# Vortex Razor HD vs Swarovski EL



## trial153 (Nov 27, 2011)

I have owned razors, EL's, SLC as well as HTs and Conquest HD. I would rank the Razors the worst of the bunch. When I had the Razors ( 8x I compared them to Conquest HD in low light and shadows and it wasn't close. I also felt like the focus adjustment was sloppy on the Razors. I won't think comparing Razors to EL or even SLC are a fair comparison honestly.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

The difference is only worth it if you spend a lot of time glassing.
Out of the truck to look at a buck in a bean field....not worth it.
Backcountry glassing for hours and hours and hours...absolutely worth it.
I have EL's and Razors and I'd give the Razors a 6/10 if the EL's are a 10/10.


----------



## Sandskipper (Jun 29, 2016)

I'm going to subscribe to this thread to read everyone's comments and opinions regarding this topic. 

I for one just cannot fathom spending $1800 let alone $3100 on a pair of binoculars!!! 
(And YES, I know they go up in price from there)

I have looked through $200 and $3000 bino's and could not justify the cost if the $3000 bino's cooked breakfast and mowed my lawn!

Yes there is a difference, but not a $2900 difference.

I guess some people have way more money than they know what to do with, but unless your one of those people save your money.
Even if your sole source of income was dependent on having good optics..... no wait, if your life depended on having the best optics, the Swarovski's are not that pair.

Whenever I see these $2000+ pairs of bino's I can't help but to think that crack was being smoked at the time they settled on the price.


----------



## trial153 (Nov 27, 2011)

Sandskipper said:


> I'm going to subscribe to this thread to read everyone's comments and opinions regarding this topic.
> 
> I for one just cannot fathom spending $1800 let alone $3100 on a pair of binoculars!!!
> (And YES, I know they go up in price from there)
> ...


So basically you added absolutely nothing relevant to the topic of conversation.


----------



## Sandskipper (Jun 29, 2016)

trial153 said:


> So basically you added absolutely nothing relevant to the topic of conversation.


Yes, basically.....

Except to save your money.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

Sandskipper said:


> Yes, basically.....
> 
> Except to save your money.


That's not a option for me[emoji6] if it was, I wouldn't be looking at $2800 pair binos.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

Sandskipper said:


> Yes, basically.....
> 
> Except to save your money.


So,simply looking through binoculars makes you an expert from cost analysis through ones personal needs?
Obviously not, it's a rhetorical question.
There is a reason Swarovskis are the most popular from birders to hunters and beyond.
The price tag reflect the quality.
Save your pennies for crack or whatever your rant was about and I'll continue glassing up Bulls miles back in canyons with the brightest, clearest and sharpest ergonomically superior glass I can afford.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

spike camp said:


> The difference is only worth it if you spend a lot of time glassing.
> Out of the truck to look at a buck in a bean field....not worth it.
> Backcountry glassing for hours and hours and hours...absolutely worth it.
> I have EL's and Razors and I'd give the Razors a 6/10 if the EL's are a 10/10.


Never been on a backcountry hunt but plan on it soon. My thought is the EL 10x50 or the razor 10x50 and the new razor HD spotting scope.


75% of their use will be for target archery.


----------



## FIB (Jul 25, 2008)

I had a pair of Vortex Razor's and sold them to purchase a pair of Swaro SLC HD's. I thought the Razor's were good until I spent more time with the Swaro's. The SLC HD's that I have are clear throughout of the viewing area and in the early/late daylight shine over the razor's.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

Huntin Hard said:


> Never been on a backcountry hunt but plan on it soon. My thought is the EL 10x50 or the razor 10x50 and the new razor HD spotting scope.
> 
> 
> 75% of their use will be for target archery.



50's are huge...id go with 42's unless you have certain needs.
And,in nearly 20 years of backcountry elk hunting I've used a spotter once and it wasn't as useful as my binos.
Unless you are counting points or field judging score,10x42 binos are all you need.

Are far as els and razors, look through them yourself.
Not inside a store either. You'll be amazed at the difference.


