The BIG 3 Bino/Rangefinders (or 4?) Swaro EL RF, Leica 3200’s , Sig 10K or Ziess?

[verdugo60]

Been considering a new set of premium binos for years. Built in rangefinder would be nice. I do a little local PRS, wanting to shoot more NRL Hunter and will be using these to actually glass animals on Western hunts. I shoot mid-range ELR too so I would prefer a laser that performs to 2K yards but also want great optical quality.

Looking for hands-on experience between the Leica and Swaro, seems glass will be mostly a wash, swaro is an easier interface but Leica has the better range finder as far as distance ranging. Swaro wont connect to Kestrel if I remember right but Leica’s and Sigs do.

The Sig 10K’s are supposedly a phenomenal range finder but the glass will probably not be on par with the other two.

For reference, I have the Sig 3K’s and they’re actually pretty great except for glass they aren’t up to standard with top of the line optics. I do think optically they are fine for their price point and punch above their weight class as a rangefinder.

I wish Swaro would put Sigs’ laser in their EL’s. No one seems to make premium glass AND an awesome range finder AND a good interface. First world problems. Wondering if I should buy the Swaro’s and a separate rangefinder for ranging 1K+ yards.

 

[Drbobinmo]

I’ve been contemplating this too. Want good glass but the ranging capabilities to the 10k seem very appealing.

Hoping to find a pair that can push the limits on prairie dogs and use in matches.

 

[verdugo60]

I’ve been contemplating this too. Want good glass but the ranging capabilities to the 10k seem very appealing.

Hoping to find a pair that can push the limits on prairie dogs and use in matches.

Yeah, I think a lot of people would pay good money for premium glass, a reliable long range laser and a Bluetooth or native ballistics like the 10K. If some company nailed all three they would own the market I think but no one seems to have done it yet.

 

[forthehunt]

Swaro can't connect to Kestrel.
Sig doesn't have top end glass.

You didn't list any shortcomings of the Leica. That's your winner.

 

[PFG]

I think the new x32 Geovid Pros are going to be the ticket to ride…

 

[Steel head]

I’m still waiting to see real world reviews on the 20K

 

[gr8fuldoug]

Swaro can't connect to Kestrel.
Sig doesn't have top end glass.

You didn't list any shortcomings of the Leica. That's your winner.

I agree

I think the new x32 Geovid Pros are going to be the ticket to ride…

The only downside may be the 32mm objective. From an optical quality and technically advanced point of view this is the best of the best right now

 

[charnicus]

I’d say 10ks or Leica Pros. I’ve always been happy with the Sig units.

 

[shields shtr]

The only downside may be the 32mm objective.

yup. This was a fail in my opinion.

 

[gr8fuldoug]

yup. This was a fail in my opinion.

For some folks usage maybe, however, the hunting community has been asking for a x32 rangefinder for a very long time

 

[shields shtr]

For some folks usage maybe, however, the hunting community has been asking for a x32 rangefinder

I had the chance to hunt with a couple leica guys a few years ago. Real good dudes, and genuinely interested in what features the "market" I am in (western hunting) would like to see. Even back then (this was maybe five years ago) I told them my top 2 would be a 10x42 set of binos with a rangefinder, and a lightweight 4x20 scope with a capped windage and low profile turrets. The one thing I could tell is the "euro" influence is very prevalent with Leica, they are behind the times for sure when it comes to the type of hunting and shooting I do. The intro of their PRS style scope was a start however, and it's great they listen to their customer base. If they had a lower profile set of 10x42 with rangefinder I would be all over them.

 

[PFG]

If they had a lower profile set of 10x42 with rangefinder I would be all over them.

I don’t have the new x32 Pros in hand. But it’s not going to shock me to see the x32s compete down to the last few mins with the bigger x42 HD-Bs.

Most of the time, the 32 vs 42 debate is quickly squashed with a side by side at last light. X32s do a LOT

X50 a different animal…

 

[Tralle]

The el's are supposedly way stronger in low light due to the rangefinder part not obstructing in the main tubes.

 

[msstate56]

I don’t have the new x32 Pros in hand. But it’s not going to shock me to see the x32s compete down to the last few mins with the bigger x42 HD-Bs.

