My buddy purchased Vortex binos in 10x32 or 10x28 I cant quite remember. Anyways, he said he prefers the larger 8x42 and offered the Vortex Diamondback HD to me for 3/4 normal price. I currently have Leupold Mckenzie 8x42 and they are heavy and big so I was looking for something smaller. The issue I think I will have is I hunt thick woods so would 10x be too much?
8x or 10x binos
- Thread starter Axis II
- Start date
- Status
troy fairweather
Member
Thick woods= lower power, wide field of view.
7x-8x seems to be the sweet spot for hand held binos. I don't thing the 10x32 or x28 will work as well as your 8x42's. Especially in thick woods, where light is reduced. You want an exit pupil of 4+ for low light. That said, if you like the price, they are probably good binos, just not for the woods.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,083
Kinda depends on whether or not it's the 10X32 or the 10X28. The field of view is wider with the Vortex 10X32s than it is with your Leupold 8X42(by about 20'@1000yards). Thus you can see more area at a higher magnification.
Last edited:
If you plan to use them in low light situations then you want the front objective at least 5X more than the magnification. For example if you have a 40mm objective you don't want more than 8X. Anything less and you won't get enough light through them to be useful except in full daylight. If you want 10X, then you really need 50mm objectives.
My woods binoculars are in the 6X32 range. General use are 8X43's. The really small binoculars with front objectives less than 30mm can be pretty good in good light. And to be honest, I don't feel handicapped with 6X anywhere.
Also when you get above 8X it is hard to hold them steady unless you're using some type of tripod or other support.
My woods binoculars are in the 6X32 range. General use are 8X43's. The really small binoculars with front objectives less than 30mm can be pretty good in good light. And to be honest, I don't feel handicapped with 6X anywhere.
Also when you get above 8X it is hard to hold them steady unless you're using some type of tripod or other support.
Boomholzer
Member
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2021
- Messages
- 231
The 8x42s are indeed a better fit relative to 10x for forest and boats/canoes. One minor grievance is that the associated 8x42mm Vortex clam shell hard case is the same size across a few models. It doesn't make any effort to optimize the compactness of the specific optics package. Otherwise, that's a decent optic IMO.
I tried 10x42s for a while but I found that my eyeballs have to make up for my hand shaking more than they do with the 8s And I get tired faster.... Or at least that's the way it seems to me.
When I rested the tens on stuff I kind of preferred them, but that's not really how I use binoculars So I went back to the 8x42s.
I'm not sure I would be comfortable using a lighter 10x32 as I bet the wobble would be even more pronounced........
Again that's just me though, quite honestly I usually forget my binoculars and end up using my rangefinder to look at stuff....
When I rested the tens on stuff I kind of preferred them, but that's not really how I use binoculars So I went back to the 8x42s.
I'm not sure I would be comfortable using a lighter 10x32 as I bet the wobble would be even more pronounced........
Again that's just me though, quite honestly I usually forget my binoculars and end up using my rangefinder to look at stuff....
For our OP's situation, I would definitely prefer the 8X. I've spent many hours behind binos or scope in search of prairie dogs, coyotes, deer, bird watching, etc. I'm on my 5th or 6th pair of binos and have had many scopes. You live and learn and your needs change.
daniel craig
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 2,815
The more magnification you get the more your breath or any kind of hand shake will be accentuated.
With that said. My scope goes up to 9x power so I don’t see the point point in getting binoculars in any less magnification than that.
With that said. My scope goes up to 9x power so I don’t see the point point in getting binoculars in any less magnification than that.
.38 Special
Member
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2006
- Messages
- 7,368
I personally can't hold anything more than 8x steady enough to get any benefit, so there is no reason for me to put up with the extra size and cost. For folks who can, it may be worthwhile.
.455_Hunter
Member
I generally use 8X now, but have used 12X in past.
Chuck R.
Member
I actually like higher (10X) magnification for woods.
My favorite still hunting binos are an old pair of Leupold 10x28s. When using them for still hunting I'm literally glassing ahead looking for; an ear, antler tip, fir patch, basically any portion of an animal. The little 10x28s excelled at this because they're light and easily used one handed.
My normal every day binos are 10x40s, which to me are a good match for all around here in KS where t6he distances might be on the long side.
My favorite still hunting binos are an old pair of Leupold 10x28s. When using them for still hunting I'm literally glassing ahead looking for; an ear, antler tip, fir patch, basically any portion of an animal. The little 10x28s excelled at this because they're light and easily used one handed.
My normal every day binos are 10x40s, which to me are a good match for all around here in KS where t6he distances might be on the long side.
mcb
Member
Hope you guys don't mind me piggy backing on this thread. I am considering some new binoculars. Currently I have an old set of Cannon 10x25 that are 20+ years old. The are good binocular but they are small, which is good for being light and compact but only so so for glassing in low light. I also have a cheap pair of Bushnell that are 10x50 the glass is OK but but are pretty low quality, lousy focus mechanism and are not water proof.