----------



## Sandskipper (Jun 29, 2016)

spike camp said:


> So,simply looking through binoculars makes you an expert from cost analysis through ones personal needs?
> Obviously not, it's a rhetorical question.
> There is a reason Swarovskis are the most popular from birders to hunters and beyond.
> The price tag reflect the quality.
> Save your pennies for crack or whatever your rant was about and I'll continue glassing up Bulls miles back in canyons with the brightest, clearest and sharpest ergonomically superior glass I can afford.











And I will do the same with my $250 binoculars!


----------



## rodney482 (Aug 31, 2004)

You can find Razors used on Rokslide for around $900
And they are IMO excellent glass.


----------



## ironman_gq (May 22, 2012)

Like any optics it depends greatly on what your doing with them. What distance are you planning on glassing to and what size animal are you looking at? Better lenses and coatings really shine at longer distances, under 3-400yds the differences are less apparent. Same goes for looking at fine detail at closer ranges, less distortion on better glass. Better light transmittance with the more expensive glass as well.

If you spend a lot of time looking at things over 3-400yds away or in low light conditions it might be worth it to get the more expensive equipment. If your starting at deer under that distance in the middle of the day I'd say spend the money on something else and go with a $3-500 pair of binos.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

Sandskipper said:


> View attachment 4920145
> 
> 
> And I will do the same with my $250 binoculars!


Nice!
Seriously though,there are many downfalls to cheap glass.
One being eye strain. Misalignment of lenses not noticeable to the naked eye are fairly common with cheap glass and cause fatigue.
Headaches being number one. 
Try this with cheap binos. Glass something at 50 yards. Focus the binos perfectly and then quickly drop the binos still looking at the object with naked eye. What does your vison do?

During an average hunting day I can easily spend 3-4 hours glassing. On scouting trips even more.
I glass equally as much shed hunting which I spend a iot of the spring and early summer doing.
Quality, bright glass is astronomically important to me. Hense, my position on spend as much as you can afford on certain optics.

My buddy uses an $800 pair of binos and we were side by side glassing an alpine basin at first light just 4 weeks ago.
I spotted elk, and he couldn't because my Swaros are that much brighter.
I took his binos and glassed the elk and could barely make them out.
Put mine back up...you get the point.

I bought a Swaro spotter for shed hunting. This is where my opinion wavers...
I also have a Vortex Razor spotter.
To me,through a spotter I see less of a drastic increase in optical quality when comparing mid range to high end. Not the case with binos.
I sold the Swaro spotter and use a Razor.
Vortex makes great glass for the price.


----------



## trial153 (Nov 27, 2011)

Sandskipper said:


> View attachment 4920145
> 
> 
> And I will do the same with my $250 binoculars!


Are you normally so crass?


----------



## jmann28 (Nov 22, 2010)

The swaro's are that much better. If somebody makes 200k a year, swaro's aren't that much. If you make 40k a year, sure they can seem ridiculous.


----------



## NCTribute (Jan 28, 2007)

Some good reviews here of both the binos you are looking at. Unless you are using them many days a year for hours and hours, you probably will not get your moneys worth of the high end binos.

Check out the Swaro SLC HD, same glass as the EL and can be had for ~$1,600.

http://www.optics4birding.com/reviews/vortex-razor-hd-binoculars-review.aspx


----------



## Sandskipper (Jun 29, 2016)

I'm really surprised to be reading people's posts talking up Swarovski optics.... seriously. Swarovski would not even make it into the top 3... even the top 5. 

In reality what you guys are saying is that because they cost more than a liver transplant, they have to be the great!

Look into Zeiss, Steiner, Leica, Zhumell, Nikon.

I realize this is just my OPINION and people are going to have other opinions differing from mine, but Swarovski is just WAY OVER PRICED mid-to-upper level optics, but certainly not "the best" read up on the topic and I think you'll also find that those in know, that do comparisons and evaluations, say the same thing as well.

What your really paying for is the name that is synonymous with fine lead crystal and the advertising that goes along with it. 

I bet if Mercedes Benz started making TV's a bunch of you would run out and buy one while saying their the best tv's ever because they're $15,000!


----------



## FIB (Jul 25, 2008)

Sandskipper said:


> I'm really surprised to be reading people's posts talking up Swarovski optics.... seriously. Swarovski would not even make it into the top 3... even the top 5.
> 
> In reality what you guys are saying is that because they cost more than a liver transplant, they have to be the great!
> 
> ...


