I'm probably going to buy a high end set of binoculars for hunting the northeastern big woods (home area), still hunting and tracking mostly. Looking at 8x40ish from Zeiss (Victory SF), Leica (Ultravid), Swarovski (EL). I live in a rural area in the Adirondacks with no real opportunity for side by side comparison. Also not going to order multiple sets to return some. I have no real experience with high end optics. Any clear winner among the 3 among the current offerings? Rolling ball/other distortions more prominent in any of the 3? Not opposed to newer used but excellent binoculars.

PM me if you'd like.

Thanks for the info.

Frank

You should take a hard look at Tract

Frank:
Plenty of others will weigh in with excellent suggestions. What I have learned over the years is that in the big woods (such as the NEK of VT where I deer hunt), the best fit for me is a pair of 6 to 8 power by 30mm or so. Compact. Smaller that you are thinking about. I "still hunt" so stick my binos inside my jacket to keep the twigs from pulling at them when I'm not pulling them up to my face.

What am I looking for? Not really across a big field or long distance, or a big buck silhouetted against a treeline. Mostly its something pretty close, like making out the form of a bedded buck within 50 yards, or needing to separate antlers from tree limbs, or an eye from a tree knot.

Probably considered low brow by some of the optics worshipers on here, but I like my compact leupold 6x30's the best. I believe Kowa makes them, or used to, and Kowa makes their own as well - Cameraland sells them.

Coincidentally, I understand that Phil Shoemaker (458Win on this board) likes the compact Leupolds, although his application is totally different, for sure.

Best $100 I ever spent on optics.

YMMV!

You should take a hard look at Tract

If you're bound and determined to buy Z,L, Swaro, I'd find a used/like new Swaro SLC. No rolling ball to worry about, a touch brighter than the EL's, and very well built. If you'll entertain other brands, like jwp I love Tract Torics and Meopta Meostar HD.

I really loved my Swaro 7x42's but they were as big as a tank and as heavy. I think a 7x30-32 would be about perfect.

I have surprised myself when I bought a Swarovski EL 8x32 on a blemish sale a few months back. The surprise is how well this bino works at last light, as well as its magnificent field of view, sharpness and clarity. This binocular line is known for the rolling ball effect, but I can’t detect it at all in this one.

I bought it for primarily woods hiking, but it will now see some mountain hunting as well.

This model has been discontinued, replaced by an even more pricey “NL Pure” which no doubt is great, but offers less eye relief than the EL version (a major factor to me, an eyeglass wearer). You may be able to find an EL used, and I would recommend it.

I also would strongly suggest looking at many brands in these smaller binos. The compact size and optical value are terrific.

I never regretted buying my 8.5x42 ELs in 2005. Im a eastern hunter. I hunt in FL, AL and Ohio. Thick woods , open timber, planted pines, clear cuts and pastures ,ridges and dark bottoms. Still using them this year. Im considering a new pair to get into updated glass but really these old ones are getting the job done very well.

FOV is why I bought my Leica 8x32 BA binos, They only weigh 1 lb 7 oz and have a fov only a couple feet shorter than the wife's heavier 8x42's. I'm too clumsy to still hunt, but for birding they have been outstanding. Those EL's are very ergonomic, though I haven't tried any lately. What I do notice with our birding club is that most people don't use binoculars correctly. They look with their normal eyesight and then look at what they saw with their binoculars. I'll scan with my binos and then point out birds that they didn't see. A wider field of view helps considerably.

I use Swaro ELs in 8.5 x42s. Best bino I've ever used. Thick woods, open country, long distance, handles everything very well with amazing glass and clarity. Extremely durable as well.

I'm not sure, exactly, what "big woods" means. But in my mind I picture thick black spruce forests and tamarack swamps akin to what I see in Hal Blood's books.

Personally, for run-n-gun tracking of a big woods buck, I think compact binoculars, e.g., Swarovski 10x25, Ultravid 8x20, Victory 8x25, etc., would be my choice.

I used my Leica 8x32s for most everything except for Turkey I use my little Pentax 8x25s. Love bigger glass in the stand but those are my go to glass for woods.

Skeen, I thought so too and bought a pair of those Swarovski 10x25's for out west when I was trying to save weight walking up those mountains. Neat little binos for sure and I do carry those along with my 8x32's to look at little stuff better at 10x than 8x. That said the black spruce and tamarack swamps or our cedar swamps here are dark and that 25mm divided by10x is only a 2.5mm exit pupil and that doesn't equal a good low light bino. Then there is that fov thing again. I've used both my sets of binos watching our football team and with the 10x25's I saw the quarterback, fullback and interior part of the line. With the 8x32's I see the entire team out to the sidelines. Big difference. The 10x25's would be great for confirming an animal that you see with your normal vision, but so would your rifle scope. If I am scanning, I want a larger fov and resolving power.

