Coming home from Shot Show 2013 this year, the one thing that struck me the most about this year's optics products was that laser range finding has come of age and within the next few years I expect virtually all serious long range shooters will be purchasing a first, or additional, laser range finder. In the past, I have seen most laser range finding products as niche products with limited application. They were certainly not essential for a long range shooter and were often viewed as gimmicks. Very few of these early range finders were reliably good to 800 yards and virtually all of them were standalone, single purpose, monocular devices that output only range yet still cost a substantial amount of money.
While some of that changed in the past couple of years with the release of long range binoculars from Zeiss and Swarovski, as well as the first generation Burris Eliminator scope; these were still very limited devices. The Burris scope was short range and used only factory tables while the Zeiss and Swarovski, though they did double duty by replacing the shooter's binoculars, incorporated only ranging functions and, at 42mm or larger, were not as small or light as I would like. All of these products were an upgrade, but they were not total ballistic calculation solutions.
This year all that changed. Not only did the Burris Eliminator III offer an almost total ballistic calculation solution in a scope, but the Leica Geovid HD-B 42 (with the exception of wind) accomplished this in binocular form. Bushnell even came pretty close with the Fusion one mile 8x32mm product. This is a product that, at $1,000 and with the 8x32mm form factor I want, offers quite a value even if it lacks the Leica's custom load data, temperature, and pressure sensors.
The Leica Geovid HD-B 42 offers output to shooter in mils or moa calculated from custom data and measured range, altitude (pressure), angle of inclination, and temperature:
More calculation still is offered by the Trijicon CCAS and Tracking Point systems. These are scope based systems that actually tag and track targets in order to compensate for discrepancies between the velocity of moving targets and that of moving or stationary shooters. While esoteric in price, availability, and, in the case of the Tracking Point, user freedom; these are technologically quite advanced.
With the products now available, there is simply no doubt that a shooter's primary ballistic calculator can be integrated with the laser range finding unit in the form factor of a pair of binoculars, a rifle scope, or a standalone monocular device. I will now lay out my reasons for desiring the form factor of this device to be 8x32mm binoculars, as well as exactly what features I think this optic should include. I would like as much comment from the community as possible on these points because I intend to cajole my favorite optics makers with this thread and many of you members are far more experienced than I am. In order to get what we want, we need to let the right folks know.
The first decision that has to be made regarding the range finder is the package. My preference is an 8x32mm binocular because binoculars are part of my always present long range shooting gear. Furthermore, unlike the rifle and scope, the binoculars I use are the same regardless of rifle. Thus, with one binocular I could service all rifles as well as bows for the bow hunter and black powder for the black powder hunter. Another consideration is that while a range finding and ballistic calculating binocular would supersede the cumbersome use of a range finding reticle, angle of inclination gauge, thermometer, barometric pressure gauge, and set of written tables; it would not replace any of them. This would allow the shooter a backup in event of electronic failure. My choice of 8x32mm as opposed to, say, 10x42mm is because the 32mm is lighter and has a wider field of view than the 42mm. I do not feel that the low light advantage gained from 42mm is worth the weight, but I really don't shoot in low light a great deal of the time. I choose 8mm simply because my hands are not steady enough to enjoy a 10mm and I wouldn't want to give up the field of view anyway since I am often using them to spot groundhogs in high grass. Field of view is crucial and 8x32mm is excellent in this regard.
Now for the features. If you had asked me last year, I would have said that range finding is fine if you like that kind of thing. Now that I have seen I can have more: I want it. Using tables, counting mils, looking at inclination gauges, messing with ballistic programs on the phone, and playing with the Kestrel all add up to a real complex pain in the ass system that is prone to screw ups on my part; especially in stressful situations when it matters most. I want the binocular to incorporate all that ballistic calculation as well as the readings for range, inclination, altitude (pressure, actually), and temperature. Furthermore, I want the program to allow a great amount of user input so that it can actually be accurate. Having an input for BC, muzzle velocity, and zero distance is good, but I would also like the program to be able to make best fit interpolations of these things from drop at distances with input of atmospheric variables. In short, there needs to be an advanced mode that allows things to be futzed with. Many of you have orders of magnitude more hours behind the rifle than me. Your input as to just exactly how this custom control should be done would be of great help. I am quite sure that with proper programming, the range finding binocular should replace the cadre of instruments and tables currently in use.
