Ever THINK you have good optics but then look through mind-blowing better?

[uplander01]

You get what you pay for with OPTICS-End of Story.

 

[Woodcarver]

I've never used the darkest spot in the store but I have had the salesman go outside with me at dusk so that I can get a real feel on what the optic are going to be like.

I've even done this in the bright daylight just to get away from the artificial store lights.

If they say that they can't then I just walk away

I spent a couple hours with the salesman from Sportsmans Warehouse several years ago when I wanted a good spotting scope for my sheep hunt. We took virtually every scope they had out to look at the rocks on the northeast end of Cheyenne Mountain. Early evening, overcast with the usual afternoon thunderstorm brewing, so it was getting fairly dark. Leupold, Vortex (1st one eliminated, it was worse than my ancient Tasco pos), Nikon, Swaros, and a Leica; tried both 60mm and 80mm in brands that had both. Narrowed it down to the Nikons and Swarovskis (which were on sale). The 80mm Swaro was visibly better than anything else, just weighed an extra pound and a half. The 60mm Swarovski was the visual equivalent of the 80mm Nikon at the same weight, but twice the money.
Ended up with the Nikon 80mm for a little less than half the money of the Swarovski and it has worked well, but if I buy another, it will be the 60mm Swarovski. Same clarity in a smaller, more packable scope.

 

[Hogpatrol]

You get what you pay for with OPTICS-End of Story.

And the main thng you pay for is what it does in low light.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Is there any other bino?

@Flewis
Yes.
A mate bought some swaro binos and raved about them. I got the pair out my father bought in 76 can't remember the brand but they are German made. Thes stay permanently under the seat of my 4x4 as you never know when you need them.
He looked thru mine at dusk and immediately said I will give you the Swaro if I can keep yours. Naturally I just laughed.
Scopes are a different story. I had mid range brand because I could get them at cost price. They worked well for my needs. They were clear with precise adjustments and held good zero. When I had my first custom rifle built I thought I would put a meopta on it. What I had missed out on for years was obvious. I now have 2 meopta and 1 ziess one my rifles the other scopes ore in the cupboard.
Don't get me wrong the other scopes served me well for years but now I have become a bit of a snob on good glass on my hunting rifles.
Bob

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

Oh, I look, but can't afford what I see
(

@geoff rath
I know the feeling but I saved up and bought good scope on sale when I could afford them. Still not top of the Lin like lieca,and nightmare but definitely an improvement. No a lover of meopta scopes.
Bob

 

[Ray B]

Evaluating optics reminds me of the Parker scale for wine. I have pedestrian taste in both wine and optics so don't see a great deal of difference between Good and Great. I have a 1935 Zeiss Zeilvier 4x that I see very little difference with a 1990 Schmidt & Bender 4x; 1949 Bausch & Lomb Zephyr 8x30 binoculars are similar to Leica binoculars. Some may take issue with that, just as Parker would take issue with my evaluation of various wines- but i don't see a big difference.

 

[CBH Australia]

Avoid looking through them so you don't know what you are missing.
I've had cheap scopes that worked and never failed me but I've upgraded many times and can appreciate the "Buy once, Cry once" mantra.
But those cheap scopes are not a patch on good glass.

A couple of decent scopes I have were impulse buys . Sale or runout model so I just used the credit card and made it priority to pay it down ASAP.

They sure make me appreciate better glass and on low light I've noticed the difference.

My brother ordered Meopta and found the reticle was to fine, take 2 and he goes and buys a Swarovski Z3 and is suitably impressed Now he has a NIB Meopta up for sale.

