Print Page | Close Window

Vortex Razor HD review

Printed From: OpticsTalk by SWFA, Inc.
Category: Other Optics
Forum Name: Binoculars
Forum Description: Anything that requires two eyes to look through it
URL: http://www.opticstalk.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=28759
Printed Date: March/28/2024 at 11:51
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Vortex Razor HD review
Posted By: Klamath
Subject: Vortex Razor HD review
Date Posted: April/18/2011 at 23:36

Review:  Vortex Razor HD 8x42

 

I finally gathered up a bunch of optics I was no longer using and sold them.  Instead of doing something useful with the money, I used it on more binoculars.  I had about decided that I needed a bona fide alpha, if for no other reason that to serve as a reference standard against all of the binoculars I eventually wind up reviewing.

 

So this has been an effort of some scale for me and has involved a bunch of time, lots of binoculars, and a lot of head scratching.  There has been as much comparison with as many alpha glasses as I could arrange to get my hands on.  There are some pretty decent deals out there right now too.

 

So into the mix comes the introduction of the Vortex Razor HD, well not so much the introduction as the availability.  Doing as much research as I could do without actually having one made it seem like this new glass was at the least worth a close look.  As it happens, another glass I had been wondering about for some time also shows up ready for sale.  That is the Kruger Caldera, which I’ll do in a separate review.  So to start myself off, I now am the proud owner of one each of these binoculars in the 8x42 version.  I chose the 8x for no other reason than that (and 7x) is my personal favorite.  I was however able to get some fairly significant time with each in the 10x version before I bought.

 

The Vortex Razor HD

 

Vortex told me that they were confident this glass would compare very favorably to any of the alpha glass.  There has been some Internet skepticism about the new Razor HD’s price tag of almost $1,200.  I decided to see for myself.  Every indication I can see right now says that Vortex, amid all of the “HD” Market Hype, got the new Razor right.  It most definitely is not the old Razor.  There were few real flies on the original model as it was, but the new big brother has pretty well chased those off.   The housing on the new one is completely different.  I actually prefer the three finger gap of the original to the current two finger gap between the hinges.  Anybody who has had a ZEN ED or a Promaster ELX ED in hand has a pretty good idea of how the new Razor feels.  It is not quite the same, as the Razor is a little slimmer, and the ocular assembly is different too, and it is just a touch longer.  I am noting only apparent similarity here, nothing more.  I suppose another way to look at the housing is to say it resembles the new SLC-HD with a front hinge.  This apparently is a very well made binocular, but it does not have quite the “finishing school” finesse to the feel of some alphas.  But this will be largely a matter of personal preference.  Suffice it to say it looks and feels like a $1,200 binocular should.

 

The accessories are pretty typical Vortex.  There is a rather more substantial molded black nylon carrying case, standard Vortex neck strap, cleaning cloth, and carry strap for the case.

 

The focus is counterclockwise to infinity.  There is 1.5 total turns of the focus wheel.  The close focus distance is 7 feet.  One half (or 0 .75 turns) of the wheel goes from the close focus to 20 feet.  The second 0.75 turns goes from there to infinity. There is no focus past infinity.  The wheel movement is smooth and relatively easy and mine has no backlash.  The diopter adjustment is on the center focus knob, for the right eye, and works by pulling the knob back to adjust, forward to lock.  The focus wheel does not seem to get knocked out of focus and the diopter has not needed attention since I initially set the focus up.

 

With the eyecup fully extended there is 17.75 mm distance to the ocular lens.  Fully collapsed, the lens is 2.00 mm below the edge of the eye cup.  The eye cups have four click stop detents.  The detents seem perfectly able to stay where they are put too.

 



-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron




Replies:
Posted By: billyburl2
Date Posted: April/18/2011 at 23:55
Nice review! Thanks for taking the time, and putting in the effort.

-------------
If it is tourist season, why can't we shoot them?


Posted By: lucytuma
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 08:03
Thanks for sharing Klamath and good on Vortex for providing another great product.

-------------
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." - Thomas Jefferson


Posted By: coyote95
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 08:19

Thanks for the review Klamath.



