Compare Swarvoski SLC 10X42 binos with ??

noharleyyet

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2004
Messages
22,439
Location
TEXAS
I the SLC are the best value in glass you can get. They hold their own against Els, Geovids, noctivids and Ziess HT and SF at about 1k less.

If I was on tight budget I would stick with SLCs.

You are correct. Haven’t check prices in a while.
 
Last edited:

Trial153

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2016
Messages
854
Location
New York
Assuming you mean first gen SLC...and I agree.
I had the first and now the HD versions. I also have ELs and most of the glass I listed. I like the SLC HD’s, the newest versions the best. However if was on a budget I wouldn’t blink at the first gen SLC.

I also keep hearing comparisons to of vipers, Conquests HD’s and meostars to SLCs.....sorry but I don’t see it. I think the SLCs are better glass and better value.
 

recurveman

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
49
Location
Gilbert, Arizona
Zen ray glass is not too shabby. But stacking vortex or maven (both zenray glass) against Swarovski? If the swaro guys were handed a pair of razors for a day I think they’d be disappointed.
Had a group out hunting last fall. We had 3 pieces of 10 X 42 glass. We had the swaro EL's, vortex razors and a cheaper pair (300-400) of nikons. The swaro's were far and away the best, razors were second and the nikons were a distant 3rd. All were good enough to hunt with but at distance there was a very noticeable difference.

Here is what the group determined after it was all said and done. There is a big difference in quality when you go from $100 to $400 pair of bino's. Then when you go from $400-$1000 the difference is still there but not quite as big. When you go from $1000-2800 there is not near the gain in clarity for the price. If you want the best then get swaro. If you can't get the best or are looking for the best value then cut the price in half and you will find a great pair of glass. You get what you pay for but as the price increases the gain is not nearly as noticeable.
 

Cornell Cowboy

New member
Joined
Apr 5, 2019
Messages
18
I bought the SLCs 10x42, Zeiss Victory T* FL 10x42, Nikon Monarch 7 8x42, and the Vortex Viper HD 10x42 all at the same time and spent a little over a month off and on in the field under varying light conditions. The Vortex was okay, but clearly not as good as the other three. The Zeiss and Swarovski were the best, so most of the month was spent comparing them. I ultimately picked the Zeiss and have never looked back. In the lowest light, the Zeiss are brighter; the SLCs may have had slightly better contrast. The biggest difference I saw was during bright light glassing towards the sun: the Zeiss had much better internal baffling to stop the reflective flashing. The Nikon's cost $1000 less than either the Swarovski or Zeiss but the difference between them was VERY small. I ended up keeping them too because I thought they were such a good value relative to their performance. In short, from what I've looked at, Zeiss is the best... but you would struggle to see the difference from a $400 pair of Nikon Monarch 7. So even though I use Zeiss, I recommend the Nikon's to most everyone I meet.
 

jrsrock80

New member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
18
I got the 8x Toric, it is great glass in low light but image quality falls short in those conditions. It is excellent glass for the money but I’ve looked through SLC’s in low light and they r superior when it counts
 

pgidley

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2018
Messages
73
I bought the SLCs 10x42, Zeiss Victory T* FL 10x42, Nikon Monarch 7 8x42, and the Vortex Viper HD 10x42 all at the same time and spent a little over a month off and on in the field under varying light conditions. The Vortex was okay, but clearly not as good as the other three. The Zeiss and Swarovski were the best, so most of the month was spent comparing them. I ultimately picked the Zeiss and have never looked back. In the lowest light, the Zeiss are brighter; the SLCs may have had slightly better contrast. The biggest difference I saw was during bright light glassing towards the sun: the Zeiss had much better internal baffling to stop the reflective flashing. The Nikon's cost $1000 less than either the Swarovski or Zeiss but the difference between them was VERY small. I ended up keeping them too because I thought they were such a good value relative to their performance. In short, from what I've looked at, Zeiss is the best... but you would struggle to see the difference from a $400 pair of Nikon Monarch 7. So even though I use Zeiss, I recommend the Nikon's to most everyone I meet.
Interesting, the Zeiss Victory T FL uses the Abbe-Koenig prism as well. It seems to really make a difference at low light, although from what I can find its only about a 2% difference, but I guess 2% can be a lot to human perception.
 

300 short mag

Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
45
Were these the tract optics the new Schott ht glass or the previous model? The new glass is suppose to be better
 

F250

Active member
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
403
Location
Vermont
Thanks to all of you who replied !! I appreciate the info and your experience with different brands of glass.
 

twsnow18

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 4, 2013
Messages
1,108
Location
Boise, Idaho
If shit the fan and you needed to sell, it's always a seller's market for Swaro's. They sell in minutes on all the boards.

I have used Meoptas on a couple backpack scouting trips. Excellent glass as well. Not sure of the price difference.
 

schmalts

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 22, 2002
Messages
8,145
Location
WI
If shit the fan and you needed to sell, it's always a seller's market for Swaro's. They sell in minutes on all the boards.

I have used Meoptas on a couple backpack scouting trips. Excellent glass as well. Not sure of the price difference.
Big price difference. You can find Meostar's for in the $800 range all day long if you contact the right seller;)
 
Top