BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steve C" data-source="post: 1270228" data-attributes="member: 56622">Kristoffer,The whole idea of a "blind optics test" (I think there may be an oxymoron hiding somewhere in there) is probably a good one.  Especially if we could keep Tero and his cheese spread under control. Blind by cheese spread is probably not what we seek.   It seems (to me anyway) a lot of the praise and the "wows!" we read from people are in large part written in order to convince themselves their buyers' remorse is unfounded and that they really didn't pay too much for their high money glass.  I think there are a lot of lesser priced binoculars that would fare way better than people might think if the identity and price of the range of binoculars was hidden from the viewer and the testing was done simply to answer a series of questions related just to optical quality. One of the binoculars that would compete with the big boys quite well is the Viper.  The optics of that binocular are good enough to satisfy the binocular needs of even serious birders.  A lot of people really do enjoy viewing through what they percieve as their "best".  Some also really can justify their need for top dollar stuff.  So, far be it from me to criticize their purchase. People tend to go overboard in analysis with the goal of finding fault far too easily.Human nature is what it is, and bigger, or more advanced, or more whatever is seen as desirable.  While I am not foolish enough to say a Viper can hang at the same level in serious optics testing as the premium brands, I am saying that you simply do not need to spend that kind of money for a good binocular.  Using the money you save toward a good trip where you can use the binocular in new scenery is in my opinion a better coice.I have a Viper and like it a lot. I would not mind a Razor, but I had money for the Viper, but not the Razor when I needed to buy.  The big practical differences I see is that the Razor has a noticeably larger FOV.  There is also the obvious difference in the designs that will effect personal ergonomics choice.  The Viper is actually a little brighter than the Razor.  Put one of each on Jupiter and its moons and the Razor is the resolution winner.  But in terrestrial viewing, the Viper has never left me wishing for more optical quality.</blockquote>

Verification