So how bad are Steiners? (1 Viewer)

[justin2992]

Hello,

I'm new to the forum and to high-end binoculars. I've noticed a consistent lack of enthusiasm among birders for Steiner binoculars. Are they all marketing hype? They sure have a manly, rugged look and feel to them, but I have no experience with judging optical quality.
I've handled and looked through the Wildlife 8.5x28 and the Peregrine 10x42 and didn't find anything objectionable.

 

[Al Tee]

Justin; welcome.
Maybe this isn't the answer you're looking for but your question as to Steiner binoculars can also be directed to other brands. I think I'm right in saying that over here, (UK), Steiner would be classed as mid range quality & not high end. I've observed lots of threads regarding performance of binoculars and the same names always appear; Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss & Nikon, & maybe through jealousy that I can't afford such equipment it prompted me to put a search in the forums box headed "snob value"! Appologies to anyone I offend but as I said, "I'm only jealous"!
This ended up with me looking at a thread started by "Pduxon" in August last year, (well before I started birding), and titled "Top bins v the mid range".
I found it interesting reading & to some it could save them a few quid, (sorry "bucks")!
Hope you find it in some way answers your question.
Al.

 

[Henry B]

Welcome to Birdforum,Justin.

 

[ranburr]

Steiner is a quality bino, especially the Peregrines. Steiners primary focus has been on military, police, and other govt contracts. Unless things have changed, their number one civilian sales market is to the marine industry followed by hunters. They make an extremely rugged product. Here is the problem as I see it: First, they have too many models, some of which have very short lifespans; Secondly, while the peregrines are very good, they are not as good as binos that are only a few hundred $$$ more, and they are essentially equal to and sometimes not quite as good as binos of similar or slightly cheaper pricing; Finally, they are rather unattractive looking, they all have a "tactical" look to them.

ranburr

 

[xenophobe]

I loved my 10x50's when I was in the Army. That was before I knew better. They're still great binoculars, but definitely aren't anywhere near Zeiss or Leica. I've only had extensive use of the Military version. I don't know how their other lines rate, but I do know they're a lot like Nikon or Bushnell... lots of crap, along with a couple of really nice performers.

 

[chartwell99]

I loved my 10x50's when I was in the Army. That was before I knew better. They're still great binoculars, but definitely aren't anywhere near Zeiss or Leica.

Most of the Steiner "Military Marine" porros I have seen, including the very costly and now discontinued "Hunting" series, were out of collimation right out of the box, and none are repairable. The 10 x 50s were actually the best of the bunch, but I think it is a real stretch to characterize Steiners as "great binoculars".

 

[barry robson]

Over styled, uncomfortable thumb grips, uncomfortable eye cups - at least that was my impression when I tried them a coup[le of years ago alongside Minox, Opticron etc in the same price range.

I love my Minox

B

 

[xenophobe]

The 10 x 50s were actually the best of the bunch, but I think it is a real stretch to characterize Steiners as "great binoculars".

Well, I meant that in the particular context in that they were great for the particular use they were given. They had IR protection, and the image quality was nice. They were also extremely durable. For extreme duty, infantry-issue binoculars, they were excellent.

Were they as nice as my Zeiss Classics or my Ultravids? Not a chance.

 

[Jess Curious]

I consider Steiners to be near or at the top of the second tier i.e. non Zeiss/Swar/Nikon/Leica in terms of optic performance, but they are definitely more rugged than any of the Top tier (IMHO)
However, do most folks in the birding community need that level of toughness? Probably not, so spend the money on optical performance rather than toughness
I own a set of 10x50 Night Hunters and 8x30 Predators
I'll still use the Predators for hunting,, but the Night Hunters I'll sell off to pay for some Nikon Venturers I just purchased
Night Hunters are supposed to be the top of Steiner's line but they aren't as good, even to my untrained eyes, as the Nikons.
In short, if you're going to be beating the bush or climbing over rocks etc for a hunt, Definitely get the Steiners but otherwise...

 

[xenophobe]

I consider Steiners to be near or at the top of the second tier i.e. non Zeiss/Swar/Nikon/Leica in terms of optic performance, but they are definitely more rugged than any of the Top tier (IMHO)

I would put my Zeiss Classics against any pair of Steiners in terms of ruggedness. If I had the rubber armored Ultravid I would do the same as well.

 

[Swedpat]

Steiner are very reliable and rugged binoculars which is an attractive quality, and I had a pair of Rally 8x30 some years ago. The sharpness was good but contrast and brightness very poor, they where almost uncoated. They had the most tremendeous ghost images and inner reflections I have ever seen in any binoculars. When looking at night time the entire FOV was filled up with strong light circles around light sources as street lights. This phenomena was also mentioned by friends who tried them.

The reason to the circles I think wasn't bad coating, but that the inside had a glossy surface. This effect was visible even in the much more expensive boating 7x50 model I tried. It surprises me that in other respects qualitative binoculars had a such big problem. What's with the Steiners today, have you other noticed this I described?

 

[Wehr]

I would put my Zeiss Classics against any pair of Steiners in terms of ruggedness. If I had the rubber armored Ultravid I would do the same as well.

And you would very likely damage both, the Classics and the Ultravid in this contest against a Steiner IF.

Walter

 

[xenophobe]

For rough handling? I'd still take my Classics. In a pure torture test? Steiner would easily win.

 

[robert s]

Steiners Peragines

Wow I`m glad I got my 8-42 peragines before I found Birdforum or I probably would`nt have bought them. I have no experiance with any other steiner line so I can`t comment on them but I have finaly been able to check out the leica`s and swaros and there excellent but with no disernable differance in clarity. So I figure I got excellent binocs for half the price. Oh and the leicas and swaros I checked out were with fellow bird enthusiasts. And they were quit impressed with the looks and clarity of the steiners. So to each his own. :t:

 

[bodromarsh]

Steiner's main problem is the fixed focus.

Steiner has many different series. Currenly the Predator, Merlin, and Peregrine are center focus.

Their reputation over the years has primarily been bought on the Military Marine Series. The ones with green armor. I agree with another reviewer who stated they were near the top of the second tier of binos, below Leica, Swarovski, Zeiss, and some Nikon.

Speaking of the Military Marine models, their main problem is the fixed focus. You focus them once for 20 yards to infinity, and this does really work, but you can never focus them to the greatest precision. Their main appeal is that you can get a European binocular for a price the non-enthusiast can afford. They are basically the Volkswagen of binoculars. Not as good as BMW, but still nice German engineering.

I agree that they are horrible at night, with ghosting, and light rings from any light source. Another thing I don't like about them is the view has a large black circle. It's like looking down a tube. My Leica don't have all this black surround. The Steiner 7x50 Military Marine has a much larger exit pupil than my Leica 8x42 Trinovid, but the brightness cannot compare. The Leica is far superior.

I used to love Steiner when my budget was lower, and my experience less, but since moving up to Leica I have abandoned Steiner.