Opinions on Rangefinding Binos

[BrentM]

For those valuing the ballistic features, what scope reticals are you using. I typically use BDC or some custom reticals that provide aim points up to and last 600 yards. Wondering what advantage is there for ballistic features if I am not shooting straight cross hairs or adjusting my knobs.

I'm willing to bet most are using standard hash mil and moa. I am not a fan of bdc or any drop reticle. They can and do work but I may swap ammo, scopes, etc and prefer a simple standard reticle. 1. I have to use a LRF to get range. 2. It takes no additional time for me to dial vs count down or find my reticle shoot to point. 3. I am centered in my cross hair for the hold and use the hash marks above or below for hold changes if needed. 4. with a lrf bino and solution output its a literal press the button on the target and get a dial to solution within fractions of a second. For example if I range and the solution says 8, I just reach up and dial 8, compensate for drafts, aerodynamic jump, cory, etc. Usually minimal hold change.

 

[Huntnful]

For those valuing the ballistic features, what scope reticals are you using. I typically use BDC or some custom reticals that provide aim points up to and last 600 yards. Wondering what advantage is there for ballistic features if I am not shooting straight cross hairs or adjusting my knobs.

I guess it would be the benefit of always using the center of your crosshairs and running your turret. You're also limited to one ballistic solution at one specific elevation.

I'm I have data for three different loads, all designed for the same rifle and different purposes. One bullet, for example takes 20 MOA at 1000 yards at sea level. And only takes 17 MOA at around 9000 feet elevation. If you're shooting at 500 yards and in, a lot of these variables are minute though.

 

[Buck100]

I've been running the same middle of the road binos and a 2005 model range finder for a long while now and I'm thinking seriously about upgrading. I'm considering the swarovski range finding binos. My question is, are they that much better than any other range finding binoculars? What others are there out there that compare? What are your recommendations?

IMO, I don't believe the Swarovski binos are that much better than Zeiss or Leica to warrant the extra cost. You know Swarovski gets a little more just for the name. I've been using Leica 10x42 and 15x56 for quite a few years now and they have been great. If you're going to shell out the money for good glass you should consider buying the bino's with the ballistic calculator built in with Bluetooth to sync with your phone and kill two birds with one stone. I recently purchased a pair of Zeiss Victory RF's and I wish I had waited. The glass is great and the ballistics are fine but I don't like the location of the button when ranging. I didn't think it would be a problem when I tried them in the store but in the field it's a different matter. It's located to the front of the bino's and the button itself can be very stiff to push so unless you are using a tripod there is much movement. The Leica's, on the other hand, like all Leica's, have the button on the top nearer your eyes where everything seems to be better balanced therefore less movement. Whatever you decide spend the money even if it means going on a payment plan for awhile. Good glass pays for itself; you'll never have to buy another pair again unless you break, lose or just want to upgrade.

 

[Huntnful]

IMO, I don't believe the Swarovski binos are that much better than Zeiss or Leica to warrant the extra cost. You know Swarovski gets a little more just for the name. I've been using Leica 10x42 and 15x56 for quite a few years now and they have been great. If you're going to shell out the money for good glass you should consider buying the bino's with the ballistic calculator built in with Bluetooth to sync with your phone and kill two birds with one stone. I recently purchased a pair of Zeiss Victory RF's and I wish I had waited. The glass is great and the ballistics are fine but I don't like the location of the button when ranging. I didn't think it would be a problem when I tried them in the store but in the field it's a different matter. It's located to the front of the bino's and the button itself can be very stiff to push so unless you are using a tripod there is much movement. The Leica's, on the other hand, like all Leica's, have the button on the top nearer your eyes where everything seems to be better balanced therefore less movement. Whatever you decide spend the money even if it means going on a payment plan for awhile. Good glass pays for itself; you'll never have to buy another pair again unless you break, lose or just want to upgrade.

I completely agree. The swaros were a huge letdown for the price. I bought them, and spent over a week trying to like them. I had to return them. They were honestly terrible in every aspect besides the glass. Major let down.

I've stuck with the Zeiss. But the button is in a weird spot, and does move the bino slightly when you press it. But after two years I'm totally used it and comfortable with it now. Now that Leica has the internal ballistics out to 1000 yards though, that would be another GREAT option!