Sandskipper while I own a pair of Swaro's I don't know if I would say they are the BEST. I've also owned Leica's and my friend has a nice pair of Zeiss. IMO, once you get into the realm of high end glass the differences are miniscule.


----------



## fferazzi (Jan 13, 2015)

As long as someone brought up other options, I would suggest you look at Maven binoculars. Check out the reviews by Outdoor Life and Field & Stream. Not cheap but they are half the the price of the Swaro's and the experts like them as well or better. You can also customize them with some cool camo. Mail order only. Check them out before you decide.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Bullhound (Feb 5, 2004)

FIB said:


> Sandskipper while I own a pair of Swaro's I don't know if I would say they are the BEST. I've also owned Leica's and my friend has a nice pair of Zeiss. IMO, *once you get into the realm of high end glass the differences are miniscule*.


you bet. I have owned about every brand of high end to middle of the field glass. Lost a bunch of money on some too! I am a firm believer that oncew we get into higher end glass, the user's own eyes and idiosyncrasies are what makes certain glass "work" for them or not. For example, I cannot use the EL bino as it hurts my eyes after very short period of use. Almost get dizzy trying to use them. HD SLC's are perfect though for my eyes (have 8X42). The glass that is on me 80% of the time though are my little Zeiss 8X30. Everyone's eyes are a little different and those little differences make one guy choose one bino over the next.


----------



## shinbone (Apr 19, 2007)

Is the extra cost for Swarovski worth it over Vortex? All depends on how big your wallet is.


----------



## arrowpuller (May 14, 2007)

The true test of any optical product ..rifle scope/ binocular is in low light...that is when that extra money you spent starts to show the difference between the pretenders and the real mccoy...also if you are glassing for hours on end ..the cheaper optics will give you a major headache


----------



## Regohio (Jan 13, 2006)

A friend told me years ago…Buy the best Binos you can afford…You'll never feel like you have Binos that are to good! 

Anyone who picks up a pair of Razors and a Pair of Swaro Els…Leica Ultravids…Zeiss FLTs…and they immediately see/feel the difference!


----------



## tgutierrez91 (Jan 13, 2014)

Swaro El's are without a doubt the best glass on the market for a reason. The razors are nice and many people justify getting them because they dont want to spend the extra cash and find ways to say "these are just as good", but if money is not a problem then get the El's you WILL NOT regret that decision


----------



## OCHO505 (May 27, 2010)

I own 12x50 EL's as I was fortunate and saved and glad I did because they are just fun to use and as Spike Camp said the eye relief is fantastic makes it even better! My personal opinion is the Zeiss Conquest HD are the best for the $. I have both and have asked several buddies to compare and while they aren't exactly as good they are so close!!

Look to me this is just like boots sure you can buy a pair of boots at Walmart or buy some kenetrek for $400. You'll get from A - B in them but you'll have a huge advantage. Pretty much everything nice is expensive, ever buy a mattress? $2900 for tempurpedic or $500 and a sore back. It's all what it's worth to you.... are your hunts worth that to you will you use them often? Can it make your hunt to see horns in a filed verse small branches in the field? Well that's up to you....

Buy what you can afford or wait and get it. I have purchased lots of things and one thing I learned don't settle cause you'll only get what you got with temporary happiness and start looking for ways to upgrade. If you settle and buy just make sure it's what you really want even if that's $200 or $2500. I don't know anyone who has regretted buying swaros or Leica or Zeiss. 

Good luck with your decision!!


----------



## Wenty (Jan 6, 2012)

Huntin Hard said:


> I know there is a difference in prices so I'm asking is the price difference worth it ? I compared both at cabelas over the weekend and they were both very good. Does anyone have real world experience with both to help make my decision. I'm looking at them both in the 10x50 size.


If your comparing them in house...it won't show you anything. Worthless. Do the following....