-------------
"Life is like riding a bicycle . To keep balance you must keep moving" Albert Einstein


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 09:10
Very nice, and thanks for your hard work.  Were you able to do the comparison with the alphas side by side or are you going from memory?  (just curious).  I am one of those skeptics Klamath mentions, but I want to clarify.  I'm not the least bit surprised that Vortex can create such high class glass.  My skepticism comes into play at that price point of $1200 since it does bring mint/demo alphas into play. You know how people are, there are preconceived biases when considering brands whether they're right or wrong.  There are other issues nowadays too IMO.  Lots of us who have personally seen the newer class of $500 "near alpha" competitors and  know how good they are.  Some here have seen more of them than I have, but I've seen enough of them to know that another question comes into play at that $1200 price point. "If I can pay $500 for glass that's 95% of the alphas, why should I spend another $700 for a 2-3% increase in performance ?"  Thanks again Steve, much appreciated and great work. 


Posted By: RifleDude
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 09:58
Nice review, Steve!  We appreciate your efforts!

-------------
Ted


Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle.


Posted By: tompac
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 10:05
 Thanks Steve for the reveiw!


Posted By: supertool73
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 10:06
So how to you think it compares to the Meopta's?

-------------
Lifetime warranty and excellent customer service don't mean a thing when your gun fails during a zombie attack.

"A Liberal is a person who will give away everything they don't own."


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 12:15
Originally posted by supertool73 supertool73 wrote:

So how to you think it compares to the Meopta's?
Dangerous ground here, as this has to go from memory Big Smile.  I would place the RazorHD  maybe a tick above the Meopta.  Keep in mind my sharp scalpel comment.  The biggest difference is probably going to be ergonomics.  I rteally think that when we reach what we see in the $500 or less category, such as the ZEN ED, Theron, and Kruger Caldera that the sweet spot for quality vs cost has been hit.  Glass like the Meopta, original Razor, Leupold GR, and maybe a couple of others are good enough differences may not be there for most users to detect in practical usage, although alpha advocates will never let that opinion pass.  SO if you have and like the Meopta, t here is probably no reason for a Razor HD (if that ever stopped anybody from buying anything I guess).
 
JGR
 
Alpha comparisons came from several sources.  Most time was from binoculars I borrowed from people I know.  Some time was from dealers, hence the miles I put in looking.  Nothing was from a quick look.  I had eyes on everything for several days, EXCEPT the new Swarovski's, that was dealer time outside the store, and some recall from memory and notes from the Winter Wings Festival, where I first saw the new Swarovski's.


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 13:51
Thanks again Steve.  I hope Vortex sells a boat load of those Razor HD's.  


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 13:58
Great job Steve.  I am going to have to absorb this one for a while. 

So, there is enough pincushion to alleviate rolling ball on the Razor HD?

I have also had some time with the SLC HD  (only at the store, unfortunately) next to my SLC NEU.  Did you see some CA towards and at the edge in the SLC HD?

Your thoughts on resolution at this level of binoculars is spot on with my observations.  It seems impossible to discern resolution abilities between these models with the naked eye.

Thanks for the great read.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 14:52
Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

Great job Steve.  I am going to have to absorb this one for a while. 

So, there is enough pincushion to alleviate rolling ball on the Razor HD?

I have also had some time with the SLC HD  (only at the store, unfortunately) next to my SLC NEU.  Did you see some CA towards and at the edge in the SLC HD?

Your thoughts on resolution at this level of binoculars is spot on with my observations.  It seems impossible to discern resolution abilities between these models with the naked eye.

Thanks for the great read.
Rolling ball is not a problem (with the for me anyway qualifier).  I can't find any CA anywhere with either the SLC-HD or the Razor HD.  However, I'm not particularly sensitive to seeing it either.

-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 22:06
I noticed a small amount of CA in the outer 30% or so of the FOV on the SLC HDs (10X42) I looked at, but I was looking hard.  Still, I was expecting a bit more, after seeing the top-notch CA control in the Swarovisions.  Keep in mind, I am unfortunately quite sensitive to CA.

