New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 8x vs. 10x - a slightly different question?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Check GunBroker.com for SWFA's No Reserve and No Minimum bid firearm auctions.

8x vs. 10x - a slightly different question?

 Post Reply Post Reply   Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options Page  1 2>
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 09:28
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
I have read tons of opinions on the 8x vs. 10x debate for a handheld binocular.  The advantages of 8x in a 8x42 vs. 10x42 size are:

1.  Better field of view.
2.  Less shake which means better resolution.
3.  More depth of field.
4.  Better eye relief.
5.  Better low light performance.

I hunt out west and am still considering the 10x for one reason.

Would the 10x help you detect animals better than the 8x?

I understand that the handheld 8x will probably give you finer details because of less shake.  But, I am wondering if detection is a separate issue.  I am less interested in nature watching than I am knowing if there is nature to watch. 


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 11:15
3_tens View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Knight
Optics Jedi Knight
Avatar

Joined: January/08/2007
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Online
Points: 7180
I prefer the 8 X
1.  Better field of view. If using the 10 you may pass over the game.

2. Less shake. With the reduces field of view and increased shake you may  may cause you to miss       movement. Movement is the key issue when spotting game.
3. More depth of field. Sharp focus is primary to picking out hidden game. The more area that is in
     sharp focus, the more chances to spot the game.
4. It is much less tiring to field an area using glasses that are easy on the eyes more eye relief. If
    your eyes tire then the tendency to take down the glasses to rest the eyes. = Missed opportunity
     to catch that flick of an ear.
5. Speaks for itself. Most game is within 20 min at start and end of the day.
    It looks like you had summed up all the best reasons to use the 8X. other than the 8X will be
    lighter in weight with the same model.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 11:28
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Thanks for the advice.  I think those are valid points. 

Would the Cannon 10x42 L IS Image stabilized binoculars be the best of both worlds? 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/373459-USA/Canon_0155B002_10x42_L_IS_WP.html

They have decent field of view.  The shake issue would be gone.  I carry my 7x50 Nighthunters now.  So, the weight would be the same.

Even with my 7x nighthunters, I have sometimes found it hard to be stable during long hunts where I am tired, on uneven ground, or loaded with a pack. 

Any opinions?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 11:34
Klamath View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/20/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1267
IMHO, I don't think it matters how you approach the question of 8x or 10x.  That is a facet of how your biological system interacts with the glass and metal system of the magnified world.  Some, like me like 8x.  Some will argue for 10x and neither side is either right or wrong as a general point.  What is right or wrong is getting the right one for you, and the only way to get there is spending some time with both.
 
I also think that success behind a binocular is having "good glass "(and I don't mean the most expensive glass either) and an inherent ability to pick out antler tips from the brush.  The eyes behind the glass are the key, more so than the glass in front of the eyes, again  IMHO.  Patience and observation are the keys I think.
 
My liking for 8x is two fold.  One the greater depth of focus presents me with a more three dimensional appearance in the view and makes it easier for me to add a bit extra dimension of a 3-D effect.  Also 10x is high enough for me that heat mirage personally is a deal breaker issue as it seems to me much worse at 10x.  I have and use 10x, but I stay away from long distance and mirage conditions.  No mirage and long distance is another matter.  But push come to shove I usually grab the 8x and so far have yet to kick myself for not taking the 10x that day.
 
I will say this.  If you have the notion in your mind that you would like 10x, then that is where I'd go first.  If you are magnification neutral at the start of this, then I'd say go 8x.  The chances are that you will go through more than one binocular to get where you want.  Settling on 8x or 10x is to me more important than spending a whole bunch 
 
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 12:00
supertool73 View Drop Down
Optics Jedi Master
Optics Jedi Master
Avatar
Superstool

Joined: January/03/2008
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Points: 9530
I have used 10x for quite a few years and like it quite well.  I have no issues with shake.

I test drove a pair of 8x for a couple weeks and used them a lot against my 10x.  In all honestly I just could not tell much difference in how they performed.  I did not really feel under magnified with the 8x or over magnified with the 10x. 

I would try to spend some time with both of the ones you are considering side by side and see what works best for you.

My dad uses 12x and would not even consider trading them for my 10x.  He will spend 3 to 4 hours at a time glassing.  He really likes them.  He feels he can see game better with them. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 12:42
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381
Although I use both, I prefer 10x for most hunting, because I do not have trouble keeping the shake down, and I can see more detail with the 10x. I also use a tripod quite often, and can make the most of the magnification in that manner.

I am strongly considering adding some 15x bins this year, for tripod mounted glassing only.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 14:52
JGRaider View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: February/06/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1432
I hunt lots of open country, so, like Bitteroot I prefer 10x.  I always hear the argument about image shake i regards to 8x v 10x.  To me, glassing means sitting down, resting my elbows on something like my sticks or my knees, and taking lots of time to pick apart the terrain.  Unlike "looking through binos" which I consider to be just standing there looking through them.  I don't consider that glassing myslelf, and I don't believe you can effectively glass an area without sitting down or at least resting your arms/elbows on something solid.  I'll take 10x every time.  
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 17:20
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
I just got the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars.  I can not put into words how amazing they are.  Everything is rock solid and you can see so much more detail than a regular 8x or 10x binocular.  The stabilization feature allows you to get a better focus too.  I can not imagine ever going buying a non stabilized binocular again.   I recently looked at the Swaro EL 10x42.  The glass was nice.  But, the image I am seeing in these Canons BLOWS them away. 

Comparing them to my 7x50 Nighthunters makes me feel like I am viewing the nighthunters in the midst of an earthquake.  I thought I was stable with the nighthunters until I used the Canons. 

They are heavy.  But, I would carry them if they were twice the weight.  They are that worth it.  I have Gen III nightvision and a 640 core thermal imager.  These new Canon's are even more exciting than both of these combined. 

Wow.  Just wow.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 18:55
Klamath View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: May/20/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1267
Those Canon's are good for sure.  I have been tempted for over a year to talk myself into one of those.  Gonna take some getting used to having a for safety's sake, fresh, spare battery though.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 19:08
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
I just got done using them (I can't set them down). 

I was comparing them to my Nighthunters.  I saw what I thought might be a small lizard on a fence about 50 yards away with the Nighthunters.  I didn't know for sure. I picked up the Canons and turned on the stabilization feature.  Not only could I tell it was a lizard, I could see his eyes clearly and the fact that he had a small patch of brown on his side. 

Again.  Amazing.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/27/2012 at 21:55
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381
Glad you like the Canons, m4coyotehunter.  I have used stabilized canon bins, and loved them as well.  The effect is a lot like using tripod-mounted bins.  It is AMAZING what you can see using stabilized bins, either way you stabilize them.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 07:27
Bird Watcher View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1490
Originally posted by Klamath Klamath wrote:

Also 10x is high enough for me that heat mirage personally is a deal breaker issue as it seems to me much worse at 10x.  I have and use 10x, but I stay away from long distance and mirage conditions.  No mirage and long distance is another matter.

Steve,

Heat mirage is something that is 'rarely' mentioned & perhaps the reason for that is the type of   
arid, or semi-arid terrain, that is being hunted on. Good point in any case. 

In my local area heat shimmer is not noticeable until I start using magnifications much higher than 10x & often times it is seen above water as well.

Stan




Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 07:32
Bird Watcher View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1490
Originally posted by Bitterroot Bulls Bitterroot Bulls wrote:

I am strongly considering adding some 15x bins this year, for tripod mounted glassing only.

Matt,

I'd like to hear more, from you, regarding your decision to go with 15x binoculars, either here on the forum or in a PM.


Stan 


Edited by Bird Watcher - April/28/2012 at 08:45
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 09:33
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
After using these new Canons for an afternoon and a night, I find myself asking a question.  Seriously ...