The last thing to talk about is the output. In rifle mode (bow mode should be different) the unit should have two output screens with four values per screen. The first screen will be the raw data check screen that allows the user to verify that the data looks plausible. This will display first and for a few seconds upon ranging. It will show at top left range in meters or yards. The top right will be angle of inclination in degrees. The bottom left will be altitude in meters or feet. The bottom right will be temperature in degrees centigrade of Fahrenheit. Output units will be selected in the software so that mixed up Americans can mix metric and English units in the same output screen. The second screen will automatically be switched to after three seconds and will have four pieces of shooting data. The upper left will be the holdover in mils, MOA, or IPHY. The upper right will be hold over at distance in feet and inches or meters. The bottom left will be correction for a 10mph full wind value in mils, MOA, or IPHY. The bottom right will be the correction for a 10mph full wind value in feet and inches or meters at distance. These wind values will simply serve the purpose of preventing the shooter from having to look at any tables at all. Again, the units for each value will be chosen by the shooter in the software under the advanced mode and may be mixed by confused American shooters. The output of these final calculated values may turn off after a few seconds, but will not be erased until the next ranging is done and should be accessible by tapping a key to wake up.
I would next like to address memory. Leica's new unit has a removable MicroSD card. This might be the best possible solution since you would have the ability to have unlimited loads and you could divvy up the loads onto as many different cards as you wanted to prevent yourself from getting mixed up regarding just which load you have for which rifle. It seems plain to me that with most shooters having several rifles as well as several loads per rifle, it will not take long to very quickly reach 10 or 20 ballistic profiles. If the unit is to rely on onboard memory alone, I do not think that 50 ballistic profiles is probably an unwarranted number.
The last issue I would like to address is appealing to a wide customer base. It seems obvious to me that having a unit that appeals to the precision rifle shooter, center fire hunters, bow hunters, and black powder hunters is better than a unit that appeals to only one class of people. The features I talked about are what I desire as a precision rifle shooter. For center fire hunters, the software should include an input for popular hunting loads as well as barrel length. The software should have a linear setup mode that asks the shooter for his input data serially as well as what units he wants output. Bow hunter should be included as a ballistic profile that outputs equivalent horizontal distance. I really don't know what black powder users are looking for with inputs, but I expect that bullet type, powder charge and type, and barrel length would be tolerable for those who don't know BC and muzzle velocity. The software should be flexible enough to allow all of these different modes to create ballistic profiles so that the optic or a memory card could hold a number of each simultaneously. Cycling from bow to a precision rifle profile would not be different than cycling from one precision rifle load to another. The optic would contain only labeled ballistic profiles not menus.
Tell me what you all think about laser range finding. I am impressed with how close to what I want Leica is currently offering. I expect that a firmware update changing the output format and adding wind values would put them in line with everything except the 32mm form factor I would most like.
While some of that changed in the past couple of years with the release of long range binoculars from Zeiss and Swarovski, as well as the first generation Burris Eliminator scope; these were still very limited devices. The Burris scope was short range and used only factory tables while the Zeiss and Swarovski, though they did double duty by replacing the shooter's binoculars, incorporated only ranging functions and, at 42mm or larger, were not as small or light as I would like. All of these products were an upgrade, but they were not total ballistic calculation solutions.
This year all that changed. Not only did the Burris Eliminator III offer an almost total ballistic calculation solution in a scope, but the Leica Geovid HD-B 42 (with the exception of wind) accomplished this in binocular form. Bushnell even came pretty close with the Fusion one mile 8x32mm product. This is a product that, at $1,000 and with the 8x32mm form factor I want, offers quite a value even if it lacks the Leica's custom load data, temperature, and pressure sensors.
The Leica Geovid HD-B 42 offers output to shooter in mils or moa calculated from custom data and measured range, altitude (pressure), angle of inclination, and temperature:
More calculation still is offered by the Trijicon CCAS and Tracking Point systems. These are scope based systems that actually tag and track targets in order to compensate for discrepancies between the velocity of moving targets and that of moving or stationary shooters. While esoteric in price, availability, and, in the case of the Tracking Point, user freedom; these are technologically quite advanced.
With the products now available, there is simply no doubt that a shooter's primary ballistic calculator can be integrated with the laser range finding unit in the form factor of a pair of binoculars, a rifle scope, or a standalone monocular device. I will now lay out my reasons for desiring the form factor of this device to be 8x32mm binoculars, as well as exactly what features I think this optic should include. I would like as much comment from the community as possible on these points because I intend to cajole my favorite optics makers with this thread and many of you members are far more experienced than I am. In order to get what we want, we need to let the right folks know.