I will say that the SLC HDs showed me little optical improvement over the SLC NEU, which was kind of disappointing.  I looked at them side by side for about 15 minutes in failing light, and did not notice a difference in apparent brightness.  This was surprising, because brightness seems to be a big talking point with the SLC HD.  The SLC HD sure felt good in the hand, though!  Perhaps I would notice more differences with a long field test.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: April/19/2011 at 23:00
Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

I will say that the SLC HDs showed me little optical improvement over the SLC NEU, which was kind of disappointing.  I looked at them side by side for about 15 minutes in failing light, and did not notice a difference in apparent brightness.  This was surprising, because brightness seems to be a big talking point with the SLC HD.  The SLC HD sure felt good in the hand, though!  Perhaps I would notice more differences with a long field test.
At some juncture, which we may have reached, a point will come where we are talking in terms of "how many angels can dance on a pinhead?" in terms of A-B differences in optical discussions.  I think you are right, improvements are often pretty subtle, and may be either insignificant or not noticiable in typical, routine use.
 
I happen to think, especially if you know what you are looking for (or looking at for that matter) a lot can be noticed without exhaustive testing.  Especially with good quality stuff.
 
This sort of gets to the point of why I got a Razor.  I'd just about decided to get an SLC-HD.  Fact is the differences are so small the $800 difference is just not needed.  The RazorHD will do whatever I need from it.
 
Don't be dissapointed either.  Just think you can save the extra money from not needing to buy an SLC-HD on something like a new scopeSmile.


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: April/20/2011 at 14:09
I was just at a local family owned sporting goods store I frequent.  They are a Vortex dealer and they have a Razor HD and their price will be $979.  While I think it is worth it at $1,179 less than $1k should be good news.  How prevalent this will be among dealers I have no idea, but he was happy enough with what he will make..
 
 


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: koshkin
Date Posted: April/20/2011 at 15:39
It sounds like I should check out the Razor HDs.

Nice review!

ILya


-------------
http://www.darklordofoptics.com - www.darklordofoptics.com
https://rumble.com/c/DLO - Rumble Video Channel


Posted By: bogey
Date Posted: April/20/2011 at 17:35
I have had the Razor 8x42 for a few weeks and think they are a great bino.  I do not have the expertise you guys do to get to technical into a review or lots of different bino to compare to.  I compared them to my Geovids and liked think the Razor HD's where a much more neutral color, where brighter, and sharper.  Thats about as technical as I can give you.  


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/08/2011 at 12:48
Well, I have had these for a while now, and events lead me to the need for posting an update I think.  I still think these are good binoculars, but I now think, especially after seeing the ZEN ED 3, and that these carry much a higher price tag, that the Razor has reached the end of the line with me.  I have showed both the Razor and the ED 3 to several people, and, sort of to my surprise I must admit, nobody thought the Razor was better.  I think it is, but only by the most narrow of margins.  Since the Razor costs $1,179 and the ED 3 will run $450, or the Vortex Talon HD for the same money, the Razor HD really has no use for me anymore.  I have even come to prefer the Kruger Caldera to the Razor.  So I sold mine and have used it to finance a new Zen Prime HD.
I have had some focus/diopter quality issues as well, so that argument is null and void for me.
 


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: motts
Date Posted: October/08/2011 at 15:58
Very interesting. I'm anxious to check a pair of these out. I wasn't overly impressed by the original Razors. I'm definitely interested in comparing them with the Meostar HDs when they come out. Thanks for the update.


Posted By: Hitthespot
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 09:06
Appreciate the review.  It was good reading right up until your last post.   I guess the short update was more important than the whole review.  Is the Zen prime the same as the Zen HD 3 ?  I couldn't find the Zen prime at SWFA.
 
I have recently been flooded with astronomy questions from my 16 year old son since he's took a class in school.   Unfortunately I have no equipment for even leisure viewing of the night sky.  We grab my 8 X 30 Swaro's but they're just not made for that kind of thing.   I'm hoping to kill two birds with one stone and get something reasonable for stationary field viewing and the skies.  Something in the 10-15 X 50-60 range.  So reviews of the newer ( Less Expensive ) models is going to be a pleasure to read.   Although if anyone knows of a reasonably priced model for the night skies that can double duty and give resonable terrestrial views I would enjoy researching your choice. 
 