 

[azarcher10x]

Yeah, you use the app in your phone to set up the custom profile and transfer to the bino. It's good to 1000. Comparing it to shooter and ab solvers it's right there and gives moa to the tenths. It doesn't hold more than 1 profile at time in the bino but it's not a bad transfer time if you wanted to swap out. Takes 2 minutes if you know what your doing. All in all the on board program is pretty good. If you use kestrel you also get wind transferred to the bino. I really don't care about wind as I use my own short cut for wind and it works very well. Just a quick calc in my head and send it

Another advantage to the Ziess. They will store 9 ballistic profiles on the unit. Many more on the app. I believe the app will show ranges out to something ridiculous like 10,000 yards! I know the chart on my 300 RUM will go to 8500 yards! Something like 1200 moa @ -45°! LOL

 

[BrentM]

Another advantage to the Ziess. They will store 9 ballistic profiles on the unit. Many more on the app. I believe the app will show ranges out to something ridiculous like 10,000 yards! I know the chart on my 300 RUM will go to 8500 yards! Something like 4000 moa! LOL

Minor issue. Not down playing ziess but that's not a big swaying decision for me. I mean having solutions as far as the LRF will range is fine but not remotely practical for most users. ELR shooters generally have to use more than 1 tool and segment drop and wind anyway, so not sure how good that data is. I've not played with the ziess custom profile set up, looked at their solver (ab?) or how accurate any of it is. Seems it should be fine. I think Leica really missed the opportunity to build the 3200 correctly when they chose to link to kestrel vs just using the app and on board solver to house more data. Partnering with AB or similar level solver and storing data on board seems pretty straight forward. I thought Swaro was going down that road and instead they come up with a stupid tracking gimmick and charge another 1k for it. Dumb

 

[kpacker]

The new swaro has the best glass. But lacks in every other aspect.

Leica is second on glass, but lacks in the ballistic calculations.

Zeiss is third in glass, but ranges well out to a mile and gives accurate ballistic data with the correct inputs. No wind though.

I ended up with Zeiss again, after using all three. I won't mess with the wind on a long range shot on a game animal. So that part didn't bother me.

Definitely get what fits your personal needs, I would just recommend staying with the premium glass companies for a rangefinding bino. If you're dead set on linking kestrel, get the Leica. If you just want to use the kestrel separately to get an accurate wind hold, but want your binos to do the ranging and ballistic calculations, get the Zeiss. I got mine for $2500 from the forums.

This is me. For years I ran a pair of ELs and a Leica RF. Ultimately I went with zeiss so I can run a bino stud with Outdoorsmans tripod setup. So, basically it came down to functionality with my current hunting setup as a quiver of 1.

 

[Huntnful]

Minor issue. Not down playing ziess but that's not a big swaying decision for me. I mean having solutions as far as the LRF will range is fine but not remotely practical for most users. ELR shooters generally have to use more than 1 tool and segment drop and wind anyway, so not sure how good that data is. I've not played with the ziess custom profile set up, looked at their solver (ab?) or how accurate any of it is. Seems it should be fine. I think Leica really missed the opportunity to build the 3200 correctly when they chose to link to kestrel vs just using the app and on board solver to house more data. Partnering with AB or similar level solver and storing data on board seems pretty straight forward. I thought Swaro was going down that road and instead they come up with a stupid tracking gimmick and charge another 1k for it. Dumb

No I think you're totally right here. Shooting consistently past 1000 yards requires more data than just a simple ballistic drop anyways.

I also thought the tracking assist on the swaro was a ridiculous addition considering how much they were lacking in other aspects.

 

[Pro2A]

I've been running the same middle of the road binos and a 2005 model range finder for a long while now and I'm thinking seriously about upgrading. I'm considering the swarovski range finding binos. My question is, are they that much better than any other range finding binoculars? What others are there out there that compare? What are your recommendations?

I like the Sig3000BDX binos for broad functionality. Got them for under $900 delivered.......great value/function/performance node. As always, for more money, there are better single purpose binos and rangefinders (use Terraopn X for longest range accuracy). Glass is very subjective to the user's eyes. Those old adages: "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and "One man's trash is another man's treasure" sums up glass preferences. Glass is very acceptable for my old eyes. They provide AB solutions to 800yds....more than enough for coyotes where we often hunt. Connecting to the Kestrel allows unlimited range solutions for other longer range applications. Run them off tripod reduces eye strain for long glassing sessions, often through a digiscope with smart phone/tablet. Allows two eye scanning without tunnel vision of binos giving improved peripheral situational awareness for game sneaking in from the side or for when you've gone far enough that you become prey for nasty toothed/clawed critters. Liking solutions sharing to Sig Sierra6 BDX 5-30x scope I started playing with for yotes. Often hunt with partner....one on gun, other on binos to spot/range with solution automatically to the BDX scope....fast, accurate, easy peasy. on multiple simultaneous target opportunities. When solo, can spot/range, get off binos (use Rick Young Outdoors bungee cord binos harness or twin bino/gun mount on tripod setup), and get on gun with solution already in scope. Can't get any faster than that, and find solution to be very accurate, especially when custom profile loaded.

 

[BrentM]

No I think you're totally right here. Shooting consistently past 1000 yards requires more data than just a simple ballistic drop anyways.

I also thought the tracking assist on the swaro was a ridiculous addition considering how much they were lacking in other aspects.

I like the fact there is competition but good lord, sig is the only one who did it right, however, the sig bino glass is crap compared to the 3 being discussed. I like my binos just fine but I know how much is left on the table and just can't believe these engineers missed it so badly once again. Leica has a nice ergonomic design, glass, and features that make it a top consideration. I like how fast and precise the leica laser is, the location of the buttons especially while on a tripod, and the ease of set up. I don't like the bt to kestrel bs for over 1000 yard solutions. I am meh on the profile memory. I rarely take more than 1 long range on a hunt etc so its not a huge negative. Over the past couple months playing with it I've come to terms with the 1000 yard solution. I've killed yotes further but it's that common and most of the time everything is inside 1k anyway.

 

[Elk Hunter 338]

I guess I must have received the GOLDEN nugget pair of Leica 3200.com binos..

 

[azarcher10x]

Minor issue. Not down playing ziess but that's not a big swaying decision for me. I mean having solutions as far as the LRF will range is fine but not remotely practical for most users. ELR shooters generally have to use more than 1 tool and segment drop and wind anyway, so not sure how good that data is. I've not played with the ziess custom profile set up, looked at their solver (ab?) or how accurate any of it is. Seems it should be fine. I think Leica really missed the opportunity to build the 3200 correctly when they chose to link to kestrel vs just using the app and on board solver to house more data. Partnering with AB or similar level solver and storing data on board seems pretty straight forward. I thought Swaro was going down that road and instead they come up with a stupid tracking gimmick and charge another 1k for it. Dumb

Yeah, I was being a little sarcastic about the range. The ballistics app seems to work ok, but high end things like spin drift, coriolis aren't considered.

 

[BrentM]

Yeah, I was being a little sarcastic about the range. The ballistics app seems to work ok, but high end things like spin drift, coriolis aren't considered.

I got the sarcasm. I think some people would actually bank on that data tho. Ha ha. I complete agree on the advanced ballistics solver. I can adjust for both, like most everyone here, but the average joe who buys these may not consider those things since the system doesn't as well. For me I just zero .25L, use a wind short cut, send it. For Cory I just know to add and subtract 750-1000 by .5. Last, aerodynamic jump or draft compensation. Most of that is minor under 1k but man once we push past that things can get out of hand in a hurry. Maybe Leica figures if you use a kestrel you know what you are doing or it relies on kestrel to tell you for the most part. who knows

 

[azarcher10x]

I got the sarcasm. I think some people would actually bank on that data tho. Ha ha. I complete agree on the advanced ballistics solver. I can adjust for both, like most everyone here, but the average joe who buys these may not consider those things since the system doesn't as well. For me I just zero .25L, use a wind short cut, send it. For Cory I just know to add and subtract 750-1000 by .5. Last, aerodynamic jump or draft compensation. Most of that is minor under 1k but man once we push past that things can get out of hand in a hurry. Maybe Leica figures if you use a kestrel you know what you are doing or it relies on kestrel to tell you for the most part. who knows

My guess is, there's money involved somewhere between the two! I do the same, .25 left!