Poll: Point of diminishing returns for binoculars

[ramsdude47]

Specifically relating to binoculars, and to have some kind of control let's stick with 8x42 price points.

In your opinion, what is the MSRP price point where the performance gain no longer increases as dramatically as the price point? In the pictured graph, that would represent point #4. Obviously different manufacturers hit different price points in between what I have listed, so round up or down . Feel free to chip in with a specific model you like at the price point you choose.

I picked this random call center graph because IMO it is the best visual representation of my question, particularly because it has the numbers. The obvious substitutions are performance on the Y Axis and price on the X Axis.

 

[pc3]

Meopta Meostars represent this point for mine...if you want to put a brand next to the price. I looked through SLC's and these and I couldn't tell the difference, NL's etc will be better and they should be.......but no one is missing any game if they have Meopta's etc. over Swaro, they are nicer and if you can afford it well and good but if you want bang for buck, Meopta's and no doubt others in this range wont have you missing game but will leave you extra $$$ in your bank acc.

 

[Claypa]

Following

 

[ozyclint]

For many reasons there's a lot of diminishing returns the moment you use roof prisms, IMO. Optical performance vs cost.

 

[TNKnoxville]

For my type and style of hunting my Maven B2 9x45's are perfect. I've looked thru Steiner HDs, Zeiss conquest, Leica (can't remember which one), Pentax (older Cabelas) and Swaro SLCs. My eyes could not tell the difference. I was able to see and evaluate all the game I was looking for with the Mavens. Funny the outfitter and friend I hunt with can use whatever he wants but he also chose Maven B2 9x45s. This year someone gave him a pair of Leica range finding binocs. Other than the fact he liked the range finder feature, he said they were no better or worse than the Mavens for optics.

The top end binocs like the Swaro NL and others may have a bit better optics, but for me it's not worth that much extra $$$. Luckily I can afford just about whatever I want, but I spend my $ on other things.

 

[5MilesBack]

If binoculars have a similar graph to the one you posted, you're seeing a 64% increase in performance from point 4 until point 8........from 70 to 115. That's still a huge increase in performance that's in the "diminishing marginal returns" category. But I doubt that the charts would be the same for bino's.

I don't put a dollar value on the scale when I compare bino's. I've seen expensive glass that I optically didn't care for.

 

[Matt G.]

Again it goes to what is the use of your tool. If just finding game, then I think like others say, probably 1k has the biggest bang for the buck where you are not compromising missing game by not seeing in the shadows or low light etc. If you are using them to see the world close and enjoy the view etc I can see you chafing the perfection. I use my binos all year and appreciate the optics although not in budget yet.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

 

[Hoodie]

I voted $500, because these days you can get a bino that will work for your whole life at that price point and you aren't going to be missing animals you would've seen otherwise. Leupold BX-4, Meopro. It starts to get real marginal when you spend more than that.

The $1k range is where I think even pretty serious hunters don't need to spend more. I haven't looked through the NL Pures yet, but just looking at their specs I'm aware that they have to be amazing.

They are 3x the price of a Nikon Monarch HG, Meostar, or Maven B series. For the cost of an 8x42 NL Pure you could get a Tract Toric 8x42, a 15x56 Meostar, and a non-resident mule deer or elk tag in some states.

 

[PathFinder]

It has to depend on how you hunt and the amount of time spent glassing. Most of my hunting is very glassing centric, sometimes 12 hours a day glassing. Hunting that way, I have no desire to own anything but NL/SF/Noctovid type glass. The limitations and imperfections of the next tier down become very apparent over that amount of time.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

 

[Hatchet Jack]

It has to depend on how you hunt and the amount of time spent glassing. Most of my hunting is very glassing centric, sometimes 12 hours a day glassing. Hunting that way, I have no desire to own anything but NL/SF/Noctovid type glass. The limitations and imperfections of the next tier down become very apparent over that amount of time.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Bingo. If i'm hunting archery elk, mountain goat, or antelope or anything that is less bino glassing intensive I can get by with anything decent. If i'm hunting coues in October where i'm behind glass for hours and hours, even going from Swarovski EL to Meopta bugs me after that amount of time; i have switched with buddies and tried it. Every flaw becomes compounded once you're looking for minute details for that long. I think very few guys have sat behind a pair of tripod mounted binoculars for >8 hours a day actually with their eyes in them, and that's why the $1000 range is preferred by many.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

I voted $500, because these days you can get a bino that will work for your whole life at that price point and you aren't going to be missing animals you would've seen otherwise. Leupold BX-4, Maven C series, Meopro. It starts to get real marginal when you spend more than that.

The $1k range is where I think even pretty serious hunters don't need to spend more. I haven't looked through the NL Pures yet, but just looking at their specs I'm aware that they have to be amazing.

They are 3x the price of a Nikon Monarch HG, Meostar, or Maven B series. For the cost of an 8x42 NL Pure you could get a Tract Toric 8x42, a 15x56 Meostar, and a non-resident mule deer or elk tag in some states.

Was using Viper HDs and could not see a herd of axis deer. Looked through the guide’s ELs and saw them. So someone cannot say that a $500 pair of binoculars will allow you to see all of the game that more expensive binoculars allows you to see.

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

The threshold for diminishing returns is when you made up your mind and attempt to justify your purchase decision; doesn’t matter the price.

 

[Trial153]

The 900-1500 range has very big returns vs say 500 glass.
Above the 1500 mark the returns drop off substantially for the amount of price increase.

I still think that alpha glass is good purchase if you use it enough, furthermore I think optics are one of the few items that have pretty direct correlation between price and performance.

 

[CastIronSkillet]

I have thought about this a lot over the years. To see an appreciable performance gain in the optics world you need to double the price. So, a $100 bino would be noticeably better than a $50 bino. So I think #1 is a $50 bino, #2 is $100, #3 is $200, #4 is $400(the point that quality starts to show), #5 is $800, #6 is $1600, #7 is $3,200.

I have never owned Alpha glass but I have owned several in the $1K range and I have sold all 3. A $500 pair of BX-4 HD's is what I use. I choose based on comfort, ergonomics, and focus knob over glass quality. I can't seem to use the entire field of view like others seem to wail about, the sharp center hot spot and comfort(staying behind the glass) are what matters.

 

[ramsdude47]

I posted the same thing on BirdForum as well. The bird watching crowd voted pretty comparably. More voters (by percentage) on the bottom 2 groups but also on the highest group.

 

[country_20boy]

I voted $700, and I think the curve is pretty flat beyond that point.

 

[ramsdude47]

The data from the expansive 2013 Cornell ornithology review tend to agree with you.

It’s unfortunate there aren’t many offerings at that price point (or $750).

 

[Grassymike]

I once owned a pair of 8x42 Bausch &Lomb Elites and compared them to a pair of Swarovski EL 8.5 x42's. After a week of glassing deer daily in every type of weather and late/early , directly into the Sun etc. I came to the conclusion that the Elite's were very close to the Swaro's . Those Elite's I paid $600 for when Bausch and Lomb quit making them and Bushnell bought them out. The Swarovski EL 's cost me $1700.

 

[Matt G.]

I am in the same debate. I was tempted to get the EL's and now that the NL's are available, do you just make the leap. I need a talk with Dave Ramsey LOL....