My quest for "the one"

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
During last year’s deer season I had a chance to watch 7 bucks at the last of last light come out below me in a small bowl at 186 yards. Of the 7 bucks I could actually only tell that one had antlers while my hunting partner could see that 7 of the 11 deer below us had antlers on their head. It was at this time that I realized that had I not had already filled both of my tags this would have meant that a potential legal buck could have walked just because of my glass, so a new pair of binoculars where in order.

Like some I started out with what I could afford. Coming from a “road hunting family” we used the old porro prism 8x32 bushnell’s, then as a teen I started to venture into other hunting styles and changed my binocular choice. I went from a Nikon 10x25, to a Bushnell H20 10x42, to a Vortex Diamondback 10x42, then Vortex Razor 10x42 and currently am using a Zen-Ray Prime HD.

My quest like most of use began with the Internet. There are many binoculars available today with lots of reviews from biased and un-biased experts, birders, and average Joes. Sifting through all the reviews can be a challenge. One suggesting that would pop up from time to time was that everyone’s eyes are different and we need to let the binocular pick us. So, this is the route I took. I just spent $10k on a variety of “high end” binoculars from Cabela’s, knowing that I have 60 days to return them (I double checked that in the store too) in hopes of finding which ones work best for me and returning the rest. One thing to keep in mind is that I have the money to buy any one of these, so $$ is not an issue and I have zero loyalty to any brand.

I am no expert when it comes to binocular terminology. So this review will be from an average Joe who plans on just telling you what I see through them with my eyes. It should be noted that I wear glasses. I am not blind and barely passed the DMV vision test, but I always have my glasses regardless.
As I have been playing with them for the last 48 hours I have been noticing a lot and I figured it would be best to write up what I see each night as I compare them in different situations instead of writing one review.

So I will start with how I selected my binoculars. First obviously they had to be at cabela’s. When I went into the Reno store I had the associate pull out all 10x42 binos of the following: Conquest HD, Ultravid HD, Razor HD, El Swarovision, SLC HD, Cabela’s Euro HD. I got both elbows on the counter and picked out a small sign hanging inside of a wooden canoe they had on the wall. The sign was on the upper half and was in the shadow and I was focused on the writing. It was about 50 or so yards and I wanted to see if I could eliminate any of them right out of the gate. Going back and forth I found the Razor HD would not focus well and I could not get the diopter to adjust right. I had him pull out another pair just to see if it was the bino and my eyes or just that bino. It turned out to be that bino and the next pair adjusted fine. The Conquest HD and surprisingly (at least to me) the Ultravid HD would not focus well despite how much I played with the diopter and going back and forth from them to others that did adjust well. I had him take those two away and we then took the remaining four outside to see if I could remove any from the list. It was sunny outside and a little breezy. I sat on the ground and put my elbows to my knees and proceeded to glass up a power tower that was about 1 mile away (that is what the associate told me). At the base of the tower were three small metal boxes and the middle one had a yellow sign on it. I did my best to focus on that sign. Immediately I could tell that the Razors were picking up the heat waves really bad compared to the other three. The others showed little to no heat waves while glassing. The three were very close in focusing on the sign as far as clarity of the sign and clarity of what was around it. I then went to looking under a tree that was on the same hill and tried to focus on a large bolder in the shade under the tree. Again all three were very good and with a little more adjusting I got the Razors to work ok, but they still showed the heat waves. With that I decided to purchase all of these and take them home to do some real testing in low light and hopefully on some game. While in Reno I also went to Scheel’s and was able to check out the Victory HT. In the store I was impressed with them, so when I went back to Reno on my way home I had them order me these as well.

---note--- 99% of the time I glass putting the binos on a stick, my elbows on my knees or standing. This is how I am testing the binos..

Night 1- behind my yard there is an oak tree (I am facing west) at about 80 or so yards away. I sat on my deck and as light faded I went from bino to bino looking at a small twig in the middle of the tree that was skylined as there was a hole through the leaves. The performance was impressive from all of them. The El impressed me most as not only was could I see the twig well, but I everything around it was crisp and clear too. The others (Victory’s should arrive on 5/10) could focus well on the twig, but did not show the surrounding leaves as crisp as the El’s.

