Steiner M1050R vs T1042R vs something else?

[TheGerman]

Am looking for a set of binoculars that can be used as a 'spotter' during the day as well when we don't want to/dont have time to drag the Spotter 60 out.

Was interested in the Steiners because I like the SUMR reticle they use and I have other non reticle Steiners that have good glass that have had the shit knocked out of them yet don't seem to ever care.

Was looking at the T1042R as well as the M1050R and while I can see some differences between the two, I can't figure out if the extra cost of the 1050 is worth it or not. I'm mainly looking for a set that will:

- Be used as a spotter; optical clarity is paramount here
- Will stand up to knocking around in a ruck

That's about it.

Comparing the two seems a bit tricky as some of the 'features' make absolutely no sense to me as far as whats better. For example:

1042 has a 'high definition tactical optic' coating and the 1050 has a 'fully multi coated' WTF does this even mean?

I think the biggest benefit the 1050 has is the larger objective whereas the 1042 is 42mm vs 50. The 42 has the edge on weight and size and then we run into 2 aspects Steiner lists and again, I have no idea if these matter, or have a small/gigantic difference between the performance of the two units:

Luminosity 17.6 for the 1042 and 25.0 for the 1050 as well as Twilight Factor of 20.5 vs 22.4. Does any of this even matter?

Trying to figure out of the 1050 is worth the cost difference as well as if there are any other binoculars with a similiar reticle that are vastly better?

 

[Mr Flannel]

Can’t comment on the coating issue - who can decipher marketing BS anyway? What I can say is I’ve run the 10x50 mil version for years as a do-it-all GP bino and it’ll probably be around until I peg out, as I haven’t succeeded in breaking it. For context, I used them during several periods in the sandbox back in the late unpleasantness and they got a hammering. As a spotter though - not sure you’ll get quite what you want as they don’t have variable focus, so you do lose some clarity and contrast. At distance (500+) I put them at about 90% of the glass in my swaros. It’s the infinite focus setting that handicaps them.

Don’t know of anything else going with a reticle in binoculars. I can’t help but thinking if one of the alpha bino mfgs put out some top end glass in 12 or even 15x mag with a decent reticle and a built-in RF, they’d sell like hookers on coupon night.

 

[bluegrasspicker]

I use the T1042R for a lot of different roles, from PRS, wildlife, to night sky. The binos are so small and light that there's no reason not to take them with you wherever you go.

I can't answer your tech questions, but I can tell you that I love my T1042R for what it is, which is a very clear reticled optic that's tough and always seems to make its way into my pack.

 

[TheGerman]

Can’t comment on the coating issue - who can decipher marketing BS anyway? What I can say is I’ve run the 10x50 mil version for years as a do-it-all GP bino and it’ll probably be around until I peg out, as I haven’t succeeded in breaking it. For context, I used them during several periods in the sandbox back in the late unpleasantness and they got a hammering. As a spotter though - not sure you’ll get quite what you want as they don’t have variable focus, so you do lose some clarity and contrast. At distance (500+) I put them at about 90% of the glass in my swaros. It’s the infinite focus setting that handicaps them.

Don’t know of anything else going with a reticle in binoculars. I can’t help but thinking if one of the alpha bino mfgs put out some top end glass in 12 or even 15x mag with a decent reticle and a built-in RF, they’d sell like hookers on coupon night.

What do you mean as far as the infinite focus setting handicapping them?

 

[TheGerman]

I use the T1042R for a lot of different roles, from PRS, wildlife, to night sky. The binos are so small and light that there's no reason not to take them with you wherever you go.

I can't answer your tech questions, but I can tell you that I love my T1042R for what it is, which is a very clear reticled optic that's tough and always seems to make its way into my pack.

How far out could you call hits/misses/adjustments with them do you think?

I'm being realistic in that I know with a pair of 10x binos I'm not going to see .1mil adjustments at 900 yards, but what would you say its capable of?

 

[squishee]

Dont be poor buy both.

 

[bluegrasspicker]

How far out could you call hits/misses/adjustments with them do you think?

I'm being realistic in that I know with a pair of 10x binos I'm not going to see .1mil adjustments at 900 yards, but what would you say its capable of?