Go a hour before dark...grab a manager and many pair of glass. Step outside. Keep cycling through the glass till its dark out. Over that time you will notice the difference...no doubt. Get all the glass you can afford.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

Thanks for the help guys! Leaning towards swallowing the pill and getting the Swarovski and being done for glass. I would regret it ( most likely ) if I didn't get the swaro and then end up selling the razor and buying the swaro and it costing me $1300 more.


----------



## OCHO505 (May 27, 2010)

Huntin Hard said:


> Thanks for the help guys! Leaning towards swallowing the pill and getting the Swarovski and being done for glass. I would regret it ( most likely ) if I didn't get the swaro and then end up selling the razor and buying the swaro and it costing me $1300 more.


Yup! I agree that's what I have done in the past try to settle and wasn't long till I regretted it. Lost on the item on settled on and than had to pay the difference for my upgraded item. Better go for gold first if that's what you truly want!


----------



## Predator (Jan 18, 2003)

Swaro ELs all the way. Best investment I've made in my hunting career. You will NEVER, EVER, EVER regret buying the best glass you can get your hands on. I tell guys to keep saving vs. settling for budget glass.


----------



## camelcluch (Aug 25, 2009)

There is no comparison. I was very disappointed in vortex when it came to low light. Stryka is much better and a little cheaper than vortex. However, Swaro is the top of food chain.


----------



## bigbucks170 (Feb 2, 2006)

EL's are brighter for sure..I love my Razors but would love EL's more haha


----------



## azscorpion (Feb 12, 2010)

Huntin Hard said:


> Thanks for the help guys! Leaning towards swallowing the pill and getting the Swarovski and being done for glass. I would regret it ( most likely ) if I didn't get the swaro and then end up selling the razor and buying the swaro and it costing me $1300 more.


Buy once.......Cry once.....

Swaro's are the best there is.....period.


----------



## Sandskipper (Jun 29, 2016)




----------



## petertom (Feb 12, 2007)

rodney482 said:


> You can find Razors used on Rokslide for around $900
> And they are IMO excellent glass.


i have apair in the classified right now for $900 shipped there 12x50


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

azscorpion said:


> Buy once.......Cry once.....
> 
> Swaro's are the best there is.....period.


That's usually my motto, don't know why I was thinking different.


----------



## OCHO505 (May 27, 2010)

Sandskipper said:


> View attachment 4922737


Based on everyone else's experiences your the only one who feels that way.... i can appreciate the ability to sell out and try to convince everyone else that they are wrong or lying to themselves when clearly it's reversesed.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

OCHO505 said:


> Based on everyone else's experiences your the only one who feels that way.... i can appreciate the ability to sell out and try to convince everyone else that they are wrong or lying to themselves when clearly it's reversesed.


It just sounds as he isn't financially secure so he comes off like he does.


----------



## cornfedkiller (Feb 16, 2008)

The other nice thing about the Swarovskis is after you buy them, you will never wonder if you should've bought nicer ones, how much better other binos would have been, you won't need to ask opinions on the internet again, won't have to read any more reviews, etc..



Sandskipper said:


> I realize this is just my OPINION and people are going to have other opinions differing from mine, but Swarovski is just WAY OVER PRICED mid-to-upper level optics, but certainly not "the best" read up on the topic and I think you'll also find that those in know, that do comparisons and evaluations, say the same thing as well.


Where are these reviews by "people in the know"? 



Sandskipper said:


> *What your really paying for is the name* that is synonymous with fine lead crystal *and the advertising that goes along with it.*


Advertising? Are you sure you arent talking about Vortex?


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

I looked at the Vortex offerings when I bought my Swaro 8.5x42 ELs and thought the Vortex binos were nice but the image was dark and of low contrast compared to the Swarovski, Zeiss or Leica offerings. This was very evident when looking into the shadows in low light situations. Of course they cost a lot less so you might expect to find a difference like that.

I found the difference to be worth it for me. I use my binos year round for lots of different things, mainly birding and watching the critters around my place. I'm old enough that this may well be the last binoculars I ever buy and I wanted the best available. The Swarovski service was also a factor in my decision. Optically I would have been happy with any of the big three German brands but ergonomically the ELs were superior for me. I also think the contrast and flat field of the Swarovski made the image pop a little more than the others.