Night 2- I decided to put all of the binos on a tripod and make sure the diopter was set the best I could get it. Due to rain and cloudy weather I could not get out to a local hill to do some long distance outside glassing. I elected to use the same tree again, but this time I found a small grey colored branch closest to me with the remaining of the tree behind it, giving a nice dark back drop. Going back and forth with the binos the razors performed better than the night before (I did make a diopter adjustment on them) and probably performed as well as the SLC and El. Again, just through my eyes and focusing only on that one light colored branch. Surprisingly the Euro’s performed the best and when I could barely make out the branch with the others, I could still see it looking through the Euro’s. The El’s kept everything around the branch very clean and crisp looking, but when I tried to just stare and focus on the branch it faded with the other three bino’s.



Some of my initial thoughts thus far are:
1-You can make out a difference in bino's at a store, but last and first light tell a new story.
2-You will never know how good or bad a bino is unless you have others to compare it to at the same time.
 

Brent1321

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
100
Location
Colorado Springs, CO
You bought $10,000 worth of Cabelas???? All at the same time of purchase? And they know you will be returning all but one? And they are good with that? If that is the case, bravo to Cabelas! That is pretty incredible service as I would assume they cannot sell the returned binoculars as NEW, but will head to their Bargain Cave.
 
OP
J

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
You bought $10,000 worth of Cabelas???? All at the same time of purchase? And they know you will be returning all but one? And they are good with that? If that is the case, bravo to Cabelas! That is pretty incredible service as I would assume they cannot sell the returned binoculars as NEW, but will head to their Bargain Cave.

Yes, I made double sure that what I was doing was ok with them. I do know that in their return policy it was ok....but I wanted to make sure that with that actual store they did not mind me doing it....multiple people checked and said it was ok.
 
OP
J

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
Night 3 – I finally got out to a local hill near my house where I could glass from 0- about 1 mile in terrain very similar to what I hunt in. The hill holds deer so it was a plus as I could actually use them for their intended purpose. I glassed an east and west facing slope hill from .5 hours before sunset until dark. I will say there is a HUGE difference in glassing from in store, to outside the store in daylight, to glassing in your neighborhood and finally to actual hunting style situation glassing. Each time I glassed I put the binos in order of which ones were “top” during that session and each time they changed. I glassed leaning against my vehicle or putting my elbows on the door and roof to stabilize the image. Some initial things I noticed last night was that the Vortex were bright, but for some reason the diopter adjustment needed to be moved again. I tried to fiddle with it, but it was problematic. It was breezy and with that and the Vortex being light weight made it harder to stabilize on the image. So even though it was clear, the image would bounce causing it to be harder to get a great clear crisp image of the button buck I was looking at (he was about 300 yards away). The vortex focus adjustment is really smooth, but very fast. It goes from extremely blurry to crystal clear and blurry again in a small adjustment. The Cabelas and EL’s were extremely similar in the appearance looking through the glass. The main difference from first to last light was that the EL’s hold a clean crisp image in the whole FOV, were as the cabelas lacks the crispness all the way to the edges of the FOV. The center of the FOV image in both the EL and Euro’s were identical in how crisp the image was, however there was a slight increase in brightness to the EL’s..it was very slight and I had to go back and forth quickly to notice it. Both have a very similar speed on the focus wheel. The Euros are a tad bit stiffer and they hold a clear image much longer while turning the wheel. One thing about the EL I noticed was that because of the longer tube configuration while I was holding it for a longer period of time I noticed a very slight bounce in the image and it was due to the way I had to hold it in my hand while glassing. I continued to glass the small button buck (he had about 3”) until last legal hunting light. During the last 15 minutes of light I noticed the Euro’s got a tad darker in the FOV (glassing an east facing slope with overcast skies), but still had a crisp image. The El’s held out until about 7 minutes of legal light before they too started to get darker, but again the whole FOV was still crisp. When I say crisp I believe I am referring to the lack of CA on the edges. Within the last 5 minutes of legal light is when the button bucks “buttons” became more of a bump on his head and with the EL and Euro’s I could not make out extreme detail of the buttons (like how tall or wide they were). Now for the SLC HD’s, from the first time I have ever looked through them to do a quick comparison in store they have always seemed brighter than any of the other binoculars. I believe this is because the EL’s have extra layering on the glass for the field flattener (what I read online) which cause it to be a tad darker. In my backyard I ranked the EL’s to have the edge over the SLCs but glassing the deer it was the other way around. The SLC’s hold a crisp image throughout the whole FOV. They also have a sort of “pop” to the image while you glass. The focus wheel is less than desirable. It is stiff on the outer extremes and kind of has a hick-up when you leave the extreme and move the wheel into the sweet spot. When you get into it sweet spot (clear focus from ranges of like 200-1000+ yards) it is very smooth and quick. The time it is in the sweet spot is just a little longer then the Vortex. At 5 minutes left of light I was still able to see the button bucks “bumps” very well and could see they still appeared to be 3” and about 1” wide. I was very impressed. At about last light I glassed over on a west facing slope which was about a mile away. Under an oak tree there was about a 3” diameter grey branch under the tree on the ground I found earlier in the glass session. The Euro’s were ever so slight tad bit less clear then the EL’s, but it was extremely slight. The SLC because they were still very bright showed the branch with still great detail compared to the other two.

