[kudu40]

I'm looking at binoculars in the 8x42 to 10x42 range and have narrowed it down to either the Leica Ultravid or the Swarovski EL. I saw a box from Leica that stated they were made in Portugal.
Does anyone have any reasons why I should but one and not the other?
Thanks,

Kudu40

 

[tpv]

The outfitter we use for mule deer hunting swears by the Leicas. He sold his old pair to my son, and bought new pair. Excellent glass, know nothing about the Swarovskis.

 

[kdub]

Have a pair of 7x42 Leitz (forerunner to Leica) that I've had for years and years. Nice sharp optics in the old binocular. Yes, they were made in Portugal even back those many years ago.

 

[MontyF]

I'm looking at binoculars in the 8x42 to 10x42 range and have narrowed it down to either the Leica Ultravid or the Swarovski EL. I saw a box from Leica that stated they were made in Portugal.
Does anyone have any reasons why I should but one and not the other?
Thanks, Kudu40

I can't answer your question but if I were in your position of parting with that much cash I'd visit a store that handles both. Make it about dusk and take 'em outside for a side by side test run. Low light seperates the great ones from the pretenders.

 

[Shawn Crea]

Many years ago (10+), I looked at both the Leica's and Swarovski's at several stores. I came away with the opinion that the Leica's were just a bit sharper. Not much difference IMO, and different eyes and different setting may tip the decision the other way. I ordered the Leica 10x42 BN's. What they sent me were the 12x50 BN's. I decided to keep them, and I really like them. Last year, the left barrel would no longer focus for me. I sent them in and from what I can tell, they didn't rebuild them, but sent me a brand new binoc. I like Monty's suggestion, and I'll add, look towards a low sun. That's tough duty for any optics and may point clearly to your winner.

10+ years in optic design is a long time, so take my experience FWIW...old. Good luck in the search.

 

[kudu40]

Thanks for the information. I will go to a staore that carries both and do just that some day before sundown.

Kudu40

 

[Pete D.]

Binos

You cannot go wrong with either choice. I have a pair of the Swarovski ELs. They are marvelous instruments. Clear/sharp images edge to edge, no color fringing, durable, waterproof. Really top shelf.
Pete

 

[416elk]

I can't answer your question but if I were in your position of parting with that much cash I'd visit a store that handles both. Make it about dusk and take 'em outside for a side by side test run. Low light seperates the great ones from the pretenders.

This is a superb recommendation. I've sold both brands over the years and I always encouraged potential buyers to take a chair outside and spend enough time to let the optics reveal themselves. One aspect of any optic is the eye that is looking through it.

 

[Jack]

This is a win/win decision.
Finding a store that carries both is a great idea - a little hands on time often makes the decision for you. Might be hard to find a local store that has both, though.
I have used Leitz 8x40's since the late 1970's and they have performed flawlessly, even after a fall out of a tree stand. Wouldn't be without them.

 

[Bird Dog II]

I did extensive testing of some 8x40 binos last year and this include a pair of $2,500 Swarovski's. No Lecia's were available. I tested everything else in the store including Zeiss, Viper, Nikon, Leupold, Steiner, Bushnell. For 1/5 the price of the Swarvos, and 1/2 the price of the Zeiss, the Nikon Monarch 7 was a touch better than the Zeiss and a touch behind the Swarvos. Really any difference between the three was almost interpretable and all three were clearly better than all the others. The Monarchs also are build like a rock. It's just me, but I'd rather have 5 pair of these bright, crystal clear Monarch 7s (both cars, boat, house, hunting backpack) than one pair of Swarvo ELs for the same money.

Here is the review: http://www.shootersforum.com/sporti...ex-bushnell-zeiss-swarvo-bino-comparison.html

 

[2Bits]

I think Leica is better but I would never purchase either of them!

 

[nachogrande]

What kind of user are you?

As said try several. After trying many that worked OK for a while, then faded, Nikons lasted longer then most. I bought Zeiss 10x40's and Leica 8x30 mini's, both excellent and would likely give the edge to Leica. I've never tried Svaros however. If you are the kind of guy that is going to drop your pack from a tree stand, or clean the lenses with a dirty T-shirt, I'd stick to the less expensive types.