Besides the weight issue, why would anyone buy an non-stabilized binocular?

Yes.  They are heavier.  But, the difference in the quality of the image is so dramatic that, in my mind, the other binoculars are obsolete.  When you account for shake, the $2600 Swaro 10x42 ELs were a distant second place to the canons. 

I don't get it.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 10:23
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381
Stan, I am looking at the lightweight Minox 15s.  They would supplement, not supplant the 10s in the high country.
 
m4ch,
 
I have no need for a stabilized binocular because I always have a tripod, and the tripod-stabilized Swarovskis still have a slightly superior image to the Canons.
 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 10:35
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
That makes sense if you use a tripod. Don't most people use binoculars handheld?
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 11:53
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
I was just outside looking at a Jet at I am guessing 30,000'.  With my Steiners I could see the landing gear as I used all my concentration fighting to make my image as stable as possible.  With the Canons, I could relax and not just see the same landing gear, I could study it.

Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 12:11
mike650 View Drop Down
Optics God
Optics God
Avatar

Joined: May/14/2006
Location: West of Rockies
Status: Offline
Points: 12711
I hunt out west 100% of the time, 10x is what I would recommend.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 13:04
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381
Originally posted by m4coyotehunter m4coyotehunter wrote:

That makes sense if you use a tripod. Don't most people use binoculars handheld?
 
I was just answering your question:
 
Originally posted by m4coyotehunter m4coyotehunter wrote:


Besides the weight issue, why would anyone buy an non-stabilized binocular?
 
But here are some more answers:
 
1.  Bulk
2.  Batteries
3.  Durability
4.  Maximum optical performance.
 
Coincidentally these are the weaknesses of rangefinding binoculars, as well.
 
Additionally, I can get a near-stabilized image from seated viewing.
 
Stabilized binoculars are most usefull for handheld distance glassing and marine ajpplications, IMO.  They really shine in those situations.  I am glad you enjoy yours.  Eventually, I will get one, myself.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 15:53
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Thanks Bitterroot, for sake of friendly discussion, here is my response:

Bulk - you are right.  They are more bulky.  The image quality is worth it to me.

Batteries - To me, no big deal.  Just about everything has batteries.  And, they still work without them as a regular binocular.

Durability - I don't know.  The L IS WPs seem built like a tank.  The manual even says to dunk them in a buck of water to clean them.

Maximum optical performance - I actually think this is the advantage of the stabilized.  I have handled $2600 Swaro ELs.  When you use both handheld, I think the Canon BLOWS the Swaros away in terms of image quality.  Even if the glass of the Swaro is better,  natural human shake ruins the image.  For me sitting, there is still orders of magnitude more shake on the Swaro compared to the image stabilized Canons. 


Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 16:54
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381

m4ch,

Thank you, and I see no reason for an unfriendly discussion.
 
Again, I think the Canon IS bins are a great product, and the stabilization works as advertized.
 
I don't like batteries, and try to minimize my needs for them.
 
Bulk and weight are very important to backpackers, and people with neck problems.
 
Electronic components are inherently less durable than mechanical components.
 
By maximum optical performance I meant when comparing without stabilization.  As I posted before the Canons, in my experience, don't have quite the optical performance of other high-end bins.  Non-stabilized bins can be stabilized by tripod or technique.
 
I don't spend a lot of time standing and hand-holding binoculars, myself.  I move between stationary glassing points.
 
Others may have different needs in a binocular.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 17:17
m4coyotehunter View Drop Down
Optics GrassHopper
Optics GrassHopper


Joined: April/27/2012
Status: Offline
Points: 16
"By maximum optical performance I meant when comparing without stabilization."

I think this is the heart of the issue.  Yes, if you put $2600 Swaros and the Canon on tripods, the Swaros will be better. However, in my opinion, the overwhelming majority of people use binoculars without tripods.  So, the million dollar question is:

Is physical non-tripod "technique" be good enough to to take advantage of the superior $2600 glass you see in high end binoculars?

