Visit the SWFA.com site to check out our current specials. |
what are differences between a 8x32 vs a 8x42 |
Post Reply |
Author | ||
mtmander
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/10/2013 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: January/24/2014 at 11:03 |
|
I would like to understand the differences/benefits between the 32 and 42 for the same binocular besides the weight and FOV. Why yould you buy a 8x32 vs a 8x42 ?
thanks
|
||
RifleDude
MODERATOR EVIL OPPRESSOR Joined: October/13/2006 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 16337 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
The 42mm objective provides a bit better low light performance (a "brighter" image in poor light) due to a larger exit pupil. This assumes a comparison of optics of the same or similar quality. Theoretically, you also get a tad better resolution and likely deeper depth of field as well. However, you usually get wider FOV with the 32mm version. Some people find the additional weight and size of 8X42's make it easier to hold steadily and therefore better stabilize the view in use.
However, everything's a tradeoff, and you have to decide what priorities you value the most. If you get a high quality 8X32, you will still have superb image quality, and for most eyes, you will likely have enough low light performance for most uses. It all depends on how you use your binos. For me, I prefer an 8X32 the majority of the time. I'm a hunter, and although I have 42mm and 50mm objective binos as well, I carry my Leica UV HD 8X32s with me most of the time while hunting. It will take me well beyond legal shooting hours already, so I see no need for a larger, heavier bino, and I don't see any noticeable resolution difference between it and its 42mm brethren. I'm therefore willing to trade a little low light performance for a handier, less bulky optic that doesn't give me neck strain after carrying it around all day. |
||
Ted
Money can't buy happiness... but it's much more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than on a bicycle. |
||
Skylar McMahon
Optics Jedi Knight Capt. BlowHard Joined: April/05/2011 Location: TEXAS Status: Offline Points: 6082 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I believe that you also have to account who made them.
Like with what RifleDude uses (Leica Ultravid HD 8X32 Binoculars) versus something from another manufacturer...designed in 8X42, there is very little to no difference optically from what I could see, that is also in low light. Matter of fact, I was able to see past legal shooting times with those very binoculars. The benefit for me actually, was the weight. Since, I love to bow hunt, I prodominantly wear bino's around my neck while hanging in a tree and after a while, the larger, heavier bino's will create some strain. Smaller binoculars do not have the additional weight, but ergonomicall they are smaller and in most cases are used with single hand operation rather than stabilizing with both hands. May I ask which manufacturer you are entertaining?
|
||
mtmander
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/10/2013 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I was looking a the Vortex Viper HD Binoculars
|
||
PhilR.
Optics Apprentice Joined: August/02/2008 Status: Offline Points: 162 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
IMO, there is no need for an 8x bino in 42mm, as long as one can spend enough to get a very good 32mm one (I would consider the Viper HD to be a very good one). A good 8x32 is plenty bright, and as already mentioned, has the advantage of less weight and more F.O.V.. Between the two Vipers, there is no way I would get the 42mm version. The 42mm costs more, but yet you pay a weight penalty of almost a quarter-pound, and you get much less F.O.V.. IMO a 350 feet FOV is sub-standard compared to what you can purchase today. Even the 32mm Viper's FOV isn't that great, but it is still a lot better than the 42mm version. I know you didn't ask about this, but I'm going to post this anyway -- do yourself a favor and investigate the Nikon Monarch 7 8x30. This is a great 30mm bino that costs less than the Viper HD, but yet has a very sharp and bright view that is even greater in FOV than the Viper. It also weighs much less than the Viper too. If you compare these side-by-side, you will probably start to wonder why the Viper costs so much, or why the Nikon costs so little. Even if they were to cost the same, I would still go with the Nikon M7 over the Viper..... |
||
Klamath
Optics Master Joined: May/20/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
As has been pointed out, the big difference is size. If you are not needing a lot of twilight use, then typically a 32 mm is enough.
I happen to think the Vortex 8x32 Viper HD is a top notch binocular. It is a lot better IMHO than its x42 mm big brothers. Give me a couple of days and I'll have a better handle on the Leupold Mojave 8x32. Probably worth a look along with the Monarch 7.
|
||
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron |
||
mtmander
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/10/2013 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
Give me a couple of days and I'll have a better handle on the Leupold Mojave 8x32. Probably worth a look along with the Monarch 7
Thanks, I would be interested in your input on the Leupold Mojave 8x32. I have also looked ,on other forums too, and the the Leupold 8x42 Mckinley have good reviews. I have a old pair of Nicon Monarch 10x42 and I am looking for a 8x that has the best glass that I can afford. I am in my late 60's , retired, and spend more time looking so I want glass that will be clear and gentle on my eyes.
|
||
Wood
Optics GrassHopper Joined: August/22/2012 Location: Spokane Status: Offline Points: 24 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
|
||
God is good
|
||
Klamath
Optics Master Joined: May/20/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
In that case, the Leupold Acadia 8x32 is really worth a look. It is one of the smallest 8x32 glasses I have, or have seen. Nice optics too.
|
||
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron |
||
Klamath
Optics Master Joined: May/20/2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1308 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
In general response to the OP, I would say the choice is pretty personal. The issue is size. That is more or less important according to how you use the binocular. If you have a bunch of gear in a pack, with your rifle, and measure your distance traveled in miles, and if twilight use is not a deal breaker, then the smaller size a good x32 is worth a look.
On the other hand, if your style is going to see you doing more stationary glassing, then the larger size of the x42 will be more comfortable at the end of the day. So will the larger exit pupil size be nice at the end of the day. Even if your pupil's when you are over the 50 year old hill, don't dilate to over 5 mm, the extra size to let your eyes roam in, and the somewhat less critical degree of eye placement they offer can have a big advantage at the end of the day. Personally, I think there can be a distinct level of less eyestrain at the end of the day with a little larger exit pupil. I think that also holds true with less rather than more magnification. So you need to factor in whether or not you are prone to eye strain or not. I also tend to think that how the binocular fits you face, eyes and hands is probably more important than the optics...with the caveat that we are dealing with good optics.
Edited by Klamath - January/27/2014 at 13:22 |
||
Steve
"Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron |
||
rj112275
Optics GrassHopper Joined: February/13/2014 Location: Cordova, TN Status: Offline Points: 5 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
+1 sir size difference. I tried to love a pair of 8x32 Swaros, but the fit wasn't right. Very compact and handy, but not right for me. Moved back to 8x42 which fit like a glove. Binoculars are not only about the optics. Fit is important too.
|
||
mtmander
Optics GrassHopper Joined: April/10/2013 Location: North Carolina Status: Offline Points: 20 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
|
I do get eye strain in my current Nicon 10x42's and I do glass a lot a dusk, from my cabin across the mountains (cabin is 6000 feet in montana) so I will get a 8x42.
Interesting comments on how a binocular fits you face and hands. I went to 2 Bass Pro stores to look at binoculars and I noticed a difference in how they fit. I tried several but focused on the McKinley (I have several Leupold rifle scopes and my first binocular was a Leupold porro), Monarch 5 and Zeiss Conquest HD , all in 10x42 since they did not have these in 8x42 (they did not have Vortex binoculars either).
I could not get the McKinley to fit me so it was difficult for me to look thru them, I hope the new eye cup version comes out soon. The Monarch 5 fit ok and the Zeiss fit the best, every time I picked the Zeiss Conquest HD up they felt good. They were also the brightest.
In posts there are comments about CA in the Zeiss Conquest HD but I could not tell in the store. Not sure if this is a big problem since I don't think I notice CA in my other binoculars.
I am still looking but now I know I need to see and try a binocular before buying it. |
||
Post Reply | |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |