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

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.

Thanks.

zeissman,

Since you are used to 10X I would be willing to bet a bundle, for a retired mill worker, that you will be disappointed with 8X.

zeissman,

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, not matter how good, will perform as well as a 10x of equal quality as in all-around, short-to-long use.

Many consider the 8x32 EL SV to be the finest 8x binocular currently on the market, myself included. I recently had both the EL and Zeiss 8x32 FL for a few weeks and thought the EL was best in most respects.

This year I switched to 8x32 binoculars after using 10x42 for almost 8 years. Overall I prefer the 8x. More specifically, I prefer the smaller package, lighter weight and reduced hand-held shake. The only time I miss the 10x is when I have my binoculars on a tripod. Holding with just my hands, I can see everything with 8x that I could with 10x, and sometimes more when my heart rate is up from hiking or buck fever. Dropping from a 42 to a 32 does reduce low light performance. However, IMHE it's only a small difference (5 minutes if I had to guess) with high quality glass at the very very last/first light.

Thanks guys. I'll have to seriously mull over what you've said. I was thinking that my 10x42 would have about the same light gathering as a 8x32, working on the exit pupil formula. However, that doesn't appear to be the case.

I would agree with that so long as you can keep the 10x's very steady John.

zeissman,

Exit pupil size does matter in dim light, but so does magnification, and even when the exit pupil is the same size a larger objective provides a slightly sharper image.

RD,

Yeah, that is a factor. But even at my advanced age I can hold 10x binoculars steady enough to see more detail than through 8x, and with some sort of rest can still hand-hold 12's enough to take advantage of the extra magnification.

Don't worry about it, get the 8X32 Swarovision and you won't be sorry. I have had most models in all the leading brands and at this time have Leica HD-B 10X42, Leica ultra vids and Swarovski 8X32 EL Swarovision and the last to go would be the 8X32.

Even if you change your mind, the Swarovski's will sell faster than the Leica if you do decide to change...

Not sure I understand this comment. Sounds like personal preference to me which is fine, but a 10x is not inherently superior as a binocular.

If both have 42mm objective, I'll take the 8x every time for "all-around, short-to-long use". But that is just my personal preference.

John,

I know I am not near the optics authority that you are- but I will ( IMHO) have to respectively disagree with your statement above.

IMO- and if I had to advise someone else, the best all around binocular to use for distance from the deep woods to open space would be a 8x. To me 8x has not only less shake potential, it also has wider FOV ( in most cases); and has better depth of field for short distance use.

And for my use- anything that a 10x does better than a 8x, is bettered even more by use of a quality spotter. So, a 8x for most all of my use, and a good spotter for those times when I want to reach out and see something farther is a much better combo for me than a 10x.

I can see all the detail I need with a steady hand hold on a 8x. For me, I can not say the same for a 10 x. And I have used both. And when chasing critters after a steep quick climb up some steep hill- even a 8x has a bit of shake to it; but to me not near as bad as a 10x.

But- different strokes....... And fortunately we are in a time period where there are lots of great optics choices out there to serve most all the folks.

Well, I'm not Mule Deer, but I think some of you guys are missing the point. The point he's making ( pretty sure?) is that all things being equal....in other words put an 8x42 and a 10x42 of equal quality on a tripod (taking the human shakes, etc equations out of the picture) and a 10x will show you more detail than the comparable 8x, especially an 8x32. Having grown up and hunted my whole life in open country, using and owning many of the top shelf binocs available, I would happen to agree with him, and I still reach for my 10x42's first (Meopta HD). However, for the past couple of years I've owned and used an 8x32 Cabelas Euro HD (meopta), and it is world class stuff and better built than most. IME, my 8x32 will crap out about 3-4 minutes before my 10x42 does. Whether or not that's worth it or not is up to you.

For open country muleys the 10x gets the nod, for semi open or creek bottom whitetails, or Africa, the 8x32 can't be beat, for me.

Hmm.

It seems that some believe an 8x somehow can help us see detail just as well as a 10x, and seeing distant detail is the entire point of a binocular.

The big point against 10x also appears to be more apparent shake. Well, if we're hand-holding a binocular, like somebody shooting offhand, then that's valid. But anybody who knows how to steady a rifle by using sitting, prone or a rest can also steady a binocular.

The fact is that a 10x binocular of equal quality offers 25% more detail than an 8x. This does make a difference in long-distance glassing, and it's a basic optical fact, no matter what somebody claims about seeing as much detail with an 8x as with a 10x.

If somebody wants to set up their spotting scope every time they can't quite tell what something is with their 8x binocular, then they're welcome to do so. But when seriously glassing open country I want to be able to tell whether something across canyon is a deer or a log, without hauling out the spotter every time there's a question. Which is exactly why I usually carry a 10x or even a 12x when glassing big country.

This does not mean I don't like 8x binoculars. I do, and have used plenty of them (and will use them again) to help me kill lots of animals over the years. I own and use several good ones right now, including a Swarovski EL 8x32. I also sometimes use 7x and even 6x binoculars for certain purposes.

But the OP asked about glassing everything from close up to a long ways off, and I gave my answer, based on some experience. That includes not just my own glassing but watching other people glass, including people I've guided. Whenever there was a question about something, many of those people asked to look through my 10x or 12x binoculars, and very often the question was answered without hauling out the spotter. (And yes, I always have a spotting scope handy when glassing big country.)

So no, my answer was not just "personal preference," but based on decades of using binoculars to find game in big country. Yes, 8x works fine in timber or semi-open country, whether in North America, Africa or wherever, but for serious glassing at longer distances give me at least 10x, every time.

Mule Deer is absolutely correct!

I mentioned this before but will do it again since it goes to the point of magnification against magnification. Before I became a proponent of high magnification rifle scopes I was looking at various 3-9X�s. Since I am not loyal to the mark, I started with a Tasco and compared it with a Bushnell. I did this keeping the better of the two all the way up to a Swarovski and Zeiss (I believe was the other) and went back and forth a couple times. Finally I settled on the Swarovski.

All the scopes were set on 9X. I was comparing them on a �line� about a block from the store. The man behind the counter instructed, �I�m going to hand you one more. Don�t look at the name, just look through it.� It was also set on 9X. There was no need to go back and forth with this. It was instantly better than the Swarovski. I took it away from my eye and looked at the brand: Leupold LPS. I noticed it was a 2 �-10X so turned it up to 10X. The line became an extension cord laying on the roof. Right then I decided if a little is that good a lot is a lot better.

In a contest to see detail an 8X of the same quality is not in the same league as a 10X.

For hunting mostly open country a 10x42 reigns supreme IMO.

For everything else a 8x is better (particularly a 8x42) better DOF,FOV, brighter,easier eye placement, easier to hold steady, just all around more pleasant to the eyes over an equal 10x42. I have owned and will not own a premium 8x32 again. You give up too much in low light compared to an equal 8x42. I will carry the extra weight of the 8x42.

For a hunter that can only own one pair of binoculars and may be hunting open country the 10x42 is what I would recommend.

I own both a premium 8x42 and 10x42 and use what is the best for the terrain I am hunting with the 10x42 being the default binocular if I can't decide.

I agree for mostly open country, a 10x ( or even more) is probably better than a 8x.

But it was the statement for both short - to - long ( close to far) that a 10x was better than a 8x, that I disagreed with. That along with the OP's seeking an opinion for a binocular for "fairly close to way out" is why I recommended a 8x. And I still stand by that opinion- I simply have a different opinion for a good all around power size.

But I have and use 6x; 7x; 8x; and 10x binoculars- and which one I grab depends on the situation. And then again, my opinions on this is probably steered by many years of use of optics here in Oregon. Everything from thick wet jungle like terrain going after Blacktails, to long distance glassing on the dry east side.

Not everyone wants to have a variety of optics, and if I was going to suggest one power for all use, or be told that I can only pick one binocular power for myself to use- it would be a 8x ( probably in a 8x42 format). Some may say if you can only have one power choice for all use from a 6x to a 10x- then pick the 10x. You know- "go big or go home". Well I would pick the 8x for my use if I only could pick one.

As far as a spotter, I often am not relying on one in most hunting situations. And I was not suggesting that one use a spotter instead of a 10x binocular. Only was saying that in most cases even in open country a 8x shows me what I need. And if I felt under gunned with that- for me I would rather have a spotter for real long distance verification - vs always relying on carrying a 10x. Even though a 10x on a tripod is great for long term glassing, I would rather have a 8x around my neck and then use a 8x and a spotter on a tripod for long term glassing sessions.