 

[Sus Scrofa]

As I have said on here before I have a pair of 10x40 Swarovskis and yes they are OK but to be honest no better than the 9x63 Hawkes I have other than they are lighter to carry. My experience of factory relations with Swarovski has been poor so I would never buy them again. My colleague has a pair of Leica and give or take I think the Leicas would just have the edge BUT they are 15yrs newer and have not been dragged around the world. Our eyes do differ and I suggest if you have a need to dispense with that amount of cash then go and try them all and make your choice. There are some excellent binos on the market half the price which will do the job no problem unless your in to counting the eyelashes on the deer your just about to shoot.

 

[[email protected]]

A toss up. What ever floats your bout.

 

[rojkoh]

I'm looking at binoculars in the 8x42 to 10x42 range and have narrowed it down to either the Leica Ultravid or the Swarovski EL. I saw a box from Leica that stated they were made in Portugal.
Does anyone have any reasons why I should but one and not the other?
Thanks,

Kudu40

Swarovski. Fine optics, never had a problem with them and I've used a fair amount of varying name brands over the years.

 

[fatwhiteboy]

The guides I hunt with prefer Leica. The feeling was the Leicas held their focus better. I have a pair of Leica 10X50 Ultravids and a pair of Leica 10X25's. both do all I expected.

 

[Irv S]

I use Swarovski EL binoculars and a Leica rangefinder. A neighbor with whom I hunted elk before he moved had Leica binoculars. Pick the one you like - you won't go wrong with either.

 

[Pete D.]

Binos

As an addition to my post in this thread four years ago....another option that I have found extremely successful is using image stabilized binoculars. I have two sets...one set of 10X30s from Canon and another set from Fujinon at 14x42.
Both have superb optics....clear edge to edge, no color fringing. More often than not, the smaller Canons are the set that I grab when I head out.
If you have never tried IS binos, the effect is startling....marvelously so. You press the button and the image stops moving. You see all sorts of detail that was not noticeable before the image stabilized (notice that I did not say "was not visible").
One of my hobbies is astronomy. Given the numbers for the little Canon at 10X30, you would not expect them to be good performers in a dark sky, looking for dim, diffuse objects. But they are. The IS feature adds, in effect, another magnitude of viewing. I get better viewing from the IS 10X30s than I do from a standard set at 10X50. I suspect that they would work as well in dim morning or evening twilight when hunting.
If you get a chance....take a look.
Pete

 

[sandog]

I've had Zeiss, Leica's and Swarovski EL's and the Swav El's were noticably the best. On antelope hunts in eastern Montana I tended to spot the animals before my friends did with their high end binocs. Some of the Nikons and Vortex models, though are pretty good for a fraction of the price. I do love my Swarovski EL's.

 

[puddlejumper]

I went through this a few years ago and ended up with the Swaro 8x42 EL's.

I followed a similar process to what has been mentioned . I have friends with Zeiss, Swaro, and Leica as well as many of the others so I looked through many brands under a broad variety of conditions. FME it is critical to test them at first and last light and at distance - not 200 or 300 yards. This is because at the range or in a parking lot at 300 yards I found it difficult to discern a difference between midrange optics and top end optics.

The other important thing I got out of it was is that all of our eyes are a little different. That is, what looks better to one person may not best to another.

The most telling test for me was when I had the top end 10x40 Bushnel Fusions, the top end Vortex Razor 10x42's, and Swaro 8x42 EL's lined up at dusk on one side of a valley. I scanned around and found a yard at 1500 yards in the shadows on the other side of the valley. With the Bushnells I was able to accurately range the yard and thought I could make out a grey shape moving in the yard. With the Vortex I could make out that grey blob was moving and may be a dog. With the Swaros I could easily range it and clearly see that it was a grey Scotty dog pinching a loaf in the back yard by a tree. That is what you pay the extra money for.

For me this is important because one of my hunts is a northern rockies fly in which requires us to glass the slopes (500 to 2000 yards) around a high mountain lake at dusk to spot the game and then hike up into the alpine before dawn to take them. This type of spotting cannot be done with lesser binoculars.

If your application seldom requires more than 500 yards or low light conditions then the midrange binoculars are probably just fine.

FME the Zeiss Victory and the Swaros were the best. For my eyes the Leica Geovid were a level below the other two.