Vortex or Swarovski????

[Sussexboy]

Now that I have had early retirement forced upon me by company closure my thoughts have turned to getting a decent spotting scope. I have looked through a Vortex Razor that a friend has and I thought it quite good. The question is, how much better is the Swarovski ATX? Is it really 2 or 3 times as good as the price levels would indicate? (I am talking top of the range in each case). I am fortunate that I have somewhere reasonably nearby where I can go and compare for myself once they are open again after lockdown, but I am impatient and need some input into my thinking. Thanks       

[spurs 14]

Personally I’d go with the vortex , but that choice would be made strictly on cost , as I’d be out once or maybe twice a week ! If I was doing it professionally then maybe spend the extra if I was going to get the use out of it , you’re doing the right thing go when you can and put the two side by side , only you can make the choice !

[JohnfromUK]

Optical equipment in general can be good value 'used'.

[Modafinale]

I can only go by what I’ve used and if I could afford it  I’d buy Swarovski every time ! 
but I’d also buy Swarovski used as I know they back their products with a fantastic after sales department 

[figgy]

Vortex have lifetime warranty, even if you break it.

You need to look at how far your going to be looking with it and is dusk and daybreak use.

Optics have diminishing returns with price. Three times the cost is not three times better.

I would go for Vortex Razor, they get very good reviews. I see no point in paying for supposed quality I wouldn't see a difference in.

There is a good review of vortex on YouTube, two Americans putting s opens up against eachother and showing why they cost more.

[Sussexboy]

Thanks Figgy, I will have a look for that.

[Lloyd90]

Vortex customer service and backing of their products has really made a name for themselves. 
 

They were doing a no quibbles “well fix or replace it” on their products for any reason, for life. 
 

One bloke posted how he lost his Vortex spotter Out hunting... he found it a year or two later all smashed up by sheer luck, said cattle had tramped it ... sent it to Vortex they sent him a brand new one. 

[Seadog1408]

I use razors for stalking, fantastic lenses on them.

[figgy]

 

There is a good review of vortex on YouTube, two Americans putting them up against eachother and showing why they cost more.

Found the review video it's by Backfire  on YouTube.  

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by figgy

[Modafinale]

Well after watching the video I’d definitely get the Swarovski.

i find it hard to believe that a guy who says he’s been a professional photographer for years makes a review of optical equipment then says that the quality is not good due to a poor quality camera looses some credibility in my view.

 

[Sussexboy]

I watched the video and found the testing methods unconvincing, there are some other videos on their channel that I will be adding to my watch list though, so thanks for the lead! I found another video by Rokslide where he tests the Swaro, Vortex and a Zeiss side by side at daybreak using a resolution chart. No surprises that the Swaro was best, but only by one level of resolution. I guess I will have to be patient and wait until I can look through them for myself. Vortex seems the sensible choice at the moment. Thanks for all your comments.

[Lloyd90]

24 minutes ago, Modafinale said:

Well after watching the video I’d definitely get the Swarovski.

i find it hard to believe that a guy who says he’s been a professional photographer for years makes a review of optical equipment then says that the quality is not good due to a poor quality camera looses some credibility in my view.

 

15 seconds in... I’m not sure Ricky’s hunting backpack being as light as possible is his big issue 👀

2 minutes ago, Sussexboy said:

I watched the video and found the testing methods unconvincing, there are some other videos on their channel that I will be adding to my watch list though, so thanks for the lead! I found another video by Rokslide where he tests the Swaro, Vortex and a Zeiss side by side at daybreak using a resolution chart. No surprises that the Swaro was best, but only by one level of resolution. I guess I will have to be patient and wait until I can look through them for myself. Vortex seems the sensible choice at the moment. Thanks for all your comments.

That’s the problem with these YouTube reviewers ... everyone is trying to make a name from themselves even without knowing what they’re doing. 
 

Just look at SRSPower ... never seen such bad review or “information” videos on shooting ... but anyone can make them, call themselves an expert and put them online without anyone ever proving it. 

[London Best]

1 hour ago, Lloyd90 said:

That’s the problem with these YouTube reviewers ... everyone is trying to make a name from themselves even without knowing what they’re doing. 
 

Just look at SRSPower ... never seen such bad review or “information” videos on shooting ... but anyone can make them, call themselves an expert and put them online without anyone ever proving it. 

Funnily enough, I’d noticed exactly that!

Some “experts” write books and magazine articles too.  
You have to read it all and form your own opinions from experience.

[figgy]

What the videos do is let you see the products, you can decide whether it's something to short list or dismiss.

What I look at is Swaro very expensive for little gain, used it still has value.  If the Vortex was good enough for what I wanted, it would be a much cheaper option. There are probably other makes that could do same as Vortex for similar money.

I bought my scope from Optics-Trade.eu can't fault the service or price, I saved a good chunk of money.

Edited April 17, 2020 by figgy

[Lloyd90]

1 minute ago, figgy said:

What the videos do is let you see the products, you can decide whether it's something to short list or dismiss.