 

[meigsbucks]

I started off with a pair of some Japanese binos on my first elk hunt. They were both bulky and had poor optics. I replaced those with a pair of Zeiss 8x20 sub compacts. Great optics. These have accompanied me on every hunt since… about 42 yrs worth. They are very clear but not great in low light and way too small and light for constant glassing.
I then picked up a pair of Leupold Wind River Pinnacle 10x42. They accompanied me on numerous hunts and never found wanting. A nice glass. However, just before going to Africa in ‘13, I decided I needed another pair of binos so my wife could use a pair for game watching. I looked at a pair of Swarovski CL 10x30’s. That was it. I know higher end Swaro’s are even more amazing, but the CL’s do everything I could ask of them. I can see game past legal shooting light.
Rifle scopes: Early on I owned a few Bushnells but was mostly buying Leupold VX2’s. Later started replacing with Leupold VX3’s. I could be happy with having the VX3’s on everything. I will keep them on a few rifles but have now been upgrading to Leupold VX5, US Optics, Zeiss Conquest, Meopta and Swaro (Z3 & Z5).

 

[steve white]

@Flewis
Yes.
A mate bought some swaro binos and raved about them. I got the pair out my father bought in 76 can't remember the brand but they are German made. Thes stay permanently under the seat of my 4x4 as you never know when you need them.
He looked thru mine at dusk and immediately said I will give you the Swaro if I can keep yours. Naturally I just laughed.
Scopes are a different story. I had mid range brand because I could get them at cost price. They worked well for my needs. They were clear with precise adjustments and held good zero. When I had my first custom rifle built I thought I would put a meopta on it. What I had missed out on for years was obvious. I now have 2 meopta and 1 ziess one my rifles the other scopes ore in the cupboard.
Don't get me wrong the other scopes served me well for years but now I have become a bit of a snob on good glass on my hunting rifles.
Bob

I'll bet the older pair were PORRO binoculars....folks just don't realize the better benefits of 3D vision, waterproofing etc. as compared to roof prisms for half the price. The only really great porros around these days are the Swar Habicht, and maybe the Fujinons.

 

[Bob Nelson 35Whelen]

I'll bet the older pair were PORRO binoculars....folks just don't realize the better benefits of 3D vision, waterproofing etc. as compared to roof prisms for half the price. The only really great porros around these days are the Swar Habicht, and maybe the Fujinons.

@steve white
Couldn't tell you without getting off my fat arse to go and look but I know they weren't cheap. Dad was never one to skimp on quality. His philosophy was buy right buy once.
Bob

 

[geoff rath]

As an aside, the quality of what goes INTO the glass is of utmost importance, NO ??

 

[Inline6]

As an aside, the quality of what goes INTO the glass is of utmost importance, NO ??

The utmost importance is reliability, glass is second.

A lot goes into making good glass that is a fact. Swarovski, Zeiss, S&B and Leica are some of the best. Tangent Thetas and Zero Compromise Optic are some very nice scopes focused more towards target shooting. We have a very good selection of scopes today, way better than just 15 years ago.

 

[reineke]

It is the same story, always. If you have limited stocks of money -and who has'nt-, you cannot
afford to buy low or medium quality stuff. For that means upgrading step by step, and you end
up where you should have started: For me with scopes or binos that means Schmid&Bender,Svarowski or, of course, Zeiss.

 

[geoff rath]

The utmost importance is reliability, glass is second.

A lot goes into making good glass that is a fact. Swarovski, Zeiss, S&B and Leica are some of the best. Tangent Thetas and Zero Compromise Optic are some very nice scopes focused more towards target shooting. We have a very good selection of scopes today, way better than just 15 years ago.

Was (sort of ) implying about the (liquid) contents of a glass ...

 

[JGRaider]

The doctor who did my cataracts uses all Zeiss optics in his practice. He's also a Zeiss rifles scope and binocular user. He's told me the same thing judging optics. Look at the darkest spot in the store.

Better yet, take 'em outside and look into the direction of the sun and check for glare. Do so at every angle from the sun. Check for CA while you're at it. You can gather much more info spending a short time outside even if it 's in a parking lot.

 

[JGRaider]

The utmost importance is reliability, glass is second.

