Set me straight 8 or 10 power

[elkhorn98]

I have narrowed my search down to Nikon Monarch ATBs or Audubon Equinox HP, but still am not sure what power to get. These have objectives lens of 42 so exit pupil diameter would be 5.25 for the 8s and 4.2 for the 10s. I can hold the 10 steady but I am worried about low light situations. It seems the 8s would be better. Please give me your thoughts on this. I will be using these for birding, hiking, general use, fishing etc. Thanks.

[Robert Ellis]

I have narrowed my search down to Nikon Monarch ATBs or Audubon Equinox HP, but still am not sure what power to get. These have objectives lens of 42 so exit pupil diameter would be 5.25 for the 8s and 4.2 for the 10s. I can hold the 10 steady but I am worried about low light situations. It seems the 8s would be better. Please give me your thoughts on this. I will be using these for birding, hiking, general use, fishing etc. Thanks.

The 8x have a larger exit pupil so they might be EASIER to use in low light, but on the other hand the 10x will show more DEATIL in any light, especially low light.

You can check this by using what is called twilight factor. It is a quick and dirty way to estimate low light performance. Simply multiply the magnification by the objective diameter and take the square root. Larger objectives AND higher magnification will improve the score, which is a score of rough resolution.

8x42s score 18.33, 10x42s score 20.49

For general use most would lean towards 8x.

[AlanFrench]

I have narrowed my search down to Nikon Monarch ATBs or Audubon Equinox HP, but still am not sure what power to get. These have objectives lens of 42 so exit pupil diameter would be 5.25 for the 8s and 4.2 for the 10s. I can hold the 10 steady but I am worried about low light situations. It seems the 8s would be better. Please give me your thoughts on this. I will be using these for birding, hiking, general use, fishing etc. Thanks.

I would recommend also giving some consideration to field of view. In general, 8 power binoculars have a wider field. I find this very useful when trying to follow birds flitting around in brush or up in the treetops.

Clear skies, Alan

[elkcub]

... In general, 8 power binoculars have a wider field. I find this very useful when trying to follow birds flitting around in brush or up in the treetops.

Clear skies, Alan

And the 8x will usually have greater depth of field (DOF), require less focus adjustment, and provide more cues for spatial perception.

I just had to get the human factors in. ;)

Elkcub

[elkhorn98]

So what do most people here use 8s for? How about 10s?

[helenol]

I have a pair of 8x42 Zeiss FLs and I use them mainly in woodland. Very good indeed in low light conditions.

[Tero]

Light should be OK in California at 10x. Compare models, get the brightest. 10x40 is olenty of field, just have to learn to point them fast

9x is usually not worth searching, so 8, 8.5 and 10, try all

[Jane Turner]

8x always for me.. clarity, stability and depth of field which allows your eyes to discern more detail than in a more magnified but shaky image... its the size of the exit pupil that is the most important factor IMO...when it is much bigger than your pupil you can tolerate much more shake!

[salty]

for general use 8x would probaly suit you best. easy on the eye with a brilliant field of view. but if you were useing mainly for birding i would go for 10x. the best mag for those tricky id nightmares. they are still user friendly too.

[elkcub]

... I will be using these for birding, hiking, general use, fishing etc. Thanks.

Actually, considering the variety of anticipated uses I'd really suggest thinking a 30/32 mm objective instead. They are more compact and weigh considerably less. Why pack an extra 6-10 oz. hiking and fishing? Waterproofness is very important for you.

Personally, I'd recommend an 8x30/32 for what you have in mind, and go with one of the better brands with good customer service. Later on you can buy a 10x or 42mm optic if you start to specialize in long distance or low-light observing. Many folks never need a better glass than an 8x30/32.

Just another opinion, of course.
Elkcub

[Atomic Chicken]

Greetings!

Elkcub is absolutely right-on with this one. Unless you are using your binoculars mostly for low-light evening viewing, an 8x30 or 8x32 will serve you much better for your intended purposes.

The first high-end binoculars I ever purchased were Nikon HG 8x32's, with my intended uses almost identical to what you listed. I never regretted the choice - they perform marvelously.

If you are looking for something a bit cheaper, and lighter weight, consider the Pentax XP 8x33 model. Not quite up to the optical standards of the Nikon, but pretty close (and less than 1/2 the cost and 2/3 the weight).

Best wishes,
Bawko

[ranburr]

10x42s for me. I prefer this magnification and objective size for my best all around bino.

ranburr

[elkhorn98]

I am leaning toward the Nikon 10x42s. They are only 5.6 inches long and 21ozs. Most 32s are about the same weight. I may also get a small 8x27 or so compact size for hiking, etc.

[Robert Ellis]

I am leaning toward the Nikon 10x42s. They are only 5.6 inches long and 21ozs. Most 32s are about the same weight. I may also get a small 8x27 or so compact size for hiking, etc.

The aforementioned Pentax XPs, which I may gain a pair of soon, are a mere 4.2 inches long and 4.8 inchess across. They are as tiny as compact porros, but with 33mm objectives. I held a pair on Friday, quite compact.

[HokkaidoStu]

I am leaning toward the Nikon 10x42s. They are only 5.6 inches long and 21ozs. Most 32s are about the same weight. I may also get a small 8x27 or so compact size for hiking, etc.

I have the Nikon Monarch 10x42. For many years I used an old Zeiss Jena Jenoptem 8x30 (what a great binocular THAT was). To be perfectly honest I haven't noticed that much difference birding-wise. The narrower fov is not really an issue for me-like another poster said you have to be just a touch faster in finding the bird that's all. There's less depth of field too of course but in terms of finding and ID'ing birds this isn't such a big issue for me.

As an allrounder I prefer the slightly higher mag even in a forest environment.

I still love my old Zeiss Jena's though. Shame they're crappy for spectacle wearers and totally unwaterproof.

BTW I think the Nikon Monarch (of either mag) is great value for the price in the USA and Japan...................

[etc]

That's a great assessment.
8x does seem like an all-purpose power. 42mm objectives are a great match for it.

8x always for me.. clarity, stability and depth of field which allows your eyes to discern more detail than in a more magnified but shaky image... its the size of the exit pupil that is the most important factor IMO...when it is much bigger than your pupil you can tolerate much more shake!

[seggs]

10x always for me...tried 8x but always come back to 10x..that bit extra wins me over
but its everyone to there own..

[Sancho]

My opinion only: I have 8x, 10x and 12x binos. I mostly use the 10x. But if I were restricted to using only one pair of binos, it would be 8x32, no contest. Why? 8x is best for close cover and woodland, etc. But it covers all eventualities. 10x (and Image-Stablised 12x) is better, IMHO, for more distant viewing, but hard work at close quarters or in cover. So if you want "One Size For All Jobs" binoculars, go for 8x. And modern mid to top end 32mm objectives are bright enough for all eventualities. Just my opinions, and I'm no expert. Best Wishes!

[jacquot]

I have and use both, like Sancho, and agree with what he said. Everybody is different, but for certain types of birding--spring migration in the forest, or very cold winter birding, for instance--the 8x32s rule, in the first instance for the wider view, in the second to hold steady easier. Other times, I want the extra power, especially for hawk or sea watching but also usually have and need my scope then, too. I travel with light kits, so it is generally no problem to carry binos and the scope even for hours at a time. If I had only one, it would be the best 8s I could afford.

[Tero]

Having dabbled in 8x, I have come back to 10x, for most of the winter and for trips out West where they have few trees. I did try to look for 10x25 at some point, but decided I could only hold 32mm or 42mm steady.

Birds are often SMALL THINGS, I like them bigger, up close and personal.

Nikon Monarch ATBs or Audubon Equinox HP
Get one in 10x, one in 8x. ;)

[danehower]

I really like the 8x - Keep in mind it is always nice to see the bird and in its surrounding environment - mabey you could see two birds interacting in the 8x as well. However , if you are look across a field,shore line, or some span of distance then mabey the 10x's are better. On that note 10x's might be better for seeing hawks also.

[Sancho]

I really like the 8x - Keep in mind it is always nice to see the bird and in its surrounding environment

Good point, and that´s why I love my new Santa-sourced Nikon 10x35 EII´s, ´cos they´re the only 10x bins I´ve ever seen that have a 7 degree FOV. 8x were always my choice if I thought I was going to be looking at flying birds or flocks. What I don´t understand is why more manufacturers don´t make 10x with appreciable FOV....it´s obviously possible if Nikon did it?

[ceasar]

Good point, and that´s why I love my new Santa-sourced Nikon 10x35 EII´s, ´cos they´re the only 10x bins I´ve ever seen that have a 7 degree FOV. 8x were always my choice if I thought I was going to be looking at flying birds or flocks. What I don´t understand is why more manufacturers don´t make 10x with appreciable FOV....it´s obviously possible if Nikon did it?

Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss make 10 x 32 roof prism binoculars with 360' fields of view, almost the same as the Nikon 10 x 35 EII.

Bob

[MacGee]

I can hold the 10 steady...No, you can't. Nor can you hold an 8x or a 6x steady. Your brain fools you into thinking you're holding bins steady, but actually they're moving all the time. And the greater the movement, the more degradation of the image. Whether the larger image will compensate for that is where personal choice comes in.

My view of the pros and cons of 10x are as follows:

Pros:
larger image

Cons:
heavier (or smaller exit pupil)
narrower FOV
smaller DOF
more shake

With 10x it's harder to find the bird, harder to get it in focus, harder to keep it in focus.

Michael

[Sancho]

Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss make 10 x 32 roof prism binoculars with 360' fields of view, almost the same as the Nikon 10 x 35 EII.

Bob
I didn´t know that. Thanks Bob. If my Nikon´s ever bite the dust, I´ll know exactly what to buy. :t: