WaterfowlForum.Net

Looking for some new binos soon. Mine got stolen out of my truck several years back and I've been hesitant to replace them because I want a really good set, but they're so damn high. So my question is, what do you look for in a set of binoculars?

nikon action 10x50. best "cheap" ones i've ever had, think they were $95 when i bought them

The biggest thing I notice the average person doesn't seem to look at is the clarity of the lens. Be sure to get fully multi coated lenses. Nikon makes a good bino for the money. My favorites without breaking the bank are leupolds. The high end bushnells are decent, but definitely avoid their cheap ones. And id just get a straight 8 or 10 power with the biggest objective lenses. Usually 42 or a 50mm are the largest common sizes.

So, what affects the clarity?

Westie25 wrote:So, what affects the clarity?

Cheapness of the glass they use and the coatings. Basically, a multi coated lens refracts the light in different ways to give you the brightest picture possible. That's why fully multi coated lenses are the best. That means all the lenses inside are multi coated.

Tasco...the best there is

Leupold Mesa 10x50. Best money I ever spent. Cheap binos give me a headache in about 8 nanoseconds.

I have Nikon monarch 8x50 I think, they rock the under 500 models, I won't take anything more expensive ducking

Nikon. Just don't get the adjustable power. They look good in the store but you end up with a lot of black space on the lower power levels. Make sure they are waterproof also.

assateague wrote:Leupold Mesa 10x50. Best money I ever spent. Cheap binos give me a headache in about 8 nanoseconds.

I need pictures of this! I don't believe as tight as you are you spent the money on Leupolds.

Bufflehead wrote:nikon action 10x50. best "cheap" ones i've ever had, think they were $95 when i bought them

bought a pair for the girlfriend a few years back. I ended up losing them or getting them stolen. They were decent for the money.

I bought swarovski 8.5X42 new when they were only $800. I actually bought two pair and sold one to my friend. They are fantastic but like jehler said you don't want to take them because they cost too much to replace.

If you buy 'nice' bino's you could always put insurance on them like I do.....

whisperin' duck wrote:

assateague wrote:Leupold Mesa 10x50. Best money I ever spent. Cheap binos give me a headache in about 8 nanoseconds.

I need pictures of this! I don't believe as tight as you are you spent the money on Leupolds.

He shoots a Matthews as well

Flightstopper wrote:

whisperin' duck wrote:

assateague wrote:Leupold Mesa 10x50. Best money I ever spent. Cheap binos give me a headache in about 8 nanoseconds.

I need pictures of this! I don't believe as tight as you are you spent the money on Leupolds.

He shoots a Matthews as well

But it evens out with him shooting an 870 and makes homemade groundhog killers, so it evens out.

Exactly. It's all about balance. It's a conundrum for some, especially for my wife, to try and figure out the method to my madness. For me, a $300 shotgun kills ducks just as well as an $1100 shotgun, so no need to spend the money. But a $1000 bow does kill deer better than a $300 bow. I've missed more than once, and it's so quiet that I've got another shot, and stuck it. Not gonna happen with a bow that sounds like a rattletrap. Also, deer are much more economical than ducks. With current prices, I figure I average about $300 per deer (50 pounds of meat at $6 a pound, which is probably pretty low, on average, if you include what roasts and filet mignon costs. Hell, even hamburger is almost $4 a pound), so the bow and deer rifles have been paid for many times over. I've had this 870 for about 15 years, and I still don't know if enough ducks and geese have been killed to pay for it. I'd have to live to be 806 to "pay off" an $1100 shotgun. This same thoery sort of goes through all my cheapness- if it's going to make me money, how much (and how quick) is it going to make it? If it's just convenience (or even need), I'll try and make it or find it. That sums it up. Sort of.

assateague wrote:Exactly. It's all about balance. It's a conundrum for some, especially for my wife, to try and figure out the method to my madness. For me, a $300 shotgun kills ducks just as well as an $1100 shotgun, so no need to spend the money. But a $1000 bow does kill deer better than a $300 bow. I've missed more than once, and it's so quiet that I've got another shot, and stuck it. Not gonna happen with a bow that sounds like a rattletrap. Also, deer are much more economical than ducks. With current prices, I figure I average about $300 per deer (50 pounds of meat at $6 a pound, which is probably pretty low, on average, if you include what roasts and filet mignon costs. Hell, even hamburger is almost $4 a pound), so the bow and deer rifles have been paid for many times over. I've had this 870 for about 15 years, and I still don't know if enough ducks and geese have been killed to pay for it. I'd have to live to be 806 to "pay off" an $1100 shotgun. This same thoery sort of goes through all my cheapness- if it's going to make me money, how much (and how quick) is it going to make it? If it's just convenience (or even need), I'll try and make it or find it. That sums it up. Sort of.

