Vortex Vulture- worth a try out ? (1 Viewer)

[Electric Factory]

I've read here many posts lauding the Vortex line of binoculars, specifically the Vortex Viper. I've read that many mere feel the Vipers are Swarovski-like in their view and quality.
How does the Vortex Vulture line compare ? More to the point, would you buy them ? My interest would be in the Vortex 10x50 or 10x42 binos, my usage would be general and weight isn't a consideration.
Thanks kindly for any opinions offered.

 

[Steve C]

Vortex does make good binoculars. They also have top notch customer and warranty service. I have Vipers and Furys, and while they are very good the aren't quite in the same class as the Swarovski class glass. The Razor will come closer to those than will the Viper. I have only limited experience with the Vulture. What they seem to me like, is a 50mm version of the Vortex Diamondback.

Vortex gives both the Vulture and Diamondback binoculars a performance rating of 88.5. They rate the Fury class at 93.5, the Vipers at 97 and the Razor at 100. his is a Vortex only comparison, used by them to rate their binoculars. Personally I don't see 15% difference in the Diamondback and the Viper. For what they cost, the Vulture is likely a pretty good binocular. I would rate the Diamondback as the optical equal of the Nikon Monarch, but with a wider field. Wider field would also seem to be the principal advantage of the Diamondback over the Vulture. The Vulture should be better in low light conditions. Your call as to your uses. I don't think the Vulture comes in a 42mm. In that case I'd personally opt foir the 10x42 Fury, because I do think the Fury is a better glass than the Diamondback. The Viper is a little better yet.

 

[Electric Factory]

Steve,
Thank you so much for your very helpful insights, they really do help me a great deal.
Here are the binos under consideration,
http://www.opticsbestbuy.com/VORTEX-Binoculars-10x50-Vulture-Hunting-VTR-5010.html?feed=Froogle

verses these[ not 50mm], significantly more cash,
http://www.opticsplanet.net/vortex-viper-10x42-binoculars.html

Again, I'll be using these for a variety of tasks, though dusk viewing isn't particularly high on my list. Mostly daylight viewing, mountain vistas [ I live in the Angeles Forest State Park in California], some birding, no special purpose or hard usage.

 

[Tero]

In a 10x42, I would prefer the Monarch to the Diamondback for optics. The wimpy eye cups on the Monarch are another matter. But like you say, not a huge difference.

Wish I could find some Fury binoculars to check out, but my guess is that the 10x42 Fury is pretty good. And you do not really need a 50mm for general outdoor use, 8x42 and 10x42 both have plenty of light.

BUT, EF, if you can save up a bit, or sell some junk you do not need (most of us here do), go for the Viper!

 

[Kevin Purcell]

I think the Vulture is a "Big Glass" targeted at hunters for twilight hunting. As it says on the Vortex website (better than a reseller) "Bright scanning in low light".

http://www.vortexoptics.com/binoculars/view/vortex_vulture_8.5x50_(green)

I've not used them but have the Diamondbacks and I suspect the Vultures are just the 8.5x50 version of the Diamondbacks: optimized for low light with a narrower FOV so they probably deal with stray light a bit better than the Diamondbacks with their very wide FOV.

At 31oz I think you'll find them a bit heavy and just a bit big for birding.

"would you buy them?" No. Not for birding.

The Diamondbacks would be an option at the lower price end (cheaper than the Vultures). They're not bad (see other reviews here including mine). The Fury and Viper are a step up from that if you have the money.

And at $500 you could look at the Promaster ED (or Hawke ED) for better performance. But in the $500 range you have a choice of quite a few decent mid-price bins.

 

[Steve C]

You don't indicate any budget restrictions. For the less than $300 purchase, the Vuture is probably a good choice. However if you are going to go the $500 level, go to the Promaster Infinity Elite ELX ED or the Hawke Frontier ED. I have a Promaster and a Viper. There is no question the Promaster is a better optical instrument. There are some ergonomic advantage to the Viper, as they are both smaller and lighter than the Promaster/Hawke.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

Assuming a $250 budget do you really think he should go for the Vulture over the Diamondback, Steve?

I don't see the win in it.

I'm behind you with the $300 and up choices though.

 

[Jim M.]

I think we all owe Frank, Steve, Kevin, et al. a debt for bringing the more obscure brands to our attention, but I would urge you to try before you buy. If you are interested in the $500 price range, the Promaster and Hawke models Steve mentions have gotten glowing reviews for optical quality on these forums, but I personally consider the optical difference between the Viper and the Zeiss FL to be pretty minor (and I have not seen anyone claim that the Promaster and Hawke are better optically than the Zeiss). So their primary advantage is slightly better optics. But on the downside, the Hawke may have insufficient eye relief if you wear glasses, and the Promaster has a slow focus which might frustrate avid birders. The Viper, on the other hand, has excellent eye relief, a fairly fast focus, is slightly lighter than both of them, and has a locking diopter. It all depends on what is important to you, and that will vary from viewer to viewer.

Best,
Jim

 

[Steve C]

Kevin

Since the original post specifically referenced the Vulture, so did I. But of the two, I would go with the Diamondback, assuming the OP is needing to spend in the < $300 range. That is because the Diamondback is lighter and has a wider fov. If the extra $50 is not a problem, I'd do the Fury, because I think the Fury is better glass than the Diamondback, and only slightly (if any) behind the Viper.

Jim,
I hear you about the focus of the Promaster. However there is half a turn of that focus occuring after focus at infinity. I don't have the birding issue with the focus I thought I would at normal biring ranges. ANother half turn is from 50' on in. Might be a butterfly problem. Yes obscurity. These haven't been around long, but they are the best optics for the $500 class. They are noticeably better than my Viper.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

Steve: But the OP does ask about 10x42 Vultures ... which don't exist ... but 10x42 Diamondbacks do. And he leans to Vortex. Hence the suggestion.

And I agree entirely with the "try before you buy". Find a good deal that will let you return after a decent time period. I like Eagle Optics (I'm just a customer). Both the obscure brands either have similar return policies or are availble from place with those no-questions-asked return policies.

Remeber when Vortex was an obscure brand?

Viper and the Zeiss FL to be pretty minor

Wouldn't that make the difference between the Razor and the Zeiss FL even more minor. I wonder why they even bother with that model

I have not seen anyone claim that the Promaster and Hawke are better optically than the Zeiss

I'm just imagining the response to such a claim. Perhaps in a couple of years. Oh, the humanity.

Cuation: the above may contain humor. YMMV.

 

[Electric Factory]

Guys, 'yes' 300.00 is my ceiling budget and the Fury is looking like the best Vortex option at this price point- agreed ?

 

[Steve C]

If I were in your place, I would get the Fury. One caveat here however. In mid range optics you will typically get a better binocular at 8x than 10x.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

The Fury's have it!

Steve:

How well do the 6.5x Fury (with their huge FOV) deal with off-axis stray light?

I know you have the 6.5x but did you tried the 8x? Any comments on their relative merit? image quality? sharpness? contrast? stray light?

 

[NWBirder]

do we need to concern about those off axis stray light? I don't think we will see those as it is outside the exit pupil. All the light we see through binoculars should come through exit pupil, I think. I haven't seen flare or glare related to this phenomenon

 

[Kevin Purcell]

Oh, yes we do. Off axis stray light control is one of the big differentatiors: the top end bins deal with stray light well the others less so. Baffling and careful attention to off-axis light usually comes with better design.

Off axis light can find a lot of interesting ways of getting into the exit pupil e.g. multiple diffuse or specular scattering in the bin.

Even bright out of exit pupil light can cause interesting problems for eyeglass wearers (and if it's bright enough regular users too ... the eye is not completely opaque (a fair amount of night time glare is due to light hitting the eye but no coming in through the pupil).

Try a Diamondback or a Hurricane and you'll see what I mean. It's not as resistant to stray light as one might hope but it's good enough for an entry level bin. Stray light issues go up with FOV (at constant magnification) and the 6.5x has one of the biggest FOVs.