I hunted for years with inexpensive binoculars. They worked but didn't always hold up very well and were not very pleasant for long glassing situations. The Vortex are probably a step up from the ones I used to have but in my opinion are still not in the league of the Swaros (once again not unexpected considering the price difference). Using the Swaros is a total joy but it's only under extreme conditions like dawn and dusk where I really see things I think I would have missed with my older Leupold, Bushnell or Nikon binos.

But the bottom line is using inexpensive binoculars never cost me a deer and using the fancy glass has never gotten me one I wouldn't have gotten without them. I do think the Vortex binoculars were a very good value.

Whether the extra expense for the Swarovski glass (or Leica or Zeiss) is worth it to you is a question only you can answer. They are without a doubt very expensive, I thought long and hard before I spent the money. 

A little campfire philosophy here, I've found that sometimes it's cheaper and more satisfying in the long run to buy the best first rather than buy several lesser items over time and still never have the best.


----------



## FIB (Jul 25, 2008)

Easykeeper said:


> I looked at the Vortex offerings when I bought my Swaro 8.5x42 ELs and thought the Vortex binos were nice but the image was dark and of low contrast compared to the Swarovski, Zeiss or Leica offerings. This was very evident when looking into the shadows in low light situations. Of course they cost a lot less so you might expect to find a difference like that.
> 
> I found the difference to be worth it for me. I use my binos year round for lots of different things, mainly birding and watching the critters around my place. I'm old enough that this may well be the last binoculars I ever buy and I wanted the best available. The Swarovski service was also a factor in my decision. Optically I would have been happy with any of the big three German brands but ergonomically the ELs were superior for me. I also think the contrast and flat field of the Swarovski made the image pop a little more than the others.
> 
> ...


Well said Easykeeper.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

I think Sandskipper has an issue with Swarovski,and not the money...which is odd.
Leica,Zeiss ect all have $2-3000 binos as well,so the cost difference for top shelf glass is negligible.

Another cool thing about Swaro is that they'll do a complete overhaul on any of their binoculars you send in.
Vortex has a great warranty as well. My girlfriend broke a piece off her Talon 10x32's and Vortex send a newer model year replacment,no questions asked. 
Both are great companies to work with!


----------



## Redball409 (Jan 21, 2010)

One thing I wonder about when spending money on something like optics is whether the increased cost now will be worth it years from now. Of course it depends on frequency of use. But let's remove that facet, for the sake of this discussion. Specifically, as technology progresses year to year, is this progress also applicable to optics. Does a $2000 pair of Swarovskis stand the test of time for 5-10 years. Or would one be better off to pay $800 for a pair and replace every couple of years as technology improves? Is a current year's $800 pair of Nikon or Vortex equivalent to a 5 year old pair of Swarovski? I am asking a question, and I am interested in opinions.


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

Redball409 said:


> One thing I wonder about when spending money on something like optics is whether the increased cost now will be worth it years from now. Of course it depends on frequency of use. But let's remove that facet, for the sake of this discussion. Specifically, as technology progresses year to year, is this progress also applicable to optics. Does a $2000 pair of Swarovskis stand the test of time for 5-10 years. Or would one be better off to pay $800 for a pair and replace every couple of years as technology improves? Is a current year's $800 pair of Nikon or Vortex equivalent to a 5 year old pair of Swarovski? I am asking a question, and I am interested in opinions.



Good question...id say no.
My 12 year old EL's are brighter and clearer than my new Razors.
The newest Swarovski Swarovision are even better but I don't see huge leaps in clarity happening any time soon.
Just new models with maybe lighter construction or other updated ergonomic features.


----------



## stickflipr (Aug 16, 2016)

I have always liked my vortexs especially for the price.


----------



## jms375 (Jul 29, 2007)

I bought the razors a few years ago when my wife was still in college and money was tighter. They work well for me, I use them once a year for a week on western hunts and like them. I can glass all day and they don't hurt my eyes like some lower end binoculars do. At home I hunt thick timber and seldom use binoculars. With that said, my buddy has some EL's and they are definitely a noticeable upgrade from the razors. If you are going to use them everyday or at least every hunt I would spend the extra money if its in your budget.


