Hey guys, after another season of coastal hunting I have decided it's time to update my binos. Currently have 12x56mm victory. Good glass just looking into newer maybe better binos. Looking at swarovski 12x50el,10x42el. Leica same magnification also Zeiss ht,sf. I would prefer the brightest possible. I know these are all good glass was hoping some of the members here have compared some of these side by side or just know the right ones. Thanks guys
Low light binoculars?
- Thread starter DRUSS
- Start date
I would go to a sports store and do a comparison of the ones you've mentioned. I would look at Zeiss and swaro.
Truthfully, you will probably be satisfied using any of them. European glass IMO is still one of the best hunting investments you can make. Although, I will throw in the caveat that there is a lot of strong glass out there right now which is great for the consumer, especially making the jump from the middle of the road to upper end optics.
All that said. I am currently using the Zeiss Conquest HD and love them. For the price point they were on my short list before I started working here and with the opportunity to use them I have been more than impressed. They were a huge step up from what I was using before and they have performed very well in low light conditions.
All that said. I am currently using the Zeiss Conquest HD and love them. For the price point they were on my short list before I started working here and with the opportunity to use them I have been more than impressed. They were a huge step up from what I was using before and they have performed very well in low light conditions.
if your looking for low light binos this may help explain what to look at.
The second number of a binocular designation refers to the aperture of the objective lenses and determines how much light enters the optical system. All else being equal (glass quality and anti-reflective coatings), a larger objective lens will gather more light and provide greater image detail, clarity and brightness.
The size of the aperture is the greatest indicator of the physical size and weight of a binocular. Magnification, however, has little effect on the size of most binoculars. For example, an 8x42 binocular is larger than an 8x28, but an 8x42 may be very similar in size to a 10x42 in the same series. Keep in mind this general rule when comparing binoculars of the same design (e.g., all are roof prisms): the larger the objective lens, the larger the binocular.
http://www.opticstalk.com/differences-between-swarovski-slc-and-el-binocu
The main thing is that the ELs have enhanced coatings relative to the SLCs.
This translates into better resolution (like an HD tv with a higher pixel count). The sharper resolution provides for better contrast – a birder can tell the differences between feathers easier. Colors are more true to nature in an EL and they pop out better.
The ELs all have “field flattening” lenses in them. The field flattener provides for true edge to edge distinction. For example, if you grab any pair of ELs, and put an object that goes straight up and down in the periphery of your field of view (such as a telephone or fence pole) you will see that it goes straight up and down. Only glass in the world to do this. SLCs don’t. While it’s nice that field flattening shows things they way they are (other glass bows or curves at the edges) it’s more important that the viewer’s eyes don’t constantly try and focus the periphery of your field of view, over and over and over again. Less eye strain with field flattening. ELs have more eye relief. That is, the 10x42 ELs have 20mm and the 10x42 SLCs have 16mm. ELs have open bridge design which makes them easier to grip (i.e. two hinges instead of one).
Now the SLCs beat the EL in one place, light transmission. ELs = 90%. SLCs = 91%. That’s because of the extra field flattening lenses in the Els.
I am comparing the new ELs versus the new SLCs. Over the years, there have been different versions of the ELs and SLCs with features constantly changing.
All ELs have HD glass. All new SLCs have or will have HD glass.
The second number of a binocular designation refers to the aperture of the objective lenses and determines how much light enters the optical system. All else being equal (glass quality and anti-reflective coatings), a larger objective lens will gather more light and provide greater image detail, clarity and brightness.
The size of the aperture is the greatest indicator of the physical size and weight of a binocular. Magnification, however, has little effect on the size of most binoculars. For example, an 8x42 binocular is larger than an 8x28, but an 8x42 may be very similar in size to a 10x42 in the same series. Keep in mind this general rule when comparing binoculars of the same design (e.g., all are roof prisms): the larger the objective lens, the larger the binocular.
http://www.opticstalk.com/differences-between-swarovski-slc-and-el-binocu
The main thing is that the ELs have enhanced coatings relative to the SLCs.
This translates into better resolution (like an HD tv with a higher pixel count). The sharper resolution provides for better contrast – a birder can tell the differences between feathers easier. Colors are more true to nature in an EL and they pop out better.
The ELs all have “field flattening” lenses in them. The field flattener provides for true edge to edge distinction. For example, if you grab any pair of ELs, and put an object that goes straight up and down in the periphery of your field of view (such as a telephone or fence pole) you will see that it goes straight up and down. Only glass in the world to do this. SLCs don’t. While it’s nice that field flattening shows things they way they are (other glass bows or curves at the edges) it’s more important that the viewer’s eyes don’t constantly try and focus the periphery of your field of view, over and over and over again. Less eye strain with field flattening. ELs have more eye relief. That is, the 10x42 ELs have 20mm and the 10x42 SLCs have 16mm. ELs have open bridge design which makes them easier to grip (i.e. two hinges instead of one).
Now the SLCs beat the EL in one place, light transmission. ELs = 90%. SLCs = 91%. That’s because of the extra field flattening lenses in the Els.
I am comparing the new ELs versus the new SLCs. Over the years, there have been different versions of the ELs and SLCs with features constantly changing.
All ELs have HD glass. All new SLCs have or will have HD glass.
Last edited:
what were you using before?
I have the 10x50 SLC Swarovs and love them. just curious as to wether you have an opinion as to how the two compare
Last edited:
JimP
Administrator
Do you have a Sportsman's Warehouse in your area?
