First big purchase, compromise or not? (1 Viewer)

This is my first post here though I have been reading for a few days.

I am getting ready to make a big binocular purchase. I am prepared to spend up to $1000 as I've determined the quality I can get for that amount will please me for the rest of my life. This is probably the only time I will be able to make a purchase like this. I've thought myself into a corner though and here is why. I really can't decide between an 8x30/8x32 and a 10x42. Ideally I would like to have both. One for more casual birdwatching when something smaller would be appreciated, and the other for more intense use when time or opportunity is short. However, if I buy two $500 binoculars to stay within budget and not have to choose I am compromising quality. If I buy one for $1000 I am getting a much better binocular but only one, which would be great in some of my birdwatching pursuits but not the other, which I also see as a compromise. I am furthermore not decided which I would get if I did only get one, an 8x30/8x32 or a 10x42.

For background, I am used to a 10x50 Bushnell that I paid something like $50 for as an all purpose binocular and a 8x25 store brand compact. I am comfortable using the smaller pupil of the little binocular so that is not a concern. The bulk of the 10x50 bothers me as does its weight and if I had to guess I would estimate that at around two pounds. Any input would be helpful. Do I compromise on quality or on choice as a large part of me would rather have one of each size?

Welcome to Birdforum.

Here are my comments: you are right to think that 8x32 and 10x42 make a good combination of binoculars, but the 8x32 is more important. You will see everything there is to see with a first class 8x32. The 10x42 is great in open spaces, but too slow to focus and move in dense woods on fast birds. Think of these two as a shotgun and as a rifle: which one would you keep if you could have only one? You are also right that two $500 instruments will not be quite as good as a single $1000 instrument.
So, if you have only one shot and only $1000, look into the Svarovski SLC 8x30, or the Leica Trinovid 8x32. Both come with lifetime warranty, both are divine optics. Choose the one that fits your hands and face better. Cabelas and BassPro should have them. I hear that Minox HG 8x33 and Kahles 8x32 are very good, but i've never looked through them. Nikon HG 8x32 is also excellent.

F7A said:

Do I compromise on quality or on choice as a large part of me would rather have one of each size?

Click to expand...

Never compromise on quality, never.

Get the good 8x and then a 10x42, mid price Nikon Pentax or Vortex or Swift, to satisfy your 10x urges. Nobody is ready with just one binocular.

My initial thoughts tend to mirror that of Luca's. A quality 8x32 will satisfy 90% of the birding you are probably likely to run into. The only area where I have really found any of the 8x32s that I have owned to fail is long distance use. Surprisingly though that isn't necessarily because of the magnification or solely because of it. I tend to agree with the statement that anything you can see with 10x you can also see with 7x just at a smaller scale. I have yet to find a situation, handheld, where I was able to notice something with a 10x binocular that I could not with a 7x. Since 8x is a bit closer the gap shortens considerably.

So why do I believe they fail in some long distance situations? I believe it is primarily because of the smaller objective diameter. I have yet to find an 8x32 that seems to render the detail, or comfort level for that matter, that an 8x42 or 7x42 provides for long distance glassing. On the issue of 10x I would prefer to go the 50 mm route as I believe the larger objective diameter and subsequent larger exit pupil greatly aids in making long distance viewing more comfortable and therefore more satisfying.

One for more casual birdwatching when something smaller would be appreciated, and the other for more intense use when time or opportunity is short.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying with the above quote but then again I do not. I actually believe the opposite, of the latter part of your above comment, would be the case. If you have a short span of opportunity then I think the larger field of view and quicker handling of the 8x32 would yield better results than the 10x42. I would also argue that the 8x32 provides better depth of field thus making it easier to scan from a depth perspective. I think it could also be argued that since the 8x32 would be more compact then you would also be more likely to have it with you on more occasions and thus your chances of catching a fleeting glimpse of a particular bird would be better.

To make a long story short and if I had to choose, I would opt for the aforementioned Swaro 8x30 SLC. For the criteria you listed I think it would be the highest quality 8x30 roof prism glass in your price range. I would suggest the Trinovid BN as well but I haven't really seen many places that have a brand new 8x32 BN for $1000 or under. Typically they sell for just over that price point though I have seen the factory certified/pre owned models for around $900.

On the other hand, I have seen refurbished Nikon Premier LX 8x32s (argued as having the best image quality of any of the 8x32 roofs) on sale for between $500 and $600. You are not compromising quality or warranty service with that choice. With the extra $300-$400 you could pick up a fairly decent 10x42-10x50 porro possibly or even one of the mid priced roofs of that configuration. Considering you may use the 10x42 considerably less you may not have an issue with compromising the quality level.

Just my thoughts on the issue.

I have an 8X32 and a 10X42, among other bins. I do like my 10:42, and do use it in the open and in the woods without a problem. The 10X42 gives me the detail that the 8X32 does not, but I would not want it for my only bin. All that said, if I had it all to do over, instead of buying this bin and that bin, of different magnification and objective-lens size, I would have purchased fewer bins and made them top-of-the-line bins. If I were in your shoes, I would put all the money into one pair. It would be hard to go wrong with a high-quality 8X32. I have a Nikon Premier LXL 8X32, I really do like it. If you do not want to spend over $1,000 the Premier would be a good choice.

Now I am considering buying something like the Swarovski 8.5X42, which I could have had easily, and lots of change, if I had listened to people and purchased a top line bin instead of buying this and that. Of course, I need another bin like I need another hole in my head. Some one help me stop the madness!!

