Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunting Optics Think I'll try an 8x binocular.

Thank you John.

Schrap: Interesting observation....one not lost on me and have noticed it myself.

I find 'em with a 10X....and sneak in and kill 'em with a 4X. Just the way it always worked out, I guess. Killing them is easy and finding them is the hard part

Anyone know where I can buy another 4X Conquest ?


BTW I am sorta lathered up for a 7x42. Thinking about a poro prism, too!

8x power country...grin

I think it's damn near impossible for one person to judge what binocular will work best for another hunter, even if they hunt the same animal in the same terrain. A person's hunting methods and style has a lot to do with what binocular suits him best.
Sometimes I hunt mule deer by moving constantly, but stopping every several steps to glass offhand. (I see a lot of deer doing this, by the way) For that, a good light six power is ideal because of the non critical focus and great depth of field.
The next day I might hunt the same area, but by sitting in one place and glassing from a sitting position and a ten power binocular is ideal. Another time, I am not sure what way I am going to hunt so 8X is the ticket.
Also, there is more to a binocular than magnification and exit pupil. How fast or slow the binocular focuses, how the eye cups work, how heavy or light they are, how they resolve color, all those things are very subjective and a person has to have the binocular in hand to see how suitable it is, I think.

Royce

Sam 15X would be at home there, too.

I see your into name brand optics! You are "Zeissman" !

I like upscale scopes and bino's also however I have found less expensive ones suitable as well.

As a senior, older than you, I have good eyesight and find the resolution of my Leupold 8X binos and others good and competitive with my Hensoldt 8X's.

I would not spend Zeiss $$$ on small binos. To each his own on this as the eye doctor asks us "which is better, A or B?"

The Leupold 8X to 12X switch power bino's I got are my favorites. Here they are:



8X is not quite enough when the distances are way out there. 12X is better. I can hold the 12X steady enough.

The 8X Leupold Wind Rivers have been durable and good, my son's Pentax are good as well. The Hensoldt 8X56 Nacht Dialyts are good, expensive, heavy and big.

Kirk,

Actually, I don't prefer higher-X binoculars and lower-X scopes for big game hunting.

First, as already noted on this thread I own and hunt with a lot of binoculars under 10x, including one of your beloved 8x32 Swarovski EL�s, which I really like. Mostly I use them in country where half a mile would about as far as it�s possible to see, but have used them at longer ranges as well.

Second, I just went through my list of big game rifles, and while there are a bunch of smaller fixed-power scopes on them, most scopes of 4x or less are on rifles of .30 caliber or more, whether chambered for shorter-range cartridges such as my .30-40 Krag double rifle or my Savage 99 .358 Winchester, or on larger medium-bores such as the .358 Norma, 9.3x62 Mauser or .375 H&H that are primarily used on bigger animals.

There are three 4x scopes on rifles under .30, but they�re all on classic, walnut-stock hunting rifles that simply look better with 4x scopes. Here I must also add that I�ve never had any trouble killing big game at 400+ yards with 4x scopes, and have never felt the need to shoot at any big game animal at over 550 yards, though have shot numerous varmints out to 800+.

There are quite a few 6x scopes on my big game rifles, but I don�t consider 6x low magnification, though obviously it�s not exactly high-X either. But my big game rifles for longer-range shooting all have scopes capable of at least 9x, though a couple are fixed 10�s, as I�ve never seen any real reason for turning down a scope on a long-range rifle to even 6x. Have shot deer as close as 150 yards with a 10x scope, no problem, and have seen Eileen do the same at 50-150 yards with variable scopes cranked all the way up to 8-10x, and even 14x.

In fact, I tend to carry lower-power binoculars when hunting with rifles equipped with lower-power scopes, and higher-power binoculars when hunting with rifles equipped with higher-power scopes. Or at least that�s the overall trend, no doubt due to the country being hunted. Though on occasion I�ve done the opposite: Once took my 8+12x Leica to Quebec to hunt caribou, along with an iron-sighted rifle. Guess I�m not exactly predictable�.

For what it is worth... I had a pair of 10X Lecia Geovids last year that were stolen one week before I was to leave on a hunt.
Called Doug at Camera Land. All they had in stock was a 8X and I told them to send it.

Have missed the 10X ever since

Lefty C

John,

As you already know, there aren't half dozen guys here that have owned more optics than I have. As I stated earlier, what I have is what I am using now, who knows what the future holds.

I moved from 10X after ELs came out and when the quality of optics allowed the definition in viewing to be able to see points on a rack with 8.5 ELs. Previously using Zeiss Classics and then Leica Trinovids when they came out, 10X still the preferred power.

Then at a sheep show, I got my first look at the EL 8.5X and sold the 10X in favor of the 8.5X. Since then I have owned Leica Ultra Vids In both 8X and 10X, Geovids in 8X and 10X and HD as well. I also owned Swarovski 8.5 X and 10X in Swarovision before I bought the EL range binoculars. I did buy the 8X first, but sold them I favor of the 10X.

I have also owned Leica HD-B in both 8X and 10X, selling the 8X and keeping the 10X. At this time I have 10X Swarovision , 10X HD-B, Ultra Vid compact 8X20 and Swarovski 8X32 EL Swarovision. The 10X42 Swarovision is for sale, the HD-B are on waivers awaiting final decision whether they will get traded, Ultra Vids are keepers and the 8X32 EL would be the last to go.

I bought all of these on my own dime and used them extensively in the field not looking at black bars on the wall of a sporting goods store. I have been accused by some here of being a Swarovski dealer, looking at what I've owned, maybe I should have. It is funny when someone from New Jersey makes some comment about what I have used here in Montana.

You also know I have no issues about your choices either, we have shot enough together to know we base our decisions on our personal experience, not from something we read somewhere. I am not stuck with only 8X, but these ELs are spectacular...

Kirk,

That's interesting. My first Swarovski EL was an 8.5x42--which I eventually turned into an 8x32 AND a 10x42!

No, not necessarily Savage. I just use what I like and I generally like Zeiss optics having used a Diatal C 4x for nearly 20 years with absolutely perfect performance. Also use some Zeiss camera lenses and my current 10x42 binoculars.

I use a Swarovski Z6 1.7-10 currently on my favourite hunting rifle but usually on about 2x in the thick stuff and 6-8x on long shots. It's a good scope but nothing exceptional, just versatile. I've had very reliable performance from many Leupold scopes in the past.

However, the cost of items like high-end bino's and scopes are really not that expensive when you think about how many years of use you get out of them. Look at cars in comparison; black holes for money.

I have a 26 year old pair of Steiner Military 8x30 bins which I got out of the cupboard this morning and scanned the neighbourhood. They're not bad but they lack crispness and light gathering. It's a case of diminishing returns with optics. The mid tier optics are pretty good and there's a huge increase in cost to go up a small level in performance.

One thing I noticed with the 8x Steiner's is that with the FOV being naturally greater than my Zeiss 10x less panning is necessary to locate what you're looking for. In reality, I don't need to count the hairs on a deer's hide, just locate it and decide whether to take it. If so, then close in or take the shot from where I am if it's within range.

Good advice!

I couldn't agree more.....

While to certain extent that�s true, there are certain basic realities about optics and hence binoculars. But here there�s another factor: Fifteen years ago I published a book on hunting optics. It�s out-of-date by now, the reason I�m just finishing up another, but at the time many people considered it among best books on the subject. Consequently, many people ask my opinion on hunting optics, and don�t expect: �It�s all personal preference based on hunting and glassing style, so there�s no answer.�

That�s one of the reasons Rick has long encouraged my presence here, and part of the reason I can provide at least some suggestions is for decades I�ve watched other people use binoculars, and normally test binoculars with at least one or two other people, so I can see if they have any problems. Conseqtently, my suggestions aren�t just based on my �personal preference,� but on the experiences of many people.

On the other hand my friend Kirk (Shrapnel) has had no one to please but himself. Consequently, when he firmly states he�s found 8x a lot better during his decades of using a lot of binoculars, he�s saying that about himself, which is indeed �personal preference.�

Other people here also prefer 8x over 10x, and there are reasons for that, incuding hand-shake. Some people also do most of their glassing offhand, and some do it from the cab of their pickup with the engine running. Also, 8x42�s provide a larger exit pupil than 10x42�s (though 8x32�s do not) and that can be a factor in glassing comfort as well.

But the other reality is that 10x does provide 25% more detail than 8x, everything else being equal. And I have yet to run into anybody who didn�t see something better when they looking through a 10x versus an 8x of equal quality. That has been universal over decades of testing binoculars with other people, regardless of their color perception or most other individual factors.

One individual eye-factor that can make a major difference is interpupillary distance. On average women have eyes closer together than men, mostly because women are on average smaller, but there�s considerable overlap. One of the surprises I had years ago was when a guy I know asked about a good 8x30 or 8x32 binocular for his woods hunting. At the time one of the best was made by Nikon, so I recommended it. He bought one and couldn�t use it, because despite his fairly broad face his eyes were slightly too close together for the Nikon�s minimum interpupillary distance. He could see OK at first, but after a minute or two started feeling eyestrain.

Just this morning I was testing three 10x42�s with the help of my wife Eileen, who has also looked through a lot of binoculars over the years, partly because she wrote the optics column for the NRA magazine Women�s Outlook. She has an interpupillary distance on the low side, and had trouble with one of the 10x42�s for the same reason.

On the other hand, when one of my sisters started bird-watching this year around her home in California, she asked about a good binocular. Since her birthday was coming up, I had her measure her interpupillary distance, then mailed her the same Nikon 8x32 my friend couldn�t use, since I still had one on hand. It works great for her, because her eyes are a wider-set than his�and Eileen�s.

All binoculars are adjustable for interpupillary distance, but some are more adjustable. I didn�t ask zeissman about it, partly because his user name says he�s a man, and partly because the Swarovski 8x32 EL�s interpupillary distance is very flexible.

If anybody prefers to believe there�s no possible answer to zeissman�s question, that�s their right. But I obviously don�t think that�s totally true, and neither do several of my friends who constantly test optics, both for hunting and bird-watching.

Looking forward to your next book on hunting optics John. Lots of good points being made here on personal preferences and for me, I prefer the 8x mainly for the reasons you've pointed out already. I do most of my glassing hand held, so I get a better view (steadier) with the 8x's. I've owned 10x and when I can support them, I do get a better picture so to speak, but being a whitetail hunter, most of my bino use is at shorter distances in typical whitetail habitat.

Someone's starting to sound like safariman.

Really, I've forgotten the amount of bino's I've owned, much less used.

I think the replies on this thread pretty much substantiate what I said- Lostrra, llamas, sharp, Ingwe, Bellydeep, Ringman, and ssphoge (excuse any misspellings, please) seem to prefer 8x, Samolson and Russ Outdoors are somewhere in the middle and Yimberbuck, bobinnh, and Leftycarbon prefer 10X binoculars.

Once narratives are established, they stick like epoxy...

Imagine that Swaro has been the most successful optik marketing firm to date, in terms of weaving words. That said, I like the examples on hand...

FWIW...stole a new Pentax DCF ED 10x50 and compared it to an "old" EL 8.5x42 (first year) for some time and distances this weekend--which led to more comparisons. Bottom line was magnification and objective still are an advantage to older eyes...

but by all means if you want a lighter glass you probably won't ever regret the EL...:)

Judging from the OP's handle, I'd say give the Zeiss Conquest HD 8X32's a look - amazing binos for under $600 if you get demos from doug and take advantage of the Zeiss rebate.

Yes, I thought that too. Never looked through a pair but have heard good reports about them.

Had a quick look through some Swaro 10�32 SV's yesterday as the store didn't have any 8x32's. Really liked the ergonomics and the view was very impressive. I was viewing outside the store with a shop assistant watching me and warbling on in my ear as they are apt to do.