Thanks again for the review.


Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 10:23
Thanks for the update, Steve.
 
It sounds like you reached reasonable conclusions, as well.
 
I will update my earlier comments in this thread as well.  I have found some more time with three other sets of SLC HDs, and have yet to notice CA anywhere in the field of view.  I believe the SLC HD that I was seeing CA in was a fluke, at this point.
 
The Swaro SLC HD has the most pleasing overall image of any binocular I have used.  Still, they ofter little optical improvement over the Chinese ED bins you reference.


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 10:48
Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

Thanks for the update, Steve.
 
The Swaro SLC HD has the most pleasing overall image of any binocular I have used.  Still, they ofter little optical improvement over the Chinese ED bins you reference.
 
If I ever I feel the need to part with cash in the neighborhood of $2k, then I too think the Swaro SLC-HD is the best glass out there.  I include the Swarovision EL as well.  I am not referencing my objection to the SV rolling ball effect either, I just like the side by side, non panning image of the SLC-HD better.  That might change with more use, but with the rolling ball. there is no way I'll part with SV cash.
 
I might have kept the Razor HD if the Zen Prime HD was not just over the horizion.  This is the first time in my life I've ever pre ordered sometninmg I've never seen before.


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 10:49
Originally posted by Klamath Klamath wrote:

Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

Thanks for the update, Steve.
 
The Swaro SLC HD has the most pleasing overall image of any binocular I have used.  Still, they ofter little optical improvement over the Chinese ED bins you reference.
 
If I ever I feel the need to part with cash in the neighborhood of $2k, then I too think the Swaro SLC-HD is the best glass out there.  I include the Swarovision EL as well.  I am not referencing my objection to the SV rolling ball effect either, I just like the side by side, non panning image of the SLC-HD better.  That might change with more use, but with the rolling ball. there is no way I'll part with SV cash.
 
I might have kept the Razor HD if the Zen Prime HD was not just over the horizon.  This is the first time in my life I've ever pre ordered something I've never seen before.
Whoops, I did an edit and hit quoteShocked

-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Sefrez
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 17:03
With the field flattener that the prime HD is supposedly going to have, would this likely cause for the rolling ball effect?

I know my Vipers have a field flatterer due to the limited distortion, and there is a bit of a rolling ball effect. I don't mind it too much as I can tell it is simply due to the flat field (not to mention I think I am slowly adjusting), and pincushion distortion probably annoys me more as you can see it even when not panning.


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: October/09/2011 at 19:55
I agree with you guys comments on the SLC HD.  I have a pair of 10x ( I didn't pay anywhere near retail) and I agree they are the finest binocular I've ever looked through, bar none.  That being said, they are nowhere near $1000+ better than the Zen or Leupold GR HD.  I'm betting this Zen Prime HD will knock our socks off.  I also love the solid hinge idea.


Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: October/10/2011 at 11:22
Quote With the field flattener that the prime HD is supposedly going to have, would this likely cause for the rolling ball effect?
 
From what was posted elsewhere it appears that Zen Ray is going to introduce a very small amount of pincushion distortion to the image in order to counteract the rolling ball effect found in other binoculars with field flattener lenses.


-------------
Frank


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/10/2011 at 12:38
No, the Prime is not the same as the ED 3 it will be a totally new traditional piano hinge style binocular.  The reason you can't find it at SWFA, or anyplace else, including Zen Ray's site is that it is not avaiable yet, probably sometime around the first of the year.  I think Zen Ray has a catalog printed with it, but that's it.
 
There is a fine line to walk with regard to flat field and sharp edge performance.  Don't expect the new Prime to be like the Swarovision in that respect.  You will LIKELY see a much flatter field and much sharper edges than Zen Ray's previous lines.  It is a shot by Zen Ray to improve performance in their own lines, not necessarily to take a shot at Swarovski or someone else.  So there will be some pincushion, and there are HD field flatteners in the eyepiece and I think a full APO-ED triplet objective.


