Thread: Rangefinder binos

Originally Posted by Kelton

Most data stops at 800 on binos I think unless paired with a krestal in which case it’s very reliable

I get it for LR target/steel shooting

My annoyance comes from the following:

1. RF binos will always have worse glass due to the arrangement of lenses being sub optimal. I've tried every top tier brand (Leica, Swaro, Ziess , the latter being the worst) and none of them have better or 'as good as' glass compared to the same non-LRF version. Leica has the best arrangement out of the three but I have never liked the ergonomics of Leica binoculars, which is more than half the battle as an unsteady hold means it's pointless to try and range/observe. Swarovski still has the best glass but their LRF binos have always possessed tumours on the underside which does nothing to help the hold.

The lower tier Asian sweat shop assembled binos (Vortex, Sig, Kahles) may be better in terms of the software inside, but the glass isn't even on the same planet. Sorry if you think so, because it means your eyes are fucked.

2. Carting a set of binos; or worse still, a scope, with LRF and ballistics built in, is all well and good until it either stops working (electronic circuits will pack up eventually, not a question of IF but WHEN) or the battery goes flat. Easy enough to carry a spare battery, but try getting the electronics fixed on an older pair of LRF binos. You'll either get a bill which is 40% of a new pair, or the person on the other end of the phone will be saying 'Guys, listen to this mug who wants their 10 year old pair of LRF binos repaired! For free! '

Sure, Vortex is 'lifetime warranty' but that's been factored into the dealer cost already. You've paid for 2-3x of what a single product would otherwise cost without that warranty.

3. A separate LRF unit is the only logical way to go. Chop and change at anytime without taking a huge hit on resale. Leupold just released a 5k yards handheld LRF...https://www.leupold.com/rx-5000-tbr-w-rangefinder

You’re not wrong but it’s also economics.

Sigs, deltas etc do everting sufficiently well for around $2-3k

The next jump for me personally would be a pair of swaro pures and a lightweight Lrf which has me looking down the barrel of $6k

That’s a 50% cost increase for relatively small returns. It’s something I’ll do eventually but I’m certainly in no rush.

Originally Posted by caberslash

I get it for LR target/steel shooting

My annoyance comes from the following:

1. RF binos will always have worse glass due to the arrangement of lenses being sub optimal. I've tried every top tier brand (Leica, Swaro, Ziess , the latter being the worst) and none of them have better or 'as good as' glass compared to the same non-LRF version. Leica has the best arrangement out of the three but I have never liked the ergonomics of Leica binoculars, which is more than half the battle as an unsteady hold means it's pointless to try and range/observe. Swarovski still has the best glass but their LRF binos have always possessed tumours on the underside which does nothing to help the hold.

The lower tier Asian sweat shop assembled binos (Vortex, Sig, Kahles) may be better in terms of the software inside, but the glass isn't even on the same planet. Sorry if you think so, because it means your eyes are fucked.

2. Carting a set of binos; or worse still, a scope, with LRF and ballistics built in, is all well and good until it either stops working (electronic circuits will pack up eventually, not a question of IF but WHEN) or the battery goes flat. Easy enough to carry a spare battery, but try getting the electronics fixed on an older pair of LRF binos. You'll either get a bill which is 40% of a new pair, or the person on the other end of the phone will be saying 'Guys, listen to this mug who wants their 10 year old pair of LRF binos repaired! For free! '

Sure, Vortex is 'lifetime warranty' but that's been factored into the dealer cost already. You've paid for 2-3x of what a single product would otherwise cost without that warranty.