Most of the time, the 32 vs 42 debate is quickly squashed with a side by side at last light. X32s do a LOT

X50 a different animal…

I'm sure the x32 will be a great bino, but it can't transmit as much light as a x42 objective. Where I hunt I often have to glass and range an animal with only a minute or two before last legal shooting time (30 minutes after sunset). So low light performance is a priority for me.

 

[verdugo60]

Swaro can't connect to Kestrel.
Sig doesn't have top end glass.

You didn't list any shortcomings of the Leica. That's your winner.

Yeah, the Leica’s will connect but users on here reported that the blue tooth sucked and dropped connection very easily. So that’s a negative. And their interface is not as user friendly as the Swarovski or Sig supposedly.

There was an update that supposedly fixed the BT connection issues. They also supposedly have improved customer service in the last year or so too so I’m hoping to hear back on that from end users here.

 

[verdugo60]

I’m still waiting to see real world reviews on the 20K

This

 

[forthehunt]

Yeah, the Leica’s will connect but users on here reported that the blue tooth sucked and dropped connection very easily. So that’s a negative. And their interface is not as user friendly as the Swarovski or Sig supposedly.

There was an update that supposedly fixed the BT connection issues. They also supposedly have improved customer service in the last year or so too so I’m hoping to hear back on that from end users here.

I am in Australia and haven't even had the privilege of touching one. I'm hoping someone buys one so I can get a review .

Having said that, it is still on my shopping list for hunting season 2022 (starts in April here.)

 

[JohnnyUno]

yup. This was a fail in my opinion.

Well, until you've actually seen one, and tested it, not sure how you can come to that conclusion. My guess, and that's all it is is a guess at this point, is that they will kick ass and be wildly successful. Ranging and shooting at big game animals at distance at last, fading light is never a good idea, IMO.

I've owned the Sig3000's, Fury AB's, and Nikon Laserforce, as well as the 3200.com. The three amigo's (Sig, Vortex, Nkon) all have the same glass and it's average at best, and Sig's customer service, in my case, was a joke. After I got a good Geovid unit that worked like it was supposed to, it proved to be superb. Until Sig and Vortex get their optics updated, they suck hind tit IMO.

 

[shields shtr]

Well, until you've actually seen one, and tested it, not sure how you can come to that conclusion.

I would love to be wrong. If Leica can get the same performance out of a 32 than a 42, let er rip. I have always utilized 10x42s for my purposes and don't know anyone else who runs 30mm objectives out in my neck of the woods. I am open to field testing though!

 

[verdugo60]

Just Announced - Leica Geovid Pro 8x32 & 10x32

Just Announced - Leica Geovid Pro 8x32 & 10x328x32 & 10x32 Geovid Pro Available in 8x32 and 10x32 versions, both priced at $2899. Available for delivery in April 2022. This product line does SO much more than than any prior Geovid Applied Ballistics is on board the unit New Leica Ballistics...

www.snipershide.com

 

[verdugo60]

Yeah, I totally missed this announcement from Leica.

I’m personally stoked!

Sounds like there’s a new app to update the legacy models including the 3200’s. Native Applied Ballistics on the devices will be badass, no need to connect to kestrel.

Bluetooth connectivity to 10 meters. And the map tracking feature that Swaros have.

Now I just have to wait to hear on the x32’s in low light, etc. If optics in low light are an issue I might just go with 3200’s for the 40mm objective, with these added features Leica may have won it for now.

 

[verdugo60]

I am in Australia and haven't even had the privilege of touching one. I'm hoping someone buys one so I can get a review .

Having said that, it is still on my shopping list for hunting season 2022 (starts in April here.)

Looks like the new x32 Pro's will be out in April from what it's saying. Maybe @gr8fuldoug or @jb1000br can answer on that one. Hopefully they tell us when they get a demo in hand and can advise on low-light of the 32mm' as well!

 

[verdugo60]

@JohnnyUno, are you running the Geovid 3200.coms? Care to comment on laser performance past 1K, and the updates with Bluetooth, etc?

 

[verdugo60]

Also Interested in the Zeiss option, heard good things but haven't researched them as much.

 

[JohnnyUno]

I hunt mostly desert country so ranging is a bit more difficult IMO. I can get consistent reads out to about 1500, but have never gotten close to 3000 yd readings. Haven't had any bluetooth issues either, but I think the new Leica hunting app should be light years ahead of the current app, which is not user friendly IMO.

