I need to purchase a new set of binoculars and have about 300 dollars to spend. I have narrowed it down to Vortex diamondbacks 10x42, Leupold cascades 10x42 and Nikon monark 5 10x42. Am I comparing apples to apples in quality? Thanks in advance.

Apples to apples comparision, you will not find differences in light performance, because the mechanical aspect is identical.

I really like the close focus with the Diamondbacks though. But that is a personal preference for me.

When I was looking last year I also looked at the Vortex diamondbacks 10x42 and the Leupold cascades 10x42. I could see no differenct in the optics but went with the Leupold because they seemed a little lighter and less bulky than the Vortex.

Thanks to the guys at SWFA for helping me with my selection, I ended up with the Nikon monarch 5 10x42. Mainly because they fit my hands the best, but all 3 are really great glass for the price.

I just had a long conversation at BPS this morning. I couldn't tell a difference between Monarch or Cascades. I tried some $1000 Conquests and was able to recognize the difference in light, but was not impressed enough to spend another $700 for them. I'm leaning towards the Cascades because I have had good service on a Leo scope.

I would personally spend a extra $50 and buy the steiner predator extremes that cameralandny has demos of.

I keep going back to the Cabelas Euro HD (aka Meoptas) I'm just having a hard time with $1000 price tag.

I like those but compare them with the Vortex Viper HD and there is not the $ difference enough to get me to swing for the Euro's over the Vipers.

I owned a pair of Nikon 10x42 I used for everyday use not during deer season and as a loaner pair. At first they were great and clear. But after 3 yrs the lenses scratched quickly and they were not very clear anymore. I sent them back and they did replace them with new ones. Which I then gave away. Good luck.

I didn't pick up the Vortex. How long have you had them and do you think they will last as long as the Nikons or Leo's?

We've got 2 pair of the Nikon Monarch 10x42 and one pair of the 10x50's. All are very clear, though the 10x42's are a good bit smaller and easier to handle and carry around. For my hunting, I use some rather old Leica 10x40 and I'll never give them up. But for what you want to spend, any of what you mentioned should be just fine. It just comes down to personal preference and what feels best in your hand. As for the quality of the glass, the differences are probably very minor. If there's anything that I can say about the Nikons that is slightly negative, it's that their toughness is questionable. Which of the binocs will best survive a 4 foot drop on a hard surface? I'd factor that into the purchase, if you can.