I am in the market for a new set of binoculars. I really need light gathering ability for low light situations. I won't be walking too far with them so weight is not an issue. What is your recommendation for a great low light binocular for near dark situations. I currently have 8x40's but was thinking 8x56 or 10x56. Do the larger objectives really help?

Thanks,

Dan

Dan,
Yes, larger objective will help considerably - particularly in a quality optic.

Thanks SKane

Better quality lenses and coatings trump objective diameter. Spend the money on a quality binocular, not size. My Zeiss and Leica 8x30 do extremely well in all light conditions for any hunt from turkey, antelope to elk.

True, but those same models of binoculars in an 8x50 will be brighter.

We hunt till pitch dark here in South Carolina. The deer are hunted for 4.5 months and very frequently move at very last light. I want the most light gathering ability I can get.

Then look at Leica, Ziess, Swarovski, etc with the largest objective they offer in your power of choice. I’d personally go with 10 power with at least 50mm objective.

+1

Brightness is only useable at the ability your eyes can dilate. You could use a 200mm objective, but if your eyes are only capable of 5mm, everything else is wasted...

Listen closely to Shrapnel, he speaks with straight tongue. I’ve used Swarovski EL 8x32 for 10 years. They have served me well in extreme low light conditions. I’m also a firm believer in S&B scopes of the Zenith model. It’s made a world of difference in my hunting.

If price is no object, by all means pick the Alpha that your eyes like best. If price is a consideration, be aware that the returns seem to diminish even more quickly these days. If your eyes can't tell the difference between $800 and $2,800 binocs, it doesn't matter how much "better" the more expensive binocs are.

You can also run it past the CameraLandNY guys, and see what their thoughts are. They've evaluated more binocs than most of us will have the chance to.

Larger objectives should help, but glass quality becomes even more important. Bigger can be better, but only if the glass is good.

And all of this binocular talk presupposes that you have a rifle optic that's capable of allowing ethical shots in those light conditions.

Let us know what you end up with.

FC

You are confusing brightness for exit pupil.

Try a 6x24 scope and a comparable 10x40 scope.

Both have the same exit pupil.

Glass quality being equal, the 40mm objective will gather more light and will be brighter.

I've read that the human eye can use a 7 Twilight Factor (Obj dia in mm/magnification power) when young, but only 5 in adult eyes. An 8x56 bino has a factor of 7 (56/8), but if true, an adult can maximize his light gathering with an 8x40 bino with a factor of 5 (40/8).

a 50mm objective will allow a great deal of light in. A better quality optic will also allow for increased light transmission.
Please feel free to give us a call and we can go over different options with you, it would be our pleasure

The best I ever used in low light was Leica 7x42mm Ultravid. If I was buying today I would look hard at the Leica Ultravid HD-Plus 8x50mm.

The best I ever used was the Swarovski EL 10 x 42's. I really like how they work in low light conditions. I hear they make a 10 x 50 these days and though I am aware that that will not necessarily give them an edge in low light usability I always like having the larger field of view- if you can get it without too much of an increase in weight.

I read this a lot, but the older I’ve gotten I’ve found that the bigger objective allow me to see much better in low light. This is despite the fact that it is not supposed to help, it is the same when reading, more light helps.

This answers the confusion of brightness. If you only have an exit pupil of 5mm, your eye can only absorb that amount, glass being equal in quality. Scopes and binoculars don't gather light, they can only transmit light unless they have been enhanced with outside influence, ie night vision...

There is more to it than exit pupil. 10x50 binos compared to 8x40 have the same exit pupil but the 10x will allow you to see more detail with binos with equal lens coatings. Think about reading a newspaper in a room with only a 20 watt bulb, at arms length you can read the paper but by bringing it closer you can see more detail. At least thats the analogy that was made to me-

You don't understand exit pupil. Magnification is not directly related to exit pupil...

Isnt exit pupil objective diameter divided by magnification?

So I will answer my own question, yes it is. Magnification is a factor in determining exit pupil. For instance look through a variable power riflescope and turn the magnification up as you are holding it at arms length, you will see the aperture of light (exit pupil) decrease as you increase the magnification - hence being directly related. My point was the same point you were making, More power will allow you to resolve greater detail in low light given all other factors being equal. For example I have a pair of Swarovski 7x42 SLC and 10x42 SLC with the same lens coatings. The 7x42 is noticeably brighter in low light but the 10x42's allow me to see detail better in the same light.

So I think I do understand exit pupil.

Just walked back inside with my 10x42mm Leica Geovids, glassed clearly for deer in the North pasture up to the tree line at 600 yards, would need a small flashlight to spin the turrets in light that low.

Nope. Magnification is what makes the image larger, not exit pupil. Your eye is capable of only so much dilation and the older you get, the less eyes will dilate. Magnification and objective lense size define the exit pupil or ability for light transmission, not light gathering. 7X42 will allow more light than a 10X42, and the 10X may show more detail, but it will be limited on how much of that detail is even visible as light wanes in the latter part of the day.

However, if your eyes are only capable of 5mm of dilation, more light won't change that as there are limits on what light is available and how much the eye and detect. So, all things being equal in optic quality, a 10X50 should be comparable to an 8X40 under the same lighting conditions, but magnification won't transmit more light.

You are contradicting yourself-

In one post you say-
Magnification is not directly related to exit pupil...

then in your last post you say-
Magnification and objective lense size define the exit pupil


So I reiterate magnification is a determining factor in exit pupil. We can agree that I was right on that-

I never said exit pupil makes the image larger, I dont know where you got that. There is a difference in between a 10x50 and an 8x40 under the same lighting conditions, its called twilight factor

"Twilight factor- theoretical estimation of how much detail can be seen in low light and is estimated by first multiplying the magnification by the objective lens size, and then taking the square root of that product. So twilight factor can increase with an increase of either magnification and objective lens size or both. The twilight factor can also remain the same if the magnification is doubled but the objective size is cut in half (and vice versa).