And regarding the OP's ? regarding the Swaro 8x32 Swarovision- it is one fantastic binocular. One of the best, if not the best 8x32 ever produced. I did long term comparing that 8x32 Swarovision during all times of day up against a bright 8x42; and that 8x32 Swarovision hung right with it as far as light gathering. The 8x32 Swarovision was only bested by the 8x42 with regards to light gathering in the last minutes of twilight. And that was well after shooting light. The 8x32 Swarovision did better in my testing than the 8x32 EL that I tested it against as far as light gathering. And I always thought the 8x32 EL was good in that regard, but the 8x32 Swarovision was even better.

I mostly hunt open country also and probably couldn't tell much difference between 8 or 10x. Maybe.


A spotter is also present if it's a 'serious' hunt so of course that makes a big difference.



Last weekend I was watching a thrush(?) pick apart an insect on my front lawn. Maybe 30-40' feet away.

Older 10x's revealed that it appeared to be a 1-2" grasshopper.

Fancy new 8x's revealed that it was indeed a grasshopper...

A black one with green stripes on his hind legs.





This thread has convinced me that I need a new pair of 10x's also.

Enablers......grin

+1. Sitting or parked behind a tripod all day, give me the 10x (or more). On the move hiking, putting on a stalk or general all-around use give me an 8x. If it were only about magnification I'd be rocking 15x. ;-)

Here's another opinion I ran across doing some research years ago the OP may find useful:

"The US military has studied the human body as it relates to optics... They also found that 97% of the test group could HANDHOLD a 7 X bino well enough to CORRECTLY count the lines on a 7X resolution chart.............but only 8% could CORRECTLY count the lines with a handheld 10X bino on a 10X resolution chart. All of the binos had at least a 5mm exit pupil. The test group were required to use both hands, could sit, stand, or kneel, steady themselves in any way against any part of their own body but were not allowed to lay prone or use any foreign object to help steady themselves or the bino. The test group were between the age of 18-27.

Bino's by design are handheld, so it only makes sense to use a binocular that gives you the best possible options while using them handheld. If most of your glassing is from a bluff overlooking a huge expands of land and you glass while sitting then by all means get a tripod and buy a 15X or use a spotting scope. But for that peice of glass that hangs around your neck that you use in MOST hunting conditions..... what's the best option? BTW I love those answers along the lines of "well I hunt out west were you can see for miles"?????? Well I live on earth and I can see for millions of miles with my naked eye completely through our atmosphere and see Mars. How many of you know that you can clearly see the rings of Saturn with only 20X. ..... (the larger the exit pupil the better the resolution.) By the way I live in New Mexico and can clearly see with as much detail as you can.... the same thing you're looking at with 10X...... because I use an optic that gives me excellent resolution and I CAN HOLD IT STILL ENOUGH to take advantage of that resolution.

Lets talk about hunting conditions. How many of you all are going to tell me you never use your bino with ONE hand. How many of you are going to tell me you can't "see" your heart beat or your breathing cycle when looking through your binos. How many of you are going to tell me you are as steady as a rock with a pack on your back and a bow or gun in one hand as you top a ridge and see movement on the next ridge over. How many of you are going to tell me you are as calm as a lamb when you see a tangled web of antlers on top of that buck or bull. Movement is your enemy when looking through any optic and the more power you try to handhold the more that movement is magnified. You see the question is NOT will the 10X or 12X bino produce good resolution. With most decent optics made today the answer is almost certainly YES they will produce good resolution. The question IS can you hold them steady enough to take advantage of that resolution? "

John has killed more Cape Buffalo than I, but I can top his elk count. Granted some were with a pick up, but I still win that contest. I will state as strongly for the 8X as John will for the 10x. I have tried them all, back and forth and at this time have the Leica 10X HD-B as well as the Swarovision 8X32, and will still keep the 8X over the 10X42 for all around use.

I do have also have a pair of Swarovision 10X42 that I would sell if someone likes them over the 8X. Having the best of both worlds, I can use them all, but I stand with the 8X crowd, at least for now...

8X here as well. Swaros as well. The only time Ive found 10 X preferable was on a caribou hunt. My 8X could tell you it was a bull from 2 miles away. My pards 10X Swaros could tell you if it was worth the walk over to get him.