What I look at is Swaro very expensive for little gain, used it still has value.  If the Vortex was good enough for what I wanted, it would be a much cheaper option. There are probably other makes that could do same as Vortex for similar money.

Bang on... one product might be 10% better but if it’s twice the price it’ might not be worth that much ... however some people will pay it because they have to have ‘the best’. 
 

However if your a dawn and dusk deer stalking and those last few minutes of light could make of break the hunt, then you might think that extra 10% will make all the difference in the world. 
 

 

50 minutes ago, London Best said:

Funnily enough, I’d noticed exactly that!

Some “experts” write books and magazine articles too.  
You have to read it all and form your own opinions from experience.

I like Paul Harrell on YouTube, actually knows what he’s talking about and has the experience to back it up. 

[figgy]

I would love to see a blind test of top spotting scopes and rifle scopes. Put covers over them and tape around turrets so the people looking and testing don't know which is which.

See just where they come out. Like blind taste tests.

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, figgy said:

I would love to see a blind test of top spotting scopes and rifle scopes. Put covers over them and tape around turrets so the people looking and testing don't know which is which.

See just where they come out. Like blind taste tests.

I think it is quite hard to do.  I have (a long time ago) done some work in optics and particularly high magnification wide aperture zoom lenses in low light.  Except at very marginal light levels, there is often surprisingly little difference.

I have high grade binos (Leica) in both 8 x 20 and 10 x 50 - and for the vast majority of practical uses the 8 x 20 are every bit as good optically - and much lighter, cheaper and more convenient.  Under good light conditions, the only real difference is the field of view.  But for that (quite short period) when the light is failing and to see a well camouflaged animal under trees - the big expensive pair are invaluable.  But that really is about the only time I prefer them - and they are damn heavy to carry all the rest of the day!

[figgy]

This is why I'd like to see a blind test.  Unless your rifle scope is as good or better than your spotting scope. There is no point in paying three times the price for a low light spotting scope.

 

[Sussexboy]

Just had a look at optics-trade.eu. I have feathers optics near me and their prices are just as keen. I think I know what I will be doing once lockdown ends. 

[billytheghillie]

My tuppence worth, I bought a pair of Opticron 8x42 binos, I field tested along side Hawke, Vanguards and Swaris, to be honest between the Swaris and Opticrons  there was not much difference apart from £800. I know you are looking at spotting scopes and I have metioned binos, but the only way is to try as many as you can. Happy spotting.

P.S.  Opticron do spotting scopes as well, worth checking out.

Edited April 17, 2020 by billytheghillie

[London Best]

I have used a pair of Opticron High Resolution 8x42 bins since 1992. They look pretty tatty now but have been brilliant. Mate has the same bins but not marked High Resolution and those are not so bright.

[Sussexboy]

Feathers optics also sell Opticron equipment as well, so I can compare directly.

[FOXHUNTER1]

On 17/04/2020 at 10:16, Lloyd90 said:

 

Just look at SRSPower ... never seen such bad review or “information” videos on shooting ... but anyone can make them, call themselves an expert and put them online without anyone ever proving it. 

Glad someone else is honest , they are shocking , I watch them for the comedy value. He is a complete attention seeking idiot , trying to educate people when he has no experience,  comes across very patronising. 

[Lloyd90]

2 hours ago, FOXHUNTER1 said:

Glad someone else is honest , they are shocking , I watch them for the comedy value. He is a complete attention seeking idiot , trying to educate people when he has no experience,  comes across very patronising. 

I just think the advise or his testing is really really poor. 
 

The “test” (if you can even call them that) are not done in any constructive or measure-able way... and the results of the tests are often the opposite of what people with real experience would find or state. 

 

I watched his video about SG’s vs BB shot for Fox. The gaps in the “pattern” for the SG were so massive that you could have fired at several foxes and missed them all, the BB’s had a tidy pattern and if kept to sensible range looked like they’d would be really effective ... then he kept going on about how the test showed the BB’s to be no good 🤷‍♂️. 
 

Honestly a complete waste of time. What’s worse is people will watch those videos and if they don’t know any better follow the “advice” ... 

[FOXHUNTER1]

4 hours ago, Lloyd90 said:

I just think the advise or his testing is really really poor. 
 

The “test” (if you can even call them that) are not done in any constructive or measure-able way... and the results of the tests are often the opposite of what people with real experience would find or state. 

 

I watched his video about SG’s vs BB shot for Fox. The gaps in the “pattern” for the SG were so massive that you could have fired at several foxes and missed them all, the BB’s had a tidy pattern and if kept to sensible range looked like they’d would be really effective ... then he kept going on about how the test showed the BB’s to be no good 🤷‍♂️. 
 

Honestly a complete waste of time. What’s worse is people will watch those videos and if they don’t know any better follow the “advice” ... 

The only people who take any notice of his advice dont know any better themselves. I.e people with limited field experience.