While there is some advantage to the higher end glass don't discount the upper end of domestic glass like Leopold. A friend had a pair of 10x42 Cabela's Euro's and he actually preferred to look through my 10x42 Leopolds
While there is some advantage to the higher end glass don't discount the upper end of domestic glass like Leopold. A friend had a pair of 10x42 Cabela's Euro's and he actually preferred to look through my 10x42 Leopolds
I own a pair of 10x50 wind river leoupolds . they are fairly good binos but are in no way even close to the class of the Swarovskis. especially WHEN IT COMES TO LOW LIGHT CONDITIONS!
the SLCs are probably the best investment I ever made in relation to hunting.
IMO getting the best glass you can afford is of more importance even then the quality of the weapon you own.
good glass MAY find the animal but GREAT glass save a lot of walking to see if it's a shooter or not.
I know it can be hard to fork that much money out and tuff to justify but my advice is , if you can afford it,SPEND THE MONEY you will not regret it
the SLCs are probably the best investment I ever made in relation to hunting.
IMO getting the best glass you can afford is of more importance even then the quality of the weapon you own.
good glass MAY find the animal but GREAT glass save a lot of walking to see if it's a shooter or not.
I know it can be hard to fork that much money out and tuff to justify but my advice is , if you can afford it,SPEND THE MONEY you will not regret it
Last edited:
I do have a sportsman, cabelas close but usually they have swaro, vortex top end in stock lots of others to choose from also. Zeiss,Leica top end, "in stock" isn't always consistent to look through at same time. I have good glass now so I am not in a big hurry and want to make sure I am happy with whichever I choose. But only time will give me that answer. I have used 10x swaro el,slc to compare with my victorys side by side. But not the new ht,sf or any of the Leica stuff. I really like leupold and they are the majority of my scopes (I live 30min from them), but they're top glass isn't keeping up. I wish they would.
Winchester
Veteran member
There's a lot of good info in this thread so far!
I have some older Zeiss binos and I love them, they're very good.
However, I've also been thinking about upgrading to something like Swaro, etc.
Thanks for starting this thread ...
I have some older Zeiss binos and I love them, they're very good.
However, I've also been thinking about upgrading to something like Swaro, etc.
Thanks for starting this thread ...
mntnguide
Very Active Member
I had Zeiss rangefinder 10x45 for about 7 years until they were stolen out out of my truck a few weeks ago.. so now I'm in the market as well. I loved my Zeiss except for the eyepiece glass tended to easily get scuff marks even with being careful using a cover. I'm leaning towards the Swaro rangefinder binos because of the built in angle compensation which zeiss does not have. But after buying a Kowa spotting scope, I will seriously consider their glass as well, because side by side with a swaro, the Kowa was noticeably brighter in low light conditions.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
I have the Leica 10x42 Geovid HD-B binos and they are very bright. I have been told the Ultravid's are even better but I haven't had the opportunity to look through them. I know the Leicas beat the 5yr old Zeiss Victory FL-T (I think that was the model, not sure) in every lighting condition. Beat the 8x56's Zeiss I had that were the same model too.
My favorite low light bino is my 15x56 Swaro SLC HD. I whitetail hunt where every minute I can get is important, especially on the foggy or overcast days where bucks move more during legal hours. Having the Swaro's on a tripod the extremely stable image and large enough that I can see more detail with this at last light than anything else I've tried. I usually set up for a 200-300yd shot while doing this. They may not be that much better if I was closer.
My favorite low light bino is my 15x56 Swaro SLC HD. I whitetail hunt where every minute I can get is important, especially on the foggy or overcast days where bucks move more during legal hours. Having the Swaro's on a tripod the extremely stable image and large enough that I can see more detail with this at last light than anything else I've tried. I usually set up for a 200-300yd shot while doing this. They may not be that much better if I was closer.
Just remember, all else being equal...
Divide the magnification by the objective lens to get the diameter of the exit pupil.
- 10x50 = 5mm light at pupil
- 10x42 = 4.2mm light at pupil
- 8x42 = 6mm light at pupil
- 15x56 = 3.73mm light at pupil
Objective lens size matters, but it also matters in relation to magnification. For instance, 15x56 has less light at the eye than a 10x42 even though the objective lens is larger.
Divide the magnification by the objective lens to get the diameter of the exit pupil.
- 10x50 = 5mm light at pupil
- 10x42 = 4.2mm light at pupil
- 8x42 = 6mm light at pupil
- 15x56 = 3.73mm light at pupil
Objective lens size matters, but it also matters in relation to magnification. For instance, 15x56 has less light at the eye than a 10x42 even though the objective lens is larger.
Last edited:
Work2hunt
Veteran member
I also have the Leica Geovid HD-B. I love it. Right now if you look around they are on sale about every where, too.
I love mine too. I think for seeing detail past 250yds or so my Swaro 15x56 beat them, not because they bring in more light but because the extra magnification makes up for what they lack in exit pupil. Maybe it's just because the Swaros are always tripod mounted when I use them at low light and the Leica are only sometimes tripod mounted. Both darn good glass.
I got the new 55mm Kowa and have been amazed at how well it does for it's size and weight. It holds in there way closer to my 2yr old ATS 20-60x80 HD Swaro than it should. I might have to check out the bigger Kowa spotters and consider trading my big Swaro toward one.