• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Is 8x32 or 8x42 the best Birding format? (1 Viewer)

I totallly agree with that.

But choosing between 8x32 or 8x42 then the 42 gets my vote. Not for extra light gathering at dawn or dusk but because I find a larger exit pupil far more comfortable for my eyes.

Never tried an 8x56, however, due to the weight and usually narrower fov. Perhaps I should give them a go. Maybe I'm missing out.

THIS^^^

I ABSOLUTELY can "see" and almost "feel" (weird, I know) the larger exit pupil of the x42. Believe me I WANTED to love the x32s for the cost and handling, but I love eyeballing up to that bigger EP.

I DO have a Viper HD 6x32 that is QUITE SWEET though... :t:
 
Glenn,

The fact that one's aging pupils can't accommodate all the light a large exit pupil delivers may be over rated. A lighter weight 8x42 can still be a good compromise.

Let's assume that 4mm wide pupils are standard on 65 year old people. If so it means that your 4mm pupil will have more room to move about inside that 5.25 exit pupil. And that means that you do not need to set your IPD perfectly as it would have to be when you use your 8x32. A 7x42 would give you even more leeway and imagine what you could do with a heavy first rate 8x56!

That may be why so many people liked using those big 10 x 50 Porros for birding in the old days.

Bob


Bob, I'm in the over 50 age group and own Opticron Verano HD 8x32, Conquest HD 8x42 and SLC 8x42, I also wear varifocal/trifocal glasses. I have found that the 8x32 has to have the IPD set precisely, but I also find the Conquest HD 8x42 has to be set more precisely than the SLC 8x42 which I find more comfortable to use. So does eye piece make up also play a part in the equation?

Les
 
European's favored the 8x30/32 backed up with a much larger 7x42/8x56/10x50.

Really? When?

Because some 30 years ago virtually everyone carried 10x40/42 oder 10x50 binoculars, and you didn't want to be seen dead carrying an 8x30. In the 1990s some people switched to 7x42s, some others (very few actually) began using an 8x30/32.

Since then things have been changing somewhat, although the majority still prefer larger objective lenses - 40/42mm and 50mm.

Hermann
 
And your your max Eye Pupil for your age is about

  • 40 years old: 6mm
  • 50 years old: 5mm
  • 65 years old: 4mm

Then if you are over 50 years old, the 8x42's 5.25mm EP is wasted because your pupil can't open wide enough to receive the EP. True?

No, not true. For a start, many people's eye pupils open up to more than the values indicated in your list. Also, using a binocular with large exit pupils is *always* easier and more comfortable than using binoculars with small exit pupils.

Hermann
 
Bob, have you investigated replacing the objectives with those of the Ultavid HD+ ? The FL glass in those should be even lighter. I like the Silverlines -- with the addition of the HD+ lenses that's starting to look like an awesome lightweight compact ×42mm classy alpha bin .... especially for 1300 + a bit for the FL lenses ................ hmmmmmmm :king:

Chosun :gh:

Chosun,

I'm afraid that Leica doesn't make the Blackline even with their standard HD glass.

The Ultravid came out in 2003 replacing the Trinovid BN. The Ultravid HD came out in 2009 upgrading the glass.

The Blackline Ultravid originally came out as a special item when the Ultravids replaced the Trinovids and they were never upgraded with them. The Silverline appeared during that period too. People susceptible to CA may not like using them at all!

See a more detailed history here from Company 7.

http://www.company7.com/leica/news.html#1September2000

Bob

Bob, I already know that the Black/ Silver lines don't have HD glass in them, but isn't the major upgrade pathway from Ulravid to HD to HD+ merely the substitution of objective glass material with ED and lately FL glass respectively (along with presumably , attendant re-indexing of the HiLux optical coating system) ......

I'm not sure that the FL objectives would be a straight bolt in for the Black/ Silverline's , but jeez, I reckon it's worth asking the question ....... :smoke:


Chosun :gh:
 
My personal opinion is: it's not the whole world if you can't make use of the entire exit pupil.

For example: if your eye pupils expands to max 4,6mm the image will be 32% brighter in the 8x42 than in 8x32. Even if that's just a slight improvement under low light conditions you will have the comfort advantage of the larger exit pupil which has been mentioned by other above.
Apart from that an 8x42 almost always provides a better eye relief than an 8x32.


I DO have a Viper HD 6x32 that is QUITE SWEET though... :t:

You are not alone about that opinion! :t:
 
No. Actually, a 10X42 (used to be 10X40) is probably the best choice for someone who can heft the weight and keep it steady! After seeing more than a few "little old ladies" toting 10X50 Swarovisions, I bought one for myself. The 10X is more immersive than either our 8.5X42 or 8X32's, but it's not for everyone. My wife's not-for-debate comfort limit is 20 ounces (Nikon 8X32 SE and 8X32 SV). I'm quite sure that's why we have so many excellent choices!

After using a 7X42 for ten years, I concluded the only reason for owning one is a more stable view. I hesitated to buy the 8.5X42 SV based on handshake and FOV concerns. I was wrong on both accounts. Interestingly, the view in a 27 ounce 7X42 shakes a lot more than the view in a compact, lightweight 8X32 SV. Weight (and size) really make a difference if you're looking for a stable, comfortable handheld view. When I can no longer hold a bin stable I'll be "downgrading" to the 8X32 SV or a lightweight IS model...if and when they appear.

8X may be the most popular size but I think a lot of very serious birders go for 10X magnification. The 10X50 is a bit much but the 10X42 models are really the sweet spot for aperture and magnification.
 
A very high quality 8x32 is light, compact and easy to carry.
I stopped using the 8x40/42 format after I bought my first high quality Swaro 8x30 SL.
If you are buying a high end 8x32 you will find almost no need for a 8x42 and will find the 8x32 much more compact and much easier to take with you.
The 8x32 can fit in large jacket pockets and even on a belt carrier, neither of which an 8x42 can do.
You are much more likely to take 8x32 with than an 8x42 and that makes it much more usable.
European's favored the 8x30/32 backed up with a much larger 7x42/8x56/10x50.
Mostly they used the 8x30/32 and only brought out the big guns for special circumstances.

Art

I can't see why a birder would carry their bins in their pocket, or a holster. By the time you've dragged them out the bird would have moved off. A decent neck strap allows immediate access and, regardless of weight ( is an extra c.200g really that debilitating? ) you can carry them around all day.
As an European I can say the vast majority of birders in Europe use 8 x 40 / 42's as their "every day" bins. In fact, of the many birders that I know in the NW of England, probably less than 5 always use 30 / 32's. There again we also have a far higher proportion of "alpha" users, not just owners, over here than in NAmerica, and we tend to keep our optics much longer.
 
To reply to the original question (8x32 or 8x42). I have both and use them both equally. I think you need that SF 8x42.!
I have a Leica Ultravid 8x32 which is very good optically (but not as good as my Zeiss HT) but the main advantage is its light weight and compact size. My other birding bin is a Zeiss HT 8 x 42. Although bigger and heavier I enjoy the easy view, wide FOV and clearer image - not just at dawn/dusk either, but at all times.

Depending on what kind of birding I'm doing (serious or casual), how far I'm walking or what else I'm carrying I'll take one or the other. I wouldn't now be without either a 32 and a 42.

let us know what you decide.
Peter
 
Yes, the bigger Exit Pupil makes it more comfortable but isn't 4mm enough? Is 5mm really that much difference?

It depends on how much light there is and the size of your pupil.

For instance in Africa near the equator where it is bright and twilight doesn't last a long time a 4mm exit pupil may be enough.
 
Bob, I'm in the over 50 age group and own Opticron Verano HD 8x32, Conquest HD 8x42 and SLC 8x42, I also wear varifocal/trifocal glasses. I have found that the 8x32 has to have the IPD set precisely, but I also find the Conquest HD 8x42 has to be set more precisely than the SLC 8x42 which I find more comfortable to use. So does eye piece make up also play a part in the equation?

Les

Les,

The eye cups and the eye relief they really and truly have can make a big difference, especially with glasses. They may give the same ER numbers but the design of your glasses may be friendlier with the design of some eye cups than with others. I'd look at that first since you find the SLC easier to use.

It is really the whole package that comes into play here: Your eyes, your glasses, the eyepieces and the eye relief of each specific binocular.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Bob, I already know that the Black/ Silver lines don't have HD glass in them, but isn't the major upgrade pathway from Ulravid to HD to HD+ merely the substitution of objective glass material with ED and lately FL glass respectively (along with presumably , attendant re-indexing of the HiLux optical coating system) ......

I'm not sure that the FL objectives would be a straight bolt in for the Black/ Silverline's , but jeez, I reckon it's worth asking the question ....... :smoke:


Chosun :gh:

Chosun,

I think it would be a good idea for Leica to make a version of the Blackline whenever they decide to redesign their current line of Ultravids. I don't consider their tweaking of the HD glass a major upgrade.