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: October/11/2011 at 07:07
[QUOTE=Klamath]So there will be some pincushion, and there are HD field flatteners in the eyepiece and I think a full APO-ED triplet objective.[/QUOTE]
 
That is something that was not mentioned previously. That alone is worthy of comment as not many binoculars utilize that design.


-------------
Frank


Posted By: Casey in Alaska
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 04:19
Can I chime in here?  I have no idea what you guys are talking about, rolling balls, flat hd's? 
I suspect you can help me though.  I want to be able to see antler definition during a restricted antler hunt.  For example, I saw a bull moose but at 275 odd yards my 8x30s could not allow me to count whether he had 3 or more brow tines.  
So,  I need the magnification to see the brow tines, and the definition to count the number of them.  

I am looking at 10x42 roof prism style binos and have two basic criteria. 1) not Chinese 2) Not necessarily the most expensive. A third consideration for me is my left I is significantly different than my right, thus I was steered towards checking out a pair of Steiner NightHunter XPs as they have left eye diopter.  I have looked at Pentax ED (?, $1100), Swaro, Vortex, Lieca, Leupold, Ziess,  etc.

My conclusion is, probably any glass in the $800- and up catagory that doesn't give me a headache will probably be good to get me the detail I need out at 300 odd yards.

Suggestions?
Thanks






-------------
Casey in Alaska


Posted By: motts
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 10:01
Casey,

For $1200, which is same price as Razor HD 10x42, I'd be looking hard at the Valdada JENA 10x42 B/CF ED, which is new this year and made in Germany.

Also, the Cabela's Euro HD can be had for $1000. While I haven't looked through them, if they are like the original Meopta Meostars, they should perform well, with the addition of ED glass. Made in Czech Republic.

I would also recommend the Kowa Geneis XD binocualrs. Can be had for around $1500, and give a view on par with alphas, at a price much less. The one con is that they are a bit heavy. Made in Japan.

Minox APO-HG are very nice, and lightweight--can be had for about $1800. Made in Germany now. The older ones were made in Japan. Newer ones have 15% more FoV and supposedly better quality.

At the top of the heap, Nikon EDG, Leica Ultravid HD, Swarovski SLC HD & EL Swarovision, Zeiss Victory FL--All of those can be had for around $2000-$2700 and all will give you the best image possible.


Posted By: motts
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 10:07
EDIT: The Valdada Jena also appears to be same binocular as Docter ED binocular.


Posted By: spf2
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 11:04
anyone has a photo of PRIME HD binoculars.  Is it double bridge like ZEN ED3?


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 12:09
Originally posted by spf2 spf2 wrote:

anyone has a photo of PRIME HD binoculars.  Is it double bridge like ZEN ED3?
Don't have one, but I've seen a CAD drawing.  As has been mentioned before, it is a traditional single hinge design.

-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: FrankD
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 13:03
Check out the prime hd thread. That catalog pic is the closest anyone, short of Charles, has gotten to see it.

-------------
Frank


Posted By: Casey in Alaska
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 14:32
Thanks for the recommendations!  

Casey in Alaska


-------------
Casey in Alaska


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 15:56
Originally posted by Casey in Alaska Casey in Alaska wrote:

Can I chime in here?  I have no idea what you guys are talking about, rolling balls, flat hd's? 
I suspect you can help me though.  I want to be able to see antler definition during a restricted antler hunt.  For example, I saw a bull moose but at 275 odd yards my 8x30s could not allow me to count whether he had 3 or more brow tines.  
So,  I need the magnification to see the brow tines, and the definition to count the number of them.  

I am looking at 10x42 roof prism style binos and have two basic criteria. 1) not Chinese 2) Not necessarily the most expensive. A third consideration for me is my left I is significantly different than my right, thus I was steered towards checking out a pair of Steiner NightHunter XPs as they have left eye diopter.  I have looked at Pentax ED (?, $1100), Swaro, Vortex, Lieca, Leupold, Ziess,  etc.

My conclusion is, probably any glass in the $800- and up catagory that doesn't give me a headache will probably be good to get me the detail I need out at 300 odd yards.

