24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,810
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,810
I like the 7x42 for hunting . If I am hunting for big horns, I will also bring along the spotter.
Easy to look through all day, and even better real early or late.



BP-B2

Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,285
Campfire Ranger
Online Content
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,285


Good luck finding any consensus on this. Most of the guys preferring a 10X binocular will use a fixed 4 or 6X scope on their rifle. I still prefer the 8X32 EL Swarovision or the 8.5X42 Swarovvision. I haven't felt lacking with either of those and I have hunted my entire life in Montana. I do have a pair of 10X42 Leica HD-B in my backpack, just in case...


[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,044
Campfire 'Bwana
Offline
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 32,044
Originally Posted by Canazes9
Looking to go mule deer hunting next year for the first time, the 1st of what I hope will become numerous western hunts - mule deer, antelope, elk. I would like to buy a pair of high quality binoculars that will be suitable for same, thinking Zeiss Conquest HD up to top Alpha glass quality.

This is NOT a which brand / model question - I've looked some and have some preferences, but will explore further later.

The question is magnification and objective size. I have several pair of $2-600 binoculars from pocket binoculars to 10x50. Of those, the pair that I like the most (and use the most) are my el cheapo Leupold Yukon 6x36's. The hunting I've done I find the 6x36's bright and easiest to use.

I don't see too many people talk about using low powered optics like this for open western country. Most commonly I see 10x42's and bigger magnifications/larger objective sizes. I was leaning more towards a pair of 8x42's, but curious on others opinions about binocular size/magnification for open country hunting.

Thanks,

David


Nikon Monarch are just as good and cost a great deal less


A Doe walks out of the woods today and says, that is the last time I'm going to do that for Two Bucks.
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 629
W
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
W
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 629
I'm kinda with shrapnel, 8x43 Pentax around my wife's neck with a 12-40 Leupold spotter in my pack or in truck w/window mount. 10x50 are to heavy for my wife...LOL

Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,895
S
SLM Offline
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
S
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 18,895
8X for me.

IC B2

Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,730
F
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
F
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 5,730
Originally Posted by WBill
... 8x43 Pentax around my wife's neck with a 12-40 Leupold spotter in my pack or in truck w/window mount. 10x50 are to heavy for my wife...LOL


Hold up a minute. If we get to use our wives as sherpas, then that changes EVERYTHING!

I'd go 8x, and 10x, and a spotter + tripod, and an espresso machine�


FC


"Every day is a holiday, and every meal is a banquet."

- Mrs. FC
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884
D
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
D
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 22,884
I'd go 8x. My opinion is this: with 8x or even 7x I can see anything I need to "locate."

If I need more power to really figure out if it's a critter with enough horns to make me want to shoot it, then I don't need more power at all--it's actually a dink and I'm trying to convince myself.

In other words, once I've spotted a buck, I've rarely even needed binos to decide if he was big enough or not. The big ones, are. Even with the naked eye.

Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,926
C
Campfire Regular
OP Offline
Campfire Regular
C
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,926
Originally Posted by Whttail_in_MT


Thanks!

David

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 602
F
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
F
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 602
I just picked up a Leica Duovid 8&12x42. I stole them at the price I paid. I used to use a 10x42 and found them good if I was able to get them on a tripod or rested over a pack or similar, but hand holding them yielded a shaky image for me. I moved over to a mid level 8x42 with HD glass and have been pleased. For my eyes, they are much easier to hold. Then....I got those Duovids. I LOVE them. The glass is stellar and I have found that the 12x is pretty easy to hold steady over my hiking staff. I am really pleased with them.

I hunt a lot of open country with pockets of aspen and pine and long open ridges.

Have fun hunting out here in the West. It gets in the blood and will keep bringing you back.

FH

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 629
W
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
W
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 629
Originally Posted by Folically_Challenged
Originally Posted by WBill
... 8x43 Pentax around my wife's neck with a 12-40 Leupold spotter in my pack or in truck w/window mount. 10x50 are to heavy for my wife...LOL


Hold up a minute. If we get to use our wives as sherpas, then that changes EVERYTHING!

I'd go 8x, and 10x, and a spotter + tripod, and an espresso machine�


FC


Nobody said sherpas weren't legal! laugh

IC B3

Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,046
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,046
10x42 EL range. your going to want an RF might as well get both in one unit.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802
T
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 802
I use both 8x42 and 10x42 premium binoculars. My 10x is my major use binocular but I like to run a 8x when hunting the timber and less open country. Advantages of the 8x are a larger FOV, brighter and easier to look through and hold steady than a 10x. I will not drop down to a 8x32 class because of loss of brightness in low light.