The optical clarity is impressive for its size. Both sides have a focus, and there's an additional focus in the middle.

The mil reticle is gradated at half-mil intervals. It's a crosshair, so there's no grid in the sense of an H32. It's just labeled 10 milliradians in each cardinal direction from the center. If you can see a signature it's pretty easy to approximate to the nearest 1/4 mil.

Hits were easy to spot at Peacemaker. I think the farthest targets were around 1050 yards. Spotting misses depends on the background. My disclaimer is that I haven't shot a match in about a year, so that's a fairly distant memory for me. I really can't recall what I could see from my rifle scope and what I could see from the binoculars.

From a tripod it's pretty easy to see the Galilean moons on a clear night.

My friend's coming over tomorrow. If you'd like I can see if she can take a picture on the nearest knob hilltop. It's about 1300 yards away.

 

[bluegrasspicker]

PS: I don't know what you're looking to spend, but for the ~$400 I bought the set for used it's a no-brainer.

 

[TheGerman]

The optical clarity is impressive for its size. Both sides have a focus, and there's an additional focus in the middle.

The mil reticle is gradated at half-mil intervals. It's a crosshair, so there's no grid in the sense of an H32. It's just labeled 10 milliradians in each cardinal direction from the center. If you can see a signature it's pretty easy to approximate to the nearest 1/4 mil.

Hits were easy to spot at Peacemaker. I think the farthest targets were around 1050 yards. Spotting misses depends on the background. My disclaimer is that I haven't shot a match in about a year, so that's a fairly distant memory for me. I really can't recall what I could see from my rifle scope and what I could see from the binoculars.

From a tripod it's pretty easy to see the Galilean moons on a clear night.

My friend's coming over tomorrow. If you'd like I can see if she can take a picture on the nearest knob hilltop. It's about 1300 yards away.

That would be great, thanks.

So you think that with the 10x, youd have no problem giving corrections on impacts? If so, how far out would you be confidant in?

 

[Mr Flannel]

What do you mean as far as the infinite focus setting handicapping them?

You can’t manipulate the focus on the M1050s whilst glassing to get best detail on far targets, or to pick up mirage, etc. Unless something has changed, the 1050s have a fixed objective focus, which is an infinity-lIke setting, good for 20m and out according to Steiner spec. It’s great for all-round/set-and-forget observation work but there’s an inherent compromise involved.

 

[bluegrasspicker]

That would be great, thanks.

So you think that with the 10x, youd have no problem giving corrections on impacts? If so, how far out would you be confidant in?

Herr German,

We didn't get a pic before sunset, but my friend offered to take one tomorrow. She'll email it to me, and I'd be happy to email it to you.

As for your question regarding impacts, it depends on a lot. I never had much cause to think about the details of your question before, but I'd say (from memory) if I could spot an impact with my 4.5-27 Razor set at 10 power I could spot with the 1042s. It takes more skill to call a correction with the 1042s not because of optical clarity but because of the limited reticle. So there's that, but on the other hand I wouldn't want the full grid reticle clogging up the bottom half of my view through binoculars.

 

[rothgyr]

I just got an m1050r from CameralandNY this week. I don't have a t1042r to compare against, but here are my thoughts as compared with my Vortex Diamondback 8x32s and Athlon Cronus 15x56s:

PROS:

• Optical clarity is pretty good. Images are nice and sharp as compared with my Cronus binos.
• Reticle looks to be usable for me when spotting impacts/misses out to a pretty good distance at matches. I'm pretty stoked to see how it works out at a match.

CONS:

• Sight picture is pretty small on the m1050r. I think the binos would be better served to be 10x42 instead of 10x50.
• Eye relief. The ocular lenses are set in pretty darn far, so I have to remove my glasses to use them.
• Chromatic Aberration is pretty strong when looking at white objects. Not enough to blur anything, but it's definitely there. I'm a bit surprised to see it in a optic above $1k. This is honestly the first time I've observed it in any of my optics in any significant amount.

 

[Pbjunkiee]

I have some steiner 7x50 and hot damn they are clear.
Some of my favorite binos, have had them for years and are pretty beat up now but as clear as the first day i got them.