Re: Binoculars
- From: penultimate <drwilly@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 12:21:00 -0700
Go read John Barsness's piece on binoculars at
http://www.24hourcampfire.com. He regularly conducts real-world,
objective, tests on a side-by-side basis for the current crop of better
binocular models and does not pull any punches in publishing his
results. He writes regularly (including a book) about hunting optics,
usually ignoring the crap models, but fairly including and favorably
evaluating the good buys as well as the most expensive pieces.
Virtually every other writer on the topic seems to me either a purveyer
of general BS or a shill for a manufacturer that gave him a free pair
of binoculars or both. The important point, however, is that you can't
adequately compare models in a store on your own because the necessary
variation in viewing conditions to tell one model is notably better
than another just do not exist.
Many of us can cite specific binocular models that have pleased or
displeased us. But it is doubtful that any of us can cite careful
study of all the better products currently on the market. "All",
"careful study", and "currently" are in combination pretty important.
And you are talking about spending enough money that I think a few
bucks extra for the education you will get from Barsness's book is
probably worth it. I have not read his book. But I have read read
several of his magazine pieces and know enough about optics to know
that he really understands the topic and enjoy his writing. He has
also published a comparative test of binoculars within the last year or
two in either Rifle or Handloader.
Ignoring brand and specific model, for your use in your sort of
neighborhood, my experience would recommend a top quality roof prism
model in 7X30 (or so) or 8x30+ (or so) range. I have not hunted NH.
But I have seen enough of the state as a tourist to slightly modify my
recommendation for you from what I use myself in the terrain I mostly
hunt.
I suggest a roof prism design because they are usually tougher and more
compact. 7X would probably be my power choice in NH because I suspect
most of your use will be at reasonably close range in the woods and you
sure get a steadier, wider, quicker view at lower powers. 8X would be
OK, but I would consider 10X excessive. I hunt in the western US where
it is generally more open and use 8X that I wish was 6X or 7X when I am
crawling through a pole thicket trying to find the Bull elk that might
be watching me 40 yards away. In my neighborhood, 10X would be an
asset for evaluating horns at 300 plus yards and possibly in spotting
game on a distant hillside, but a hindrance up close and personal.
Here, most that know what they are doing would consider anything over
10X excessive and usually a mark of someone not understanding what they
are buying. You can get 7X50 and 8x50 models. But the teensy amount
of extra light gathering is neither particularly useful except at night
when your pupils are fully dark adapted and in my opinion not worth the
extra bulk and typically weight.
In selecting between models that seemed otherwise equivalent in quality
and performance, I would pay extra for binoculars that were 4 oz
lighter and certainly choose the lighter of two models that were also
equivalent in price. It is not that 3 or 4 oz is in isolation such a
huge difference. It is that you quickly find yourself carrying several
pounds extra if you are not weight conscious about every item.
There is little doubt that Swarvorski makes good binoculars, one or
more specific models of which might perform at the the head of this
week's class and others that do not. But I imagine you can spend a few
dollars more on a Leica Duovid and Zeiss in the "pricey" big 3 is
pretty good too. But top of the line Nikons (Premier line I think) are
in the same league and quite a bit less. And I am very happy with my
Pentax DCF SP 8x43's purchased when they first came out to replace a
pair of Pentax DCF WP 8X42's that I had used for three years and were
stolen from luggage on a United flight through Chicago. The SP's
seemed to be even better than the WP's and the latter was every bit as
good side-by-side with older Zeiss and Leica models at about 1/3 the
price. And I bought the WP's to replace a vintage 1980 or so pair of
Zeiss 7X30's that I shattered in the same fall that did in a Leupold
scope. Note that I looked at the WP model because of a John Barsness
article at the time pointing out that it offered exceptional optics at
a super price. This binocular was super in every way and I would still
be using it save for a sticky-fingered baggage handler.
Here I would point out that Leupold considered shattered glass and a
crushed objective tube a "manufacturing defect" covered under warrantee
at no charge and the Zeiss repair center told me to buy a new pair of
binoculars and not drop or fall on them. I'm told that Leupold now has
a "gold ring" binocular line that is optically up there with the best.
If this is objectively true and the same "no questions asked" warrantee
applies to binoculars as scopes, I would sure look at the Leupold Gold
Ring models as well. Binoculars do break.
So, in summary, my recommendations are:
1. Consult those that have done real comparative tests, even if you
are dead set on a Swavorski just to be sure you are buying a model that
is objectively "the best" while also of a power range (around 7-8x30+ I
think) that is suitable for your use. The only good source of
comparative testing in the hunting community that I know of is
Barsness. There may be other good tests from the birding watcher
community.
2. Recognizing that "best" is model and power specific, the list of
unquestioned potential sources for the "best" should be expanded to
include Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, and possibly Leupold's gold ring line.
3. While there is always argument for having the best, I think for
binoculars that the performance difference between "best" and "nearly
as good" has become one of splitting the thinnest of hairs. I have
direct user experience only with the indicated "top of the line" Pentax
and there are undoubtably other candidates in the "nearly as good"
glass class. But I suspect the "good deal" price tag for Pentax DCF SP
8X43's has fallen to around $400 - possibly less. Comparable
top-of-the line Swavorski's are probably 3-4 times as much and twice
the street price for the appropriate Nikon model that proves in the
same performance class. I consider the Pentax performance level to be
entirely good enough. Against this price/performance standard, I might
be willing to pay $600 for a possibly better performing Swarovski. The
additional $1000 or so cost delivers value only in prestige.
Rusty wrote:
I am about ready to lay bite the bullet and get a good pair of binoculars.
and I am leaning towards Swavorski. They are certainly the most expensive.
Are they the best binoculars ?
I will be using them to still hunt in the NH mountains and do not need the
most powerful available. Can anyone suggest one of their models and a good
power to use seeing that I will be walking and carrying them all day?
Been looking around for deals but everyone sells them for the same price.
Appreciate any help I can get
rusty
- References:
- Binoculars
- From: Rusty
- Binoculars
- Prev by Date: Re: black bear
- Next by Date: Re: New Hunter Needs An Answer
- Previous by thread: Re: Binoculars
- Next by thread: Re: Binoculars
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
