# Outdoor life optics test



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I just finished my June OL magazine and I found the optics test to be interesting. Since it is a commonly discussed topic here I thought many may find it to be a good read. Having a hard time finding the article online; they apparently don't publish the newest articles for obvious reasons. These are the same people that rated the Polaris Sportsman as the best 550 ATV, so take it FWIW. They rated the Meopta HD as the best full size, better than the Leica and swaro that cost about 3x as much. I found that to be very interesting. The Meopta is the same as the Cabela's Euro HD; I have the standard Euro and sure love them, but I was amazed to see that they rate it better. 
They rated the Vortex as the super buy in the medium size group in comparison.


----------



## fish_wisper (Jan 7, 2011)

I was just thinking about adding a thread about optics on here. I too have that issue of Outdoor Life and found it very interesting. I have been looking at the Vortex Talon Hd. I'm not sure why OL says they are midsized binos? I have been looking at the 10x42 and they seem to be full size to me. I have been comparing them to the Steiner Predator Pros (also 10x42). I have read some reviews on both and most of the reviews say the Vortex are better. To me the Steiner seem to have a more crisp image than the Vortex but that could just be my eyes. Have you ever heard of the Zen Ray ED3 before? My brother in law has been telling me about them and they are getting excellent reviews as well. I don't know of any stores that sell them in Utah. I sure would like to try them out and see what they are like before buying. All three Binos are in the $425 - $500 range.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I meant to mention the Zen Rae also; never heard of them before. I think they said it was the first time a Chinese made brand was ever awarded Editor's choice. Of course, that part of the rest was only testing new stuff, which I find to be kind of useless, show me what is available, not just what is new unless there is some trend setting technique or technology.


----------



## fish_wisper (Jan 7, 2011)

Check out there website www.zen-ray.com and let me know what you think. Some of the reviews are saying the are the best binos under $1,500. I have been looking at the ED3 10x43. I hear they have excellent customer service and a 30 day money back guarantee. I would still like to look through them before spending $430.00 on them.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Those sure look similar to a high end brand, certainly on purpose.


----------



## timberbuck (May 19, 2010)

If you read the OL review with detail you will see that compared to the Leica Trinovid,Zeiss Conquest HD and Swarovski EL range that:

Optically in terms of brightness and resolution that the Meostar HD placed around third or fourth. This hardly makes it the best bino in the test.

The Zeiss Conquest HD is a $1000 bino and was rated better for brightness and resolution. Its the same price as the Meostar HD or Cabelas Euro HD.

If I had $1000 to spend I would consider the Meopta Meostar HD and the Zeiss Conquest HD and look through both.

One problem with the Meostar is it is a very heavy glass by todays standards at over 30oz.

As far as Zen Ray goes they are just about to ship their new Prime model which is their new top line glass, they will run around $600 and are looking to be a contender for best bino under $1000.


----------



## Buckriser (Mar 27, 2009)

I have the Cabelas Euro HD's and love them. My previous binos were the standard Euros (non HD) I was hesitant to check out the HD version cause I thought, how much better can they be? Cause the originals were darn near as good as the big 3. Wasn't sure if they could.... but they have improved on them. They are sharper, clearer and have better color. Great glass for the $$. the only downside is the weight.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Buckriser said:


> I have the Cabelas Euro HD's and love them. My previous binos were the standard Euros (non HD) I was hesitant to check out the HD version cause I thought, how much better can they be? Cause the originals were darn near as good as the big 3. Wasn't sure if they could.... but they have improved on them. They are sharper, clearer and have better color. Great glass for the $$. the only downside is the weight.


Thanks, I'll be sure to not make the mistake of trying them! Free handing the binos they do seem crazy heavy, but considering the fact that I always have them on my bino harness it isn't really much of a factor for me.


----------



## Buckriser (Mar 27, 2009)

Huge29 said:


> Buckriser said:
> 
> 
> > I have the Cabelas Euro HD's and love them. My previous binos were the standard Euros (non HD) I was hesitant to check out the HD version cause I thought, how much better can they be? Cause the originals were darn near as good as the big 3. Wasn't sure if they could.... but they have improved on them. They are sharper, clearer and have better color. Great glass for the $$. the only downside is the weight.
> ...


Those were my thoughts exactly. Its only ounces of difference not pounds.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

timberbuck said:


> If you *read the OL review with detail *you will see that compared to the Leica Trinovid,Zeiss Conquest HD and Swarovski EL range that:
> 
> Optically in terms of brightness and resolution that the Meostar HD placed around third or fourth. This hardly makes it the best bino in the test.
> 
> The Zeiss Conquest HD is a $1000 bino and was rated better for brightness and resolution. Its the same price as the Meostar HD or Cabelas Euro HD.


You speak of details, but maybe you are referring to a different article, test or review as your details clearly are not in line with the article. http://www.outdoorlife.com/photos/galle ... ars-review


> The Meopta is that good. The 10x42 we tested was runner-up on both our low-light and resolution tests, thanks to its first-rate low-dispersion glass.


Meopta 
Test Results
Score: ? ? ? ?
Price: $1,000
Optics: A+
Perceived Image: A
Design: A
Price/Value: A-

Zeiss
Test Results
Score: ? ? ? ?
Price: $1,000
Optics: A
Perceived Image: A
Design:A
Price/Value: A-

Swaro
Test Results
Score: ? ? ? ?
Price: $2,770
Optics: A
Perceived Image: A
Design: A
Price/Value: B
It beat the Swaro in each of their overall categories and when compared to something costing 170% more, that is quite an accomplishment; like comparing a Ford Taurus to a Lexus in cost ratios. Impressive!


----------



## timberbuck (May 19, 2010)

Runner up means second place last time I checked.

So the Meopta HD was the second brightest and had the second best resolution.

The Zeiss was the brightest and tied for 2nd place for the best resolution.

So the Zeiss scored higher.

Price/value score means nothing when it comes to the optical qualities.

My main point was that the Zeiss scored better and is the same price as the Meopta HD.

The review makes no sense as they rated the Zeiss higher but picked the Meopta as editors choice??


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

Clearly there is much subjectivity in such a "test," but they rated the "optics" higher as an A+. They didn't rate the Zeiss higher in any final category; it is kind of odd how they mentioned specific categories, but the final test results use different categories. Clearly, no one is going to rely on their opinion only. However, I strongly disagree with your comment about Price/value meaning nothing. For the typical hunter, value is everything, unless you have a rich Unless Spencer Eccles a hunter is going to struggle dropping 170% more money on the Swaros, the Zeiss is clearly very comparable.


----------



## Buckriser (Mar 27, 2009)

What would be weird is if people actually went and l compared these side by side and made the decision for themselves. I did this very thing, and now own the Euro HD's. They really are that good.


----------

