[Jrdnmoore3]

I am buying some Vortex Diamondbacks and am torn between 10x50 and 12x50 I have heard the 12s can get a little shaky but then some say they have no idea what they are talking about. I am picking them up before the weekend any input would be greatly appreciated thanks.

 

[Huge29]

In general, stronger is much better, but quality is a huge factor, not sure how the 12's look at that price point. I would try them both, have the salesman take them outside with your for a quick test. I see that happen regularly. Dont feel rushed, get some good realistic practice in looking close, looking far, etc.

 

[manysteps]

Can't speak for the Diamondbacks as I have Viper HD 12x50s... that said, I have noticed no more shakiness than I had with the 10x50s I replaced them with. (And yes, I LOVE my Viper HDs!)

 

[Kwalk3]

I have a hard time honestly keeping my 10x42 vipers stable freehand. If you get the 12s plan on spending a lot of time with those binos on a tripod. Even if you go with the 10x you will get more out of long glassing sessions with a tripod and a stable base. Both are good glass for that price point.

 

[Jrdnmoore3]

I have seen for the money they are about as good as you can get I just can't justify going double the price for the next step up when in all reality they can't be twice as good in my opinion. Most of what I do is on the wasatch and is out a long ways away that's why I was thinking on the 12s I will see if I can take a peak at them outside thanks for the input

 

[Loke]

Optics are one of those things where better is always more expensive. How you quantify value is up to you. If you want to discern every last bit of detail, get the best you can afford. If you only want to see some of the detail, go cheap.
Since a 300 Win mag burns twice the powder as a 308, shouldn't you be getting twice the velocity? The same logic applies.

 

[waspocrew]

I've got 10x42 Viper HD's and think the magnification is perfect for my use. I prefer 10x to 12x for a little wider field of view. Too much magnification and it can be a little hard to locate an animal quickly. The difference between 10x and 12x isn't enough that I'd worry about though. Anyways - take them both out and see what you like best.

 

[torowy]

the 10's will be brighter, and you will be able to hold them more steady. If you are glassing from your hands and not a tripod, I would get the tens.

 

[RandomElk16]

This really depends on the person. I have no problem looking through 12x50. If you are straight up glassing with them and need them THAT steady for observation or scoring, you should have a bipod or realistically a spotting scope.

That said, I love my 10x42's because anything they can't do, means its time to pull out the spotter. Vortex Diamondback are great quality.


Oh yeah.. Most places will let you look side by side in the parking lot. Sportsman's is pretty good about that.

 

[Nambaster]

I have had the diamondbacks in 10x50 and I remember them being very bulky. I now carry a pair of 10x42's and the difference is actually significant in my opinion. 7-10 power is what I prefer when it comes to binos. The spotter is good for everything else....

 

[Mr.CheddarNut]

If long distances is what your going to be glassing up, I would recommend getting binoculars and a spotting scope. I use 10x42 binos as I find them to be the perfect balance of everything. For me it is much easier to scour the landscape with binoculars. Then when I see something I want a better look at (if needed) I use the spotting scope on a tripod. I have just recently gone through quite a few comparisons on optics and although hard to stomach cost, the best you can possibly afford is worth every penny.

Cheddar

 

[Jrdnmoore3]

If long distances is what your going to be glassing up, I would recommend getting binoculars and a spotting scope. I use 10x42 binos as I find them to be the perfect balance of everything. For me it is much easier to scour the landscape with binoculars. Then when I see something I want a better look at (if needed) I use the spotting scope on a tripod. I have just recently gone through quite a few comparisons on optics and although hard to stomach cost, the best you can possibly afford is worth every penny.

Cheddar

I do have the a spotting scope currently not the greatest but it gets the job done I was actually looking at the 20-60x80 angled diamondback as well if i am happy with the binos thanks for the the help i think i am going to do the 10x50s and the new spotting scope here shortly

 

[chia6]

My girlfriend has the 10×42's and loves them. If your in need of the x50's I'd recommend looking through both and make sure you can hold them steady. If you can't than maybe look at the x42's or look into a tripod. Either way I think you'll be happy with any vortex product.

 

[swbuckmaster]

Id honestly go 10 or less "weight factor" vortex are already heavy enough as is.

If you need more magnification id go with a spotter at a later date. I use a cheep light weigh spotter from bosh and lomb or nikon cant remember. It looks like a rifle scope. I can see anything with that scope and its dirt cheep. Sure its not as nice as the swaros but I can pack the thing and actually use it. Big glass is good for video, truck and wheeling packing imho. When you get in the back country a good pair of 10x42s are hard to beat. So hard to beat I hardly every pack my tripod and spotting scope anymore.

 

[Jrdnmoore3]

I ended up buying the 10x50s and picked up a badlands bino case while I was there. I use a cheap simmons blazer scope at the moment but just in the two days I have had the binos looking around the house huge step up from the leupolds I had before. The diamondback scope is for sure the next thing on the list.

 

[Mr.CheddarNut]

I ended up buying the 10x50s and picked up a badlands bino case while I was there. I use a cheap simmons blazer scope at the moment but just in the two days I have had the binos looking around the house huge step up from the leupolds I had before. The diamondback scope is for sure the next thing on the list.

Which Leupolds did you have before?

Cheddar