Good quality binos
 

Looking for a good quality pair of binos. I know Swarvoski & Leica make top notch but don't have the $ for them now. Any Leupold or other manufacturers up to $400 that are worth a darn or no?

Nikon, Leupold, Vortex, Burris and Bushnell - among others.

Get a lifetime warranty !

I've got a pair of Steiner 9x40 Bighorns I use in the woods. A pair of 15x45 Zeiss Conquest for fields, open area & out west. A pair of 8x25 Zeiss compacts I use bow & turkey hunting (fit in shirt pocket, Might say I've had them awhile, they have "Made in West Germany" on them). I "assembled" this collection of binocs over the last 2+ decades. Honestly if I didn't already have them & was starting from scratch tomorrow I'd buy a pair of 10x Nikon Monarch 7s & call myself prepared!

You just AINT gonna beat the Monarch scopes & binoc for the money! :s4:

In that price range it is hard to beat the Nikon Monarch 5 or Monarch 7. I think the 5 is the big bargain of the Nikon line, but the 7 is well priced for HD binoculars. The 7 usually runs closer to $500 but the 10x42 is on sale for about $420.

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Shoot...3Bcat104217480

If I had $600 to spend it would be on a pair of Leupold McKinley HD.

I have a pair of Nikon monarch 5s and they are starting to break down. The eye cups are stripped and not working properly. The warranty is short.

Get a set of Leupold Hawthornes. Lifetime guarantee and are great glasses for the money. 10x42 or 12x42

leupold MAKES DECENT BINOS THEY ARE NOWHERE NEAR THE QAULITY OF SWAROVSKI but their waranty and costumer service is second to none.


I have owned leupold ,bushnell, tasco, and nikons in the past and leupold is the only one of those I would consider buying again. none of the others held up for more then a year. I now own a pair of swarovski 10x50 slc, that I bought about 20 years ago.I have had to replace eyecups ,which swarovski provided free of charge but have had no other issues with them.I know you said you are short of cash now but if ever in a position you can afford it , go swarovski.

Wow and I thought I was rough on my equipment - LOL !

My Nikon Monarch Binos 12X 42MM are still holding up well, after all these years....................... ?!?! :confused0024:

back then I WAS OUT HIKING WITH THEM dang near every day, often in some nasty weather. yes, I WILL ADMIT I GAVE THEM A GOOD TEST. I DIDN'T DROP THEM OR BANG EM AROUND OR ANYTHING but they get used and don't sit in a case in the house 350 days out of the year

+1 - I bought a pair of McKinley's last year with a great deal from Cabela's. They are awesome bino's and hold there own against my buddy's Swarovski's.

I picked up a pair of Vortex Diamondback 10x50 binoculars and they are outstanding! They are not bulky or heavy and I paid $211 from Opticsplanet.com when they were on sale. Plus, Vortex offers the VIP no questions asked lifetime warranty. I like these binos so much that I'm going to get a pair for my wife before next fall, maybe in the 10x42.

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,

mike makes a good point it really comes down to what and how much you're going to use them for. if you glass a lot in the half light of dusk and dawn ,you will want a pair that draws in and magnifys light well.
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

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.

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.

Not surprised the Nikons came out on top. I would not be surprised if the Nikon 5 would have come in close to those two other models,listed.

My vote is still for the McKinleys, Leupolds warranty definalty would be worth the extra $$$

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.

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.

Vortex Razor HD for me. Either an 8X or 10X.