Couldn't agree more, especially with your last sentence. If you set a UHD and SLC side by side, both having a price tag of $1400, The SLC would get the nod every single time by anyone knowing anything about the two makers. Correct that.....one maker and one importer/marketer/seller.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Allbinos Vortex 10x42 UHD Review (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ontario
- Start date
Couldn't agree more, especially with your last sentence. If you set a UHD and SLC side by side, both having a price tag of $1400, The SLC would get the nod every single time by anyone knowing anything about the two makers. Correct that.....one maker and one importer/marketer/seller.
I got a chance to try some of the 10x UHD and was very impressed by their optics. I've owned several alpha models including the EL SV, SLC, FL, and UV HD, and I would put these right up near them on all fronts.
But, I've always found Vortex to be great binoculars, unlike many others on this forum. I actually prefer the 8x Razor to the 8x Conquest HD I currently own as an example, and found the Viper HD to be tremendous performers at their price range (I see them regularly in the hands of the various field technicians I've worked with). Also, their warranty/service department is amazing and on par with SONA, from my experiences and hearing from others.
$1400 certainly is not a good price, and if anything they should price themselves in alignment with the Maven B2 models, the platform of which I'm sure is the same as this model.
Justin
But, I've always found Vortex to be great binoculars, unlike many others on this forum. I actually prefer the 8x Razor to the 8x Conquest HD I currently own as an example, and found the Viper HD to be tremendous performers at their price range (I see them regularly in the hands of the various field technicians I've worked with). Also, their warranty/service department is amazing and on par with SONA, from my experiences and hearing from others.
$1400 certainly is not a good price, and if anything they should price themselves in alignment with the Maven B2 models, the platform of which I'm sure is the same as this model.
Justin
Interesting post, Canip
. I would guess that for most folks who use binoculars, made in China (including Zeiss Terra as well as Vortex etc) is good enough for what they do with them. A good friend of mine really likes his Vortex Diamondback, he thinks it's great. I have been tempted to broaden his horizons 3
but have resisted doing so. Too many folks are already interested in the same binoculars I am ... :king:There is no manufacturing of binoculars in the US, nor here in the UK, because Bausch & Lomb, Barr & Stroud, Kershaw etc. ultimately could not produce binoculars as desirable (which includes, but goes beyond optical quality) as those from the top German brands, nor combine price with performance like the JB manufacturers from Japan. The same was also true of some German brands eg. Hartmann and ultimately Carl Zeiss Jena. I have to take my hat off to Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski and indeed Nikon not only as great designers and manufacturers of optics but also as great businesses, as they have survived in a very competitive marketplace where their US and British wartime rivals have not.
I am impressed that your PRC-made binoculars have never required service but I cannot but wonder (a) that with the number of binoculars you have in your (wonderful) collection, how many hours each binocular would have gotten used in the last five years, and (b) of the Zeiss, Leica etc. you sent in for service, were they purchased new or secondhand and if the latter, how old were they and in what condition?
ad a)
Some get used more often than others, of course. But what‘s relevant: of those (German) ones requiring service, some were very rarely used. Some of the Chinese ones get used frequently (astro).
ad b)
All Zeiss and Leica binos sent in for service were bought first hand. As I inspect the entire collection in detail once a year, I can spot differences in condition from one year to the next.
Plus:
All binoculars are in monitored storage (temperature, humidity).
No binocular gets stored while wet or even humid.
Of course, the percentage of binoculars with service needs in my collection is overall quite small. But for instruments in the 2‘000 price range and above, it is still too high.
Allbino rankings include quite a bit and it all depends on what you as the consumer value and need.
Now, the light transmission being in the mid 80's for that Vortex stand out to me as 'the inners' not being as high quality as the outer appearance. That shows me cheapness. I have a pair of HT's that are near 95%. Quite the difference, quite.
Also, to show how the Allbino rankings don't mean much. They have the Zeiss FL over the Zeiss HT in the rankings but in their actual review they show that the Zeiss HT is better than the FL. So how is it that the rankings come out lower on the one they state as being better in the actual review? Maybe it is the price, or the ? ...who knows. But I don't go by Allbinos'. The vortex ranking alone is enough to turn me away.
And in terms of which bins I have had issues with...they are: The Vortex made in China, The eagle optics made in China and the cheap zeiss terra made in china. I see a pattern. My Zeiss HT's ...no issues. My Swaro's, no problem...an Zeiss West German pair...no problems....
Now, the light transmission being in the mid 80's for that Vortex stand out to me as 'the inners' not being as high quality as the outer appearance. That shows me cheapness. I have a pair of HT's that are near 95%. Quite the difference, quite.
Also, to show how the Allbino rankings don't mean much. They have the Zeiss FL over the Zeiss HT in the rankings but in their actual review they show that the Zeiss HT is better than the FL. So how is it that the rankings come out lower on the one they state as being better in the actual review? Maybe it is the price, or the ? ...who knows. But I don't go by Allbinos'. The vortex ranking alone is enough to turn me away.
And in terms of which bins I have had issues with...they are: The Vortex made in China, The eagle optics made in China and the cheap zeiss terra made in china. I see a pattern. My Zeiss HT's ...no issues. My Swaro's, no problem...an Zeiss West German pair...no problems....
Last edited:
So, a binocular with say 95% light transmission is better than one with 90% light transmission.? and so on?
Really....all one can REALLY say is binocular X has more transmission than binocular Y. Transmission isn't the ONLY aspect to take into account but it CAN be important. If I were in the market for a binocular that would be at it's best in low light situations I would certainly place transmission higher on my list than I would for a general birding binocular.
In the example above there is really no good reason for a SOTA AK prism binocular to have a transmission of less than 90%. There are several examples of smaller/ligher SP prism binoculars with transmission of 90% and above. MOST of the current better SP prism binoculars have transmission of 86/87% and above.
Rob from Texas
Well-known member
One reason I can think of for AK prism binocular to have transmission below 90% would be additional lens in the construction. Each additional lens cuts down on transmission.
Last edited:
Yes but you said “Vortex coating MUST NOT be the same quality as other brands. Light transmission is on the the low side”
So what you are saying is, irrespective of anything else, coatings with lower light transmission are inferior the coatings with higher light transmission? Thats what you have said.
I must be picking on your brand. LOL!
You are putting words in my mouth. I really don't like that. Find someone else to argue with.
It's not my intention to argue with with anyone, much better things to do with my time.
I' m just trying to get some clarification on what you said.
You are a well respected member of these forums and from what I can gather vastly experienced with regards to optics.
Statements like “ Vortex coating must not be to the same quality as some other the other brands. Light transmission is on the low side” With no evidence whatsoever Destroys your credibility in my eyes.
If you don't know it to be true, don't say it.
Oh, and I'm not putting words into you mouth, it's what you said.
If you don't like it, don't say it.
I think you comments would be classed as fake news these days Lol.
mccarthy22
Member
According to birdguides the vortex uhd light transmission is 92% so in fact better than pretty much any binocular out there?
pat mitchel
Well-known member
As I recall in the birdguides review, they called it "quoted by Vortex transmission figure" Still trying to find the source of that figure as I did not see it on the Vortex site. But I did not look closely. Regards,Pat
