Since this HAS apparently become a �personal preference� voting contest, it might be useful here to revisit the original post:
�I have and use Zeiss Victory HT 10x42 binoculars for hunting. As Swarovski have their anniversary discounts available until end of September I thought I'd try an 8x bin. As I'm now 61 and my max pupil size has probably decreased I'm wondering whether I'd be better off with a smaller, lighter binocular such as the Swarovski EL 8x32 SV. Would like to try an 8x as I've used 10x for years. Distances vary in my hunting areas from fairly close to way out. For those that own or have experience with the EL 8x32 SV, how do you rate them in low light, sharpness, color fidelity etc? As I have to order these from the U.S. sending them back is not an option.�
Please note: �Distances vary in my hunting areas from fairly short to way out.� He did not say really short, but fairly short. He did not say somewhat long, but way out. He�s been using a really good 10x for a long time, and is asking how the Swarovski 8x32 (not an 8x40 or 8x42) will compare. Since I have a Swarovski 8x32 EL and have used it considerably, along with a bunch of other good 8x and 10x binoculars, I posted this answer, very early in this thread:
�While my 8x32 EL is the best 8x32 I've ever looked through, and the sharpness and color rendition are as good as they get, no 32mm objective binocular can quite match a larger objective binocular in low light, even with aging eyes. And no 8x, no matter how good, will perform as well as a 10x of equal quality as in all-around, short-to-long use.�
I have noticed that none of the pro-8x posts since have come close to answering his question. One quoted a military study about how well people could HANDHOLD a binocular and see stuff, though exactly who was in the test group isn�t revealed�and then talks about holding binoculars in one hand. Shrapnel talked about how he�s killed a bunch of elk using an 8x. Well, gee, I used a 6x when grizzly hunting and spotted the one I killed (about the size of a cow elk) over a mile away, but that doesn�t mean 6x is superior to 8x or 10x for all-around use.
Several people stated that they prefer 8x, apparently because they can�t hold 10x steady. They apparently also assume their hunting is exactly like his in New Zealand. But none addressed the original question.
The OP has been using a very fine Zeiss 10x for many years, at least partly because he often glasses �way out.� He apparently hasn�t been having any problems holding a 10x steady, but now wonders if the lighter 8x32 Swarovski will provide the same level of performance, and mentions sharpness and low light.
I explained why I didn�t think it would, including many instances where hunting partners using very good 8x binoculars (some even Swarovski 8x32�s) asked if they could use my 10x so they could see something better, exactly like Ingwe could see the caribou better when he borrowed a partner�s 10x. And they ALL could see whatever they were looking at better with 10x, even without a tripod or any other fancy way to hold the 10x steady.
The entire point of the OP�s question was to get a realistic idea of whether the 8x32 Swarovski would outperform his 10x42 Zeiss Victory HT for his uses. I explained why I didn�t think so, and despite all the pro-8x protests, still don�t.