 

[ShaoKahn]

How about a pair of Vectronix VECTOR 23 rangefinder binos? Will get you out to 27K yards and should have some good glass. Don’t think it connects to a Kestrel though.

 

[verdugo60]

How about a pair of Vectronix VECTOR 23 rangefinder binos? Will get you out to 27K yards and should have some good glass. Don’t think it connects to a Kestrel though.

Lol, I was waiting for some smartass to suggest these!

Once I'm ready to drop $20k for an upgrade and help my buddies driving M1 Abrams get on target I'll look into it further.

 

[ShaoKahn]

Lol, I was waiting for some smartass to suggest these!

Once I'm ready to drop $20k for an upgrade and help my buddies driving M1 Abrams get on target I'll look into it further.

Listen, I’m looking out for you. Wanted to make sure you had all your options,

 

[Cardboard Assassin]

In the market for some high end binos with rangefinder / ballistics that works - tagged

 

[Cardboard Assassin]

Just Announced - Leica Geovid Pro 8x32 & 10x32

Just Announced - Leica Geovid Pro 8x32 & 10x328x32 & 10x32 Geovid Pro Available in 8x32 and 10x32 versions, both priced at $2899. Available for delivery in April 2022. This product line does SO much more than than any prior Geovid Applied Ballistics is on board the unit New Leica Ballistics...

www.snipershide.com

Interesting - seems to tick a lot of boxes......

 

[forthehunt]

Looks like the new x32 Pro's will be out in April from what it's saying.

Thank goodness it's a Euro product. We will probably get them in July. If it is American, we will get it 2023.

 

[Glassaholic]

Hopefully they tell us when they get a demo in hand and can advise on low-light of the 32mm' as well!

assuming glass is equal between 3200.com and Pro, the difference will be in the exit pupil, if you have been used to 10x42’s and thinking of dropping down to 8x32 you’re talking 4.2mm vs 4.0mm which is fairly close, but if you’re comparing 10x42 to 10x32 it is a much larger difference. I’m excited about the 8x32’s and would hope they perform close to 10x42 and if Leica improved optical performance of the Pro then all the better.

 

[Glassaholic]

Sounds like there’s a new app to update the legacy models including the 3200’s. Native Applied Ballistics on the devices will be badass, no need to connect to kestrel.

New app is coming. Leica has responded to how wind is calculated in Pro model - you can set wind manually in app or in bino as well as have wind automatically fed direct from Kestrel.

 

[verdugo60]

assuming glass is equal between 3200.com and Pro, the difference will be in the exit pupil, if you have been used to 10x42’s and thinking of dropping down to 8x32 you’re talking 4.2mm vs 4.0mm which is fairly close, but if you’re comparing 10x42 to 10x32 it is a much larger difference. I’m excited about the 8x32’s and would hope they perform close to 10x42 and if Leica improved optical performance of the Pro then all the better.

So…assume that I’m 23% or so, retarded.

What you’re saying is 10x32 would seem like what exactly? A smaller FOV? Less light transmission, especially at low light? Less overall optic “quality”? Like right when that elk might be creeping out of the aspens 28 minutes after sunset?

If that were the case it might be worth just snagging some 3200.coms and enjoying the new app when it comes in March. The built in AB, hopefully simplified Leica App and better connectivity of BT to kestrel might work out well for my needs.

 

[verdugo60]

The el's are supposedly way stronger in low light due to the rangefinder part not obstructing in the main tubes.

Hmmm. Wish someone that had done a side by side comparison could chime in.

 

[Tralle]

Hmmm. Wish someone that had done a side by side comparison could chime in.

Researching a bit it seems the leicas and swaros are pretty close in low light performance.
May have been an issue related to earlier models or other brands/constructions.

 

[JohnnyUno]

New app is coming. Leica has responded to how wind is calculated in Pro model - you can set wind manually in app or in bino as well as have wind automatically fed direct from Kestrel.

The way I understand it, AB helped with designing the app like they did with the Fury AB and Sig 3000, which is by far the best thing about those two units IMO. With AB involved, it will be a really, really good product.

 

[Glassaholic]

Hmmm. Wish someone that had done a side by side comparison could chime in.

