Have vortex vipers and have no complaints.
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
I use the Vortex Viper HD at work and have the older Diamondback at home and I'd throughly recommend them. They're more than good enough and with the VIP warranty what's not to love. I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell you to buy some 1950 Zeiss or Swaro that have better glass than the cheap Vortex tat made in China though.
That’s interesting. I was also looking at the Dimondback. Is it worth spending the extra for the Viper?
nun_hunter
Well-Known Member
I can tell a slight difference but not much at all. I'm not sure what the price difference is now as the Diamondbacks were £130 when I bought them 5ish years ago. One eye piece broke and they were sent back and replaced FOC.
I have a S/H pair of Leica 8x32BN that'll blow the socks of anything new in this price bracket that I'll let go at the top of your budget.
Danny Fireblade
Well-Known Member
Another vote for the vortex, their warranty also takes some beating.
Reloader708
Well-Known Member
I'll put a shout in for the bushnell forge range, maybe slightly over your budget but well worth the money!
Another Vortex fan here.
I would go with the Vortex. Good warranty replacement service from @CSW when you need it.
long_range_rob
Well-Known Member
I got a second hand set of 8x30 SLC’s for that sort of money. Keep your eyes open.
Both offer excellent warranties. You get a nice holder with the Vortex but, as stated earlier, I think you'll find the image slightly better with the Hawke ed.
I have been very pleased with my Hawke ED 8x42, which are the first version, bought just after they had come out. Made of magnesium alloy, Probably the first really good quality Chinese binoculars, excellent field of view and linearity as you scan around (this really matters, some high end Swarovskis I tried were poor at that), and have good eyepieces that work well whilst wearing my glasses. My first version ones are heavy, long and large. Still going strong albeit showing some battle scars on the outside.
TBH, if buying again I would be looking more at 8x32 size, some modern ones I've tried pretty much equal my 8x42 in FOV, light gathering, sharpness etc. Hawke make a set of those too which I have evaluated and found good. and so much smaller and lighter. TBH, if I could find something in X7 or even X6, with even larger FOV, those would suit me even better.
Light gathering is, other things being equal (coatings, eyepiece design etc) a function of exit pupil size. Which is a function of the objective diameter divided by the power. That's optics. I.e. 5.25mm for 8x42, 4mm for 8x32. But the fact is that, as you get older the ability of your eyes' pupil to open up to its maximum in low light reduces, so not all of that light may actually enter your eye.
A large exit pupil, bigger than what your eye can actually accept (the rest is wasted), does however make it more tolerant of not having to line things up precisely.
The same applies to riflescopes of course.
As with both, what suits one person's eyes may not suit another's. A 35 year old with perfect uncorrected vision should find most mid priced modern offerings good, and not necessarily be able to easily discern the subtle improvements in higher priced ones. However once rather older, and possibly requiring corrective lenses (contacts or glasses), the differences between adequate, good, and very good, start to become very noticeable. Any recommendations can only be subjective, for that person.
It may seem a small point, but the way that the focus wheel works matters to me. Grittiness, backlash, smoothness, resistance, amount of movement needed to make usual adjustments over the range of interest is important. Some are not terribly good, I found that with some Vortex and Minox things, albeit some years ago. Actually returned a set of Vortex a few years ago and exchanged them for Bushnells.
However a strong consideration for me now would also be a rain repellent coating for the objective lenses. I think Bushnell invented this, and it is licensed to all the big names such as Zeiss (called Lotutec ISTR), Leica, Swaro. and of course used on the better Bushnells. Some put it on the eyepieces as well, where it help against steaming up, as well as any raindrops if you don't cover them. It really works, raindrops etc just shake off.
My GF's Zeiss Conquests have this, as do my Bushnell rangefinder binos. and it really works. I even once flushed off the Bushnells with my water bottle when a stumble ended with some mud on the objectives. Absolutely no harm done and the stalk scarcely interrupted. Not sure well that would have worked without the coating, and I wasn't going to try rubbing it off with whatever came to hand. Hankie, cleaning cloth, lens wipe etc.
Bird watchers can be super-critical about binoculars, and have several forums discussing them, e.g. birdforum. But their use cases might be slightly different. For me, at least, my Hawke EDs have had a hard life and proved themselves very robust against knocks, falls, bashing against things, foul weather with nothing except the eyepiece covers, dropped in mud, and sailed through all of that.
Can't speak as to the latest ones, but I doubt that I would be disappointed.
TBH, if buying again I would be looking more at 8x32 size, some modern ones I've tried pretty much equal my 8x42 in FOV, light gathering, sharpness etc. Hawke make a set of those too which I have evaluated and found good. and so much smaller and lighter. TBH, if I could find something in X7 or even X6, with even larger FOV, those would suit me even better.
Light gathering is, other things being equal (coatings, eyepiece design etc) a function of exit pupil size. Which is a function of the objective diameter divided by the power. That's optics. I.e. 5.25mm for 8x42, 4mm for 8x32. But the fact is that, as you get older the ability of your eyes' pupil to open up to its maximum in low light reduces, so not all of that light may actually enter your eye.
A large exit pupil, bigger than what your eye can actually accept (the rest is wasted), does however make it more tolerant of not having to line things up precisely.
The same applies to riflescopes of course.
As with both, what suits one person's eyes may not suit another's. A 35 year old with perfect uncorrected vision should find most mid priced modern offerings good, and not necessarily be able to easily discern the subtle improvements in higher priced ones. However once rather older, and possibly requiring corrective lenses (contacts or glasses), the differences between adequate, good, and very good, start to become very noticeable. Any recommendations can only be subjective, for that person.
It may seem a small point, but the way that the focus wheel works matters to me. Grittiness, backlash, smoothness, resistance, amount of movement needed to make usual adjustments over the range of interest is important. Some are not terribly good, I found that with some Vortex and Minox things, albeit some years ago. Actually returned a set of Vortex a few years ago and exchanged them for Bushnells.
However a strong consideration for me now would also be a rain repellent coating for the objective lenses. I think Bushnell invented this, and it is licensed to all the big names such as Zeiss (called Lotutec ISTR), Leica, Swaro. and of course used on the better Bushnells. Some put it on the eyepieces as well, where it help against steaming up, as well as any raindrops if you don't cover them. It really works, raindrops etc just shake off.
My GF's Zeiss Conquests have this, as do my Bushnell rangefinder binos. and it really works. I even once flushed off the Bushnells with my water bottle when a stumble ended with some mud on the objectives. Absolutely no harm done and the stalk scarcely interrupted. Not sure well that would have worked without the coating, and I wasn't going to try rubbing it off with whatever came to hand. Hankie, cleaning cloth, lens wipe etc.
Bird watchers can be super-critical about binoculars, and have several forums discussing them, e.g. birdforum. But their use cases might be slightly different. For me, at least, my Hawke EDs have had a hard life and proved themselves very robust against knocks, falls, bashing against things, foul weather with nothing except the eyepiece covers, dropped in mud, and sailed through all of that.
Can't speak as to the latest ones, but I doubt that I would be disappointed.
Thank you - very helpful response!
Similar threads
