quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Well, I should have said probably, I have used and owned the same pair since the early 50s when I was a kid. I used them until I bought my first Zeiss binos in the late 60s, 10x40s (or maybe 42s)without checking. Those Zeiss were a helluva lot better that the B&Ls then and the Zeiss of today are a helluva lot better than that pair of Zeiss are (which I still have). So when were you born?

There's lots of old stuff, including us, that we think are better now than newer items, but thinking (or hoping) don't make it so.

I use binos just about everyday, and have well over a dozen pair, including multiple Zeiss and Leicas, and to tell me that WWII B&Ls are better than current production good glass is just pure BS.

Amen.
I was born in 1934.
Optics of today far outclass the old stuff, not only in glass, but coatings as well. Not to mention improvements in construction.

Do you need a tripod for the 15x in order to hold steady?

quote:

Originally posted by Buliwyf:
Do you need a tripod for the 15x in order to hold steady?

I would consider the 10x and 12x the highest magnification for free holding.
Know doubt you could use other items to rest the 15x on.

Thanks. 15x is fantastic without more understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by Buliwyf:
Do you need a tripod for the 15x in order to hold steady?

If you mean me, the Conquests I use are 15x's and are fine for field use w. out a tripod. They "feel" well when up to the eye.

Old eyes see pretty good through old binoculars and the Rochester made B&L's certainly were the best of the best at least until the 1960's.

Today these old eyes see really good through Zeiss, Nikon, Swarovski, Kowa and Leica len's.

In previous post I said Zeiss Conquest binos were the foshizzzzle and that I could hold steady w. 15x's.

Took them out to day and sure enough, no problem holding steady on my kids 115yrds out.

The model I have is 15x45xB T*

Leica Geovids

Like many have said here it is hard to tell the difference between the very top bino's but the added benefit of rangefinding puts the Geovids over the top.

JMHO

just got a pair of 2009 Swarovski EL 8.5x42
....

I have owned Zeiss, Leica, Pentax, Bushnell, Meopta...

THEY all "WORK"

THese are stunning and the handling is great

not to change the suject matter to much, what about the brand name steiner. I have been looking for a pair and have seen that brand on sale. Any input.

Steiners are German Tascos.

Steiners are a good glass for the money. A friend has had a pair of 8x30 Military and Marine for 20 plus years. They are tough and optically solid.

The expensive Steiners are very good binos.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Steiners are German Tascos.

that´s hitting the nail on the head...

Right, and there's even worse : Lisenfeld ! The latter are living proof that even Germans can produce junk when they work at it

quote:

Originally posted by Buliwyf:
Do you need a tripod for the 15x in order to hold steady?

Not for the first 30 seconds

quote:

Originally posted by Gatogordo:
Well, I should have said probably owned a pair since before you were born. I have used and owned the same pair since the early 50s when I was a kid. I used them until I bought my first Zeiss binos in the late 60s, 10x40s (or maybe 42s)without checking. Those Zeiss were better that the B&Ls then and the Zeiss of today are a helluva lot better than that pair of Zeiss are (which I still have). So when were you born?

There's lots of old stuff, including us, that we think are better now than newer items, but thinking (or hoping) don't make it so.

I use binos just about everyday, and have well over a dozen pair, including multiple Zeiss and Leicas, and to tell me that WWII B&Ls are better than current production good glass is just pure BS.

You're the type of guy who thinks there have been improvements on the 45-70... HA! Take THAT!

quote:

Originally posted by Pancho:
I personally use Kahles. Before that I used Pentax and would still use them if my Kahles were broke.

Well durn - - it happened. My Kahles broke on a recent Doodad hunt and I grabbed my old 10x40 Pentax. (Kahles will not hold up to being dropped onto a rock.) After using the Pentax for a couple of days, I had to come back and update this post. The Pentax is not nearly as good and will be for sale as soon as my Kahles come back from the repair shop. Maybe I'll spring for a new set of the Swarovision.

Today's advanced manufacturing processes have shrunk the differences between low-end and high-end glass to quite a degree. Even the cheapest pair of Bushnells made these days are really not that bad. In the 60s-80s, an inexpensive pair of binos were obviously not on par with the top German brands...a clear center surrounded by a foggy halo around it. But now the differences are not that great, but they're there.

Speaking of birders and Bausch & Lomb...the Bausch & Lomb Elite used to be the premier birder glass...not sure what they're using now.

One thing not mentioned is that in the higher-priced brands, in addition to optical excellence, you're also buying durability and water/fogging protection.

As has been alluded to, the real "test" of which glass is better these days would involve using high-tech test equipment, as the differences would be far beyond the capability of the human eye to perceive.

I hesitate to comment, because I certainly don't own the best of the best, but I do have two pair of Docter Optics poro prisms, on 8x56 and the other 7x50 (individual focus). I consider both superb for the money, if you don't mind the additional weight. I was warned that the 8x56 was a beast in weight, and I have to admit the warnings were right. It's for twilight use in a stand only.

All the top line glasses are just that - Top Line. You won't be unhappy with any of them and they will last. I still use my 25 year old Zeiss 7x42 Dialyt and am still as delighted with it as I was when it was brand new and likely will use it for another 25 years. Quality tells.

Jerry Liles

I've had several pairs of Pentax binos and they were clear enough, though the colors seemed a bit on the green side.

A little pair of 8x21s fell a few feet out of a bag on to the floor, though, and an internal lens turned sideways. The distributors were no help in getting them fixed, so both are useless as far as I'm concerned.

