Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
Zeiss conquest vs vortex razors |
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Author | ||
Klamath
Optics Master Joined: May/20/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
There is what I'm having a problem with. There simply is not enough room in image difference for even a new Swaro to be "noticeably better than the Prime", nor for that matter, the McKinley either. I'm having a heck of a time figuring out just how the Meopta is going to get that done...unless you had a substandard Prime...or I have both a cherry Prime and McKinley...or who knows. That ring is insignificant. You either have to be seriously looking for something like that before you see it, or you have to know it's there before hand. It is almost absent from my Prime, I really have to look for it, and I already know it's there. In normal use I would never notice it. EDIT: I can't see that ring on the new stock Primes I have from the Winter Wings Festival booth. I know Charles made a couple of production tweaks after the first run. I may have to bite the bullet and buy a Meopta HD with the idea of wringing it out and returning it, but I really don't like doing that. But maybe it is the binocular that finally checks all my checklist points. I have some that come awful close, but nothing has checked them all off yet. This would be a dull place if everybody agreed on everything .
Edited by Klamath - March/10/2013 at 20:50 |
||
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron |
||
mike650
Optics God Joined: May/14/2006 Location: West of Rockies Status: Offline Points: 14569 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
“A hunt based only on trophies taken falls far short of what the ultimate goal should be.” – Fred Bear
|
||
JGRaider
Optics Master Joined: February/06/2008 Status: Offline Points: 1540 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
In regards to the SLC HD/McKinley comparison that Klamath refers to........I've posted before than IMO the SLC HD is the finest hunting glass ever made, and I'll stick with that, and I've seen most all the top shelf stuff in the field. The McKinley is really, really close, and I have no idea what ring BB is referring to. My buddy who owns a shop in town was taking inventory today so I stopped by. I can see zero difference between the McKinley, Conquest HD, and Meopta HD.
|
||
Bitterroot Bulls
Optics Master Extraordinaire Joined: May/07/2009 Location: Montana Status: Offline Points: 3416 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
That is the rub there, Steve. These small differences are much more noticeable to me than to many other people. I am sure there are some that would agree with me, and clearly some that wouldn't.
I have already conceded to myself that I am MUCH more sensitive to CA than most people. Like CA, the "ring" isn't super noticeable, unless you look for it, which of course I do. However, no matter how much I look for it in the Meopta it will never be there.
I am less picky about other performance areas, like extreme edge sharpness, or pincushion distortion. I am sure there are those that put those areas above all others, and their opinions will vary from mine.
Everybody is different. On another website, I had a PM from a guy that knew I had the Primes. He told me he thought his were defective, because he noticed they weren't (to his eyes) as sharp as his friend's alphas. I told him that opinions varied, but my SLC neus were apparently sharper to me than the Primes. I further advised if he was concerned, he should have Zen Ray look at them. He liked them enough overall to keep them, however.
Then there is the eyecup design of the Primes, which I found disturbing. In fact, eyecup design alone would be worth the difference in price for me. I spend many, many hours with binocular eyecups pressed against my face.
I am kind of defending my opinion here, and I don't want to get on the Primes too badly. They still are the best Chinese produced bin in overall quality that I have seen, and still offer tons of value.
|
||
-Matt
|
||
Klamath
Optics Master Joined: May/20/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
No need to defend your opinion on my behalf.
The Prime, and for that matter the McKinley, do have large ocular diameters and those will not suit a lot of people. That is one tiny checkpoint on the ideal binocular list they don't quite tick off for me. I happen to think that anybody should be careful about teaching themselves to look too closely at, or for, minute differences. Pretty soon even a $2,500 Swarovision will be lacking. Anyway, I have faith in your high opinion of the Meopta, and if I go with one you will be one reason I did.
|
||
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron |
||
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |