8x32 pros and cons (1 Viewer)

Hi, I would like to know your views on the good and bad points of owning a decent 8x32 binocular.

I know that a 42mm lens will let in more light at dawn/dusk but is the resolution really higher than a 32mm during daylight?

If you could let me know your experience with this binocular and maybe suggest the best 8x32 for under £200?

Thanks

I had a pair of 8x43 minox hg and now use a pair of minox hg 8x33. The 8x43 were only marginally brighter but this was offset by the lighter weight and smaller size of the 8x33 which I found more user friendly.

I also have a pair of Opticron Discovery 8x32 and the good points I can think of are they are lightweight with a nice wide fov. They fit my hand perfectly and they have a nice big focus wheel. They have a bright clear view close to the edge and they come in well under the 200 mark. Bad points for the price I cant think of any.

Ger.

If you have good eyesight anyway, a decent 8x32 should resolve at least twice as much detail as your eye can see, a good 8x42 should do three times. Some claim it's possible to distinguish the difference. I personally think aspects like contrast and colour balance make a greater practical difference. I don't think you would find anything lacking in a good 8x32.

The little Opticron discovery Ger referred to is cute and great fun to use. Sherwoods have a couple of Ex-demo Opticron Verano 8x32s at the moment at half price. Japanese made rather than Chinese, and pretty good IMO.
http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/ex_demo/ex_demo_optics.htm

David

I came late to 8x32s after using many larger binoculars (up to 25x150s)
but now find the smaller ones my most used binoculars due to small size and light weight.
The few weaknesses are during low light conditions and very distant birds.

edj

The attribute that I find most inferior to full sized is that it is harder to look around the view without vignetting. Eyes must remain closer to centered for best view.

--AP

Alexis Powell said:

The attribute that I find most inferior to full sized is that it is harder to look around the view without vignetting. Eyes must remain closer to centered for best view.

--AP

Click to expand...

Yup exit pupil is the main thing. Id say more but Im losing time on this dumb tablet thing. Don't really know how it works. Go for exit pupil if you dont mind the weight. Go for weight if you can live without the exit pupil. That's about it I think.

Mark

Kammerdiner said:

Go for exit pupil if you dont mind the weight. Go for weight if you can live without the exit pupil. That's about it I think.

Mark

Click to expand...

I think it can't be put more succinctly, Mark. Also, this is where you'll find the argument for owning two binoculars: a large exit pupil-binocular for serious, no-holds-barred birding, and a smaller sized model for leasure time activities, walks etc. For the latter an 8x32 is perfect and the nice thing is that you don't have to splash out on the latest and greatest but can go shopping for discontinued models of good quality as you'll accept more compromises anyway. My binocular of choice here is a Leica Trinovid 8x32 BA and it gets lots of use. For the other one I decided to skip the 8x40/42 format and go for the Zeiss 8x56 FL which has reference quality resolution and ease of view in whatever conditions. On first glance it may seem that owning two binoculars is too much of a luxury but in fact it's not: for this combination I paid less than what a new alpha Swarovski, Zeiss or Nikon 8x40/42 would have cost me.

Renze

Matri-Juve said:

Hi, I would like to know your views on the good and bad points of owning a decent 8x32 binocular.

I know that a 42mm lens will let in more light at dawn/dusk but is the resolution really higher than a 32mm during daylight?

If you could let me know your experience with this binocular and maybe suggest the best 8x32 for under £200?

Thanks

Click to expand...

I feel overall the 8x32 format is the best all around birding binocular there is when you consider all the pros and cons.

Alexis Powell said:

The attribute that I find most inferior to full sized is that it is harder to look around the view without vignetting. Eyes must remain closer to centered for best view.

--AP

Click to expand...

I use a pair of Zeiss 8x42 FLs and a venerable pair of porro Nikon 8x32s. Whatever the technical advantages of 42mm over 32mm OGs in 'real world' birding I find very little difference optically. I have never noticed the problem outlined above - not that I've looked for it which may be the key.

Yes, at dawn/dusk the 32's are duller, but only when the light's really poor (last/first 20-30 minutes). On a dull overcast day the difference is there, but only visible on direct comparison. Most days I couldn't really tell. I don't think I've ever missed a bird or an ID as a result.

On the other hand the 8x32s (even my porro pair) are more compact, lighter and easier to pack. Unlike marginal optical advantages of a 42mm, this advantage is there all day every day! If I was buying a new pair of 'alpha' bins today I suspect I'd go for 8x30/32s rather than 8x42s (but as suggested elsewhere on BF might well spend the same money on a top grade 'beta' 8x32 and 10x42).

Best thing is to go to a dealer late in the day or when it's particularly dull and compare 8x32 vs 8x42 bins (preferably the same make/series) yourself. If you're happy with the marginal difference then you'll find the 8x32s a better deal (they're also usually much cheaper too!)

[email protected] said:

I feel overall the 8x32 format is the best all around birding binocular there is when you consider all the pros and cons.

Click to expand...

I feel overall the 7x42 format is the best all around birding binocular there is when you consider all the pros and cons. :t:

Each to their own, there is no universal best!

I think a full size rather than "mid compact" may be better quality at the price point suggested by the OP, but all binoculars are better than none!

I have quite happily used a cheap pair of Hawke Nuture-Trek 8x32 for days when I expect I could get sand blasted or want a smaller pair, if you don't compare your binoculars to others then they are fine, but no matter how small a difference, there is one to be had between full sized and mid compact type bins of the same model.

Also, I have quite small hands, but for some reason I always felt the handling characteristics of a smaller binocular are a bit naff for want of a better word, I think as long as I am physically capable I will now always opt for a full size bin as my main bin, I know the optical quality is better, even if not detectable all the time, but comfort is a bigger quality for a binocular than I first realised, and for me my full sized bins are more comfortable than smaller ones.

I would not say no to an alpha 7x32 though!

Alexis Powell said:

The attribute that I find most inferior to full sized is that it is harder to look around the view without vignetting. Eyes must remain closer to centered for best view.

--AP

Click to expand...

I agree with both Alexis and Mark. My only complaint with the 8x32 format is the 4 mm exit pupil. I tend to prefer 5 mm or larger. The 8x32 shines in terms of size and overall ergonomics for most individuals. The 4 mm exit pupil is large enough to provide a bright enough image in almost all light conditions and the 8x magnification is the general limit for wjhat many individuals can hold steadily.

The now overlooked 7x35 is my "all purpose" configuration for general use though you will have a difficult time finding many of them to choose from. You will find either some relatively inexpensive porro designs that can and do suffer from quality control issues because of their price point and/or a select few 7x35/7x36 roof prisms that are notably more expensive.

Essex Tern said:

I feel overall the 7x42 format is the best all around birding binocular there is when you consider all the pros and cons. :t:

Each to their own, there is no universal best!

I think a full size rather than "mid compact" may be better quality at the price point suggested by the OP, but all binoculars are better than none!

I have quite happily used a cheap pair of Hawke Nuture-Trek 8x32 for days when I expect I could get sand blasted or want a smaller pair, if you don't compare your binoculars to others then they are fine, but no matter how small a difference, there is one to be had between full sized and mid compact type bins of the same model.

Also, I have quite small hands, but for some reason I always felt the handling characteristics of a smaller binocular are a bit naff for want of a better word, I think as long as I am physically capable I will now always opt for a full size bin as my main bin, I know the optical quality is better, even if not detectable all the time, but comfort is a bigger quality for a binocular than I first realised, and for me my full sized bins are more comfortable than smaller ones.

I would not say no to an alpha 7x32 though!

Click to expand...

I have tried many 7X's and they never had enough magnification for me. The 8X just gets so much closer to the bird. 8.5X as in Swarovski's are nice too.

Matri-Juve said:

Hi, I would like to know your views on the good and bad points of owning a decent 8x32 binocular.

I know that a 42mm lens will let in more light at dawn/dusk but is the resolution really higher than a 32mm during daylight?

If you could let me know your experience with this binocular and maybe suggest the best 8x32 for under £200?

Thanks

Click to expand...

8x30 and 8x32 have found extensive usage aming birders for good reason. Their somewhat high magnification combined with a wide field and light weight means they can be used successfully for hours in the field.

squidge said:

I had a pair of 8x43 minox hg and now use a pair of minox hg 8x33. The 8x43 were only marginally brighter but this was offset by the lighter weight and smaller size of the 8x33 which I found more user friendly.

I also have a pair of Opticron Discovery 8x32 and the good points I can think of are they are lightweight with a nice wide fov. They fit my hand perfectly and they have a nice big focus wheel. They have a bright clear view close to the edge and they come in well under the 200 mark. Bad points for the price I cant think of any.

Ger.

Click to expand...

Ger.

Don't you find that the midsized models give less depth perception and 3-D effect than the full sized models?

And also that the full sized models resolve slightly better than the midsized?

This has been my experience in comparing full sized to midsized roofs from various price points.

At the $300 and under price point, I prefer the full sized models or midsized plus such as the Pentax 8x36 NV, which is 6" long, same length as the full sized Pentax 8x42 CS. The FOV is a modest 6.5* so "edge effects" are well controlled.

You often gain FOV with midsized configurations, but that usually comes at the expense of "edge effects" (pincushion and field curvature).

The Opticron Discovery 8x32 has 7.5*, which is pretty good if the edges are sharp and there aren't any weird distortions while panning.

Brock

So the 8x32 has the potential to give a wider FOV. Nice

One thing I would like to know is, does the 8x32 have more shake compared to a heavier 8x42?

The Opticron Discovery you guys suggested does sound good, many thanks.

Matri-Juve said:

One thing I would like to know is, does the 8x32 have more shake compared to a heavier 8x42?

Click to expand...

It seems most don't have a problem, but I do and prefer using either a 7x26 or 7x36. It you want to consider a lower power x32 the Viking MD 6.5x is worth considering and comes in below £200. Not the prettiest model around but I was seriously impressed with the centre sharpness.

David

Matri-Juve said:

So the 8x32 has the potential to give a wider FOV. Nice

One thing I would like to know is, does the 8x32 have more shake compared to a heavier 8x42?

The Opticron Discovery you guys suggested does sound good, many thanks.

Click to expand...

Weight does help even out the "shakes" to a point, over the course of a day that heavier weight can have the opposite effect and increase shakes because of muscle fatigue.

How much weight is the minimum for you may be different than for me. Bins under 20 oz. start showing more shake, BUT ergonomics play as an important role as the weight.

Take two bins, same weight -20 oz. The 8x30 EII (with Bushwackers added) and the 8x32 Noble (early Jap. version that looked like a mini-me Regal LX).

The 8x30 porro gave me more "real estate" and allowed me to support the weight from the bottom with my thumbs. W/out the Bushwacker covers, the views were a bit shaky due having nowhere to rest my pinkies. With the covers, the balance was perfect.

The roofs, OTOH, were so small -- 4.3" by 4.4" - that my fingers ended up in a praying position (praying I can hold the image steady), with no support for my thumbs folded underneath the barrels, so I'm pushing in from the sides to hold the bin. Shake City.

How well you can handle an 8x32 has a lot to do with the size of your hands, how steady your hands are to begin with, and how well the particular pair of bins fits your hands.

A case in point, mooreorless and I both had a Nikon 8x32 HG. For my large hands, I ended up in the praying mantis position while using it. Eventually, my palms would cramp from holding the bins for long periods and shake would set in.

For mooreorless, less was more, because he could better balance and hold the bins with his smaller hands.

Another case in point, this one with the tables turned. Two bins, same user - me. Two bins - 8.5x42 EL, 8x32 EL.

I found the full sized EL (WB version) big, bulky, and too heavy for carrying around my neck all day, and the thumb indents were in the wrong place for my hands.

The 8x32 EL fit my hands much, much better than OJ's blood stained glove. Perfect, in fact. That was a first for me with a roof, which usually don't fit my hands well.

So while one could say in general that full sized bins are easier to hold because of their size and weight, it really depends on the bin/user interface.

IOW, there's no hard and fast rules, you got to try them to know for sure.

brocknroller said:

Ger.

Don't you find that the midsized models give less depth perception and 3-D effect than the full sized models?

And also that the full sized models resolve slightly better than the midsized?

This has been my experience in comparing full sized to midsized roofs from various price points.

At the $300 and under price point, I prefer the full sized models or midsized plus such as the Pentax 8x36 NV, which is 6" long, same length as the full sized Pentax 8x42 CS. The FOV is a modest 6.5* so "edge effects" are well controlled.

You often gain FOV with midsized configurations, but that usually comes at the expense of "edge effects" (pincushion and field curvature).

The Opticron Discovery 8x32 has 7.5*, which is pretty good if the edges are sharp and there aren't any weird distortions while panning.

Brock

Click to expand...

When I compared the minox hg 8x43 to the 8x33 they both had the same depth perception or 3d effect. The only differences in the view were the slightly brighter view of the 43 but this was offset by the wider fov of the 33, add in the lighter weight and more compact size and this clinched it for me as this is what I was looking for.

As regards the 'resolve' of the binoculars the 43 had a very slight edge over the 33 but I put this down to the slightly brighter image of the 43.

I prefer the mid sized bins over the full size mainly due to size, weight and the wider fov. That is not to say I won't get myself a full size pair in the future, not that I have my eye on a pair.

Ger.

Only a 4mm exit pupil. But small and light is a pro.

Lighter / smaller is better for moving about, right?