 

[Steve C]

Kevin,

As to stray light, I'd say the 6.5x32 Fury handles it pretty well. Same thing for fringing and CA. Now, I do not use glasses with binoculars, although I do need them for closer than about 4 feet. I finally had to admit that my arms were not getting shorter as I aged. I do however try to use a binocular with reading glasses in place. The 6.5 Fury has enough eye relief that it is the binocular that I have experience with that is probably best for eyeglass use. I always tend to get some flare when looking toward the sun with glasses more than without. I think the 6.5x32 Fury is one of the better binoculars for the money out there. I think the stray light issue is handled better with the Fury than with Diamondback.

I have compared them side by side to the 8x32 Fury. I prefer the extra brightness if the 6.5 and I for one do not feel that the 6.5-7x gives up much if anything to the 8x, unless you are looking prett long. At most birding distances, I can't say I notice much difference. I figure if I get out birded by somebody with an 8x, it's probably because they are a better birder than I am, not because they had 8x and I didn't. Other of course will disagree.

 

[Electric Factory]

If I were in your place, I would get the Fury. One caveat here however. In mid range optics you will typically get a better binocular at 8x than 10x.

In this specific instance and given bright daytime light what do you believe would be the practical improvement- if any- with an 8x verses a 10x Fury binocular ? Eye relief ? Field of view ?
Thanks again Steve, invaluable help.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

x8 versus x10

FOV - the biggest change. Even though quite a Vortex bins are wider FOV than average .. it seems to be part of their design style. Easier to acquire and track moving birds or to observe flitting birds in the trees. Or to look for some action: stare at a point and wait for something to move somewhere in the field.

Shake is also reduced at x8 though I don't have too much problem with x10 especially in a bin I can grip well.

If you've not done much birding or don't have a preference for x10 already I recommend starting with x8 or less. Consider x6.5 too.

As Steve says it's not that much different at typical birding distances: if you can just see a detail to ID a bird at 40m (shotgun range ) with x6.5 then you would be able to see the same detail at 45m at x8 (and 50m at x10). It's not a huge difference. The time x10 pays off is for distance viewing (shorebird, on salt marshes, in deserts) but even there the win of x8 is no huge. If you have only one bin then x8 is a good compromise.

ER is generally larger at lower magnifications (with short focal length eyepieces). This can occasionally be a problem with a x10 with just not quite enough ER so you loose a bit more of the already narrower FOV.

 

[Steve C]

It is pretty simple. The more magnification you ask from a particular design, the less resolution you can get from it. This means that if you want 10x, be prepared to spend more for the same level of resolution you will get from 8x. At the Fury/Viper level, the image quality is better at 8x. Also, 8x has the added advantage of less eyestrain (stuff is less magnified so the eye can handle it easier) and increased magnification also makes it harder to hold the binocular steady, as the shake in your hand is also magnified. The field of view is also wider with less magnification. However at 10x, you are 20% closer to your target. Lots of people like that and can handle the shake factor. However, I'd get as first choice the 6.5 or 8x 32 Fury, with the 8x42 as the second. That is a size, weight, and larger fov choice I'd make for myself. The practical differences in 32 vs 42 mm binoculars is pretty slim unless you do a lot of twilight viewing. Then decide for yourself if you need more magnification. Check the used/demo section at CameralandNY for some killer deals on Vortex and others. Vortex also has topo notch warranty and customer service. The warranty goes with the binocular, not the owner. I'd get the 6.5 and 8x Fury from them and they'll let you send the one you don't want back. Ditto Eagle Optics.

 

[NWBirder]

It is pretty simple. The more magnification you ask from a particular design, the less resolution you can get from it.

Steve, it is the first time I have ever heard of this statement. Maybe you can elaborate more?

From my understanding, the theoretical resolution is limited by objective lens size. But of course, none of the binoculars will ever reach to that limit. For 8x42 promaster, a 4 arcsec resolution (from one of the posters) seem to be very good. But I don't know you have lower resolution with higher magnification. I do know 8x has wider sweet spot for sharpness than 10x because of less field curvature. But on axis resolution, I would think they should be the same if measured by arcsec, or better with 10x if measured by linear term? anyone can chime in on this?