----------



## bcowette (Jan 11, 2007)

I always laugh when people say they "compared a few bino's at Cabelas". There is much more to a good bino then what you see looking through one for 2 minutes in the perfectly lit store.


----------



## V-TRAIN (Feb 27, 2009)

I have several pairs binos, i just really love messing with them. My wife hunts also so that gives me an excuse to have more on hand. lol
I currently have:
Swaro el 8.5x42
Leica ultravid hd 10x42
Pentax sp 8x43
Hawke frontier ed 8x43
Opticron countryman hd 8x32

I have never had my hands on the razors, but i have read a lot about them. If you are talking new retail prices, then i would get the new razors and save the money.
I never buy new though, so i would just look and buy some used ones. I doubt you could find a deal now but in the off season they are out there, you just have to jump on them fast. i have never paid more than $1,100 for my high end ones, the lower end ones only like $200. i enjoy all of them and hunt the early season with the opticron 8x32 and then use the el's mid to late season.


----------



## Bwana (Jul 29, 2003)

Redball409 said:


> One thing I wonder about when spending money on something like optics is whether the increased cost now will be worth it years from now. Of course it depends on frequency of use. But let's remove that facet, for the sake of this discussion. Specifically, as technology progresses year to year, is this progress also applicable to optics. Does a $2000 pair of Swarovskis stand the test of time for 5-10 years. Or would one be better off to pay $800 for a pair and replace every couple of years as technology improves? Is a current year's $800 pair of Nikon or Vortex equivalent to a 5 year old pair of Swarovski? I am asking a question, and I am interested in opinions.


Any Alpha glass will certainly retain it's value better than mid level or low level glass, even older Alphas far surpass new mid level quality...so your investment return is a better. A mid level/tier bino drops in price very quickly, including spotting scopes. Any interest in Alpha big 3 brands, needs to be personally viewed through for personal eye constraints and limitations(eye glass wear "eye relief", black out kidney beaning from too much eye relief, ergonomic hand fit, etc...)...buying the best doesn't mean they are perfect for YOU.

The older generation EL's hold their value because many don't want the Swarovision model due to "rollerball" effect, thus the trade off for field flattening lenses. The new EL's and SLC do not have the same glass as previously stated, and the ergonomics are very different also.


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Redball409 said:


> One thing I wonder about when spending money on something like optics is whether the increased cost now will be worth it years from now. Of course it depends on frequency of use. But let's remove that facet, for the sake of this discussion. Specifically, as technology progresses year to year, is this progress also applicable to optics. Does a $2000 pair of Swarovskis stand the test of time for 5-10 years. Or would one be better off to pay $800 for a pair and replace every couple of years as technology improves? Is a current year's $800 pair of Nikon or Vortex equivalent to a 5 year old pair of Swarovski? I am asking a question, and I am interested in opinions.


Optics have reached a point a minuscule improvements from year to year, definitely a point of diminishing returns. One of my other hobbies is photography where lens quality is even more important than with binoculars since the results are right there on the negative or print. You notice image quality much more in those conditions than looking at a live view through binoculars.

Some of the best photographic lenses ever made were made 20, 30 and even 40 years ago. Most of the improvements now days come with new coatings, not new lens designs.


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

Thanks for all the help guys. Appreciate all the opinions


----------



## NCTribute (Jan 28, 2007)

Bwana said:


> The older generation EL's hold their value because many don't want the Swarovision model due to "rollerball" effect, thus the trade off for field flattening lenses. The new EL's and SLC do not have the same glass as previously stated, and the ergonomics are very different also.


You might be right, but this is what I based my comment on that they have the same glass and coatings. Do you have anything to the contrary?


----------



## NM_HighPlains (Nov 25, 2005)

spike camp said:


> The difference is only worth it if you spend a lot of time glassing.
> Out of the truck to look at a buck in a bean field....not worth it.
> Backcountry glassing for hours and hours and hours...absolutely worth it.
> I have EL's and Razors and I'd give the Razors a 6/10 if the EL's are a 10/10.


About like this ^^^^^

I have 6 pairs of Vortex, 2 of their Diamondback HD scopes, and the 20-60 x 85 Razor HD scope. I also have 2 pair of West German Zeiss 10x40 binos. The Vortex are great binos for the price and I have 6 because I have a pair in every vehicle, but when it comes time to _glass_, I use the Zeiss and every time I do, I'm blown away by the clarity and sharpness. 