I'd say I bought my Nova 10-12 years ago. In 2-3 seasons, I spend more on shells than my initial gun investment. I'd guess I've seen my investment returned in 1-2 seasons. What's a couple hundred ducks worth? If I throw in all the turkeys I've shot with it, I'd say it's paid dividends by now.
As for the bino question, I'll never buy Nikon again. Their seals on the glass suck. I have a set that started leaking within 6 months. when I was at a sportsman's show, the Rep said I could return them for repair replacement, as long as they weren't more than 25 years old. He said I didn't need the original receipt. I called and the story was different from the factory. No receipt no RMA. They were a gift, back when gift receipts were not even heard of.
I'd go with leupold, hands down best affordable glass.
Bushnell sells cheap glass but, the quality matches the price.
Hey Red, Tasco.......that's a good one.

Hey westie go look at camofire.com right now. theres some nikon monarchs for $250 regular $450

FlintRiverFowler wrote:Hey westie go look at camofire.com right now. theres some nikon monarchs for $250 regular $450

If only I wasn't poor!

Credit Cards!!!! they help make us poor people even poorer.

Find some auto focus Steiner's! You can thank me later.

QH's Paw wrote:

assateague wrote:Exactly. It's all about balance. It's a conundrum for some, especially for my wife, to try and figure out the method to my madness. For me, a $300 shotgun kills ducks just as well as an $1100 shotgun, so no need to spend the money. But a $1000 bow does kill deer better than a $300 bow. I've missed more than once, and it's so quiet that I've got another shot, and stuck it. Not gonna happen with a bow that sounds like a rattletrap. Also, deer are much more economical than ducks. With current prices, I figure I average about $300 per deer (50 pounds of meat at $6 a pound, which is probably pretty low, on average, if you include what roasts and filet mignon costs. Hell, even hamburger is almost $4 a pound), so the bow and deer rifles have been paid for many times over. I've had this 870 for about 15 years, and I still don't know if enough ducks and geese have been killed to pay for it. I'd have to live to be 806 to "pay off" an $1100 shotgun. This same thoery sort of goes through all my cheapness- if it's going to make me money, how much (and how quick) is it going to make it? If it's just convenience (or even need), I'll try and make it or find it. That sums it up. Sort of.

I'd say I bought my Nova 10-12 years ago. In 2-3 seasons, I spend more on shells than my initial gun investment. I'd guess I've seen my investment returned in 1-2 seasons. What's a couple hundred ducks worth? If I throw in all the turkeys I've shot with it, I'd say it's paid dividends by now.
As for the bino question, I'll never buy Nikon again. Their seals on the glass suck. I have a set that started leaking within 6 months. when I was at a sportsman's show, the Rep said I could return them for repair replacement, as long as they weren't more than 25 years old. He said I didn't need the original receipt. I called and the story was different from the factory. No receipt no RMA. They were a gift, back when gift receipts were not even heard of.
I'd go with leupold, hands down best affordable glass.
Bushnell sells cheap glass but, the quality matches the price.
Hey Red, Tasco.......that's a good one.

agree on the Nikon. Bought the Nikon Action and the seal leaked on my first deer hunt with em. Replaced em with Leupold and haven't looked back.

Ever seen anyone with Tasco mounted on their deer rifle?!

Bufflehead wrote:nikon action 10x50. best "cheap" ones i've ever had, think they were $95 when i bought them

I have the 12 x 50s. I like em so far, but you will want to spend the 20 bucks for a harness.

Those elastic harnesses are the cat's ass.

assateague wrote:Those elastic harnesses are the cat's ass.

Is that anything like the bee's knees?

Better. Somewhere above "the ticket", and a bit below "the shit".

assateague wrote:Those elastic harnesses are the cat's ass.

I really like the nimrod pack's designs. They are a little different in that the part the drops from shoulders to binos is not elastic. I like it better.


http://www.nimrodpacks.com/n9.html