I think you are really splitting hairs on the high end stuff.
If you are a hunter in a deer blind and weight or size does not matter. Get the big binocs (they are heavier and easy to hold still and allow a bit more light at dusk.
If you are scaling mountains get a 8X32 @ less than 20oz.
I would always shoot for at least a 4MM exit pupil.
10X42 are the median that most choose for a single binoc.
I looked a little beyond the optics and would personally choose a Leica. I think they are the toughest of the big 3. The most compact, the most durable lens coatings and the coatings have a water shedding outer layer. Their focus wheel as teflon ceramic disks that do not typically change resistance as the ambient temp changes.
I just think they are a well thought out unit for a hunter.
That being said, the new Zeiss HD's claim to be extremely bright and have a new change that I believe is great for hunting. The focus wheel is not so sensitive. It is a fine focus. Most Binoc. companies make their units for fast focus for fast moving targets (birds, sports, etc.). That is a hinderance in hunting.

I have 2 pair of swaros which i like very much. the first is 8x30 about 8 years old. This is an excellent pair of binos very sharp very clear and easy on the eye and also to carry. the second which i got last year is 10x42 w/ swarovision. these are noticably better in clarity and for low light. i mostly take the 8x30s due to ease of carrying and less fatigue glassing.
i also have a fine pair of zeiss 10x20s 10 years old which fit in a shirt pocket. i use these when hiking but not for hunting.

I carried 4 binoculars around with me just a test. They were cheap dinky 6X20, cheap 7X35, Leupold 7X30 IF, and Burris 10X40 CF.

The large Burris glasses were of excellent quality but offered nothing for woods hunting where most glassing was less than 800 yards.

the 6X20 were nothing but a nuisance

the cheap beat up 7X35 Bushnells were light and risk free. Dropping them on a rock would have resulted in little loss.

The winner was the 7X30 Leupold IF glasses. They never needed focusing and they were sharp looking into the west after sunset. The picked out the tan of the white tails backs from the dead bluestem grass.
The Leupolds were bright, compact and had enough field of view they did not drive me nuts like the higher mag glasses.
I will say that the cheap and more than 20 year old Bushnells had seen a lot of use and when compared side by side with the Leupolds performed at about 95% to 98%. Which is not that bad.
Were I to chose between the optically excellent 10X40 and the cheap 7X35 I would have taken the latter. The Burris glasses were bulky and heavy and were a nuisance to haul around compared to the two 7X glasses. They offered nothing optically due to the range of my hunting and the narrow field of view.

Many years ago I had used a borrowed 6X30 B&L glass. Based on my hunting that would be an excellent power and objective combination in a modern glass.

Over the past few days I've been playing around with the new Leupold McKinley's (8x42) and comparing them to my Leupold GR HD, and SLC HD, both 10x42.



I haven't hunted with them yet, but I can say that the McKinley is brighter, sharper, and resolves better than the GR HD. That's saying something because I love the GR. It compares very favorably to my neighbors SLC WB. It also has a much wider sweet spot and edge to edge crispness. The colors are very vivid and pop into view. Now the SLC HD. I considered it the best hunting binocular on the planet before this comparison, and I still do. The combo of ergos, pure optical excellence, etc has no peer and I've seen most all of the high end stuff. Surprisingly enough though, the McKinley isn't far off. Not far off at all. I do not like the ergos as well as the SLC.

I understand those that are averse to Chinese stuff. I'm not a huge fan of it either, but it's here to stay, and will only get worse. If you're not averse to the origin of the McKinley's, and you're looking for fantastic glass, you can have it very reasonably priced. Unless a guy just wants to, there's no need to spend big $$$ for optical excellence anymore.

quote:

Originally posted by ScotsGun:
Kahles are Swarovski. I use both but i think Leica Ultravids have the edge...a tiny edge at that.

They are owned by Swarovski,but are not the same.

I like my old Zeiss 10x42's and my Leica 8x30's but that's just me. They've done everything I've asked of them and everything I've needed.

Owned em all. The new Zeiss rangefinder binocs ($2000+) are impossible to beat (and heavy)

I wonder what brand the child used to evaluate the warp and weft of the emperor's new clothes?

For the money, I have found nothing that can beat older Optolyth scopes that I have bought in Germany. I can see no difference between the best of Zeiss or Hensoldt, and certainly not of that era. They are excellent value for $350-400.
My favorite is the 9x63...but they're not for hiking the backwoods. But for low light or all day on stand, they are tough to beat. Any kind of moonlight and they work very well.

Not to step on anyones toes, but to my way of thinking, i'll scotch a little on the optics and buy another rifle with the difference. I've bought several Nikon scopes lately and one pair of binos and have had no problems with any of them.
I had a pair of Zeiss binos back in the day and wasn't impressed, gave them to a cousin as a gift.

Stepchild

True--every eye is different to my eye the Zeiss FL is very good...I also like the Nikon EDG it is super good also. Leica is very good too...when you get into this realm it is really splitting hairs.

Ed

I've heard it said that glass can vary from bino to bino, scope to scope. If so, a Swaro could beat a Zeiss today, reversed tomorrow.

By the way, I have no idea why one would buy a pair of binoculars. You can only carry and use one binocular at a time.

quote:

Originally posted by Brice:
I've heard it said that glass can vary from bino to bino, scope to scope. If so, a Swaro could beat a Zeiss today, reversed tomorrow.

By the way, I have no idea why one would buy a pair of binoculars. You can only carry and use one binocular at a time.

Actually each and every lens varies. There is an optics lab test called a star test that easily detects the differences. If you sort through and build the instrument out of all hand picked lens it will be significantly better than your normal production optic.

quote:

Originally posted by SR4759:
Actually each and every lens varies. There is an optics lab test called a star test that easily detects the differences. If you sort through and build the instrument out of all hand picked lens it will be significantly better than your normal production optic.

Where can we go to do this - and at what distance could we then spot the difference in bees' appendages?