Old vs new

[Irrelevant]

How comparable are optics of varying ages? As in...
How does a 20 year old Swaro compare to a 10 year old nikon ED? Or a new vortex HD?
What about a 10 year old Nikon ED vs a 2 year old ED? Is there a difference? How much?
Do the current non-hd/ed glass compare to older HD/ED?

I'm mind f-ing to death a decision on a spotter, and cannot for the life me find a "clear" path that doesn't involve so much money as to get kicked out of the bedroom (not recommended during quarantine-time).

 

[ImBillT]

It depends a lot on the age range you’re talking about. There were some big improvements in lens coatings between the late ‘90’s and mid 2000’s. Those improvements in coatings improved light transmission, contrast color rendering and reflection. High contrast and enhancing the right colors really makes spotting game a lot easier in all light conditions, but especially low light. Clear glass and good prism alignment has existed in top end scopes for forty years or more. I would say that any high end Leupold or Euro scope that is newer than 2010 is PROBABLY going to be difficult to distinguish from a new one.

I think the other noticeable improvements would likely be in weight and magnification range.

 

[BuzzH]

How comparable are optics of varying ages? As in...
How does a 20 year old Swaro compare to a 10 year old nikon ED? Or a new vortex?
What about a 10 year old Nikon ED vs a 2 year old ED? Is there a difference? How much?
Do the current non-hd/ed glass compare to older HD/ED?

I'm mind f-ing to death a decision on a spotter, and cannot for the life me find a "clear" path that doesn't involve so much money as to get kicked out of the bedroom (not recommended during quarantine-time).

Cant answer all your questions...but I have a non-hd leupold spotting scope that I bought used in the late 90's for $500, I THINK it was at least 4-5 years old when I bought it.

I used it last year when hunting sheep because its a lot more backpack friendly. After using it seriously again, (been in purgatory since buying the Swarovski), I question how "worth it" it was to pay the price for the upgrade? Don't get me wrong, Swarovski optics are stellar...but the question becomes is the Swaro that much better for the price difference, and is the old scope really good enough?

Tough questions...

I was looking at 5 rams that were on about the farthest slope you can see with my Leupold non-hd:

Picture on about 20 power or so from 1200ish yards:

I've also looked through glass side by side and once you get to a certain quality, in particular with half decent light, IMO, the difference in quality are pretty slight. Low light, sun angles, glassing shade, is where I think the differences are more apparent.

I also tend to think when people spend a lot of money on glass, they tend to over-exaggerate the quality difference to justify the huge wads of cash they invested.

Wish I could help more...because those are good questions.

 

[Irrelevant]

Cant answer all your questions...but I have a non-hd leupold spotting scope that I bought used in the late 90's for $500, I THINK it was at least 4-5 years old when I bought it.

I used it last year when hunting sheep because its a lot more backpack friendly. After using it seriously again, (been in purgatory since buying the Swarovski), I question how "worth it" it was to pay the price for the upgrade? Don't get me wrong, Swarovski optics are stellar...but the question becomes is the Swaro that much better for the price difference, and is the old scope really good enough?

Tough questions...

I was looking at 5 rams that were on about the farthest slope you can see with my Leupold non-hd:

Picture on about 20 power or so from 1200ish yards:

I've also looked through glass side by side and once you get to a certain quality, in particular with half decent light, IMO, the difference in quality are pretty slight. Low light, sun angles, glassing shade, is where I think the differences are more apparent.

I also tend to think when people spend a lot of money on glass, they tend to over-exaggerate the quality difference to justify the huge wads of cash they invested.

Wish I could help more...because those are good questions.

Thanks @BuzzH that's some real-world insight I appreciate.

 

[ImBillT]

As Buzz’s experience shows, with some manufacturers, like Leupold, Swaro, Schmidt, and probably a few more, you can push that date closer to the late ‘90’s. His specific example is a great one.

 

[Irrelevant]

com'on @SnowyMountaineer @Greenhorn @Schaaf @schmalts @Oak @Dinkshooter @Randy11 @MTGomer some of you have 2 cents out there. I know I'm not driving Lambou's like you guys, but I'm sure you have some insight. I browsed back a couple of years, but didn't seem to see where this was ever touched on. I've kinda pestered Snowy about it already but thought I would ask a broader audience. All I have is a Minox MD 50... and it isn't worth the effort it just took to type that...

 

[Schaaf]

I think optics are one of those areas where we haven't seen the developments improve at the same rate as everything else in our world. When you look at a 20 year old pair of swaros they're still damn good, not as good as their current offerings but they still hold their own against elite optics and are better than most manufactured today. One area where you see some improvements are coatings on the lenses to repel water and grease like Leica's AquaDura and Zeiss' Lotutec. You have also seen improvements with field flattening lenses improving the percentage of the field of view that remains in focus.

I spent some time with a Swarovski spotting scope made in 2004 and compared it with a new Swaro ATX and in daylight you would really have to look to see any differences, maybe the colors popped a little more with the newer scope but that was about it. There were some noticeable improvements as the sun was going down and you started to notice glare coming into the objective.

I think a 20 year old pair of Swarovski SLC's, Leica Ultravids, or Zeiss Victory binos will compare with most binoculars you see in the $1000 price range today.

Now on the lower end, a pair of binoculars that you can buy today for a few hundred are worlds better than what a couple hundred bucks bought you in 2005.

 

[ShootsManyBullets]

I wouldn't hesitate to buy an older piece of quality glass. Just send them back to the mfg for a little cleaning and you'll be impressed with what you get back. It'll be better than the newer lower priced stuff.

 

[schmalts]

The quality has not skyrocketed. What has changed is the quality you can buy for the money. The quality these days is a lot better for the same $$ as it used to be but the highest quality has not changed as much if that makes sense..

 

[std7mag]

What surprises me is more the "make the same thing better" more than new designs.
Spotting scopes from years gone by are still the same as the new ones, albeit with better coatings on the optics.

When i was looking to upgrade my spotter, i looked at/through a lot of spotters that was in my budget, and some outside.
While the ones outside my budget were brighter and more "clear"(for lack of a better term) outwardly they were all the same.

So i did more research on optics in general. Which led me to telescopes. Wherein i read about the Maksutov types of scopes.

I ended up buying a Celestron C70 Mini Mak.
Short, FAT, but light weight, i'm continually surprised by the optics quality. (Even for a spotter priced just over $100(note i had planned upon spending 5 times as much)).

With the HD/ED coatings, i'm surprised more manufacturers are not looking into this design, and or designing other options.

 

[Irrelevant]

The quality has not skyrocketed. What has changed is the quality you can buy for the money. The quality these days is a lot better for the same $$ as it used to be but the highest quality has not changed as much if that makes sense..

So are you saying that it's kind of a win-win. Either go with something new mid range and get optics that are close to high end or go with an older used high end, both of which you get a lot of "Bang for you buck?"

 

[Deleted member 16014]

I haven't looked through nearly as many spotter as I have binos, and not nearly as many as some people. I have had no problem using older high end glass, and there is some value to be found. I agree with the above that in the early 2000's there were some really meaningful coating changes and such. For spotters I think there is some particular value to be found in:
-Leica 62 and 77 APO Televids
-Nikon 60 and 80 ED
-Non HD Swaro
-Any used Kowa

An aside that I think is relevant...I'm not sure that I even know what "best" is anymore in the case of binos because I've spent countless hours looking through the same pair for the last 7 years. I put about 5 other newer alphas up against my 8x42 SLC HD's around two years ago and I just kept coming back to them. Some were sharper (EL), but my second favorite pair to look through were some 10 year old Zeiss Victory T* FL's...probably because the view was the most similar to my SLC's.

For a spotter I think you've gotta start with:
-What you need it for; counting horn rings, telling the difference between a 160 and 175 buck at a mile, picking about bedding areas, judging bears etc. Maybe it's all of those, or maybe it's one, and that would lead me down different paths in terms of investment strategy.
-Are you going to be selling and/or upgrading? There is always going to be demand for used Swaro's in good condition. But if you stretch the budget on Meopta or Kowa and decide you want to try something else it might cost relatively more in the long run unless you got a screaming deal to start with. That's probably the primary reason I haven't owned a Kowa spotter, despite the fact I'd really like to give them a whirl. IMO new Vortex, Leupold, and Maven are going to lose value pretty fast.

Anyway, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, but based on my buying history apparently I prefer used and older alphas to new glass.

 

[Irrelevant]

I haven't looked through nearly as many spotter as I have binos, and not nearly as many as some people. I have had no problem using older high end glass, and there is some value to be found. I agree with the above that in the early 2000's there were some really meaningful coating changes and such. For spotters I think there is some particular value to be found in:
-Leica 62 and 77 APO Televids
-Nikon 60 and 80 ED
-Non HD Swaro
-Any used Kowa

An aside that I think is relevant...I'm not sure that I even know what "best" is anymore in the case of binos because I've spent countless hours looking through the same pair for the last 7 years. I put about 5 other newer alphas up against my 8x42 SLC HD's around two years ago and I just kept coming back to them. Some were sharper (EL), but my second favorite pair to look through were some 10 year old Zeiss Victory T* FL's...probably because the view was the most similar to my SLC's.

For a spotter I think you've gotta start with:
-What you need it for; counting horn rings, telling the difference between a 160 and 175 buck at a mile, picking about bedding areas, judging bears etc. Maybe it's all of those, or maybe it's one, and that would lead me down different paths in terms of investment strategy.
-Are you going to be selling and/or upgrading? There is always going to be demand for used Swaro's in good condition. But if you stretch the budget on Meopta or Kowa and decide you want to try something else it might cost relatively more in the long run unless you got a screaming deal to start with. That's probably the primary reason I haven't owned a Kowa spotter, despite the fact I'd really like to give them a whirl. IMO new Vortex, Leupold, and Maven are going to lose value pretty fast.