Eurooptic did, but on the "older" units, here's what I posted in the Swarovski Rangefinder thread. It shows the old Geovid with light transmission rates in the high 70% range which is to say pretty poor; however, the new Geovid Pro advertises light transmission at 91% but they don't say if that is through both barrels. Keep in mind "light transmission" can be very tricky depending on how the manufacturer is measuring but anything in the 90's is really good if they are measuring properly.

Here is an article from Zeiss that I believe is helpful in understanding light transmission - https://www.birdforum.net/threads/5-light-transmission-and-coating.401835/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Euro has a good write up on the older unit: https://www.eurooptic.com/pdf/swarovski-el-range-training-document.pdf

According to the above comparison, the Swaro has considerably brighter lens systems in both barrels than Leica and Zeiss but keep in mind this is an older comp and compares to the "older" Swaro, Zeiss and Leica. Not sure if any of them have changed their system since...

Light Transmission: 91% in each barrel! This is a considerable improvement over the competition and a major selling feature! It was a great challenge and tremendous achievement for SWAROVSKI OPTIK engineers to be able to obtain 91% light transmission with the aiming dot and distance readings in the optical system.
By comparison:
A Zeiss Victory RF (8/10x45) yields light transmissions of 85% on the left barrel and 74% on the right barrel.
A Leica Geovid (8/10x42) yields light transmissions of 77% on the left barrel and 79% on the right barrel.

 

[PFG]

I’m a little shocked that on YT, there isn’t a single non-Leica video review of the new Pros.

Usually companies get these in the hands of the optics community so that reviews are ready to upload once the product drops.

Nothing.

Nada.

Not even a “look at me hold these while at SHOT” video

What’s up with that. It’s like they exist, but don’t exist.

 

[Glassaholic]

So…assume that I’m 23% or so, retarded.

Don't worry, I think I'm around 25% Seriously though, we all have a lack of understanding in certain areas. When I began seriously researching good optical design in riflescopes in 2012 I knew a thimbleful of what I know now, and I still have much to learn.

What you’re saying is 10x32 would seem like what exactly? A smaller FOV? Less light transmission, especially at low light? Less overall optic “quality”? Like right when that elk might be creeping out of the aspens 28 minutes after sunset?

Sorry, I guess I was not clear - so when comparing exit pupil if you read the above article from Zeiss on light transmission you'll see that exit pupil does play a part and if all things are equal (which they are not with different designs) then the bino with the larger exit pupil will have the "brighter" image. So the answer to your question would be - less light transmission which will affect low light performance. Trying not to get too much into the technical weeds, the comparison between 10x42 and 8x32 is only .2mm (point two) and if the optical design of the 8x32 is such that it uses less glass elements then it may be possible the light transmission of the 8x32 could surpass that of the 10x42 even though it has a slightly smaller exit pupil. A drastic example of this would be to take a cheap set of 8x50 binoculars and compare them to an 8x42 set of high end binos in low light and you may notice when you look through them that the 8x42 "appear" brighter. But light transmission doesn't tell the whole story, @koshkin has taught me about scotopic vision and when your eyes transition from using cone photoreceptors to rod photoreceptors (okay sorry, I said I would not get technical) in low light, and here the ability to see micro-contrast (detail) can be just as important - what good is a bright image if it's all fuzzy and you can't define detail. For this reason, I always test scopes in low light levels because it offers the greatest stress on our eyes - when we look at two scopes under bright midday sun both may appear to perform at similar levels, but wait 25 minutes after sunset and look again and you'll likely see a big difference in performance.

If that were the case it might be worth just snagging some 3200.coms and enjoying the new app when it comes in March. The built in AB, hopefully simplified Leica App and better connectivity of BT to kestrel might work out well for my needs.

One other factor between the 3200.com and the Geovid Pro is the pro is using a new laser with smaller beam divergence, this can mean the difference between that elk 432 yards away but he's standing behind some brush that is at 327 yards and your LRF tells you 327 instead of 432 and you miss your shot - this is because the beam was larger and hitting the brush in front while you thought it was centered on the elk.

Here is an example, notice the antelope was standing well past the tree in front of it, I was testing accuracy by trying to get the ranging circle close to the branches and trunk but be able to range the antelope behind, an LRF unit with larger beam divergence may have picked up the tree instead of the antelope. In general, the smaller the beam divergence the better.

 

[CoryT]

I can do Vector IVs for 6k and 21’s for <10k, Bluetooth dongles are available for Kestrel connections.

 

[JakeM]

You might want to look at the Zeiss Victory RF

 

[PFG]

You might want to look at the Zeiss Victory RF

I wish the button placement would have been better

 

[verdugo60]

Don't worry, I think I'm around 25% Seriously though, we all have a lack of understanding in certain areas. When I began seriously researching good optical design in riflescopes in 2012 I knew a thimbleful of what I know now, and I still have much to learn.

Sorry, I guess I was not clear - so when comparing exit pupil if you read the above article from Zeiss on light transmission you'll see that exit pupil does play a part and if all things are equal (which they are not with different designs) then the bino with the larger exit pupil will have the "brighter" image. So the answer to your question would be - less light transmission which will affect low light performance. Trying not to get too much into the technical weeds, the comparison between 10x42 and 8x32 is only .2mm (point two) and if the optical design of the 8x32 is such that it uses less glass elements then it may be possible the light transmission of the 8x32 could surpass that of the 10x42 even though it has a slightly smaller exit pupil. A drastic example of this would be to take a cheap set of 8x50 binoculars and compare them to an 8x42 set of high end binos in low light and you may notice when you look through them that the 8x42 "appear" brighter. But light transmission doesn't tell the whole story, @koshkin has taught me about scotopic vision and when your eyes transition from using cone photoreceptors to rod photoreceptors (okay sorry, I said I would not get technical) in low light, and here the ability to see micro-contrast (detail) can be just as important - what good is a bright image if it's all fuzzy and you can't define detail. For this reason, I always test scopes in low light levels because it offers the greatest stress on our eyes - when we look at two scopes under bright midday sun both may appear to perform at similar levels, but wait 25 minutes after sunset and look again and you'll likely see a big difference in performance.

One other factor between the 3200.com and the Geovid Pro is the pro is using a new laser with smaller beam divergence, this can mean the difference between that elk 432 yards away but he's standing behind some brush that is at 327 yards and your LRF tells you 327 instead of 432 and you miss your shot - this is because the beam was larger and hitting the brush in front while you thought it was centered on the elk.

Here is an example, notice the antelope was standing well past the tree in front of it, I was testing accuracy by trying to get the ranging circle close to the branches and trunk but be able to range the antelope behind, an LRF unit with larger beam divergence may have picked up the tree instead of the antelope. In general, the smaller the beam divergence the better.
View attachment 7794010

Thanks for the in-depth breakdown, excellent, as always sir.

I don't have a ton of experience owning high-end bino's but have used some nice ones at matches for spotting, etc. Most of those aren't in low light conditions. I've also seen the difference in an 8X Swaro pair vs a 15X tasco, etc, lol.

I was considering the 10x32's Pro's vs the 8x32's. I know magnification isn't everything but on a tripod with good glass it seems 10's, 12's or 15's are what guys like for comps and a 10 should be fine hand-held for hunting. The 8's may be perfect for someone looking for hunting optics if they have pulled off the 90% transmission with those, especially if they run a spotting scope too. Light transmission on the 10x32's will be interesting for sure. If they pulled it off it could be a winner.

I may just get the 10x42 3200's and see if the beam divergence is an issue for me. The PRO's won't be out until April or May I would imagine. Until people that know what they're talking about; like @Glassaholic or @koshkin, can get them in hand and do a good side-by side between them in low light it will just be conjecture I think. Would be a great article for @BigJimFish or my guy Cal Zant at Precision Rifle Blog to do!

@Glassaholic, your issue with the Leica's above may also be where the aiming point is compared to the actual laser point of impact right? The beam divergence obviously might cause it too. I think the Sigs having an adjustable aiming box or circle is a nice feature so you can "zero" you laser to the center of you reticle in the bino/rf.

 

[verdugo60]

You might want to look at the Zeiss Victory RF

Do you have them? If so please share your data and any comparisons to the others you might have.

 

[JakeM]

Do you have them? If so please share your data and any comparisons to the others you might have.

