Replacing Leupold with Leica
- Thread starter KTP
- Start date
Help Support Long Range Hunting Forum
Same here. My 10x42 monarchs were retired to live in my truck and used for work because my 6x Leica 2800.com is so much clearer that I can see just as well with it as the "more powerful" binos.
Steve
GSP814
Well-Known Member
Leica by a mile!
sea2summit
Well-Known Member
I'm butting in because I'm in the market. But at the Leica price point, don't swaro's win?
Depends entirely on your eyes. One of my hunting partners sees better with Swaro, I see better with Leica. As far as the range finder part, Leica kicks Swaro big time.
I was on a big $$ Sonoran mule deer hunt. Outfitter knew I was a 'glass freak' and wanted some objective comparison. Since we were driving in, he said to bring all the good stuff. I brought Swarovski, Zeiss, and Leica. I had them all in 8, 10 power + another Swarovski in 20 power. We're talking about Hours of glassing for 6 straight days. Day one, we placed our bets - me on Swarovski, him on Zeiss. On day 6 there was a clear and unequivocal winner - Leica by a mile. It was a total no brainer. I admit I was surprised!
On our Tanzania hunt all the professional hunters were carrying the little geovids. No Swarovski, no Zeiss. Geo's - period. They laughed at our Swaros!
For me it was about the whole package. I have some Swaro and Leica glass. For my eyes the NL pure was a noticeably better than the Leica in a pure binocular. The EL was more or less about the same but there were subjective differences that could make one choose one or another. The Zeiss is up there too.
For me the biggest reason that many choose Swaro over other is the FOV. This isn't insignificant but it's also isn't everything. One of the largest reasons people choose Leica over others is greater subject isolation. For a small percentage of people the field flattening effect in Swaro is disorienting if/when you pan and focus on the edges… it's not a issue of mine and the reason I still consider picking up a set of NL Pure's for just observing wildlife.
Like I said above my Geovid Pro 32's were a practical choice in something that I could use for archery, rifle, and birding/photography with or without the rangefinders on. The lenses are a noticeable step up in quality from the older ones IMO for me. I was concerned about them being 32's at first so I got them in 8x power to maximize light gathering. My buddy got a set in 10x and he's happy with them as well. I lean towards getting a 10x in the 42's at some point but it's lower priority for me.
sea2summit
Well-Known Member
Based off what metrics?
One would sort of assume it was based on who they guys using them voted as the best optic after trying them all over 6 days of varied use. Doesn't need to be more complicated than that. It is how I evaluate a whole raft of gear I use. Arbitrary numbers matter far less than what the gear works like in actual use.
Practical only
Clarity
Detail at low light levels
Which could you stay on longer without a headache
Which would you reach for first
Which one you absolutely didn't want to use again given other choices
I have the Geovid 10 x 42 rangefinding binoculars and I love them. I have had Zeiss, the Swarovski EL's and the Leica Noctivids and I keep going back to my Geovids. Everybody's eyes are different, these just seem to fit my eyes perfectly. Good Luck with your decision.
sea2summit
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. I was just wondering if there were specifics like eye strain, how it fit the hand/strain, etc.