If they decide to stand pat with the current version of the Ultravid then I think it would be a good idea to upgrade the Blackline to include their new improved HD Plus glass so people who require HD glass would also buy them.

Personally I wouldn't pay the money they would ask for them which I guess would be in the $2500.00 or higher range. Their current price is too high for me. Mine were Demos and I don't need HD glass.

Bob
 
THIS^^^

I ABSOLUTELY can "see" and almost "feel" (weird, I know) the larger exit pupil of the x42. Believe me I WANTED to love the x32s for the cost and handling, but I love eyeballing up to that bigger EP.

I DO have a Viper HD 6x32 that is QUITE SWEET though... :t:
That is because it has 5mm exit pupils. Also, 6x gives you great DOF and sharp looking images and a flat field and you don't shake as much. 6x has a lot of advantages. Those Yosemites 6x30 are starting to grow on me too. The Viper HD 6.5x32 had too MUCH ER for me. Good glass though.
 
Last edited:
Bob, I'm in the over 50 age group and own Opticron Verano HD 8x32, Conquest HD 8x42 and SLC 8x42, I also wear varifocal/trifocal glasses. I have found that the 8x32 has to have the IPD set precisely, but I also find the Conquest HD 8x42 has to be set more precisely than the SLC 8x42 which I find more comfortable to use. So does eye piece make up also play a part in the equation?

Les
The SLC's ER is probably better suited for the depth of your eye sockets than the Conquest. The image on the SLC probably hits your eyes perfect and gives you more room to move around in that exit pupil.
 
My personal opinion is: it's not the whole world if you can't make use of the entire exit pupil.

For example: if your eye pupils expands to max 4,6mm the image will be 32% brighter in the 8x42 than in 8x32. Even if that's just a slight improvement under low light conditions you will have the comfort advantage of the larger exit pupil which has been mentioned by other above.
Apart from that an 8x42 almost always provides a better eye relief than an 8x32.




You are not alone about that opinion! :t:
Most modern 8x32's have enough eye relief don't they?
 
It depends on how much light there is and the size of your pupil.

For instance in Africa near the equator where it is bright and twilight doesn't last a long time a 4mm exit pupil may be enough.
I agree with you. 4mm is enough most of the time BUT in bad weather and under low light conditions a 5mm EA is advantageous. 5mm EA is also a little more comfortable for eye placement. Tradeoffs.
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bob and Dennis, it all makes a lot more sense now, and yes the SLC's give me the same ability to move around in the exit pupil that I have with the Yosemite 6x30 that I use on frequent cross channel ferry trips to France.

Les
 
FWIW-I have tested the Swarovski 8x32 SV a ton down to the limits of of twilight and being able to see anything at all up against quality 8x42's. And it more than holds its own. In fact it is superb in low light.

And not all 8x32's are created equal in this regard. For instance the 8x32 Swaro EL that I had was not as good. And the 8x32 Nikon EDG that I had was no where near as good in very low light as the 8x32 SV. And I spent extensive time testing it.

As far as quality 8x42 bino's, I tested the 8x32 SV in low light up against the Swaro 8x42 SLD HD; and a Leupold 8x42 Cascade porro ( very good in low light)- and the 8x32 Swaro SV held it's own right up against the very limits of twilight.

So, IMO, I would not be getting a 8x42 bino to beat the 8x32 SV for simply lowlight reasons. I would get one though ( an 8x42) if you felt it was better in other optic areas than just light gathering.

And if you want to know what I would do, and you did not ask. I would get a 10x42 quality binocular to compliment the great 8x32 SV that you already own. Even though I love the 7 and 8x32 format and prefer it for most situations, I picked up a 10x42 Nikon SE and it is a super compliment to the 8x32. And I also have 6x30 binoculars that are used when I want that format.
 
Last edited:
8X32mm exit pupil = 4mm
8X42mm exit pupil = 5.25mm

32mm objective area = 804
42mm objective area = 1385 (72% greater than the 32mm)

All else being equal and assuming one can utilize the 5.25mm exit pupil, the 8X42 will deliver considerably more LIGHT to the eye when conditions warrant. We own the 8X32, 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV's and I'm sure you can guess the order of "brightness" in low light! At 63 I can easily see the differences, especially in deeply shadowed areas at dawn or twilight. I visit Alberta in late June each year when daylight fades slowly. When the 32mm starts to give out I get another 90 minutes of useful observation out of the 42mm. This summer I'll have the 50mm and I expect to bird and/or stargaze until dawn.

PS
The 32mm SV is my wife's. Also, I've done this comparison with the 8X32 SV and 8X32 SE. Results were similar.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top