The Razor HD scope, OTOH, is excellent. I had it next to a Swarovski scope and the Razor was better to all of our eyes. The main issue with it is that the 20-60 zoom eyepiece has broken 3 times, replaced with a brand-new one which is so far, so good, but it's "grabby" when it turns. I mostly just use the wide angle fixed 30x.

You don't have to always buy new. I bought one of the Zeiss used for $300.


----------



## Bullhound (Feb 5, 2004)

Bwana said:


> Any Alpha glass will certainly retain it's value better than mid level or low level glass, even older Alphas far surpass new mid level quality...so your investment return is a better. A mid level/tier bino drops in price very quickly, including spotting scopes. Any interest in Alpha big 3 brands, needs to be personally viewed through for personal eye constraints and limitations(eye glass wear "eye relief", black out kidney beaning from too much eye relief, ergonomic hand fit, etc...)...buying the best doesn't mean they are perfect for YOU.
> 
> The *older generation EL's hold their value because many don't want the Swarovision model due to "rollerball" effect*, thus the trade off for field flattening lenses. The new EL's and SLC do not have the same glass as previously stated, and the ergonomics are very different also.


I believe this is what I struggled with myself with the EL's. I don't get the effect with any other glass. That is why I use SLC's.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

I would seriously consider the new Zeiss Conquest Gavia 85. Great price point at 1999.99 and I would even say they are better than my old Swaro 65.

The New 2016 Vortex Razor HD is not the same as last years and wouldn't hesitate to go that route either. They have better prisms than last years Razor HD and overall sharper image quality. Their warranty is with out question tough to beat. I know guys personally that have ran over and dropped theirs off of cliffs while glassing. Even in these situations they have been replaced.


----------



## Bullhound (Feb 5, 2004)

I tried three different binos from Vortex and they never did fit my eyes at all. two were hd's


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Bullhound said:


> I tried three different binos from Vortex and they never did fit my eyes at all. two were hd's


That new Zeiss is pretty sweet and very friendly on the eye's for all day glassing.


----------



## rodney482 (Aug 31, 2004)

My 2016 Razor HDs are amazing! 




ontarget7 said:


> I would seriously consider the new Zeiss Conquest Gavia 85. Great price point at 1999.99 and I would even say they are better than my old Swaro 65.
> 
> The New 2016 Vortex Razor HD is not the same as last years and wouldn't hesitate to go that route either. They have better prisms than last years Razor HD and overall sharper image quality. Their warranty is with out question tough to beat. I know guys personally that have ran over and dropped theirs off of cliffs while glassing. Even in these situations they have been replaced.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

rodney482 said:


> My 2016 Razor HDs are amazing!


Definitely a difference from last years. I just wish they would have named it something different. 

Great choice !! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rodney482 (Aug 31, 2004)

Im not sure what they changed but the edge to edge clarity is much improved 




ontarget7 said:


> Definitely a difference from last years. I just wish they would have named it something different.
> 
> Great choice !!
> 
> ...


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

rodney482 said:


> Im not sure what they changed but the edge to edge clarity is much improved


Yep, prisms and glass changed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Huntin Hard (Aug 8, 2011)

rodney482 said:


> Im not sure what they changed but the edge to edge clarity is much improved





ontarget7 said:


> Yep, prisms and glass changed
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Are you guys talking about the binos or spotting scope ?


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Sorry
Spotter


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

Not much difference between the big 3 binoculars since all use Schott glass.
Only difference that can be argued is the coatings.
Swarovski does have the best warranty and service by far, no argument there.
Vortex is not quite with them but they've improved a lot lately.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Same glass but different grinding processes as well as coatings 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## spike camp (Jun 2, 2008)

Sagittarius said:


> Not much difference between the big 3 binoculars since all use Schott glass.
> Only difference that can be argued is the coatings.
> Swarovski does have the best warranty and service by far, no argument there.
> Vortex is not quite with them but they've improved a lot lately.




My understanding is that the 'big 3' don't use Schott exclusively.
Ohara and Hoya are used as well,especially by Zeiss and Leica.


