10x50 Binocular $1K range Best value?
Looking for the best buy for the buck. Would be willing to spend up to $1000. Suggestions, experiences, best value ??? Plan on a prairie dog hunt and I'm told the binocular is far more useful than a spotting scope. ?? Comments. THANKS
0
-
Swarovski or Leica; can't go wrong with either. Probably can't find either in 10X50 new for your $1000 target price though. However, should be able to find them in good condition used for that price and lightly used is as good as new. The 10X50 would be good for a prairie dog but if you plan to do any other hunting and will be carrying them much you might want to look at 10X40 or 8X42 or something compable. Probably almost as good for your prairie dog hunt and less bulky and less weight. 0 -
Two comments: First, you don't need a top end binocular to spot prarie dogs. You will be able to do everything you need to do with a pair selling for well below $1,000. High priced units are so because they give the best color rendition and the clarity extends all the way to the edges of the field of view. These things are important to birders but not to doggers. Second, I agree with the 10X power, but you might find 10x50s just a bit heavy to use all day long. I use Bushnell 10x40s and am very satisfied with them. 0 -
Steiners. Baush and Lomb are good too. 0 -
You will have a very hard time beating the Nikon Monarch for less than half your budget. http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/nikon/nikon-monarch-pc-10x56-atb-binocular
Take a look at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html
You can spend a lot more, but you will get very damn little for the extra $600. I use Nikon Monarch 10x50s for birding all the time and have on 3 continents. They are durable and pretty darn good optics.
Edit: Sandwarrior, My wife uses Leica binos, and I have put them on top of my older Eagle Optics Rangers and compared. The Leicas get me less that 5 minutes of additional viewing time sunrise and sunset, no greater clarity or better color rendering. They are slightly lighter. That is not a lot of advantage for the $400 dollar difference. I agree on the middling quality of Burris and Leupold binos. Disagree on the durability of the Nikon Monarchs, which as I say I have had on 3 continents. Undoubtedly the finest 10x binos in the world are Swarovskis. They weigh almost three pounds, and for the difference in price between those and the Monarchs, you can buy a rifle. No brainer as far as I am concerned, and I am a guy that uses a Leica Televid APO scope for birding.0 -
I hunt "dogs" a lot. Using 10x power would get tiring in an hour.
You are better off with 6x to 8x. I have tried maybe 12 different binoculars, and find that Image Stabilized Canon 8x, or my current Pentax 8x are the best I have used.
example: http://www.telescopes.com/pentax8x21ucfr.cfm
They are light, have big depth of field, and low power enough to see moving or standing dogs over a wide view. You are going to be constantly scanning a wide area to see where dogs emerge from holes. This requires a wide view ...low power, and since the distance may be (often in my shooting) from 70-240 yards away, having lots of depth of field is critical. That is what the Pentax does for me.0 -
quote:Originally posted by He Dog
You will have a very hard time beating the Nikon Monarch for less than half your budget. http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/nikon/nikon-monarch-pc-10x56-atb-binocular
Take a look at: http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html
You can spend a lot more, but you will get very damn little for the extra $600. I use Nikon Monarch 10x50s for birding all the time and have on 3 continents. They are durable and pretty darn good optics.
I haven't used these binocs in particular, but I work every day with high-end optics, and having done the Pepsi-challenge with some of them, I'll say that the GLASS on Nikons is every bit as good as the expensive German stuff.
In general, I think that binoculars are like everything else, you can pay more and more money for less and less incremental benefit (ie a $2000 pair is only *slightly* better than a $1000 pair, etc).
Obviously better glass never hurts, but I doubt the difference between a pretty good pair and an exceptional one is going to make the difference between spotting a prairie dog and not (let alone hitting it, or not).0 -
fredbear4,
To me that's easy. One set of 10x50 bino's fits that perfectly. Swarovski EL's. You will not go wrong at all with them and you have a lifetime warranty. And a lifetime of fine viewing.
I will agree with Beantown that Nikon is excellent as far as glass. My problem with them is how well do they build the surrounding piece? In the past there was no question and it was solid. That was when it was all built in Japan. Now, the lowest end stuff is China, (questionable as to whether it will last the year) and some in the Phillipines which has lasted better. Back to the top end stuff built in Japan, which is still high quality stuff.
My Steiners bighorns have been good but can get frustrating as I have the autofocus and unless you have it adjusted perfectly...is a strain on the eyes for extended viewing. It get's you right on what you want to see if it's obvious. The predators with roof prism might fit not only your budget but your needs.
Leupold never seemed to feel the need for top end glass in their bino's. Same with Burris. Both have better glass in their scopes than their bino's. Which is stupid, because you're glassing from a mile or more sometimes and need clarity. When shooting from a scope, that I've stalked into a position to get a shot from, I need a relatively clear picture. Not a view where I can see every hair. In fact, if your bino's do a good job you can take a shot with open sights. I like great scopes don't get me wrong. Supplementing them with average bino's isn't what I call a better idea.
Leica's are really nice but you would have to find a used pair to match the 1k pricetag.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments