I have lower end leupold 8x42’s and they have been fine, but one eye cup did break on a pretty soft fall. I am sure they would fix it if I sent it in. The diamondbacks, from what little I have used them inside the store, seem like they are actually better, with a solid warranty. Durability is the big question. My diamondback scope has held up well, so I am hopeful. I have not been impressed with Nikon quality, nor their warranty (although a friend did get binoculars fixed without a receipt).
For me, glass is a tool and investment, and not a status symbol. I have used cheap glass in the past and been frustrated. But I believe with products like the diamondback, you can do 95% of what high end glass can do, last nearly as long, and have the same or better warranty. Is uber expensive glass really gonna put more blood on the dirt or meat on the table? I hunt with working class biologists, and by far average products like this are the norm (even when the state pays), and their success is second to none. And I am in Nebraska, a wide open place with big, long viewsheds, where glass earns it. If I have to choose between glass and an elk permit, the very reason I am going to use the glass, which do you think I would choose? It’s far more productive and rewarding to scout, do the homework and sharpen skills than try to find some product that takes away the challenge.
What I REALLY want to know is why do these things have to weigh 26 ounces? Can’t they make them out of aluminum or titanium and lighten them up?