OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc. Homepage SWFA     SampleList.com
Forum Home Forum Home > Other Optics > Binoculars
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Gun-Tests Optics Review  Part II
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials.

Gun-Tests Optics Review Part II

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Rusty View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: April/12/2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rusty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Gun-Tests Optics Review Part II
    Posted: August/15/2005 at 10:49
Has anyone read the second part of this review?  If you have, could you summarise the findings from this review.  I do not get Gun-Tests, and am curious about the results. 
Back to Top
SteveSF View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: May/17/2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 37
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/16/2005 at 08:31

Sorry that I don't have it with me at the moment.  They said that all the over-$1,000 binoculars that the looked at (only 3 were evaluated Zeiss Victory FL, Leica Ultravid, and Swarovski EL; all 10x) were excellent.  For ergonomic reasons and build quality (although I don't understand this), they liked the Zeiss best.  They said that the Leica was heavy compared to the others.  They were not very specific as to their reasons for their judgments.  Sorry that I can't remember more at this time.  The article was quite short, only a few pages and most containing specifications.

 

Back to Top
gremlin View Drop Down
Optics Apprentice
Optics Apprentice
Avatar

Joined: February/16/2004
Location: left of center
Status: Offline
Points: 115
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gremlin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/19/2005 at 12:52

Rusty--

Where'd you get a chance to read the first part?  Was it somewhere here in this forum?  Darn, go on vacation for a little while and you miss out on the good stuff!

 

 

Back to Top
Chris Farris View Drop Down
TEAM SWFA - Admin
TEAM SWFA - Admin
Avatar
swfa.com

Joined: October/01/2003
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 8024
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chris Farris Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/23/2005 at 14:27

We have a new Catagory and subforums.

  •  

    Part I and Part I are posted under the Gun-Tests Magazine forum.

    Back to Top
    tbone1 View Drop Down
    Optics Apprentice
    Optics Apprentice
    Avatar

    Joined: May/31/2004
    Status: Offline
    Points: 195
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tbone1 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/25/2005 at 01:28

    Thanks Chris for posting the Gun Tests review.  Somebody explain this to me.  They claimed that the Leica were optically excellent and the brightest of the three but they didn't pick them because they felt too heavy "tipping the scales at 37.3 oz making them the heaviest of the group".  That is pretty amazing since every other pair of Ultravid 10x42 weighs 27oz.  It appears that someone accidently misprinted the specs.  Probably an honest mistake, but what bothers me is that they typed up a review based on false information and claimed the Leica felt too heavy to carry and they prefered the Zeiss since they were lighter.  This is impossible since they weigh exactly the same as the Zeiss.   They are also more compact.  My point is that they obviously didn't feel too heavy and they must have based part of their review on specs rather than strictly on performance.

    Back to Top
    xenophobe View Drop Down
    Optics Apprentice
    Optics Apprentice


    Joined: July/29/2005
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 26
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote xenophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/25/2005 at 03:29
    At least the Cornell binocular article has some merits, but is far from unbiased or even fair... This "review" isn't any more informative than a gun magazine's "What's New" section.



    Back to Top
    SteveSF View Drop Down
    Optics GrassHopper
    Optics GrassHopper


    Joined: May/17/2005
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 37
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August/25/2005 at 08:53

    tbone1 and xenophobe are both right.

     

    The "Gun Tests" people know firerarms, but their binocular reviews don't explain their judgments well, or at all.  I was puzzled by their two reviews, too.  I'm sure that the over-$1,000 binoculars reviewed were all nearly flawless and indistinguishable in their views; for practically everybody, the choices between these are based on ergonomics.  As xenophobe said, other magazine reviews are similar.   

     

    Anyway, what are your impressions of the binoculars reviewed by Gun Tests?  I'm curious if you agree or disagree.

    Back to Top
    SteveSF View Drop Down
    Optics GrassHopper
    Optics GrassHopper


    Joined: May/17/2005
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 37
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/06/2005 at 09:09
    A correction:  the Swarovski that was reviewed was an SLC model, not EL.  My apologies.
    Back to Top
    Brady View Drop Down
    TEAM SWFA - Admin
    TEAM SWFA - Admin
    Avatar
    Casino Cruiser

    Joined: May/20/2004
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 1844
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Brady Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/06/2005 at 10:32
    Originally posted by tbone1 tbone1 wrote:

    Thanks Chris for posting the Gun Tests review.  Somebody explain this to me.  They claimed that the Leica were optically excellent and the brightest of the three but they didn't pick them because they felt too heavy "tipping the scales at 37.3 oz making them the heaviest of the group".  That is pretty amazing since every other pair of Ultravid 10x42 weighs 27oz.  It appears that someone accidentally misprinted the specs.  Probably an honest mistake, but what bothers me is that they typed up a review based on false information and claimed the Leica felt too heavy to carry and they preferred the Zeiss since they were lighter.  This is impossible since they weigh exactly the same as the Zeiss.   They are also more compact.  My point is that they obviously didn't feel too heavy and they must have based part of their review on specs rather than strictly on performance.

     

     

     

    I weighed both the Ultravid and the FL out of curiosity. I found the Ultravid actually weighs a little less then the FL.

     

    Ultravid - 26.24 oz

    FL - 26.88 oz

     

    Makes you think they based their whole review off specs and stats. Rather than actual hands on viewpoints. If I handled them constantly I sure wouldn't get the impression that the Ultravids are heavier. When they are in fact lighter. How can you do a write up on something, and base your main dispute from a spec that is this inaccurate?

    Back to Top
    xenophobe View Drop Down
    Optics Apprentice
    Optics Apprentice


    Joined: July/29/2005
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 26
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote xenophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/09/2005 at 03:28
    I just weighed my Ultravid 10x42 BL without strap or rainguard.  They weigh 24.6 oz
    Back to Top
    Rusty View Drop Down
    Optics Apprentice
    Optics Apprentice
    Avatar

    Joined: April/12/2004
    Location: United States
    Status: Offline
    Points: 147
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Rusty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September/12/2005 at 15:20

    Chris, SWFA Staff,

     

    Thanks for posting the reviews.  Every bit of information helps.

     

    Crusty Rusty

    Back to Top
    Chris Farris View Drop Down
    TEAM SWFA - Admin
    TEAM SWFA - Admin
    Avatar
    swfa.com

    Joined: October/01/2003
    Location: Texas
    Status: Offline
    Points: 8024
    Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Chris Farris Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November/29/2005 at 11:58

    Gun Test editor sent me a revised review that I uploaded, so if anyone was reading this thread and reads the review it has now been corrected.......thanks to OT members.  He is also running a correction in the printed magazine.

    Back to Top
     Post Reply Post Reply
      Share Topic   

    Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

    Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
    Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

    This page was generated in 0.203 seconds.