I assume you have a hard time with field of view because you leave your glasses on when you use a spotter. I take my glasses off when I use my spotting scope and often when I use my binos for an extended time. Would that work for you?
Are you wanting ot pack them in your pack or on a horse or use from the truck my uncle has stiner 20x80 they are very heavy but some great glass
Originally Posted by SAR
You are correct on the field of view, my eye sight is very bad without my glasses and I feel I must keep them on. I do fine with binos though.
Originally Posted by hoshour
Thanks for the explanation you’re probably right, you just don’t get much for $800 bucks these days might still be worth a look.
Originally Posted by hardstalk
I don't have 15x binos, but the difference between 10x alpha quality glass and the mid range can be extreme at least with my eyes. I had the good Minox 13x56 binos that I read a lot of great reviews on and traded them in on the 10x42 Zeiss Victory binos I have now. I guarantee that I can see more detail on deer tines with the 10x Zeiss in any light than with the 13x Minox that are still darn good binos. I was impressed with the 13x until I got the Zeiss. I'm cheap but sometimes things are worth the extra money to buy once and enjoy.
My advice would be to find a place to try 15x Swaro binos, I have been wanting a pair myself after looking through an outfitters on a muley hunt a few years back. The guide he had working for him had 10-15 Leica Duovids that were also impressive although not quite up to the Swaros on 15x. I'd be interested in seeing the Nikon ones also but will have to see them to become a believer. The Vortex Kaibabs are awful nice from the short time I looked through a pair also. If you get the chance take the Swaros, Vortex, and Nikons outdoors and try them on small detailed things at decent range. In a store with bright lights everything looks better than it is, try picking out individual leaves at 600yds outdoors for example. The fine crisp detail is what you are looking for to identify and evaluate animals. If you get the chance please do a post on your thoughts also.
I guess my point is to not get overly hung up on magnification. Top quality glass with a lower magnification will beat mid-range glass with higher magnification for my eyes at least. Go somewhere to try them outdoors and see what fits you the best evaluating fine detail at range.
Great advice micseal2 thanks. I have a pair of 15x Zeiss conquest, does anyone know how they would compare to the 15x Swaro's? I know the Swaro's are twice the money but will I see a noticeable difference?
I bought a pair of 20x by Celestron a few years ago after looking through a pair of Zeiss 20x80. Waste of money.
I have a pair of Kaibabs 15x56 and the glass is so much better the higher power of the Celestron is actually detrimental.
The most important part of any optics is the glass. The better the glass the higher the price. When the magnification goes up the better glass becomes more important. A pair of cheapo 7x50 perform pretty well for the most part, jump up to 10x and a pair of cheapos gives you a headache almost instantly when glassing. The 20x is worse.
Mcseal is right if you can't afford the good glass save up. Don't settle for second best.
I had the pleasure of using some Kowa Highlanders on a recent elk hunt and WOW... those things are incredible. Not something you'd want to pack far obviously, but if you can glass far enough, there's no reason to carry them anywhere. You definitely need a super-duty tripod for them.
This has been my first year hunting with 15x56s and I'm a believer.
They had a good article on 24hr campfire a while back comparing the Zeiss with the Swaros and some of the others. They said with the smaller lenses they couldn't compete. Found the link.
Good article, thank you!
Originally Posted by mcseal2