bins.

Now, I reach for some UVHD+ or SF action, and that's it. They're ALL great bins, but I've been spoiled.

SO... bottom line for me, point of diminishing returns begins gently at around $1000 and then sets in HARD at $2100.

 

[Maljunulo]

There are two different sides to the "you get what you pay for" argument posted above. The other side is "you can overpay for what you get". Neither answer is either intrinsically right or wrong, but it illustrates the divide between the two levels.

I suspect that the owner/driver of a Yugo or a Trabant probably comforts himself by looking at a BMW owner/driver and thinking "That guy overpaid, because he was just paying for the name, and his car is not 12-15 times better than mine."

 

[Chosun Juan]

I suspect that the owner/driver of a Yugo or a Trabant probably comforts himself by looking at a BMW owner/driver and thinking "That guy overpaid, because he was just paying for the name, and his car is not 12-15 times better than mine."

There was a time when BMW's were leading edge mechanical and stylish designs - instead of now, like something out of the Rocky and Bullwinkle show .....



Chosun 🙅‍♀️

 

[gcole]

IMO binoculars have not evolved much in the last 25 years, your miles may vary of course, but you can keep the $900 glass, different folks for different folks. The $900 glass will never be built as well as a $2000 glass, one always gets what they pay for, not just binoculars.

I am amazed on how much optics have evolved ….. Not just 25 years but these past fifty years. The cost ratio to quality has also given the consumer more bang for their dollars and I think this example is proof of that ….. I have owned the Meopta Meostar 8x32 and the Kowa Genesis 8x33. One could argue here on this forum til the cows come home, as to which pair is Optically better or not better than a $1800 plus Zeiss Fl 8x32. I have seen and handled the Zeiss and there is no way I will believe the Zeiss is built better just because of their higher(Double) price. All three … the Zeiss FL , Kowa Genesis and the Meopta Meostar are indeed some of the best high end built binoculars one could purchase and Yes one always gets what they pay for but in this comparison …. In my opinion Paying twice as much for the Zeiss 8x32 FL is not getting you a better built binocular, just a very more expensive one.

 

[dries1]

I agree regarding the Meopta a well made glass for sure, I have no idea about the Kowa but I have heard good things about them. I guess the price difference also includes the optical quality in this case. The Meopta was always I felt was underpriced and performed like a premium glass, owning a couple of Meostars myself I would agree they were a great bang for the buck, but their prices have come up a bit as of late.
I still think that the Leica BN can compete today, that is why I do not think the evolution of glass has changed much over 25 years, yes they are more economical values out there today, but in general, what can I see out there in nature with an NL that I can't see with a BN, nothing.

 

[jan van daalen]

Well, the immense FOV for one thing, the edge tot edge sharpness and brightness for example. Than there is the weight and balance difference.
Yes, the BN is the Porsche of the past century but the Porsche of 2021 is better.

Jan

 

[GrampaTom]

"immense" FOV?

 

[jan van daalen]

159 against 130?

Jan