Another thing I noticed about them was that when I glassed up a deer at about a mile away the actual size of the deer through the Euros was smaller than what I was seeing through the EL’s and the SLC’s. The size difference was nothing extreme, but still smaller. When the sun set I was still able to make out a buck at a mile away on the west facing slope with yellow grass as his backdrop with the Euro’s, EL and SLC. The bucks rack was a spike, but was wide and right along the line of the top of his ears.

I will wait until I get the Zeiss Victory HT to compare it to the others to see how it stacks up.
 

AGPank

WKR
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
978
Great read. I looked at 3 of these models. I planned on keeping 2 pair. Although I tend to give the slc HD a slight edge over the razor hd and meopta HD I ended up selling the slc HD. The decision for me was more financially driven. If I could have kept them all I would. I may end up trying to trade the 10x razors for 8x.
 
OP
J

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
I pulled out the Razors again to attempt to set the diopter. Before I put them on the tri-pod and used my credit card to focus on at a distance of about 20 feet. I did it again last night, but used an object at about 75 feet. I found that the diopter adjustment changed from where it was inside Cabelas, to where I had it two days ago, to where it is set now. This is the same kind of issue I am having with the Zen’s. I don’t know what causes it, but have a guess. My last optometrist visit resulted in some weird data about my eyes. I have some kind of over eye dominants issue. When I use both eyes the adjustments to get my vision clear is set one way, when the doctor blocks my right eye and I can only see with my left, the adjustment changes for just that eye and the same goes for my right eye. I guess it is not too uncommon, but he was surprised at the results we were getting while he was testing my eyes. Whether or not the Zens and Razor’s are just not able to compensate for my issue, I don’t know. The previous Diamondbacks and original Razor’s showed no signs of this issue.

I wanted to touch more on the Leica’s. Like I stated before both the Leica, Conquest HD and Razors had issues in store getting the diopter adjusted properly. I figured for a bino to cost as much as the new Ultravid HD’s that they should not show that kind of issue out of the gate and that is the only reason I did not ask the Associate at cabelas to try another pair, like I did for the razors. The only reason I wanted to try another pair of Razors was simply for their warranty and in hopes of finding a pair that I could at least give a fair shot at comparing them to the others I have chosen. The same goes for the Conquest HD. I fiddled with both the conquest and Leica for a good 5 minutes and after that, I just gave up as the other bino’s did not present the same problem I was getting with these binos.

I suppose I just wanted to clarify this so that people don’t think that these binos are not as good as the others as I was not able to actually test them the way I wanted to. It could simply be an issue with my vision and the way the binos diopter works, type of glass coatings, the way the internal mechanisms function……I just don’t know. When I let my brother use the Razors for a bit (during daylight hours) he said that they adjusted just fine and seem to hold a great image. So that leads me to believe that the issue with my vision when using those binos and not the binos themselves.
 

Attachments

  • binos.jpg
    binos.jpg
    94.7 KB · Views: 559
  • glass spot1.jpg
    glass spot1.jpg
    51.3 KB · Views: 398
  • glass spot2.jpg
    glass spot2.jpg
    83.7 KB · Views: 351
  • Mr. nub.jpg
    Mr. nub.jpg
    86.5 KB · Views: 363
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
641
Location
Arizona
Wow that is a sweet lineup of binoculars there.

