Brass Balls,
The Pentax binos that preceeded yours, the Pentax 8X42 WP were of such quality that it took me some time to decide that my Nikon 8X32 Superior E were better for my needs. I haven't seen their replacement, the 8X43 DCF SPs, yet, but if they're an improvement, they should be a killer set. The replacement is lighter and has aspherically-ground lenses to improve the flatness of the image. They'd be the first set I'd look at.
Also, I would agree in general that each marginal increase in quality costs disproportionately more, but I'd submit that that holds only for a given engineering design. Roof prisms, say, improving lens coatings. Ashperical lenses can be a cost reducer, if it reduces by some amount the coatings necessary.
Further, radical change of design can offer marked improvements for less money than incremental improvements in a theoretical base design. Of course, that opens up a whole new set of advantages and disadvantages instead of incremental changes in them, too. I have in mind here the old porro prism technology as an improvement over the roof prism. An excellent set of porros will present a better image than an excellent set of roofs at a cheaper price, so incremental improvement actually is cheaper. That's assuming "improvements" refers only to the image presented, and doesn't include sturdiness and waterproof-ness, which is a general design deficiency in porros.
In case it isn't immediately apparent, I'm in violent agreement.
Edited to say: SteveW13, I'm not in a position to know what power most hunters need or use, but most of the ones I know use 8X. These people all know me, however, and as I do have an opinion about it, I may have had an influence on them...
Jaywalker