Viper HD vs Razor HD 10x42 FOV (1 Viewer)

[Tatanka88]

Hi!
I've read strange things about the Razor HD, what are your experiences with the field of view?
Is it really smaller than the factory specified data? How close is it to the Viper?
I had about 1 minute to hold both in my hands, limited to about 200m, in a street with both ends closed with buildings, and I could not find all the differences, however, I could see the difference in CA, with stronger aberration in the Viper.

Just wondering if I'm really getting that much more for double the price...

What do you think, why did Vortex return to a narrower FOV with the UHD models?

 

[Tatanka88]

Anyone?

 

[giosblue]

I few years ago when I was looking to change my bins, I had the 10x40 Viper and Razor side by side for over a week, under field conditions and to be honest, optically there was nothing in it.
I choose the Razor because at my age 63, it would the last binocular I would buy. Nearly everybody on these forums rave about the Swarovski SLC's, so I bought some to compare to the Razors, nothing in that either, my son preferred the Razors, I couldn't make my mind up, the whites on the SLC,s was a tad whiter. If you want to save a few bob, go with the Vipers, excellent pair of bins by any standard.

 

[Paultricounty]

Anyone?

The 2018 version Viper has a FOV of 6.5 degrees to 6.9 for the Razor, that’s about 20 feet at a 1000 yards. Nothing there in my opinion that would would sway the choice.

This is an interesting comparison considering the Razor is twice the price $500 to $1000, but the gap in optical quality is smaller than with other brands in that price gap.

Although there is a slight difference in resolution and very little difference in CA control. The difference here is not like the difference between a Zeiss Terra and a conquest or a Nikon M7 and a MHG. Also the body (build quality) on the Razor is not any better than the viper. Here I’d choose the Viper over the Razor.

I just bought the Cabelas pre 2018 Viper HD sale , and I think these are brighter than the 2018 version, and they’re $200 less. At my age of 63 this is the last binoculars I’m going to buy this December 🤣.

Happy Holidays
Paul

 

[Tatanka88]

Thank you very much for your answers!
I also saw little (but not negligible) differences between them, the Razor has clearly a bigger sweet spot, but I was unable to determine the FOV.
Maybe I would go for a Viper then...

 

[Pepitogrillo]

Really the Razor, twice the price, is similar, óptics and mechanical, at the Viper..??? Umm..

 

[Tatanka88]

And what about brightness? Is there a reliable test somewhere comparing the light transmission between them?

 

[Paultricounty]

And what about brightness? Is there a reliable test somewhere comparing the light transmission between them?

I believe allbinos has some light transmission numbers on both of these bins. But for some reason what the eyes see and his numbers don’t always line up. I think there was some talk that two different methods were over time with his measuring of transmission, so that would mean some of the old reviews of some binoculars would have different transmission levels if done with the newer method. But don’t quote me on that.

I was very surprised by the lack of differences between the Viper and Razor. There is barely a noticeable optics bump for double the price, and that seems very unusual when comparing other brands where there is a clear optics bump and a physical build improvement. The Viper and Razor share the same magnesium body and similar coatings. I really could not tell much of a difference between them, if I had to mention one attribute it would be the Razor was a tad brighter, but not in any significant way.

There’s a big noticeable jump from a Nikon M7 to a MHG or a Terra to a conquest , not only in optics but also in build quality. That’s not the case between these two Vortex. It’s possible the Viper is just a great little mid level binocular and a sweet spot in the Vortex lineup. There’s so little separating these two. Ive always been one of those people who’s willing pay (reluctantly) the premium for the small but noticeable improvements in optics , but on these two I couldn’t justify it if I can’t see the difference. The Razor UHD is a whole other story, it’s almost like Vortex went from a mid level (viper ) to a premium alpha (UHD) in one jump and left out the upper mid level, imo.

Paul

 

[Steve C]

I tend to agree with Paul here. I recently had Vortex replace a 2005 vintage Fury 6.5x32 with a new 8x42 Viper HD. Have to say I was surprised by the View from the Viper HD. I'd not feel put put or disadvantaged using the Viper in any scenario. That got my curiosity up so I went to the local Sportsman's Warehouse, who always stock a good selection of Vortex stuff. I think one reason Vortex sells so well is that their stuff is very easy to actually find and see it for yourself. Anyway I go in there quite a bit and know all but the new guys that show up behind the counter time to time. I finally convinced them to deploy some resolution charts in various places in the large building. My impression was that I would not fork out the extra money for the Razor. A friend of mine who was an optics and camera dealer his whole life, and carried a lot of Vortex stuff always took his Viper HD on his at least once yearly birding trips as he did not think the Razor was worth the extra either. Both my friend and the guys at Sportsman's say the Vortex Warranty is a big deal to people who buy Vortex.

 

[Paultricounty]

I tend to agree with Paul here. I recently had Vortex replace a 2005 vintage Fury 6.5x32 with a new 8x42 Viper HD. Have to say I was surprised by the View from the Viper HD. I'd not feel put put or disadvantaged using the Viper in any scenario. That got my curiosity up so I went to the local Sportsman's Warehouse, who always stock a good selection of Vortex stuff. I think one reason Vortex sells so well is that their stuff is very easy to actually find and see it for yourself. Anyway I go in there quite a bit and know all but the new guys that show up behind the counter time to time. I finally convinced them to deploy some resolution charts in various places in the large building. My impression was that I would not fork out the extra money for the Razor. A friend of mine who was an optics and camera dealer his whole life, and carried a lot of Vortex stuff always took his Viper HD on his at least once yearly birding trips as he did not think the Razor was worth the extra either. Both my friend and the guys at Sportsman's say the Vortex Warranty is a big deal to people who buy Vortex.

The warranty and customer service is great. And they have a product for almost everybody, from the least expensive entry-level Binoculars all the way up to the alpha UHD, phenomenal glass. Until I tried and had all three of these side-by-side, I never knew that Vortex UHD line was so good.

Paul

 

[Tatanka88]

Update
Allbinos measured their FOV to be the same. Sad.
I was able to see for myself, I've been to a local hunting expo, tried both (last generations) Viper HD and Razor HD 10x42, didn't see any difference in the field of view, however, Razor HD is a clear winner regarding CA, and most importantly, it is noticeably brighter!
Viper has better ergonomics, at least for me. I feel it more balanced, I love the stiffer focus wheel.
I would go for the Razor HD, but now I'm considering Tract Toric UHD (Sch HT), which could be better in all aspects except maybe CA, have to find out!
Toric is a rare unicorn here in Europe, but in May my friend could bring me one from the US, so I need to find ASAP a good comparison between them!

 

[Paultricounty]

Update
Allbinos measured their FOV to be the same. Sad.
I was able to see for myself, I've been to a local hunting expo, tried both (last generations) Viper HD and Razor HD 10x42, didn't see any difference in the field of view, however, Razor HD is a clear winner regarding CA, and most importantly, it is noticeably brighter!
Viper has better ergonomics, at least for me. I feel it more balanced, I love the stiffer focus wheel.
I would go for the Razor HD, but now I'm considering Tract Toric UHD (Sch HT), which could be better in all aspects except maybe CA, have to find out!
Toric is a rare unicorn here in Europe, but in May my friend could bring me one from the US, so I need to find ASAP a good comparison between them!

The Razor 10x42 is 6.9 and 362 ft at 1000 yards, one of the largest on the market , and newer 2018 viper is 6.5. The older Viper was 6°, substantially less. Also the 2018 viper version had less CA and was a touch brighter, Very little separates the newer viper to the old Razor HD. Definitely not worth the $500 bump. It’s not like going from a size Terra to a Conquest, or a Nikon monarch 7 to a MHG, that’s more of an optical jump, not so much from 2018 Viper and current Razor.

The real big jump into premium glass is there UHD. I’ve compared all three of these side-by-side extensively. This is really sharp glass, very bright and barely a hint of CA and only near the edges in the difficult lighting conditions.

Paul

 

[tonyalva]

I believe allbinos has some light transmission numbers on both of these bins. But for some reason what the eyes see and his numbers don’t always line up. I think there was some talk that two different methods were over time with his measuring of transmission, so that would mean some of the old reviews of some binoculars would have different transmission levels if done with the newer method. But don’t quote me on that.

I was very surprised by the lack of differences between the Viper and Razor. There is barely a noticeable optics bump for double the price, and that seems very unusual when comparing other brands where there is a clear optics bump and a physical build improvement. The Viper and Razor share the same magnesium body and similar coatings. I really could not tell much of a difference between them, if I had to mention one attribute it would be the Razor was a tad brighter, but not in any significant way.

There’s a big noticeable jump from a Nikon M7 to a MHG or a Terra to a conquest , not only in optics but also in build quality. That’s not the case between these two Vortex. It’s possible the Viper is just a great little mid level binocular and a sweet spot in the Vortex lineup. There’s so little separating these two. Ive always been one of those people who’s willing pay (reluctantly) the premium for the small but noticeable improvements in optics , but on these two I couldn’t justify it if I can’t see the difference. The Razor UHD is a whole other story, it’s almost like Vortex went from a mid level (viper ) to a premium alpha (UHD) in one jump and left out the upper mid level, imo.