Suggestions?
Thanks
 

I understand the non Chinese criteria, but unless you have some real need to spend 2x more money, Chinese optics are sort of a reality.  Yes there are lots of Japanese things, but the thing is you will almost NEVER have total assurance there are not Chinese components.  ALL of the major Japanese Optics Players, ALL of them, have significant Chinese connections, even including owning facilities in China.
 
Off the top of my head, there are the following Japanese or European glass that fit your criteia.
Vortex Razor HD
Vortex Viper HD
Minox has a coup[le of Japanese models, but you'll have to be your own Sherlock Holmes Smile.
Meopta Meostar, or Cabela's Euro, both now upgrading to some sort of HD glass.
 
Understand, I have no wish to sell Chinese Optics.  I am solely interested in what you pay versus the quality of what you get.  I have pretty well convinced myself that one of  the best of the bunch above, the Razor HD, is not able to seperate itself from either the Kruger Caldera or the ZEN ED 3.  It is also over 2x the price of those too. 
 
Just because you buy a glass from a recognized Japanese company name, DON'T assume it is Japanese glass.  Maybe, maybe not.
 
The Steiner diopter option may well work for your eye situation.  I've not seen a Nighthunter, but the Peregrine XP is a fantastic glass.  So is the Predator Xtreme ass well.
 
Unless you want to, there is really no need to spend much over $500 for a really good binocular.


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Casey in Alaska
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 16:58
Thanks for the breakdown on where things are made.  Yes it matters to me and I am doing my best to stick with it.  Not willing to roll over on it because they have such a large market share.  Yes I am willing to try and do the research to find non ChiCom products.

Speaking of which - Whats the Status of the Bushnell Elite Bino?  I see ALLBINO has them ranked number 10, well above many famous names.  

Concerning your comments Razor vs Kruger and Zen, where are the Kruger and Zen made? If they are ChiCom, thats all I need to know.   

As to not being able to be CERTAIN there are no Chinese components, of course not.  But that also does not mean you throw in the towel. We do the best we can with the info we have. :) 

Thanks


-------------
Casey in Alaska


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/14/2011 at 23:49
Originally posted by Casey in Alaska Casey in Alaska wrote:

 

Concerning your comments Razor vs Kruger and Zen, where are the Kruger and Zen made? If they are ChiCom, thats all I need to know.   

As to not being able to be CERTAIN there are no Chinese components, of course not.  But that also does not mean you throw in the towel. We do the best we can with the info we have. :) 

Thanks
Casey,
 
First off here, welcome to OT, I forgot my manners!
 
Now you have given yourself a bit of a conundrum to deal with.  Just what is ChiCom anyway?  Optics from a Chinese source being sold by a Chinese company here in the USA?  Or maybe something else?
 
How about this.  Kruger Optical was started by a bunch of engineers and other optics types with previous employment with primarily Leupold and Bushnell, two US companies.  What they first did was to establish a glass manufacturing concern.  They called this Pacific Rim Optical, and it is in China, but owned by Americans.  They did well enough that they expanded and formed the larger Kruger Optical, of which Pacific Rim Optical is now a division thereof.  Kruger Optical has its Corporate headquarters in the USA in a touristy little town called Sisters, which is smack dab in the middle of the state of Oregon.  They have full manufacturing, design, repair, and assembly facilities there.  Right down to a CNC mini-factory where they can make whatever they want to.  I've been there twice, since its only a couple of hours drive from where I live.  Now the Caldera is a design produced at Sisters.  Taking this one step further, Kruger also owns a complete factory also in China, in addition to the glass manufacturing capability in PRO, also in China.  So the design was done in Oregon and everything else is done by Kruger employees in Kruger facilities in China.  The binocular states "Made in China".  Kruger also makes optics for other people. for example they made/make the Cabela's Alpha Extreme.  They use the terminology "Crafted in the USA".
 
I have heard Leupold is making their own facility in China as well.  Meopta is now a US owned company, but the glass and components are from their original source in the Czech Republic.  Does this make them US?
 