Bought Swaro EL 8.5x42 this year. Hunted 17 days this season with my son, nearly all day for at least 14 of those days. All hunting is in Western NC and a mix of woods and pasture. For reference my prior binos were Leica Trinovids 3 different models.

I regret that I didn't buy these EL's sooner!

The EL's have more eye relief and I had zero neck/eye strain this season where before after consecutive days of glassing I would with the Trinovids. The color of everything, grass, trees, leaves, deer, etc. appears more real to me with the EL's where with the Trinovids they are more gray. I have no idea if there is a technical term for this, but it was obvious and real to my eyes.

I still have the Trinovids and my son uses them. During the day, the EL's and the Trinovid sharpness was on par. However at well over 30 minutes before sunrise and well past 30 minutes after sunset the EL's allowed me see deer out to 200 yards much much better than the Trinovids. Sunrise where I hunted was generally around 7:15am and on several occasions around 6:00am I could see deer in the field easily at 150 to 200 yards...not so much about rack size but seeing the body really well vs. the Trinovids...and I should given the price of the EL's.

Everyone will have their own opinion, and I have no regrets about spending the money for these EL's.

Not only the opinions here, but some of the birding sites have very good binocular comparisons though from a hunting point of view in low light, I'd be reading it here. How good is good enough and you can pay a whole bunch for high end binoculars. The image quality of the upper end binoculars is going to be very similar and for me, it would come down to things like eye relief, durability and how they feel in your hands. A person can't tell much about image quality looking through binoculars across a lighted sport shop. The real test for a pair of hunting binoculars is how well they resolve an image in low light and how much they weigh.

I've been hunting Leupold Wind River optic 10x28 roof prism binoculars for about 20 years. I tried a pair of Zeiss terra 10x42 There was quite an improvement to my eyes for less money. Been thinking the same thing myself. Don't know if I would see much or enough difference to go EL or SLC for the money.

Go to EL Range and that could replace the range finder as well as little as I carry one. Big money and lots of weight.

Still contemplating.

Good luck and shoot straight y'all

Lot of overthinking on this thread.Leupold Yosemite 6x30 or Kowa Genesis 6.5x32 will do everything in that situation. These should be in the 18 oz range, why have another 1/2 or more hanging around your neck?

I sure like my small lightweight Zeiss Conquest 8x20's. Used a friends Leica 8x40/42?, back in 07/08 hunting near Stanley, Idaho. They sure got heavy hanging around my neck compared to the Zeiss.
Had to look up the weight, thought it was 8oz., online info. says 7oz.;
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 8x20 model is an ultra-light, compact performance binocular ideal for general outdoor and hunting use, as well as travel and sporting events. Compact and lightweight The Conquest Compact binoculars are genuine featherweights. Weighing no more than 7 ounces they are the lightest binoculars in the premium class.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was glad to swap back to my little Zeiss Bino, not enough difference in performance for me to carry a bino that weighs 4x/5x more. Makes a big difference when spending hours on your feet, to me anyway.

Good Luck in finding bino's that fit your needs.

Been happy with the Meopta Meostar 8x32 for a few years now

All of the Alphas are superb. It all boils down to ergonomics in that category.

My bino collection consists of 6x,8x,10x, and 12x. The 6x are the Leupolds mentioned a couple of times above. I have the MeoStars in 8x32 and 10x42. I don't do a whole lot of hunting in the woods, but when I do I always grab the little Leupolds. 8x is great for all-around if you're only going to have one set, but the 6x, to me, is just much nicer in close quarters.

I always thought 8x was too much for woods/timber hunting.

I pickup a Swarovski 8x30 on marketplace a few months back for 80.00 . Pretty good deal.

Leica, Swarovski, Zeiss or Kowa Genesis, GPO Passion HD's. You'll be happy with any/all of them. Our pleasure to discuss the differences and opportunities with you if you have the time to give a call

I use a pair of SLC 10x42 I bought to finally upgrade my ancient 10x50 BA Leicas for glassing out west.
Last year I bought a pair of slightly used 8x33 Kowas and have been super happy with them for archery hunting here in TX.
I’d recommend them wholeheartedly.