The 'BEST' Binoculars

[307]

I have the 11's too and noticed the frequent refocusing. I thought it was just a matter of being a higher magnification optic, something that can't really be fixed, but maybe not. Are other brands better in this regard? Is it the AK prism rather than the SP prism that causes that shallow depth of field? I really have no idea.

 

[Ryan Avery]

I have the 11's too and noticed the frequent refocusing. I thought it was just a matter of being a higher magnification optic, something that can't really be fixed, but maybe not. Are other brands better in this regard? Is it the AK prism rather than the SP prism that causes that shallow depth of field? I really have no idea.

I had them side by side with the 12ELs. I rarely have to focus the ELs unless it's very drastic. But like I said in the first post. The glass in that B2 is right there with the big boys IMO. So is not focusing as much worth $1,500 more?? That's for the individual to decide.

 

[Steve C]

307 is right. Keep this civil. But this is a site about gear and this is what we do.

Steve C, I can agree with you on the Maven B2s. I have a pair of 11s, the glass is exceptional. But they have to fix the depth of field. Having to refocus constantly drives me nuts. Oh, and I will shut the hell up in about 15 days once the bear season opens.

Ryan,

Depth of field is magnification dependent. It decreases with increasing magnification, which you likely realize. For me anything above 10x is too shallow in depth. My nephew's father-in-law has the 11x45. I think that the 11x is too shallow too, but I think the 12x50 SV is shallower still. I also think the 9x is the better binocular, since it is a hell of a lot wider field as well as deeper. That fades the 9 vs 11x magnification into insignificance for me. However I am not surprised any longer at two different reactions to the same binocular from two different people. Many times differences observed by one are not observed by another, an effect of the optical system fit for the users eyes. I think...

Sorry that pissed you off. I meant only to illustrate some experience with the bird site to shed some light on the theme of who drives optical development, hunters or birders. Any binocular review is subjective and if you like something else beside a Maven, that is just fine with me. Choices never hurt anybody.

307,

Thanks.

 

[dotman]

Thank God someone from the bird site has come over to Rokslide to tell us all how stupid we all are for buying anything but a Maven. I can’t wait for you to educate us in packs and clothing, so we can all just shut up and hunt!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow, would you say the same to Aron Snyder when he talks packs? God bless you.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Steve C,

I agree with what you are saying. But side by side I’m focusing the B2 a lot more that the ELs. So there has to be more to the story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[William Hanson (live2hunt)]

Thank God someone from the bird site has come over to Rokslide to tell us all how stupid we all are for buying anything but a Maven. I can’t wait for you to educate us in packs and clothing, so we can all just shut up and hunt!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pretty out of line man. The guy gives his opinion on the best bang for his buck and you attack it because he has other interests that you don't share in addition to his hunting interests, not cool.

Live2hunt custom shelters

 

[Ronb]

First of all, my comments on Steve’s first post were aimed at him putting optic buyers into two categories. He clearly intended to say that anyone spending more on binoculars then his 2 maven choices, were just spending money until they spent the most and then they would be happy. That there were no noticeable improvements spending more. I took offense to that, and I shot back. I was using the comparisons of pants and backpacks to compare how ridiculous that was to me. Nobody would suggest that if their backpack of choice was a stone glacier solo, that spending more on a Kifaru was insignificant or meaningless. Just someone looking to spend the most money. When you get to the $1000 binocular or the $500 pack level. We all know that the percentages of improvements are small, but they are there. It can be a big deal for some. Maybe my reaction was a bit snarky, but after some criticized his binocular choices, he quickly changed his tone to suggest how subjective all these things are. Sorry to Steve if I interpreted your post incorrectly. I just didn’t like being put into either of those categories.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[EastMT]

$1500 10x42 SLC
Amazing with my astigmatism and glasses, used a pair this year. Buying my own in July

$1000
Leica Trinovid 10x42 HD
For my eyes with glasses, the range of view is great, and at $999 locally, pretty close to the SLC view for half price.

$500 10x42 leupold pro guide hd
Pretty impressed with these my buddy has, work pretty well with glasses also.

$2.75, best optics investment ever, he doesn't ask for mine when there's moose in the yard

 

[BATTLEBORN]

$2.75, best optics investment ever, he doesn't ask for mine when there's moose in the yard*

Great pic. That will change quickly. Before you know it he will be reaching for your high dollar glass and you will shopping for new binos for yourself. Haha can you tell that's where im at now.

 

[wind gypsy]

Steve C,

I agree with what you are saying. But side by side I’m focusing the B2 a lot more that the ELs. So there has to be more to the story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Definitely more to the story. I have 10x42 Zeiss conquest hd and geovid Hd-b. The depth of focus in the Zeiss seems to be half of the Leica's at best!

 

[Blockcaver]

Definitely more to the story. I have 10x42 Zeiss conquest hd and geovid Hd-b. The depth of focus in the Zeiss seems to be half of the Leica's at best!

Those recent Leica Geovid's with the open bridge design have great depth of focus. I messed with a pair along side my SV 10-42 ELs and there was a significant difference in favor of the Leicas. The Swaros are extremely clear but you had to adjust focus a lot more. Still love the Swaros but have thought about owning the Geovid too.

 

[EastMT]

Here in Alaska we get a small oil dividend of about $1000 a year per person, his all goes in an account for the future, I'm hoping by the time he's 12 I'm borrowing his swaro gear!

 

[Matt Cashell]

Ryan,

Depth of field is magnification dependent. It decreases with increasing magnification, which you likely realize.

Not entirely.