Zen Ray is in Beaverton Oregon.  Their glass is made in China.  Initially, they were using modifications of pre existing designs, but now have grown to the point where they are much more active in actual design, and are at least looking to expand their force of control over the whole process, from design through manufacture through packaging.  Much like Kruger has been able to do.  We will likely be seeing some results of this increased control of the process forthcoming with the Zen Prime HD.
 
Steiner has its own facility in China.  Look the Nighthunter over really good.  If it does not say specifically "Made in Germany"  it's not.  It will most assuredly say "Steiner Germany" and brag about German engineering etc, but it may not say "Made in Germany"  I don't know as I've never seen one.  I'd call somebody at SWFA and ask them.
 
Minox is another "German" company that used to be in Japan and has facilities in China.  Take your favorite Minox specimen and again, call and ask SWFA what it says about where they are made.
 
However you have the right idea in that anything in your price range that your eyes like, will likely work just fine.  Good luck, ask away, and let us know what you decided and how it turns out.
 


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Casey in Alaska
Date Posted: October/15/2011 at 00:26
Awesome info! Thanks, I enjoy the search! :) 

-------------
Casey in Alaska


Posted By: Klamath
Date Posted: October/15/2011 at 12:56
Originally posted by Casey in Alaska Casey in Alaska wrote:

Awesome info! Thanks, I enjoy the search! :) 
Glad you liked the info.  However the basic question still remains.  What are you considering as ChiCom?  Like practically everybody, I wish we could get our gear with an honest "Made in the USA" label.  I suspect that there are likely several possible possible answers to the ChiCom definition.  For example if the Beijing Optics Company came over and started selling their Red Flag Brand of fine optics in a, chain of Beijing Optics Stores, I wouldn't be a customer.  But when a USA based company like Kruger, Zen Ray, Bushnell, Leupold, Swift, or Vortex uses a Chinese optics company for the source of a particular binocular, the distinction starts to blur I think.  What if Vortex did all of the design work, as they do with a lot of their stuff,  or what if Bushnell or Leupold does the same thing, as they do with a lot of their stuff?  Or what if Kruger owns the whole process, but some of their ownership is in China? At some point, we have to realize that as far as the usefulness of the optical gear is concerned, the design of the optics, the quality of the design, and the manufacturing standards set by the company that is going to sell the glass becomes more important than where it was made.  Maybe it is an outfit like Cabela's, which has no optical structure to speak of, but they can still set whatever quality standards they wish at a given price level.  So could and you or I if one of us decides to start an optical company. 
 
So it comes down to just how much of what from everything to nothing needs to exist or not exist to qualify or not qualify as ChiCom?  Now I don't intend to single you out, it is just that your ChiCom query got me to thinking about what is/is not Chinese depending on who is defining it. Smile


-------------
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron



Posted By: Bitterroot Bulls
Date Posted: October/17/2011 at 13:22
Casey,
 
I understand your Chinese connections concerns, but I tend to agree with Steve on the issue.
 
 
Still, you have your criteria, and there are options available that meet all of them.
 
 
I owned a pair of Meopta Meostar 10X42s that would absolutely meet all of your criteria.  They were extremely well-made and durable.  A fine all-around instrument.
 
 
 


-------------
-Matt


Posted By: Casey in Alaska
Date Posted: October/17/2011 at 14:03
Yep, if you are willing to buy a Chinese glass you can.  That's for sure.  I will keep looking and see what I decide on ... 

-------------
Casey in Alaska


Posted By: JGRaider
Date Posted: October/17/2011 at 15:13
Originally posted by Casey in Alaska Casey in Alaska wrote:

Yep, if you are willing to buy a Chinese glass you can.  That's for sure.  I will keep looking and see what I decide on ... 

Then bide your time and look hard for a Leupold Gold Ring HD, which is discontinued, but can be found from time to time.  It'll set you back around $500 or so.  


Posted By: westernhunter23
Date Posted: November/21/2011 at 11:33

Very interesting turn of events.  I bought a pair of Razor HD 10x42's earlier this year.  I actually came to the same conclusion comparing the 10x42 SV El's to the Razor HD.  The SV's are better but by (my eye) a narrow margin.  Warranty considered it was an easy decision for me. 




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net