Most will agree that a 10x42 is better in open country and that is true. The 10x50 class is even better in all aspects but I can't afford the extra weight /bulk when I am also carrying a spotter, tripod and rangefinder.

There is another area the 10x42 had an advantage over the 8x42 and you seldom see it mentioned. The extra resolution of the 10x over the 8x in low light gives the 10x advantages when trying to identify the quality (antlers) of game animals. I learned this the hard way while running a premium 8x42 against my friends premium 10x42 on a trophy deer hunt. This advantage is expressed in the twilight factor. The 8x is brighter but has less resolution / lower twilight factor than the 10x42.

The 10x is also excellent on a tripod for mid range glassing.

For the reasons stated above my 10x is usually my choice for most hunts.


Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,255
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,255
I own both an alpha 8X30 and 10X42. Can't recall a situation where the 8X30 would have been a better choice for the glassing scenario. Sometimes its easier and more convenient to carry, but I prefer glassing with the 10X42 by a significant margin. If both were lost tomorrow morning I'd replace the 10X42 by tomorrow evening. I doubt I'd buy another 8X30 until a particular circumstance would dictate their use.


Originally Posted by Mule Deer
Suck bullets simply suck.

Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,637
T
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
T
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,637
I use 8.5x42s

And not sure what you mean by western. Are you talking about open terrain on the east side of states like Oregon and Washington? Or the very thick areas in the western half? Broken?

Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
J
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
J
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 28,179
Originally Posted by Timberbuck


There is another area the 10x42 had an advantage over the 8x42 and you seldom see it mentioned. The extra resolution of the 10x over the 8x in low light gives the 10x advantages when trying to identify the quality (antlers) of game animals. I learned this the hard way while running a premium 8x42 against my friends premium 10x42 on a trophy deer hunt. This advantage is expressed in the twilight factor. The 8x is brighter but has less resolution / lower twilight factor than the 10x42.




I agree. Our own Mule Deer, with his years of experience with many different brands and configurations of glass, posted virtually the same findings a month or so ago. IIRC the many 24HCF experts chimed in to tell him how much of a dumbazz he was. I'm a dumbazz as well because I agreed with him too.

I will add that the older I get, I don't see that much difference in brightness between 8x42's and 10x42's of the same quality.

Last edited by JGRaider; 10/31/14.

It is irrelevant what you think. What matters is the TRUTH.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,787
R
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
R
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 20,787
The best 10x42 money can buy


Throttle fixes everything. If it doesn't fix the problem, it’ll end the suspense.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,908
M
Campfire Kahuna
Online Content
Campfire Kahuna
M
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 59,908
JG,

Here I would like to list all the times somebody I'm hunting with or guiding has seen a "deer" a long ways away in their 7x or 8x binocular, which turned out to be a log or rock in my 10x or 12x binocular. But I can't, since I long ago lost count.

Once it even happened when a friend from the East was using my 7x Swarovski, which I'd loaned him because all be brought was a compact "woods binocular" that didn't work a darn. Have also had numerous people borrow my bigger binocular because they couldn't tell much about the size of a buck's antlers.

Yeah, a spotting scope will always tell more, and I always have one or two along when hunting big country mule deer. But I've also found a 10x or 12x binocular in my hand often bypasses getting the scope and tripod out of my pack and setting them up.

On the other hand, in closer country 8x is certainly plenty, and I'd much rather still hunt timber with an 8x30 around my neck than a bigger binocular like a 10x40. Which is exactly why I suggested to the OP that he bring both, since he owns a variety of binoculars. One or the other will be more appropriate, depending on what sort of country he ends up hunting.

Over the decades I have also found a spare binocular on a "big" hunting trip is a very good idea. It doesn't take up much room even if you're flying, and even if not perfect for that kind of hunting, beats the hell out of no binocular at all.


“Montana seems to me to be what a small boy would think Texas is like from hearing Texans.”
John Steinbeck
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,164
L
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
L
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,164
Every one has their particular preferences with their hunting style and how they use their optics. I am on the move quite a bit in thick stuff- so I like a 8x32/30 size around my neck. Have even used my 7x26 B&L Custom during early dry archery season. If I know I am going to be sitting for a while then I will use a spotter and either 8x or 10x40 on a tripod.

One way I have found that works for me when I am on the move and I want more power than what the 8x32 around my neck gives me is- instead of in my pack, I put a Nikon 13-40x ED 50 in the water bottle pocket on my pack instead on inside. It weighs less than a quart of water and is at my reach and I can quickly deploy it to get a 13x or more look at something. Can hand hold the 13x setting for a quick look and then can rest it against a tree for a higher power look. Of course the tripod for it is in the pack for times I want to sit down and glass. I have found this combo when on the move much more useful than just having 10x with me or carrying 10x around my neck all day. Plus the 8x to me is more useful in the setting I am in most of the time.

IMO- for western hunting you are going to want some sort of a spotter with you, or have access to one.

Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,581
S
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
S
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,581
OK, I'm not touting any great experience or superior ability on my part, but I've been using binoculars for nearly 50 years. I probably have 40 different ones to my name now and have cycled more than that. I'm not trying to disagree or agree with any post on the thread.

This is just my own personal perspective in favor of 8x. There are several things and one event in particular that really have helped in shaping that perspective. The event was an optical display (maker irrelevant) at the local big deal "Bald Eagle Conference". This outfit was in the process of introducing a 7x42 and 10x42 binocular model. They had results of their work into the decision in favor of 7x over 8x. They also had a series of different magnifications of this same binocular in 7x, 8x, 9x, and 10x. They had a relatively simple test protocol that they had the mostly quite skeptical audience was asked to fill out. As it happened, when they presented their local results at a last day of the show workshop, the local results paralleled the rest of the research. In short, some 70% selected the 7x. about 20% the 8x and about 10% selected the 10x. This was from starting out not knowing what they had. The unmarked binocular just had a test sample number on it. That outfit sold a PILE of 7x42 binoculars at that show. Predictably, the 7x did not last because consumers not aware of the research just assumed the 7x was too weak and opted for the 10x. Everybody thinks the extra 1x gain of an 8x will show more detail, and the 20% increase of the 10x over the just has to be better still. What everybody thinks rules the world I guess. smile I'm not going to detail the times I could ID something with an 8x when my partner and his 10x could not. I do not doubt for a nano second that guys with a 7x could not identify what they could with 10x either.

I have a bunch of 7x binoculars and I doubt that much more than 10% of viewers could tell they were 7x and not 8x. I'd venture that those who can are defined by the percentage of the participants who selected 10x from the series of magnifications in the blind test. I've done this some on an informal basis and your average user sure can't tell.

Here is some food for thought with 8x, and why I tend to favor them. Yeah 10x is 20% larger than 8x. Since that is the case your eyes are working harder to process the extra magnification. As magnification increases, depth of focus decreases. Quite a bit between 8x and 10x. So for me I like not having to run the focus as much with 8x vs 10x. I prefer a view with a lot of area in front of and behind whatever buck I'm looking at that is in focus. Image shake has been mentioned, but that is a personal deal. Some shake worse that others. Shake for me is not an issue. Magnification also tends to magnify heat wave distortion. There have been times I was glad to have a 7x that would show something where the 10x had too much mirage effect to be useful, in my experience anyway YMMV.

The short story is either one works. That is why the argument exists. The preference of one magnification over the other is a personal preference. I have given up trying to convince anybody to chose one magnification over another. The reason for that is that, in my estimation, the way the binocular fits your face and in particular your eyes, particularly with regard to eye cup shape and eye relief is a hell of a lot more important than whether or not you are gaining or losing anything with a 10x vs and 8x. Contrast and color balance also come in ahead of magnification. So does how the binocular balances. Kinda like a good rifle. Do you want a 30-06 that fits like a glove or a 300 Wby that you have to fiddle with to get behind? Or a rifle scope with an eye box that suits you vs one that doesn't?

So, to the original post, as far as either an 8x or a 10x, like I said, both work. Pick one and go use it. I personally have never felt I have lost anything with an 8x. You are the only one who can decide that and you may have to go through some different ones to figure this out


Steve

Theodore Roosevelt: "Do what you can where you are with what you have"
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,950
R
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
R
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,950
One seldom mentioned advantage of lower powered binoculars is the increased depth of field. If someone just uses their binocular to evaluate soothing they spotted with their naked eye, depth of field doesn't mean much. However,, to find game I like the extra depth of field when scanning for animals.

Page 2 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
837 members (12344mag, 1234, 12308300, 10gaugemag, 10gaugeman, 007FJ, 78 invisible), 3,266 guests, and 1,312 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,712
Posts18,400,280
Members73,820
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.116s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 0.9115 MB (Peak: 1.0904 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-29 01:47:52 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS