Anyone compared the new Vortex Razor 8x32 UHD with the competiton (1 Viewer)

[Popeye32]

Anyone compared the new Vortex Razor 8x32 UHD with the competiton?
I spoke with my dealer today who said he feels they are on par with the NL's and have sold several lately to buyers looking for NL's

Many thanks

 

[Maljunulo]

This will be an interesting thread.

 

[Maljunulo]

Is "comparing" looking through an example of each, or having the one he sells, and reading the spec sheet for the other?

 

[stereotruckdriver]

Anyone compared the new Vortex Razor 8x32 UHD with the competiton?
I spoke with my dealer today who said he feels they are on par with the NL's and have sold several lately to buyers looking for NL's

Many thanks

Rokslide, there is a review comparison with the CL's not the NL's, which makes sense.

 

[jgraider]

It is utter blasphemy to compare anything with the Swaro NL.....

I read the review on Rockslide, and I'm betting these will be a home run for Vortex.

 

[Maljunulo]

First off, does OP’s dealer sell both binoculars, the Vortex Razor UHD, and the Swarovski NL?

 

[chill6x6]

Not yet for me....I have too many irons in the fire right now....

 

[james holdsworth]

I have one on order from Europtics for $1375(Plus shipping and tax) and I should get it by the end of the week. I couldn't resist a new MIJ 8x32 binocular on the market. I will post here what I think of it after I have tried it for a while.

In the Audubon test, the Vortex UHD 8x42 beat the Zeiss SF 8x42 and the Leica Noctivid 8x42, so it has good genetic lines. The 9 degree FOV is considerably larger than the NL 8x32, which is 8.5 degrees, but we will see if the UHD is as sharp to the edge as the NL, which isn't really perfect.

The UHD is 1oz. lighter than the NL, which is always good. I hope it handles glare better than the NL. Hope, hope, hope!

Category: Top of the Line

The top-scoring binoculars in the $2,000-plus range.

www.audubon.org

The Audubon Guide to Binoculars

www.audubon.org

FOV is overstated for the Noctivid in the second link.

 

[chill6x6]

FOV is overstated for the Noctivid in the second link.

Leica tends to do that....

 

[dries1]

Either way, the Noctivid is one outstanding glass if the ergonomics work for you, I use them frequently.

 

[tenex]

FOV is overstated for the Noctivid in the second link.

Leica tends to do that....

Let's be careful: 443ft isn't a deliberately "overstated" FOV but a simple calculation error, multiplying 135m by 3.3 instead of 3. The catalog I have doesn't make this mistake; possibly some other Leica document does, or the reviewers themselves goofed, it's not clear which.

 

[Popeye32]

First off, does OP’s dealer sell both binoculars, the Vortex Razor UHD, and the Swarovski NL?

Yes. He told me that several have compared side by side and decided to go with the UHD as they are optically very close.
I am yet to see for myself however, hence the thread.

 

[Upland]

I’ve heard good things about the 42 UHDs. Will be interesting to see how these are with different prisms

 

[PatR]

Yes. He told me that several have compared side by side and decided to go with the UHD as they are optically very close.
I am yet to see for myself however, hence the thread.

You will receive many replies some of which will stay on thread and recommend one over the other.

There is no substitute for trying them side by side yourself and then whilst in the shop try, if in stock, the many other alternative suggestions that will come flying your way.

I have never seen let alone touched a Vortex bino but they receive much praise, especially for their warranty and after sales, so they might tick all the boxes for you….but do try them and see if your facial structure fits them, the Swaro’s or the alternatives.

Good luck!

 

[chill6x6]

Let's be careful: 443ft isn't a deliberately "overstated" FOV but a simple calculation error, multiplying 135m by 3.3 instead of 3. The catalog I have doesn't make this mistake; possibly some other Leica document does, or the reviewers themselves goofed, it's not clear which.

I understand. But Leica does have a history of listing incorrect FOVs on their website and if I were a betting man I'd say that's exactly where the reviewer's data came from. The Trinovid HD, "Retrovid", and Noctivids FOV figures were incorrect for quite a while. Pretty sure it has been discussed here. Now it looks as if they HAVE been corrected. I had all that data downloaded at one time(probably on my other laptop) but I was able to find one example:

 

[Popeye32]

Well today was an eye opener.

I am just back from testing the UHD 8x32, Zeiss SF 8x32 and the NL 8x32 out in the countryside.


The Zeiss image was cold and showed some colour fringing but I I struggled to see any with the UHD and NL.
I was blown away by the UHD and the NL but for me and my eyes it was the colour profile of the UHD that I found mesmerising and it had a punch to the overall image that really made it very special.
The UHD FOV also is extremely wide.
I viewed these at a different dealer to whom I spoke with, and he has NL’s himself. His opinion is that they are on par with the NL most definitely also. I have to agree and think the NL was slightly more comfortable in the hand but my preference due to the image pop of the UHD it’s where I’m going to be putting my money.

 

[jafritten]

for me and my eyes it was the colour profile of the UHD that I found mesmerising

What is the profile like then?

And what about the fall off of sharpness towards the edges? IIRC somone here on the forum said sharpness across the field was rather poor.

 

[Popeye32]

What is the profile like then?

And what about the fall off of sharpness towards the edges? IIRC somone here on the forum said sharpness across the field was rather poor.

I struggled to see a difference at all to the NL for sharpness or fall off.
The colour profile is rather neutral but maybe with a touch of saturation compared with the NL.
This added a spectacular pop to the image, but certainly not false or exaggerated.
It’s almost like watching standard definition TV then going to 4K.
I would say what you were seeing is an accurate representation of what you see with the naked eye. It’s just the NL was probably dead neutral and The SL certainly cold.

 

[jgraider]

Appreciate the first hand reports and comparisons. The optical excellence in the bigger models was never an issue, as they are superb. The issue there was the bulk and weight. These compacts seem to solve that problem. I'll have one incoming shortly.

 

[tenex]

I am just back from testing the UHD 8x32, Zeiss SF 8x32 and the NL 8x32 out in the countryside.

Does the UHD focus CW or CCW to infinity? I've long wondered whether or when someone would produce a roof-prism bin with FOV to match NL, but a more conventional optical design. Does it have strong pincushioning?