For example, the 8 X 50 binoculars would be 8 times 50 =400, then the square root of 500 = 20.0 value for twilight factor. The twilight factor for the 10 X 50 is simply 10 times 50 = 500 and the the square root of 500 = 22.4, so the 10 X 50s have a 12% detail advantage over the 8 X 50s in low light."

As in my example, reading in a room with a 20 watt bulb- closer means seeing greater detaill. The 8x50 binoculars will have a greater exit pupil (brighter) but the 10x50 will enable you to see greater detail in the same light

If you can afford the swaro, get it. All things being equal, bigger objectives are better for absolute last light. I lot depends on how you like big glass on your neck, and how long you have to walk to get to stand.

I think the swaros are a couple grand. I probably won't drop that much cash for a binocular used just for deer. I'd like to keep it under a grand. I was thinking the Zeiss Conquest would probably work well for me, but I see that lots of folks are recommending Tract.

I can see deer at very near dark with my current Nikons and can place an accurate shot on them with my VX6 with red dot, but what I am looking for is better light/detail so I can determine size of the horns before I shoot.

Thanks,

Dan

This. My geovids are dang near night vision. I can often see deer with them that I can't see with the naked eye because it is too dark. They are expensive but you get what you pay for.

You've got to be a pretty "old" adult to be worrying about your eyes not dilating to at least 5mm.

Get the biggest objective with the most magnification with at least 5mm exit pupil that you can afford. It will allow you to see the most in low light.

Find some way to hold it steady (like a tripod) and you will see more also.

With that stipulation it gets a little tough. I'd look for a used set of alphas or maybe a Cabela's branded meopta on clearance. The Leica rf bino Doug had for $999 would have worked well - and you would get a finder to boot.

You'll get better low light performance out of a pair of first tier 10x42's than you will a second rate pair of 10x50's. When money is the limiting factor always choose quality first and objective size second. Only go for the big objective if you've maxed out the glass quality, only then will you be able to see a difference.

If you watch the classifieds and ebay you can occasionally grab some used 42mm swarovski slc's or equivalent leica's for $1K. You'll get better low light performance out of them than the conquests.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/ubb/showflat/Number/12329475/Searchpage/4/Main/844659/Words/%2BLeica+%2B10/Search/true/swarovsks-slc-10x42-and-ats-hd-65mm-spotting-scope#Post12329475

A little above your desired range, but this is the route I would go ...

Not sure why it didn't hyperlink; also agree with everything crow hunter said above.

One will see more detail in low light with a 10x42 verses a 8x42 considering they are of the same quality.. The image may be brighter with the 8x42 because of larger exit pupiI(if your eyes can use it) but the resolution will be better with the 10x42.

The 10x42 has a higher twilight factor.

A high quality 10x56 would be a top performer in low light for detail recognition An ideal combination of large exit pupil and magnification.

I see very little difference in brightness in low light these days between identical 8x42 and 10x42 binoculars. I do see the superior resolution of the 10x in low light. I have 20/20 vision but am approaching fifty years old.

For under a Grand: Some good glass, not top of the line break the bank good, but very usable binoc's.


https://swfa.com/pentax-8x43-dcf-sp-binocular.html

https://swfa.com/nikon-8x42-monarch-hg-binocular.html

https://swfa.com/leica-8x42-trinovid-hd-binocular.html

https://swfa.com/vortex-8x42-razor-hd-binocular.html

I imagine the 10x56 Conquest will serve you very well, Dan.

Bingo to what Timberbuck said.

More magnification will show you greater detail, provided you have enough objective size to give you an adequate aperture or exit pupil. That is exactly what the 10x56 will do for you. It may not be as bright as the 8x56 to most hunters, however it will show you more detail.

I paid $300 a month for 6 months for a pair of Swarvoski SLC 10x50s in 2007. Never regretted it, still don't. I expect to use them many more years for low light hunting. Most people can't hold anything above 10 power steady enough to get any good out of it. Tripods are another subject. Look for a high quality used pair in the 10x50. Swarvoski, Zeiss, Leica. etc.

Thanks all. Maybe i'll just suck it up and bite the bullet on some Swaros or Leica. Hell, it will be the last set I ever own since I am 56!

I appreciate all the feedback.

I have 7x42 Leica Ultravid HD, 10x56 Zeiss Conquest HD, and 10x54 Zeiss HT.
I love the Leica, but when I really want to see detail in very low light either of the Zeiss are the choice.
For my purposes, I see very little difference in the view comparing the 10x56 Conquest HD and the 10x54 HT.
The HT is slightly smaller and slightly lighter, and about a thousand dollars more.
IF size and weight is not a factor the Conquest HD is a good choice for me.

Buy once cry once....I have a pair of Swarovski 7x42 SLC purchased new in the mid 90's, for me they are about the best all around pair of binos I've ever owned. I have a Pair of 10x50 SLC's as well which help with defining objects at greater distances but for all around quality, ease of use and low light conditions the 7x42 work best for me. Having said all of that a see a pair of 8x42 EL Range in my future !!

Also forgot to mention that in my experiences with them over the last 20 years, Swarovski customer service is Excellent !!

Whenever possible it is always best to tripod mount your binocular.

It would be our pleasure to discuss options and special pricing with you, please feel free to give me a call. Thanks

They're an amazing glass, and yes on the get what you pay for, but, mine we're free, won em on a bet.

Bud that lost the bet bought and had em shipped to himself first, looked em over, then left me a nice FU-!!!!! note in the box when he shipped them to me ;]