Paul

The Vipers are not magnesium at all.

 

[Paultricounty]

The Vipers are not magnesium at all.

You’re absolutely right I stand corrected. Thank you.

 

[Crazyhog]

I recently bought the Vipers 10x42. I love everything about them, especially for under $500. I am far from an expert though. My last pair were 30 year old Minoltas 10x50, but the Vipers bests them in every way.

 

[Elkhornsun]

Light transmission is primarily a function of the diameter of the objectives. A 50mm objective has 41% more surface area than a 42mm objective and that is what counts. A 42mm has 96% more surface area than a 30mm objective and in low light this is quite significant.

I compared the 2023 Razor HD to the 2023 Razor UHD and there was so little difference in image quality that I returned the UHD version that costs twice as much. I also have the 12x50 Viper HD and I am in the process of selling them, having bought the Razor 12x50 HD which are significantly better in terms of viewing clarity. The greater the image magnification the greater the gap in image clarity can be readily seen.

With a 7x50 even a $200 binocular serves it purpose for marine navigation and spending more provides no added value in this situation.

 

[Paultricounty]

I agree with Elkhornsum here, all things being equal the 50 mm will be superior in low light conditions every time.

I’d like opine on my experience with the Vortex comparisons. I had the Viper HD, razor HD, and the UHD in 10 x 42 all at the same time for over two weeks. (I also did this testing with the 8 x 42’s at a later date. I had all three on tripods on under different lighting conditions throughout the day on multiple days with five other observers. My conclusion was that the viper and the razor was so close that the razor HD went back and I kept the Viper and UHD. In my opinion the viper is one of the best $500 range bono out there.

As far as the UHD, it is in another class over the razor HD. Imo it’s the best 1600 glass money can buy. In low light the brightness difference is automatically discernible the minute we looked through them. During the day the sharpness and snap into focus was very close to my NL’s and SF’s.

I did the same test with the 8 x 42 and kept the UHD. I have quite a few 8 x 42’s so I didn’t feel the need to add the viper. The UHD was so good I couldn't send them back.

I’d like to add a little over a year ago I was testing my Razor HD with a friends UHD , my opinion was very different then. But after more scrutiny I realized that the UHD I was testing was not in great condition, was beat up, glass was dirty and might’ve been slightly out of collimation. Others Ymmv.

Paul

 

[qwerty5]

IIRC, 50mm models are (to some extent) a different design than 42mm, much more so than the difference between 8x and 10x. That might explain why elkhornsun (testing Vortex's 50mm models) found a much different result than Paul did testing 42mm models.

My conclusion was that the viper and the razor was so close that the razor HD went back and I kept the Viper and UHD.

So I'm curious, is the Razor a bad $1000 bin (ie significantly worse than say, the Conquest or MHG), or is the Viper just an exceptionally good $500 bin?

 

[Paultricounty]

IIRC, 50mm models are (to some extent) a different design than 42mm, much more so than the difference between 8x and 10x. That might explain why elkhornsun (testing Vortex's 50mm models) found a much different result than Paul did testing 42mm models.


So I'm curious, is the Razor a bad $1000 bin (ie significantly worse than say, the Conquest or MHG), or is the Viper just an exceptionally good $500 bin?

Absolutely not, the Razor HD is an excellent binocular and fits right in there with all the other $1000 price point choices, imo.

I think you said it well, the Viper is imo an exceptional $500 choice. My experience is reflected in the fact I see a good optical bump from the other makers when we look at their lineup in the $500 and $1000 range. Conquest is clearly a step up from Tera, Nikon MHG a clear step up from monarch 7 are two good examples. If I’m not mistaken Vortex Razor HD has not been updated as was done to the Viper in 2018. The viper to Razor HD is where I wouldn’t spent the money , but with that being said I paid $1600 for the UHD to get that bump, so go figure.

Paul.

 

[Elkhornsun]

Hi!
I've read strange things about the Razor HD, what are your experiences with the field of view?
Is it really smaller than the factory specified data? How close is it to the Viper?
I had about 1 minute to hold both in my hands, limited to about 200m, in a street with both ends closed with buildings, and I could not find all the differences, however, I could see the difference in CA, with stronger aberration in the Viper.

Just wondering if I'm really getting that much more for double the price...

What do you think, why did Vortex return to a narrower FOV with the UHD models?

I compared the Vortex UHD with their HD binoculars and the difference was not noticeable other than the HD selling for two-thirds as much.