No lol, I'm a poor.
But I have thought about buying a high quality set of RF binos instead of just a range finder.
When I went looking the swaros came up, and lots of people on hunting forums (these guys use binos more than they use their rifles) talked about the Zeiss victory RFs being better than the swaros.

 

[verdugo60]

Sounds like the biggest complaint with the Zeiss is the button placement. Seems trivial at first but the placement tends to “teeter-totter” the bino off target when ranging.

The glass and rangefinder itself seem to have good reviews, not sure on the ballistics engine.

 

[Glassaholic]

@Glassaholic, your issue with the Leica's above may also be where the aiming point is compared to the actual laser point of impact right? The beam divergence obviously might cause it too. I think the Sigs having an adjustable aiming box or circle is a nice feature so you can "zero" you laser to the center of you reticle in the bino/rf.

Yes, the actual beam location vs. the LED circle inside the bino can be an issue, I think Leica has a good track record and want to say maybe it was Sig and one particular model that seemed to have more issues. I remember someone using NV to identify where the actual beam is in relation to the LED indicator, but would have to dig that up.

 

[CoryT]

905nm units can be seen in NVG’s, but the power and pulse rate can make it difficult. 1550’s are invisible to NV. Set a target up on top of a berm that is the size of the beam, then move the reticle around to the edges of the target and see where you hit and miss.

Beam shape is also an issue, most are not circular, but rectangular. The Radius for example is really a line, about 5 times longer than wide, so orientation is an issue.

This is where the Vector rangefinders crush the competition. Beam size and shape combined with a high power 1550nm beam gets you an eyesafe system that ranges stupidly small targets at rally long range. I can ping a 24x18 plate at 3000m with the 21 so long as I can actually see it. Bright sun, non reflective camo paint, no problem. Sadly, they are not cheap. They are worth every penny if you really need that performance though.

 

[BigJimFish]

Thanks for the in-depth breakdown, excellent, as always sir.

I don't have a ton of experience owning high-end bino's but have used some nice ones at matches for spotting, etc. Most of those aren't in low light conditions. I've also seen the difference in an 8X Swaro pair vs a 15X tasco, etc, lol.

I was considering the 10x32's Pro's vs the 8x32's. I know magnification isn't everything but on a tripod with good glass it seems 10's, 12's or 15's are what guys like for comps and a 10 should be fine hand-held for hunting. The 8's may be perfect for someone looking for hunting optics if they have pulled off the 90% transmission with those, especially if they run a spotting scope too. Light transmission on the 10x32's will be interesting for sure. If they pulled it off it could be a winner.

I may just get the 10x42 3200's and see if the beam divergence is an issue for me. The PRO's won't be out until April or May I would imagine. Until people that know what they're talking about; like @Glassaholic or @koshkin, can get them in hand and do a good side-by side between them in low light it will just be conjecture I think. Would be a great article for @BigJimFish or my guy Cal Zant at Precision Rifle Blog to do!

@Glassaholic, your issue with the Leica's above may also be where the aiming point is compared to the actual laser point of impact right? The beam divergence obviously might cause it too. I think the Sigs having an adjustable aiming box or circle is a nice feature so you can "zero" you laser to the center of you reticle in the bino/rf.

Without question, the Leica's have my interest. They are new and so have a more powerful laser than the Swaro's which I believe predated the regulation changes. The Swaro's also have pretty limited ballistic software and the Euro neutered problem of not returning a ballistic solution at all for shots over 800M. Leica seems to be utilizing an external calculator to get around this. I am interested how seamlessly this integration works. Being in a small 8x32mm open hing bird-watching bino form factor sure looks slicker and nicer to spend large chunks of time glassing with than the large boxy Sig unit even if it isn't actually much lighter. I have not had my hands on the Sig so I really don't know how the optics stack up between the two though the Sig is obviously a lot less expensive and would not be expected to be as optically good. Sig has done a lot of work on it's software integration and it's integration with the Sig BDX scopes though. I may ask to take a look at the Leica this year. The Sig is also a possibility as well. I do not really see these two as direct competitors though given the huge difference in cost. The Swaro I really feel is a bit outdated on the laser and really hampered by it's euro - restricted range limitation and also it's rather limited BDC software. I think it probably serves must hunters who use it well as your trying not to take risks on very long shots when your harvesting animals but it's certainly not suited for folks wanting to play around at longer distances.