3. A separate LRF unit is the only logical way to go. Chop and change at anytime without taking a huge hit on resale. Leupold just released a 5k yards handheld LRF...https://www.leupold.com/rx-5000-tbr-w-rangefinder

Leupold rangefinders a notoriously shit and what’s the difference of the tech failing in binos vs a hand held . Binos no matter the shape are easier to hold steady given you hold them with to hands it’s a lot easier to get a range when glassing rather than swapping units and trying to find the animal again terrain dependant obviously . Everyone’s held up on warrenty it’s what insurance is for

Originally Posted by Project17

I'm running Sigs currently. Got them for a good price. Happy with them all in all. The Applied Ballistics software will give you a solution to 800 yards. Fine for hunting. Might not be the go for comp shooters. Optics are good but have got a subtle blue tint. Range finder aspect works well and has some legs

Good to hear, I just picked up a pair as well and can’t wait to get them out and about. Have had a bit of a cash splash and I bought a Sig Tango 4 in 6-24x50, going to mount on a Bergara LRP in .308 and see how they all work together.

The Binos seem pretty good so far and they range very similar to my Kilo 2200 rangefinder, depends how steady I hold them. For reference I’m ranging a building wall at 980 yards with the binos and 978 with the 2200… someone more knowledgeable can tell me if that’s an acceptable difference?

Weight wise they are 920g, my rangefinder and Leupold BX2’s + sig 220 weigh 940g. I used to run BX4’s which were real nice but definitely more bulk and weight so I went for the smaller BX2’s. Both 10x42’s.

Originally Posted by JDinMaui

Good to hear, I just picked up a pair as well and can’t wait to get them out and about. Have had a bit of a cash splash and I bought a Sig Tango 4 in 6-24x50, going to mount on a Bergara LRP in .308 and see how they all work together.

The Binos seem pretty good so far and they range very similar to my Kilo 2200 rangefinder, depends how steady I hold them. For reference I’m ranging a building wall at 980 yards with the binos and 978 with the 2200… someone more knowledgeable can tell me if that’s an acceptable difference?

Weight wise they are 920g, my rangefinder and Leupold BX2’s + sig 220 weigh 940g. I used to run BX4’s which were real nice but definitely more bulk and weight so I went for the smaller BX2’s. Both 10x42’s.

That’s more than acceptable that’s the difference in putting one down and picking up the other and taking a step that’s awesome

Reason I splashed on rangefinder binos was the situation where glassing - spotted an animal by the time I had found it in the seperate range finder & then the scope, the animal had gone. Don't believe in using a scope for glassing thats just wrong, so a range finding scope wasn't an option. Agree glass isn't as good but overall happy with my choice.

Originally Posted by flock

Reason I splashed on rangefinder binos was the situation where glassing - spotted an animal by the time I had found it in the seperate range finder & then the scope, the animal had gone. Don't believe in using a scope for glassing thats just wrong, so a range finding scope wasn't an option. Agree glass isn't as good but overall happy with my choice.

Not to mention it's then more difficult to try find the animal again with the RF with less magnification, smaller FOV and harder to hold steady.

Originally Posted by flock

Reason I splashed on rangefinder binos was the situation where glassing - spotted an animal by the time I had found it in the seperate range finder & then the scope, the animal had gone. Don't believe in using a scope for glassing thats just wrong, so a range finding scope wasn't an option. Agree glass isn't as good but overall happy with my choice.

Originally Posted by Beetroot

Not to mention it's then more difficult to try find the animal again with the RF with less magnification, smaller FOV and harder to hold steady.

Do you really think the difference between swapping bino to RF unit is going to make the difference between getting a shot off?

If you are talking a 500m+ shot, you are not taking a snap shot... if the animal is 300m or under, why even bother ranging?

If it's a safe shot, throw the rifle up, take aim (or hold over/dial) and fire.

I suspect a lot of people are not familliar with the ballistics of their rifle or terrain they are in and rely on gear telling them what to do...

If I see a deer somewhere I've not been before, I'll range the area from where I am, no need to range if I'm there and see deer again (highly likely if you don't throw a hail mary shot).

Sadly the first or second thing asked about a successful hunt nowadays is 'How far was it?" (I'm guilty of this myself).

Well this has strayed from the OP's original innocent enquiry.