Good quality binos
#11
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 153

There are some good quality optics out there in that price range.
While I agree that Swarovski makes a great set of binos. I doubt I will ever buy another set at the nearly 2 k price tags. The difference in a $600 Hd Leupold and a 2k Swarovski is marginal and probably only going to serve a true bird watcher well.
The Clarity on the Mckinley's is superb and backed by Leupolds excellent warrany and customer service. I have some cheaper Binos that are darn close to the Mckinley's but for most big game applications the advantages are mainly in eye strain for extreame periods of glassing,
While I agree that Swarovski makes a great set of binos. I doubt I will ever buy another set at the nearly 2 k price tags. The difference in a $600 Hd Leupold and a 2k Swarovski is marginal and probably only going to serve a true bird watcher well.
The Clarity on the Mckinley's is superb and backed by Leupolds excellent warrany and customer service. I have some cheaper Binos that are darn close to the Mckinley's but for most big game applications the advantages are mainly in eye strain for extreame periods of glassing,
#12
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: idaho
Posts: 2,773

There are some good quality optics out there in that price range.
While I agree that Swarovski makes a great set of binos. I doubt I will ever buy another set at the nearly 2 k price tags. The difference in a $600 Hd Leupold and a 2k Swarovski is marginal and probably only going to serve a true bird watcher well.
The Clarity on the Mckinley's is superb and backed by Leupolds excellent warrany and customer service. I have some cheaper Binos that are darn close to the Mckinley's but for most big game applications the advantages are mainly in eye strain for extreame periods of glassing,
While I agree that Swarovski makes a great set of binos. I doubt I will ever buy another set at the nearly 2 k price tags. The difference in a $600 Hd Leupold and a 2k Swarovski is marginal and probably only going to serve a true bird watcher well.
The Clarity on the Mckinley's is superb and backed by Leupolds excellent warrany and customer service. I have some cheaper Binos that are darn close to the Mckinley's but for most big game applications the advantages are mainly in eye strain for extreame periods of glassing,
you will also see huge difference in binos in first and last light scenarios.these are also the times you tend to see the big boys,so if you're a trophy hunter
( or at least wanting the chance at a big one)it's worth the money . if you plan on spanking down first animal you see, it probly is not
Last edited by kidoggy; 01-22-2015 at 06:32 AM.
#13

I normally carry Swarovski binoculars. However, I also own a pair of McKinleys. They are very close in optical quality to my eyes.
The biggest differences are the extra weight of the McKinleys (not always a bad thing), and the price. Swarovski binoculars cost about four times the price of the McKinleys.
The biggest differences are the extra weight of the McKinleys (not always a bad thing), and the price. Swarovski binoculars cost about four times the price of the McKinleys.
#14

Here's a decent review of 3 in that approximate price range:
http://www.opticsreviewer.com/monarc...-elite-ed.html
The Nikon Monarch 7's fair well.
http://www.opticsreviewer.com/monarc...-elite-ed.html
The Nikon Monarch 7's fair well.
#15
Fork Horn
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 153

Here's a decent review of 3 in that approximate price range:
http://www.opticsreviewer.com/monarc...-elite-ed.html
The Nikon Monarch 7's fair well.
http://www.opticsreviewer.com/monarc...-elite-ed.html
The Nikon Monarch 7's fair well.
My vote is still for the McKinleys, Leupolds warranty definalty would be worth the extra $$$
#16

A lot of it has to do with the coatings/filters. Sure the grind of the optics counts, but for my use, the coatings are more important. My eyes aren't all that good anyway, so clarity isn't nearly as important as usable light gathering.
I have a pair of (way old) Nikons, they have a fairly robust UV coating on the lens. In low light, a lot of what you see is reflected light, mostly UV (or near UV). Or objects that absorb UV (or near UV), you see a black nonrefective shape like Hogs. I call Hogs black holes, everything around them reflects a little, but true Boar don't reflect much light. The robust UV coating degrades some frequencies of low light. This may be more of a subjective than objective statement. What works for me may not work for you, in subtle sorts of ways.
My Nikons work OK in the daylight, I see much less with them at night or low light than I do with my Optolyth. I'm far from an expert, but did notice that the Nikons had a blue coating, wavelength unknown and my Optolyths have kind of a red or rust colored coating. On most of the optics the coatings are patented.
Both manufacturers are unlikely to sell you a pair of glasses that will burn out your retina, but do filter differently. One, the Optolyth, definitely works better in low light.
I got a heck of a deal on the Optolyth and they are comparable to the Swarovsky. I got a promotional deal for the Optolyth when they first started expanding into the U.S. market. Definitely a better optic, close to the best, whether they are worth the full price is anybodies guess and likely just opinion anyway.
Best advice, try them out extensively before you buy. The salespeople may or may not be open to you running outside with their wares, daylight and night time. I'd shop until I found a retailer that will allow you to test them. A relatively large ticket item, that is designed to last decades, is not a choice you want to make on the spur of the moment.
IMO every bodies eyes are little different and what works for me might not work as well for you. Again we are back to the coatings. I prefer a bino that lets in as much UV light as practical and safe.
I have a pair of (way old) Nikons, they have a fairly robust UV coating on the lens. In low light, a lot of what you see is reflected light, mostly UV (or near UV). Or objects that absorb UV (or near UV), you see a black nonrefective shape like Hogs. I call Hogs black holes, everything around them reflects a little, but true Boar don't reflect much light. The robust UV coating degrades some frequencies of low light. This may be more of a subjective than objective statement. What works for me may not work for you, in subtle sorts of ways.
My Nikons work OK in the daylight, I see much less with them at night or low light than I do with my Optolyth. I'm far from an expert, but did notice that the Nikons had a blue coating, wavelength unknown and my Optolyths have kind of a red or rust colored coating. On most of the optics the coatings are patented.
Both manufacturers are unlikely to sell you a pair of glasses that will burn out your retina, but do filter differently. One, the Optolyth, definitely works better in low light.
I got a heck of a deal on the Optolyth and they are comparable to the Swarovsky. I got a promotional deal for the Optolyth when they first started expanding into the U.S. market. Definitely a better optic, close to the best, whether they are worth the full price is anybodies guess and likely just opinion anyway.
Best advice, try them out extensively before you buy. The salespeople may or may not be open to you running outside with their wares, daylight and night time. I'd shop until I found a retailer that will allow you to test them. A relatively large ticket item, that is designed to last decades, is not a choice you want to make on the spur of the moment.
IMO every bodies eyes are little different and what works for me might not work as well for you. Again we are back to the coatings. I prefer a bino that lets in as much UV light as practical and safe.
Last edited by MudderChuck; 07-03-2015 at 06:50 AM.
#17
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location:
Posts: 2,186

Take a look at the Meopta Meopro line. These are pretty darned good binos in the $400-$450 price range. I have a Swarovski SLC and Nikon Venturer, which are considered pretty much top of the line binos. The Meopta Meopro is darn clse at less than 1/2 the price.