I really liked my 3200.com.....the Pros I hear are even better.I hear these aren’t as good as the 3200.com etc
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I really liked my 3200.com.....the Pros I hear are even better.I hear these aren’t as good as the 3200.com etc
7,500 yards is crazy...and very good glass is what makes these stand out. In most cases, that will be the two determining factors that make these the LRF binos to pick. I still give them a B+ for IQ, as I would the Geovid Pro's. There is is such a difference in Swaro EL Ranges, that nothing else is close really. EL Range is the standard. However, you give up significant amounts of ranging ability for that glass. I can only reliably get to about 1200 yards on game in the field. Your use case will determine what best suits you. IMO, money no object, there is a case for owning both.I found the glass to be as good as Leica Geovid Pro's. The Vector X is a little better in resolution and has a larger Fov. The Leica has significantly better color. I have not had it side by side with Zeiss's rangefinder. Without question I consider the Vector X to be top tier in glass quality for laser rangefinding binos.
7,500 yards is an impressive number to hit on anything.
You got them in hand ready to ship?10 pair left..... get ya a set !!!
Did you have production models of both? The published specs state the Geovid have slightly wider FoV compared to Vectors (10x42 Geovids=342-ft @ 1,000yds; 10x42 Vectors=333-ft @1,000 yds). The production Vectors that I had side-by-side with the Geovids in my previous picture had edge distortion. I'd agree that color was slightly better in my Geovids, and I thought resolution was slightly better in the Geovids as well.I found the glass to be as good as Leica Geovid Pro's. The Vector X is a little better in resolution and has a larger Fov. The Leica has significantly better color. I have not had it side by side with Zeiss's rangefinder. Without question I consider the Vector X to be top tier in glass quality for laser rangefinding binos.
Well that is very interesting. The vectors I have are pre-production though their optical components are production. The electronics have a slightly different firmware in the fpga and cannot be OTA updated on the unit I have at least. For Fov comparison I was just parroting the company given statistics on the FOV as I have 8x production geovids so they can't be side by side compared on FOV. For resolution I scaled the optical chart to compensate for the magnification. I wonder whose spec sheet changed in that time. I just looked back at my review and I had compared the Fov stat between the Vector X 10x42 and Geovid Pro 42. Evidently, someone has changed their published stat from what it was at that time perhaps due to a typo or some other error. I have now updated my reveiw to reflect this data. Thanks for pointing it out.Did you have production models of both? The published specs state the Geovid have slightly wider FoV compared to Vectors (10x42 Geovids=342-ft @ 1,000yds; 10x42 Vectors=333-ft @1,000 yds). The production Vectors that I had side-by-side with the Geovids in my previous picture had edge distortion. I'd agree that color was slightly better in my Geovids, and I thought resolution was slightly better in the Geovids as well.
Overall, the Vectors were very close to the Geovids, but my takeaway was that the Geovids optically outperformed the Vectors in both good and poor lighting conditions.