My opinion is no. 

Image quality = glass quality + stabilization

This is where the Canons give the better image over the high end alpha binoculars.  Even sitting with your elbows on your knees still gives a degree of shake that is greater than the shake on the stabilized Canons.  Especially when glassing for long periods of time.  Therefore, the image quality is better. 
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 17:26
Bird Watcher View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master
Avatar

Joined: August/30/2006
Status: Offline
Points: 1490
Originally posted by m4coyotehunter m4coyotehunter wrote:

Durability - I don't know.  The L IS WPs seem built like a tank.

The manual even says to dunk them in a buck of water to clean them.

Dunking them in a bucket of water 'only' applies to the 10x42 L IS WP model.

"Durability?".....after the warranty expires and the Image Stabilization system requires a replacement, due to being dropped, or whatever, you are looking at a repair bill in excess of $700.00. 

Stan


Edited by Bird Watcher - April/29/2012 at 08:22
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 20:35
JGRaider View Drop Down
Optics Master
Optics Master


Joined: February/06/2008
Status: Offline
Points: 1432
I've guided hunters for 10 years, probably 100 of them.  I've never seen battery powered glass in the field for the reasons mentioned.  There's a reason electronics in optics are not warrantied forever like the rest of the bino.  No offense. I'm glad you like 'em.
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)     Back to Top Direct Link To This Post Posted: April/28/2012 at 21:49
Bitterroot Bulls View Drop Down
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Optics Master Extraordinaire
Avatar

Joined: May/07/2009
Location: Montana
Status: Online
Points: 3381
Originally posted by m4coyotehunter m4coyotehunter wrote:

"By maximum optical performance I meant when comparing without stabilization."

I think this is the heart of the issue. 
 
This is absolutely the heart of the issue in this debate.  Your position is that the advantages of stabilization outweigh the advantages of superior optics.  My position is that traditional optics can be stabilized in the field in a number of ways to give their superior optics advantage over the stabilized Canons.  We disagree on this, and that is OK.
 
Originally posted by m4coyotehunter m4coyotehunter wrote:


Is physical non-tripod "technique" be good enough to to take advantage of the superior $2600 glass you see in high end binoculars?

 
Without question.  I assure you I can stabilize 10x bins from a supported position to take advantage of their full optical performance.  I disagree about the elbows on knees seated technique.  I actually think it gives excellent stabilization to the image.  I also like to sit prone with the bins resting on the crest of a rock.  That is remarkably stable.
 
And once more, I use a tripod often ... very often.  Stabilization is a non-issue when using a tripod.  I heartily recommend it to any hunter that spends significant time glassing.  Sometimes I have BogPod shooting sticks with me, and they work great resting the bins on the rifle rest.
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  1 2>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Similar Threads: "8x vs. 10x - a slightly different question?"
Subject Author Forum Replies Last Post
Re: kahles advice 8x or 10x heatherbvann Binoculars 2 8/12/2005 3:03:20 PM
Bushnell Legend Porros 8x vs 10x Barn Dog Binoculars 4 10/12/2005 1:04:22 PM
Leupold VXIII 2.5-8x vs 3.5-10x 2000Z-71 Rifle Scopes 3 6/12/2007 7:26:07 AM
8X or 10X ? (Hmmm) Mythos Binoculars 13 8/8/2007 1:41:56 PM
8x or 10x? mellis12 Binoculars 16
8X 10X Steiner Peregrine XP moosehead Binoculars 10
Zen Ray 8x or 10x ED3s m_freeman Binoculars 0
ZEN Prime HD 8x vs 10x Klamath Binoculars 2
Zen Ed3 8x vs 10x DAVE44 Binoculars 4
8x or 10x? encore4me Binoculars 14


This page was generated in 0.191 seconds.