Anyway, I don't think there's a right or wrong answer, but based on my buying history apparently I prefer used and older alphas to new glass.

How do you know how old used glass is? There seems to be a plethora of great condition Nikon ED's out there used, but I swear they look like they're from the 1980's. Used swaro's, leica's, and kowa's are dang hard to find in general unless you want to pay 80% of new. I found a couple of unique ones on CL that actually seem reasonable, but one I think they were made in the 1990's, and two they're at the price range were you could get a Nikon Monarch ED or Razor HD brand new.

And what is this alpha glass I've read about from numerous people? Is it an actual thing (like alpha polartec) or just alpha as in top end glass?

In terms of what I want to use it for. Mainly trying to locate bedded bucks in the alpine. Maybe looking at bulls on the winter range (non hunting). Everything else I can handle with my binos.

 

[Deleted member 16014]

How do you know how old used glass is? There seems to be a plethora of great condition Nikon ED's out there used, but I swear they look like they're from the 1980's. Used swaro's, leica's, and kowa's are dang hard to find in general unless you want to pay 80% of new. I found a couple of unique ones on CL that actually seem reasonable, but one I think they were made in the 1990's, and two they're at the price range were you could get a Nikon Monarch ED or Razor HD brand new.

And what is this alpha glass I've read about from numerous people? Is it an actual thing (like alpha polartec) or just alpha as in top end glass?

In terms of what I want to use it for. Mainly trying to locate bedded bucks in the alpine. Maybe looking at bulls on the winter range (non hunting). Everything else I can handle with my binos.

There has to be someone on here that knows more than me about this but I'll take a crack...

How old? Largely a lot of Googling and cross-referencing in bird forums and old ads/manuals. If you can get a serial number that will clear it up. Yes the ED's do look like they're from the 80's, but they looked like that until they stopped production. You can still get new 50mm ED's, but not 60 and 82. You could also look up a few guys who are pros on glass from the 90's and 00's, John Barsness comes to mind. I bet if you shot him an e-mail or gave a call he'd help you out.

Alpha is not a technology, just a placeholder for top end products.

 

[schmalts]

So are you saying that it's kind of a win-win. Either go with something new mid range and get optics that are close to high end or go with an older used high end, both of which you get a lot of "Bang for you buck?"

What I am saying is a older high end will be close to new mid priced stuff if you buy the best quality instead of pay for a name brand that spends a ton on advertising. I know this does not make things easier to choose, just food for thought. Keep in mind aside from the "alpha" glass, no brand makes their optics, they have a factory make it for them and that factory will make a lot of "brands" and stick the same glass elements into a slightly different body with different rubber trim. There are different levels of designs and quality and price levels and people who do side by side comparisons will see this. This is why a lot of spotters will outperform others with a lower cost. Big no-fault warranties, advertising, sponsors, all cost money and are put on the end user in the end... YOU.

 

[MinnesotaHunter]

What I am saying is a older high end will be close to new mid priced stuff if you buy the best quality instead of pay for a name brand that spends a ton on advertising. I know this does not make things easier to choose, just food for thought. Keep in mind aside from the "alpha" glass, no brand makes their optics, they have a factory make it for them and that factory will make a lot of "brands" and stick the same glass elements into a slightly different body with different rubber trim. There are different levels of designs and quality and price levels and people who do side by side comparisons will see this. This is why a lot of spotters will outperform others with a lower cost. Big no-fault warranties, advertising, sponsors, all cost money and are put on the end user in the end... YOU.

This idea is probably what would drive me toward older alpha glass. I would rather spend money on bank vault quality construction over a big warranty/marketing/sponsor budget.

 

[schmalts]

This idea is probably what would drive me toward older alpha glass. I would rather spend money on bank vault quality construction over a big warranty/marketing/sponsor budget.

But it won't be shiny and have that harbor freight smell....

 

[Irrelevant]

Thanks for the comments and PMs, I'm learning a ton. It's that classic about not knowing what you don't know.

 

[Oak]

com'on @SnowyMountaineer @Greenhorn @Schaaf @schmalts @Oak @Dinkshooter @Randy11 @MTGomer some of you have 2 cents out there. I know I'm not driving Lambou's like you guys, but I'm sure you have some insight. I browsed back a couple of years, but didn't seem to see where this was ever touched on. I've kinda pestered Snowy about it already but thought I would ask a broader audience. All I have is a Minox MD 50... and it isn't worth the effort it just took to type that...

You've received far more help than I could provide. I spent a lot of time looking through spotters before I purchased a Zeiss in 2007. I've had no desire to upgrade/update since then. I purchase a pair of ELs in 2012 and have had no need to upgrade/update. If you decided to purchase new Swaro though, I know a dealer....

 

[Irrelevant]

You've received far more help than I could provide. I spent a lot of time looking through spotters before I purchased a Zeiss in 2007. I've had no desire to upgrade/update since then. I purchase a pair of ELs in 2012 and have had no need to upgrade/update. If you decided to purchase new Swaro though, I know a dealer....

I like not sleeping on the couch too much to consider a new swaro.