Lew

If you've got that kind of money to spend, then buy top of the range optics, rather than compromise.... you'll only end with two pairs that you want to upgrade at yet more cost, rather than one that puts a smile on your face every time you pick them up.

Remember, you can only use one pair of bins at a time.... so personally I don't understand the obsession that some people appear to have with having more than one pair for every day of the week. That's surely either a gross waste of money, or an investment in quantity rather than quality. Get one really good pair, and it'll last you for years.

As for choosing which configuration to go for... the best option is to try them in the field for a day. If you explain the situation, and the money you're willing to fork out, then I reckon a good optics dealer would give you the opportunity to take a pair away for a day, or half-day (given a security deposit) to try in the field.

Personally I'd have an 8x42 pair - the ideal compromise.

Thank you for the input so far. I like the 10x42 idea because of the magnification as I said my primary binocular so far has been 10x. I like the 8x32 idea because of the size becuase my 10x is quite big. I don't think I'd like a 10x32 becuase it is probably too dim. I had not considered an 8x42 because it also seems like a compromise, not as light as an 8x32 and not as powerful as a 10x42.

Another question. How bright is the 8x30 SLC or other 8x32 compared to the 10x42s in the $1000 range. Is it close?

I agree with what everyone above has advised--generally speaking, go for the 8x32 and for a top-end model. If you're buying new, and you really can't afford over $1000, your choices in top-end binos are limited, especially for a good 10x42. I'd choose between the Leica 8x32 BN Trinovid, Swarovski 8x30 SLC and Nikon 8x32 LX (personally, I like the Leica best, but it's true that it usually goes for more like $1200 these days). Actually, my preference, if I only owned one bino, would be for an 8 or 8.5x42, but again, the prices for top-end models now exceed $1000 for this configuration, so maybe it isn't even an option for you.
--AP

F7A said:

Another question. How bright is the 8x30 SLC or other 8x32 compared to the 10x42s in the $1000 range. Is it close?

Click to expand...

The 8x32s are just as bright as the 10x42s, if you compare similar models.
You need to know something: many people think that they need or want a 10x because they have never looked through a great 8x. Many years ago i had an old Zeiss 10x50 and i tought that it was not poweful enough. Then i looked through a Swarovski 7x30 and i could not believe that i actually saw more detail with the small and "inferior" 7x30.

I don't think I'd like a 10x32 becuase it is probably too dim.

Click to expand...

Not just that. a 10x42 feels right to me, 10x32 feels all different. I am OK with some pocket bins in 10x25, but they too are dim. They are for when there is nothing else on hand.

So, if you insist on just one, go withthe 8x.

have just bought my first (and probably last) serious binoculars. I tried 8 x 40 and 10 x 40 in same brand and model. 8 x 40 were easier to watch moving objects, brighter viewing for me and enable me to get a steady viewing. The 10 x 42 was noticeably more wobbly, my fault not the binoculars.

I am no expert, a mere beginner but it may help your decision.

obm

I have to agree with the 8x30/32 recommendations. You did not mention wearing glasses unless I missed it. The various options will have differing eye relief. I recently purchsed 8x32 Nikon LX/HG for about $500, and do not regret it. They are great binos, and very eye glass friendly. That will leave good seed money for some 10x's if you want to have both later on. I also choose to have both powers and use them for different purposes.

Greetings!

My advice: Buy the BEST 8x32 you can afford, or even can't afford - don't skimp on that one. Take out a loan if necessary, but NEVER compromise on this one. It will be your workhorse binocular that you'll use 90% of the time. Worry about the 10x later.

Best wishes,
Bawko

Greetings!

I concur on 8x32 as the best all-around, have with you all the time binocular. Since they're lighter and smaller, you are more likely to keep them with you more often and that means you actually see more birds!

Good luck!

FrankD said:

On the other hand, I have seen refurbished Nikon Premier LX 8x32s (argued as having the best image quality of any of the 8x32 roofs) on sale for between $500 and $600. You are not compromising quality or warranty service with that choice. With the extra $300-$400 you could pick up a fairly decent 10x42-10x50 porro possibly or even one of the mid priced roofs of that configuration. Considering you may use the 10x42 considerably less you may not have an issue with compromising the quality level.

Just my thoughts on the issue.

Click to expand...

Frank, have you seen refurbished LX 8x32s offered lately? If not, what vendor is most likely to offer them in the future. I'd like to keep my eye out for some.
Thanks.

It sounds like I am hearing that one better binocular is the way to go. What I am learning for the first time is that you recommend the 8x30 as the main binocular and the 10x42 as the complement. I always assumed it was the other way around with the 10x42 as the binocular to use when I don't want to miss out on a bird and the 8x30 is the one to take for more casual watching. I guess things are different than I assumed.

How does the current 8x30 SLC do against the larger competition like the Meoptas, Elites, Conquests, and other 42mm $1000 binoculars?

F7A said:

How does the current 8x30 SLC do against the larger competition like the Meoptas, Elites, Conquests, and other 42mm $1000 binoculars?

Click to expand...

The New SLC beats them.

Luca said:

The New SLC beats them.

Click to expand...

Not all. I have both 7x42 Swarovski SLC and 7x42 Meopta B1 in the family. The quality differences, optically and mechanically are so minimal that I could not say one is better than the other. I was told by a Meopta representative at the Photokina exhibition that the prism design of the 42mm B1s was optimized for the 8x (it has the same 137m@1000m FOV as the 7x). If you are prepared to accept a weight of about 900g I don't think the Meopta B1 is significantly bettered by ANYTHING and it has no peers under 1000 USD.

John