----------



## Sagittarius (May 22, 2002)

spike camp said:


> My understanding is that the 'big 3' don't use Schott exclusively.
> Ohara and Hoya are used as well,especially by Zeiss and Leica.


You are correct, some of the models use Japanese glass.
The top tier use Schott.
Nothing wrong with Japanese glass, my Vortex Razor Gen II rifle scope has it and it's superb !


----------



## Rgtemple (Nov 21, 2016)

swarovskis hands down


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

Wenty said:


> If your comparing them in house...it won't show you anything. Worthless. Do the following....
> 
> Go a hour before dark...grab a manager and many pair of glass. Step outside. Keep cycling through the glass till its dark out. Over that time you will notice the difference...no doubt. Get all the glass you can afford.


i

Best way to do it. 

I got a great deal on some Hawke Frontier ED's, 8x43's. For the money, they're really good bino's. I hunt mostly whitetails in the woods and field edges. I'm not staring through my bino's for hours on end. If I were hunting out west, glassing for hours on end, I'd have better glass. My BIL has a pair of EL's. No comparison. Mid-day, fairly comparable. Low light, forget about it. As it's been said before, spend what you can afford, but there is a reason some glass has the price tag it does. 

SCFox


----------



## Wood (Aug 3, 2006)

I looked at some binos last night at Cabela's employee priced discount sale. Granted it was only in the store looking at their resolution chart. Looked through Leupold Mojaves, Vortex, Zeiss Conquest, Cabela's something, Sig Sauer Zulu7 and Sworovski ELs. I'm getting an increasingly worse catarack in my right eye so that was the caviot. I walked out with the Sig Sauer as I got the best clarity for my right eye and over all, though the Swaros were close. They are a pretty good upgrade over my older Leupold Mojaves. If and when I get catarack surgery I may revisit this but the Sigs are nice glass.


----------



## R_Burg (Sep 8, 2016)

SCFox said:


> i
> 
> Best way to do it.
> 
> ...


Curious, have you ever compared the Hawkes to the mid teir Vortex's in their price range, such as the Diamondbacks, Talons or Vipers? 

I have some Talon HDs now which are nice for the money I paid... but I know birders, especially in Europe seem to really love the Hawkes for the money. 


On topic.... This is good thread. Also being into photography, I am picky about glass but its hard to spend the same on some 10x42s that would on a used 400 2.8. There's more tech and glass in a telephoto lens by far. I realize everyone loves their Swarovskis so I don't doubt they are fantastic but there must be seriously diminishing returns vs a binocular manufacturer using the best Japanese glass. Full disclosure: I have not done the research yet to know what companies that would be. I'm just getting into higher end binos and spotting scopes, and they aren't the easiest thing to research.


----------



## SCFox (Dec 11, 2005)

R_Burg said:


> Curious, have you ever compared the Hawkes to the mid teir Vortex's in their price range, such as the Diamondbacks, Talons or Vipers?
> 
> I have some Talon HDs now which are nice for the money I paid... but I know birders, especially in Europe seem to really love the Hawkes for the money.
> 
> ...


I have compared them to some of the more popular mid range glass. Nikon, Vortex, Celestron, Stryka, etc. The Stryka's are nice glass in that $600 range, but I like the clarity of the Hawkes. Also, I think the Hawkes are better in low light. 

SCFox


----------



## R_Burg (Sep 8, 2016)

SCFox said:


> I have compared them to some of the more popular mid range glass. Nikon, Vortex, Celestron, Stryka, etc. The Stryka's are nice glass in that $600 range, but I like the clarity of the Hawkes. Also, I think the Hawkes are better in low light.
> 
> SCFox


And you think the Hawkes are a step up from the rest of them, specifically Vortex?


----------



## WTB3 (Sep 14, 2016)

It is really hard to tell the difference with just recreational use, but believe me there is a difference between low and high end optics. I have and have used most of them, both Vortex and Swarovski make great products with great glass. My opinion is that the overall product quality with Swarovski is better. This is not saying that vortex won't get the job done, just the overall line of products is just not even close to that of Swarovski, Leica, etc.


----------