A lot goes into making good glass that is a fact. Swarovski, Zeiss, S&B and Leica are some of the best. Tangent Thetas and Zero Compromise Optic are some very nice scopes focused more towards target shooting. We have a very good selection of scopes today, way better than just 15 years ago.

With regards to rifle scopes I could not agree more. I've never understood someone putting optical quality of a rifle scope as the utmost priority. A scopes job is to put bullets exactly where you're aiming, holding zero, and tracking as it should. Most any $500+ rifle scope has optical ability to get you past legal shooting light nowadays.

 

[mdwest]

historically, "good" has always been good enough for me... I'll typically buy mid-line stuff from Zeiss or Leupold (VX3, etc) and its always served me well... my wife on the other hand leans toward premium products.. mid line zeiss is her minimum standard.. she prefers higher end swaro products...

Ive never noticed, or really cared about the difference... until this past july when hunting bushbuck...

I spotted a ram in a field with less than 30 minutes of shooting light left with a set of leupold BX1 HD binos, and called over to the PH and my wife, who were checking out the next field over telling them to "come quick"...

Long and the short of it is.. it took them a while to cut through the bush and get into a shooting position.. by the time they got ready to take a shot, I could no longer see the ram in my binos.. there just wasn't enough light...

but the wife could see him clearly through her swaro optic and put the hammer on him... dropping him in his tracks...

Needless to say... I bought a new set of much better binos shortly after returning to the US.. and donated the old BX1's to our new 16 year old hunter to put into her kit bag lol..

 

[CBH Australia]

@mdwest I recall one occassion with low light end of day that I managed to drop 3 pigs quickly while hunting on foot.

I saw them being close enough but the clarity of my Zeiss scope showed up that day and is in part why I hit them.

One experience will be enough to convince you, as you know.

The killer is the benefit of great glass is only measured by those few extra minutes you gain of lowlight hunting.

Sounds like a good excuse to hunt more to get value out of our optics I'm thinking.

 

[ldmay375]

@mdwest I recall one occassion with low light end of day that I managed to drop 3 pigs quickly while hunting on foot.

I saw them being close enough but the clarity of my Zeiss scope showed up that day and is in part why I hit them.

One experience will be enough to convince you, as you know.

The killer is the benefit of great glass is only measured by those few extra minutes you gain of lowlight hunting.

Sounds like a good excuse to hunt more to get value out of our optics I'm thinking.

The low light, after sunset times are what pushed me into the more expensive optics. I also agree on the reliability theme. I know if it is man made, regardless of cost it is not infallible.

I definitely hunt close range shooting areas. But the ability to see the target and the reticle in low light is a priority for me. My first Kahles scope and Leica binoculars definitely extended my hunting time. I now have a few of the various high end European brand scopes. No tears when looking through them in low light. Nor the larger Zeiss binoculars that I bought.

I will say that I have recently bought some low powered variable scopes at about 1/2 the price of the top tier European offerings and them seem to work for me. I used one of these this year, same area, same time frames. I was not regretting the purchase. I guess in this case, "good enough" actually fits.

 

[Longwalker]

There is a good chance that the answer depends on YOUR eyes. Many years ago, I inadvertently insulted my guide while on a Yukon sheep hunt. He invited me to look through his wonderful Leica binoculars at some distant sheep that we were having trouble evaluating for trophy quality. I told him I could tell no difference in the resolution and clarity between his $2000 Leica binoculars and my $300 Bausch & Lombs. And it was true. He was really miffed and thought me an idiot.
Some years later, I had laser eye surgery that not only cleared up my myopia, but corrected some rather significant astigmatism that I was unaware that I was afflicted with. I went shopping for some new binoculars to celebrate. WOW was I surprised by the difference in optical quality at different price points.
I now hunt with some excellent Swarovski binoculars, and my old B&L are loaners that work OK for the relatives, guests and kids and such.
But the fact remains, buying my Swarovski's would have been a waste of money back then. I could tell no difference between excellent and good glass. Really cheap stuff should always be avoided, but for some, "good enough" really is good enough.