Does anyone ever move away from Swaro's

feanor

WKR
Joined
Aug 15, 2018
Messages
1,027
Location
Colorado
I have - twice. I've owned two mint pairs of the newest SLC's over the past 4 years. They didn't make me any thinner, better looking or more attractive to my wife. I had the second pair side-by side on tripods for hours trying to justify the cost vs. Zeiss Conquests, but just couldn't see it. Everyone's eyes are different. To me, the Zeiss were as good or maybe even slightly better at center resolution, esp. in the twilight hours.

On this forum, that's heresy, but it is what it is. I'm not brand loyal and have been known to drag around re-branded Cabelas Outfitter HD's that cost me $175 on the used market, because I know they are made on the same line as Zeiss Conquest HD's, and have the same glass, and give me the same information at 1/5th the cost.

Currently, I'm using Leupold BX-4's and IMO they are the equal in image quality, contrast and resolving power to the Conquest HD and SLC's, but they are lighter and more compact and handle much better.

I'll let the big names carry the big name glass.
With regard to the Cabelas HD- is there a particular year manufactured that you are referring too?
 
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,571
Location
In someone's favorite spot
With regard to the Cabelas HD- is there a particular year manufactured that you are referring too?
I am not sure the years those were sold by Cabelas. One of the saltier old guys who works the optics counter at my local Cabelas, remembers them pretty well though. He said he sold quite a few, but then they started out-selling the higher end glass, and so eventually Cabelas pulled them. They were made at the Kamakura plant in Japan, same place as the Conquest HD's. The view was very similiar. I don't ever remember seeing them new, but I have come across a few pairs of used ones, and one mint pair in a bargain cave when they still had those. They were a $450-500 pair when sold new. If I had to guess, it would have been around 2010 maybe, that they were pulled, but don't quote me on that. Only issue I ever had with them (well, two, sorta) was the huge eyecups that didn't fit my eye sockets very well (I removed them and used folded over bicycle tire tubing in their place, and that helped some), and a narrower FOV than I liked. But it wasn't really bad. I lost track of the hours of glassing I did with those Outfitter HD's over the years. They were great for tripod glassing because I always turn down the eyecups for that duty anyway.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 13, 2017
Messages
317
Location
Rockies
Ir you want to get the 411 on optics start searching the birding forums. Those guys and gals don't take any BS from anyone. They probably do the most in-depth reviews on glass there is. And if they say something is good you can rest assured that they are probably right. Swaro somewhat caters to the hunting crowd, but the birders are more neutral in how the look at glass.
Agree 100% with the birders input. It isn't clear to me how fellow hunters generally judge optics. The birders have taught me about edge to edge clarity, chromatic aberration, depth of field, stray light suppression, ghosting, field of view, color fidelity, etc. We "hunters" need to have some sort of standard to judge by.

For example,
My reading of hunting optics forums makes me believe that there needs to be more thought around the value of edge-to-edge clarity. Glass with poor edges, on a tripod, can hide those super subtle ear and tail flicks at the edge of field-of-view. Good edges will show the flick and catch your eye. Exact same with poor vs good depth of field.

I feel like if you only judge glass by "clarity in the sweet spot and it mags 10x, therefore its good", causes you to leave a lot of value on the table. Depending on the use, it might well be ok to leave value on the table, but I think you should be aware of it.
 

sneaky

"DADDY"
Joined
Feb 1, 2014
Messages
10,015
Location
ID
There are two problems with kowas. 1. I am reading a lot about them having thin bodies and being dented/damaged easily. I could be willing to risk it and get a pair anyway. 2. and this is the big one, I still haven't found anyone who Carrie's them where I can look through them in person. They arent out of the running for me but unless I can look through them before I make the decision to buy they are a no. I may make a run to pheonix or houston before long, I am sure i will find some in one of the big cities. They definitely seem like the most common brand for people to move to from Swarovski and that is what I wanted to learn in this thread. I see leica as about equal to Swarovski and i love my pair. but again I can get my hands on the Swarovski scopes but haven't found any leica scopes to fondle in person.
Most people who are talking bad about Kowas have never actually used the scopes. If you drop a Kowa bad enough to dent or break it, guess what, a Swaro will be broke too. Or a Leica, or a Zeiss. That's literally the one thing people complain about "it doesn't have a rubber condom on it like Swaros". They gotta find something to complain about, because the glass is world class in the Kowas and they know it. That being said, I would find a birding store and look through them all. Optics are like boots, everyone is different. Your eyes may like something better than what you "want" to like going in.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
320
Location
So Cal
I have not moved away from "Alpha" Glass, I just got a Swaro BTX in January to go along with my EL10xs and SLCHD15xs. You get what you pay for but if you stay with any of the top tier glass you will have an incredible piece of equipment that will serve you for years and will hold its resale value.

Anybody can hand hold a cheap pair of binos next to a pair of swaro, leica, or zeiss in the middle of the day and say, "Gee I don't understand why these things are so dang expensive they look the same to me."
Everyone has specific needs and wants out of the performance of their optics. When you are out west hunting public land from sunrise to sunset with a lot of competition/pressure from other hunters having good stuff helps a lot because that can mean the difference between you being the guy going home with a nice buck and the guy eating tag soup. A lot of the places I hunt I only have a few chances in an entire season to spot, stalk and shoot a mature buck. I certainly feel that having good optics have made the difference right at dawn, dusk or over extreme ranges in me being successful. Buy Once, Cry Once.
 

BluMtn

WKR
Joined
Nov 24, 2016
Messages
1,013
Location
Washington
Doesn't matter what spotting scope I have had, I always have had stay-on covers. I like the protection they offer because my spotting scopes rarely ever see the inside of my house. They live in my pickup, SxS, or pack. I buy optics to use not have them sit in my safe as a conversation piece. At the end of their life with me, I pull them out of their case they look brand new including my Kowas. If durability is your only concern you should be sleeping well at night.:LOL::LOL::LOL::LOL:
 
Top