I am thinking about a set of Leupold BX-4 Pro Guides. Most likely the 10x42. I will use them for hunting and spotting at NRL22 matches. Any one have any experience with the BX-4 series of Leupold Binoculars?
I am thinking about a set of Leupold BX-4 Pro Guides. Most likely the 10x42. I will use them for hunting and spotting at NRL22 matches. Any one have any experience with the BX-4 series of Leupold Binoculars?
Chuck R.
Member
Not an exact match, but I've got a pair of the 10x42 BX5 Santiam HDs and am very pleased with them. I'd say on par with my Swarovski's.
mcb
Member
Thanks, the BX-4 are the next series down. I have not seen any bad review yet but I want to be sure.
bassjam
Member
I have a pair of 10x50 Nikons. Great light gathering, but heavy and far too much magnification for the woods I'm normally in and I found I never really used them and opted to look through a scope instead when searching for squirrels up in the trees. Last year I decided to try a pair of 6x30 Leupold BX-1's. I find they're great for the woods, and much more comfortable than a scope to view through for minutes on end.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
Because you shouldn’t use your rifle scope for glassing. Sooner or later you’ll find yourself glassing a human with a loaded weapon.
daniel craig
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 2,815
You’re absolutely right. On my own property vs public land that’s not as much of a concern. I don’t glass with my scope but if I needed to I could. This was more of a comment that binoculars to me should be for seeing things even further away than your typical scope. Definitely not condoning engaging in unsafe behaviors
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
Power of your optic isn’t really about seeing things further away, power is about seeing detail. And in all honestly optical quality beats power every time. I can see more detail at any distance with a pair of 8 power Lieca binos than with a cheap 20 power spotting scope. For me 8 power binos give the best blend of field of view and magnification and a lack of eye strain. If I need to see more detail at distance I’ll pull out a spotting scope. A rifle scope is simply an aiming device for a rifle.
The art and skill set of glassing for game is something that needs to be learned. It’s not as simple as looking through your binos. And there is a distinct need for several types of glass to do it effectively and there are techniques for each type of glass.
Within a thousand yards 8 power binos will usually give you all the detail you need. A spotting scope at that distance will allow you to see things like antler tines mixed in with brush. But generally when I’m using a high powered optic it’s either at a long distance or for picking apart thick brush at a closer distance. The rifle scope is only used when it’s time to kill something.
daniel craig
Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 2,815
You make some good points. Glassing definitely takes skill to learn. It’s not been something I’ve needed enough to put much time into learning. I’d also rather not need to buy both a spotting scope AND binoculars.
buck460XVR
Member
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,083
While I agree with this for the most part, back in the days when I did a lot of sneak hunting for whitetails in heavy cover, my rifle scope was my main optic. While hunting in the wide open and spotting game at hundreds or thousands of yards, gives one the opportunity to raise their binos, then put them back down and then raise their gun if they decide to shoot, when your target may be only 50 yards away and looking at you with it's tail on the rise, you best have your gun up and on it immediately. Any more movement, much less the movement of putting your binos down and out of the way and then raising you gun to shoot will make so your target is the backside going away if you are lucky enough that it doesn't dive into cover you can't see thru. If you've ever snuck thru blackbrush thickets in the rain, you know that sometimes a stump/log looks like the back of a wet deer. Sometimes the head may be not clearly visible and the deer is already alert to your presence and trying to discern whether you have spotted it or will continue on it's way. In the heavy cover I hunt it is routine for deer to let hunters pass, even within a few yards as most hunters are looking at the ground and where to step next. Or they do not know what subtle things to look for in order to spot deer in heavy cover. You may be able to get away with the movement to raise the gun, but you will not have the time or the opportunity to mount the binos to your face, put them back down out of the way to shoot and raise your gun. The advantage to your scope here too, is that if your scope is a variable, you can run it at a lower power for close up looking and shooting or if and when that target is farther out and not alert yet, you can increase the magnification for both making sure it's a shooter and to give you a better sight picture. Most of the deer I have shot over the years hunting this method are well within 50 yards. While many never knew I was there, many did. Many times it was the movement of their head while bedded down that gave them away. They only moved their head because they had heard something that wasn't right(probably was me). Many times there were more deer there than I originally thought and having the gun up and ready meant I was able to get on other deer immediately when I realized it/they were there. While using your scope only when it's time to kill something may work well for you, does not make it wrong for others to do things differently. The use of those general statements makes it sound as if it is.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2003
- Messages
- 13,341
In my part of the world you’re kidding yourself without having both. But I agree that a spotting scope isn’t necessary in many places.
Last edited:
- Status