Great write up...

I experienced the same discomfort and configuration with the Conquest and Razor HD's - great glass, not for me when there are other options, even if they cost twice as much. Sample variation is a real consideration for optic nuts, kind of you to consider it.

What portion of glassing do you do on the tripod vs. hand held for your 10's? I have found that tripod mounted, difference in clarity, contrast, and resolution across the entire field of view, e.g. the image quality when viewing several animals in the same FOV, is more easy to notice. Also, which ergonomics do you prefer?
 
OP
J

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
Wow that is a sweet lineup of binoculars there.

Great write up...

I experienced the same discomfort and configuration with the Conquest and Razor HD's - great glass, not for me when there are other options, even if they cost twice as much. Sample variation is a real consideration for optic nuts, kind of you to consider it.

What portion of glassing do you do on the tripod vs. hand held for your 10's? I have found that tripod mounted, difference in clarity, contrast, and resolution across the entire field of view, e.g. the image quality when viewing several animals in the same FOV, is more easy to notice. Also, which ergonomics do you prefer?

Personally I am about 99% free hand glassing. I do about 50-60% putting the bino's on a stick or whatever I can find to stabilize the image and the other 40-50% of the time I am sitting with my elbows on my knees or standing if my butt starts to go asleep. I have been putting some thought into the FOV and amount of CA seen on the outer edges. What I observed was that the Swaro’s showed no CA (to my eyes) throughout the whole FOV, there may have been very little CA but it would have been in the outer 1% of the FOV if any. Again I am using the term CA to explicitly mean who crisp the image is to my eyes through the binos (I believe that is its actual definition, but I did not look it up).

Multiple times glassing the button buck I could see on the bottom left edge of the “circle” a red winged black bird on some bushes. Even though it was in my peripheral vision, it was very clear and crisp on the edges. When I did this with the Euros I would say that the circle or FOV started showing CA on the outer ¼ of the cirlce. It was gradual and not just a wall going from very little CA to considerably more. I noticed this as I would move the outer edge of the FOV from side to side keeping my focus on the deer but also seeing the red winged black bird. When I say considerably more don’t assume I mean there was a lot. It was very apparent to my eyes because I was going back and forth from El’s, SLC and the Euros. If you only had the Euro’s and just used them I really don’t think it would be this apparent.

I would think that if you put them on tripods there would be differences, but nothing extreme from what I have seen thus far. The Vortex I feel would show a huge difference on a tripod compared to holding them in the hand just because of their weight. It was very hard to stabilize them in hand.
For ergonomics all of them have pluses and minuses. The Razors are very small in my hands and it is tougher to stabilize the image. The Euro’s are bigger and the wheel is stiffer. I actually, without realizing it, was using two fingers to move the wheel. It was not an issue, that is just what felt comfortable to my hands as I was glassing around with them. The Els are longer and touch more of my whole hand. The SLC are the in between the Razor and Euro’s. Shorter but also thicker and fit well in my hand.

I am more concerned with how well they perform for using them in the field. I honestly think that over time, with most any product really, you just adapt to them and they become a part of you. I notice all these small details now because I go back and forth between each a lot, but when I actually just hold one for a while (like a few minutes) it is like it is already an appendage.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
641
Location
Arizona
I have been putting some thought into the FOV and amount of CA seen on the outer edges. What I observed was that the Swaro’s showed no CA (to my eyes) throughout the whole FOV, there may have been very little CA but it would have been in the outer 1% of the FOV if any. Again I am using the term CA to explicitly mean who crisp the image is to my eyes through the binos (I believe that is its actual definition, but I did not look it up).

This is what I found with the EL SV as well... fantastic resolution and CA control to the edge.

Also, to clarify, chromatic abberation (CA) is when the binoculars multiple lenses do not converge at the same point, so it will look distorted, doubled, purple, ghosted, shadowed. You can 'pull' CA from almost any binocular by looking outside of the sweet spot, especially at objects that 'stand out' from a brighter backdrop. It is more difficult to pull CA from bino's with field flattener lens systems, like the Swarovski EL SV, than the ones that don't. I notice poor CA management in a binocular immediately after using the EL SV's, because it controls this so well. This is a good and bad thing... Now that I know what to look for, the SLC 15x56, formerly one of my favorite pieces of glass, has too much lateral CA for my uses. Anyway, back to discussion...

I am more concerned with how well they perform for using them in the field. I honestly think that over time, with most any product really, you just adapt to them and they become a part of you. I notice all these small details now because I go back and forth between each a lot, but when I actually just hold one for a while (like a few minutes) it is like it is already an appendage.

I like this way of looking at gear. I find that as I switch between brands and configurations, e.g. 12x50's for open country to an 8x32 for forest, it takes a little more than a few minutes to re-learn the binocular (except for the EL SV's for some reason). I think that staying true to a particular model or lineup makes this easier, and let's you forget about the instrument and focus on the experience.
 

Matt Cashell

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
4,508
Location
Western MT
"Also, to clarify, chromatic abberation (CA) is when the binoculars multiple lenses do not converge at the same point, so it will look distorted, doubled, purple, ghosted, shadowed. You can 'pull' CA from almost any binocular by looking outside of the sweet spot, especially at objects that 'stand out' from a brighter backdrop. "


CA is only the color fringing seen at high contrast areas of the image. It is caused not by multiple lenses, but by light dispersing into a spectrum when passing through glass (think rainbows coming through a prism).

Points of focus failing to converge at the same location of the axis is actually spherical aberration (SA).

An image can be both sharp AND show CA in some circumstances.

Distortion and ghosting are separate issues from CA as well.
 
OP
J

JNDEER

WKR
Joined
May 2, 2012
Messages
1,508
thanks for the clarification......

so, when in image is not "crisp and clear" (ie, the outline of the ear is a a fuzzy fading line, not a hard straight line), what is that called?
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
641
Location
Arizona
I think of resolution as a combination of clarity, visible level of detail, and controlled contrast. If the fuzzy part of the ear is dead center (in the sweet spot), than the binocular, relatively speaking, would have less apparent resolution.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
641
Location
Arizona
BB is correct on CA, it's the failure of a single - not multiple - lens to converge colors.

I think that effect it is multiplied by the complexity of the lens system, and that at times you can see multiple images, variations of CA, on the same line or object.

Also, I think that describing an image as having color distortion or a ghost of itself, in terms of CA, is accurate, whether or not these terms are synonymous on the technical level that BB is referring to. A CA'd object often shows obvious color distortion or discoloration depending on your propensity for language, and at times a shadow or ghosted image of itself, offset ever so slightly. The optical terminology ghosting and distortion can be applied here for common understanding without confusion of terms.
 

Matt Cashell

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
4,508
Location
Western MT
RTS,

I was just clarifying the accepted use of the terms in the optics industry. Using terms like ghosting and distortion when referring to fringing is inaccurate, and confuses the common understanding, in my opinion.

Distortion refers to the bending of straight lines through the view, and typically comes in pincushion and barrel forms.

Ghosting is a reflective problem where an image is repeated due to a reflection. Flare is an internal reflection problem as well.



I go over these terms in these articles:

http://www.rokslide.com/2012-01-09-05-09-42/optics/209-what-we-look-for
http://www.rokslide.com/2012-01-09-05-09-42/optics/213-what-we-arent-looking-for

JNDEER,

As RTS mentions, it sounds like you are seeing a lack of resolution or "image softness." If it is in the center of the field, it is most commonly spherical aberration. At the edges it is probably field curvature or astigmatism. Field flattening lens elements like "Swarovision" help alleviate these issues and provide a sharper image at the edge.
 
Joined
Jan 8, 2013
Messages
641
Location
Arizona
Thanks BB, got it.

I will not confuse the two again, although in fairness the only place I peel CA off objects on high end optics is at the edge, where the image is beginning to not only fringe, but distort, ergo my construct, 'color distortion' :)

Back to the discussion... sorry to take away from it if I did.
 

Matt Cashell

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Feb 25, 2012
Messages
4,508
Location
Western MT
I thought it was a friendly discussion, brother. I meant no offense at all.

I think JNDEER doesn't mind, as it applies to his excellent comparison.

Rokslide is all about talking gear, friend.
 
Top