Depth of field is also related to focal ratio, just as it is in photography. You can see this yourself if you artificially restrict the exit pupil (stop down the optic) on a binocular. You can do this by cutting a disk of paper with a hole in the middle and putting it over the objective lens, restricting the exit pupil. This is pretty amazing actually and the depth of field gets immediately and obviously deeper.

Besides this difference between optical designs, there is "perceived depth of field" differences where some binoculars seem to require much less focusing than other designs, for whatever reason. All of my favorites seem to excel in this area, relative to their competition.

As far as the "best" handheld binoculars, that is mostly just a "favorite" for the individual.

Everybody has a budget, too. It is kind of frustrating to constantly hear that people need top end glass to be effective hunters. That really isn't true. People need to get out and hunt to be really good hunters and buying $3000 binoculars can really get in the way of hunting for a lot of people.

Even the European "Best of the Best" aren't really the best anyway, if you have the money.

You could always spring for Nikon WX and tell all the lowly Swaro owners they just keep saving until they can afford a really good binocular.

 

[sneaky]

I wish the Leica HD-Bs could be tripod mounted with a stud. Guess you can't have it all.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[dotman]

I wish the Leica HD-Bs could be tripod mounted with a stud. Guess you can't have it all.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The bino hand works pretty darn well though. Just don’t assume Outdoorsmans will put the qr plate in the best possible position, they won’t so you’ll have to play with it but there’s 4 possible mounting spots.

 

[wind gypsy]

I wish the Leica HD-Bs could be tripod mounted with a stud. Guess you can't have it all.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That would be nice. It would also be nice if the Leica warranty department would send back my geovids they have had since mid December!

 

[dotman]

That would be nice. It would also be nice if the Leica warranty department would send back my geovids they have had since mid December!

Yeah they keep pushing back the date on mine as well, but mine they are replacing with new.

 

[Ryan Avery]

Not entirely.

Depth of field is also related to focal ratio, just as it is in photography. You can see this yourself if you artificially restrict the exit pupil (stop down the optic) on a binocular. You can do this by cutting a disk of paper with a hole in the middle and putting it over the objective lens, restricting the exit pupil. This is pretty amazing actually and the depth of field gets immediately and obviously deeper.

Besides this difference between optical designs, there is "perceived depth of field" differences where some binoculars seem to require much less focusing than other designs, for whatever reason. All of my favorites seem to excel in this area, relative to their competition.

As far as the "best" handheld binoculars, that is mostly just a "favorite" for the individual.

Everybody has a budget, too. It is kind of frustrating to constantly hear that people need top end glass to be effective hunters. That really isn't true. People need to get out and hunt to be really good hunters and buying $3000 binoculars can really get in the way of hunting for a lot of people.

Even the European "Best of the Best" aren't really the best anyway, if you have the money.

You could always spring for Nikon WX and tell all the lowly Swaro owners they just keep saving until they can afford a really good binocular.

5.5 pounds? Whoa... I would of bought them if they were sub 5lbs. Haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Nick Muche]

It is kind of frustrating to constantly hear that people need top end glass to be effective hunters. That really isn't true. People need to get out and hunt to be really good hunters and buying $3000 binoculars can really get in the way of hunting for a lot of people.

Say it isn't so! The best gear can't make you a good hunter?!?

 

[Tesoro]

I just got off the phone with a Swaro usa service rep who definitely knew his products. We chatted for 20 minutes after he told me there would be no charge to fully service my 23 year old 8x30's (that I picked up in a garage sale). Will Maven or Vortex be around in 23 years? I hope so but there is always that unknown to factor in to a high dollar purchase decision which hasnt been mentioned on this thread. Also I believe the ones with benchmark service hold their value better. Its always nice to now that the 1 2 or 3 grand we spent on binos will pay off in long run. I think Swaro is the benchmark for not only quality but service.

But getting to the point..this is what I was told during the chat:

El vs SLC: SLC never has had a special filter coating that supposedly improves contrast. This contrast diff is not documented on their side. He said many people have compared SLC to EL not knowing which versions of glass they were comparing to. The older SLC had inferior glass to the older El. The new SLC HD has better glass than an old EL. Swarobright vs non. The new version of SLC HD has the same glass as the EL SV less the field flattening lens of the EL SV. The flattening lens also improves resolution. The amount of light it blocks is negligible and rated at max 1% over the SLC. (not more % as mentioned in some posts above). The added resolution of the EL can make up for picking out detail in low light vs the SLC.

Field test comparisons: They are very subjective due to diff peoples eyesight variance and how they perceive things. He said can give the same 2 EL and SLC binos to test to 10 diff people at the same time and results will not be consistent.

The new SLC and the El both have the fast focus. The older SLC has a less expensive to manufacture focus that took more adjustment to fine tune.

The EL field pro package is the latest that has a few improved features. One is the strap attachment and the other is the locked diopter so dosent get out of adjustment by rubbing on your jacket or inadvertent handling.

The bigger the objective the more light it brings in all other things equal. He said alot of twilight hunters prefer the 50mm model.

He said that the swaro warranty is lesser than some of the competition but not on lifetime defects or workmanship. They make everything to do with their products in their own factory so they can control every aspect of manufacture. This minimizes defects and is reflected in their warranty.
I dont think I have ever seen a post where someone complained about having a defective set of swaros, or ranges for that matter. I also havent read anyone complaining about multi month waits for servicing or infact ever complaining about any of the swaro bino line! Call it the epitome of German perfection I guess!

Now my 2 cents: Would I consider the other top 2 of the 3 over Swaro? No. Would I consider a $1000 Maven over an equiv power $2600 swaro?Yes. Would I look at a pair of 8x30 pocket Mavens over Swaro equiv? Definitely.