The first decision that has to be made regarding the range finder is the package. My preference is an 8x32mm binocular because binoculars are part of my always present long range shooting gear. Furthermore, unlike the rifle and scope, the binoculars I use are the same regardless of rifle. Thus, with one binocular I could service all rifles as well as bows for the bow hunter and black powder for the black powder hunter. Another consideration is that while a range finding and ballistic calculating binocular would supersede the cumbersome use of a range finding reticle, angle of inclination gauge, thermometer, barometric pressure gauge, and set of written tables; it would not replace any of them. This would allow the shooter a backup in event of electronic failure. My choice of 8x32mm as opposed to, say, 10x42mm is because the 32mm is lighter and has a wider field of view than the 42mm. I do not feel that the low light advantage gained from 42mm is worth the weight, but I really don't shoot in low light a great deal of the time. I choose 8mm simply because my hands are not steady enough to enjoy a 10mm and I wouldn't want to give up the field of view anyway since I am often using them to spot groundhogs in high grass. Field of view is crucial and 8x32mm is excellent in this regard.
Now for the features. If you had asked me last year, I would have said that range finding is fine if you like that kind of thing. Now that I have seen I can have more: I want it. Using tables, counting mils, looking at inclination gauges, messing with ballistic programs on the phone, and playing with the Kestrel all add up to a real complex pain in the ass system that is prone to screw ups on my part; especially in stressful situations when it matters most. I want the binocular to incorporate all that ballistic calculation as well as the readings for range, inclination, altitude (pressure, actually), and temperature. Furthermore, I want the program to allow a great amount of user input so that it can actually be accurate. Having an input for BC, muzzle velocity, and zero distance is good, but I would also like the program to be able to make best fit interpolations of these things from drop at distances with input of atmospheric variables. In short, there needs to be an advanced mode that allows things to be futzed with. Many of you have orders of magnitude more hours behind the rifle than me. Your input as to just exactly how this custom control should be done would be of great help. I am quite sure that with proper programming, the range finding binocular should replace the cadre of instruments and tables currently in use.
The last thing to talk about is the output. In rifle mode (bow mode should be different) the unit should have two output screens with four values per screen. The first screen will be the raw data check screen that allows the user to verify that the data looks plausible. This will display first and for a few seconds upon ranging. It will show at top left range in meters or yards. The top right will be angle of inclination in degrees. The bottom left will be altitude in meters or feet. The bottom right will be temperature in degrees centigrade of Fahrenheit. Output units will be selected in the software so that mixed up Americans can mix metric and English units in the same output screen. The second screen will automatically be switched to after three seconds and will have four pieces of shooting data. The upper left will be the holdover in mils, MOA, or IPHY. The upper right will be hold over at distance in feet and inches or meters. The bottom left will be correction for a 10mph full wind value in mils, MOA, or IPHY. The bottom right will be the correction for a 10mph full wind value in feet and inches or meters at distance. These wind values will simply serve the purpose of preventing the shooter from having to look at any tables at all. Again, the units for each value will be chosen by the shooter in the software under the advanced mode and may be mixed by confused American shooters. The output of these final calculated values may turn off after a few seconds, but will not be erased until the next ranging is done and should be accessible by tapping a key to wake up.
I would next like to address memory. Leica's new unit has a removable MicroSD card. This might be the best possible solution since you would have the ability to have unlimited loads and you could divvy up the loads onto as many different cards as you wanted to prevent yourself from getting mixed up regarding just which load you have for which rifle. It seems plain to me that with most shooters having several rifles as well as several loads per rifle, it will not take long to very quickly reach 10 or 20 ballistic profiles. If the unit is to rely on onboard memory alone, I do not think that 50 ballistic profiles is probably an unwarranted number.
The last issue I would like to address is appealing to a wide customer base. It seems obvious to me that having a unit that appeals to the precision rifle shooter, center fire hunters, bow hunters, and black powder hunters is better than a unit that appeals to only one class of people. The features I talked about are what I desire as a precision rifle shooter. For center fire hunters, the software should include an input for popular hunting loads as well as barrel length. The software should have a linear setup mode that asks the shooter for his input data serially as well as what units he wants output. Bow hunter should be included as a ballistic profile that outputs equivalent horizontal distance. I really don't know what black powder users are looking for with inputs, but I expect that bullet type, powder charge and type, and barrel length would be tolerable for those who don't know BC and muzzle velocity. The software should be flexible enough to allow all of these different modes to create ballistic profiles so that the optic or a memory card could hold a number of each simultaneously. Cycling from bow to a precision rifle profile would not be different than cycling from one precision rifle load to another. The optic would contain only labeled ballistic profiles not menus.
Tell me what you all think about laser range finding. I am impressed with how close to what I want Leica is currently offering. I expect that a firmware update changing the output format and adding wind values would put them in line with everything except the 32mm form factor I would most like.
