• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

10x32 viable alternative to 10x42? (1 Viewer)

tenex

reality-based
Antarctica
The one thing I'll say is that with a "challenging" format like 10x32, quality matters a lot more. I'm not sure my impression would be favorable if I was using an inexpensive 10x32.
I thought likewise until I tried a Maven 10x30 several years ago, as a result of all the praise on this forum. The optics were surprisingly good, although I didn't take time for a thorough evaluation because the mechanicals were completely unacceptable, already failing twice (hinge tension, diopter slip) in the demo unit I tried. With better construction many might find them satisfying.
 

eitanaltman

Well-known member
I thought likewise until I tried a Maven 10x30 several years ago, as a result of all the praise on this forum. The optics were surprisingly good, although I didn't take time for a thorough evaluation because the mechanicals were completely unacceptable, already failing twice (hinge tension, diopter slip) in the demo unit I tried. With better construction many might find them satisfying.

I’m not sure that contradicts my point. I’m not trying to assert that only $2000+ “full alpha” glass is required. Presumably the Maven “B” line is comparable optically to “big name brand” Japanese manufactured “sub alpha” level like the Conquest HD or Monarch HG, just at a lowered price point due to their business model... and I would certainly consider those models to be excellent optically.

I tried a Conquest HD 10x32 and found it to be quite excellent, I could have certainly enjoyed it and used it happily.... same with the Genesis 10x33.... but then I got a killer deal for the EDG which is on another level entirely. The EDG is soooo EASY to use for a 10x32, I find it as comfortable than many 8x32. I don’t know if it’s the long eye relief, the nearly perfectly corrected field, or all of the above, but it’s just sublime.
 

tenex

reality-based
Antarctica
Well, I'm not sure I'm trying to contradict you. But Maven B3 is not "sub alpha" class like Conquest, it sells for around $450. (Though I suppose it wouldn't if the physical quality were better...)
 

mwhogue

Registered User
Supporter
I would concur with this.

If I have only one pair of binoculars let it be a 8x42.

Given what's currently available new, generally yes 8x42 is the standard recommendation for a single/first/all around bin.

To go a step further though, I like to "pair up" a 7x42 with a (high quality) 10x32. This combination is very versatile, even more versatile IME than pairing an 8x42 with a 10x32.

Mike
 

[email protected]

Well-known member
Supporter
Given what's currently available new, generally yes 8x42 is the standard recommendation for a single/first/all around bin.

To go a step further though, I like to "pair up" a 7x42 with a (high quality) 10x32. This combination is very versatile, even more versatile IME than pairing an 8x42 with a 10x32.

Mike
It is true it is nice to have different binocular formats for different uses just like you would have different size shotguns for different uses. A 8x42 binocular would be a 12 gauge modified choke shotgun for all around use and a 7x42 would be a 12 gauge improved cylinder for closer in fast moving birds and the 10x32 would be a 20 gauge full choke for longer distance shots when you wanted a lighter carry.
 

eitanaltman

Well-known member
Given what's currently available new, generally yes 8x42 is the standard recommendation for a single/first/all around bin.

To go a step further though, I like to "pair up" a 7x42 with a (high quality) 10x32. This combination is very versatile, even more versatile IME than pairing an 8x42 with a 10x32.

Mike

Given that my two primary bins are the 10x32 EDG and the 7x42 UVHD, clearly I agree with you ;)

Although if I could only have one binocular, it would be a great 8x32. For ME, the weight / bulk savings of the 32mm far outweigh the exit pupil advantage of the 8x42.

The MHG 8x42 is close to changing the equation, but it’s enough of a gap optically to the EDG level glass that it’s not QUITE there yet. If someone came out with a compact, light weight ~40mm objective binocular with a huge FOV and alpha level optics that would pique my interest, but the best 32mm binoculars are so good that I don’t really miss the extra glass (and weight).
 

Patudo

Well-known member
If I have only one pair of binoculars let it be a 8x42.

But that will never happen!!! :king:

Regarding the original question:

I'm wondering if the 32mm objective can gather enough light and resolve enough detail to make an alternative to a heavier 10x42 bino?

...so much depends on the conditions you'll be using it in. I can't help but observe at this point that for many months of the year the light in the UK is very different to the conditions you might expect in San Diego (Eitan), Australia (Chosun), Colorado (tenex) or the other locations where those who have voiced their support for the 10x32 format live.

Just to throw a spanner in the works, I remember a post from kabsetz some years ago noting that his Canon 10x42 IS-L outperformed everything else in low-light situations. I can't find it off-hand, but it's worth searching for. The gist of it was that the advantages of image stabilization are if anything even greater in iffy conditions. It could well be that something like the Canon 10x32 does indeed equal or outperform most 10x42s even in poor light.
 

mwhogue

Registered User
Supporter
Patudo,

Point well taken about lighting conditions more often encountered in the US south and southwest, Colorado, southern California, etc., as opposed to the prevailing light in Jollie Olde.

That said, after acquiring 10x32 in Zeiss FL, UVHD+ and SW SV FP, I ran across the Tobias Mennle article which included the Nikon EDG comparison to the European Alpha bins in 8x42. As a result I bought on the bay an EDG 10x32 (they were already out of production) from a quintessential English gentleman. We exchanged some extensive emails discussing the 10x32. He had tried and been utterly unimpressed by any of the European "big Three" 10x32 but loved the EDG. However, he also reported that at his age he could no longer hold the 10x32 steady enough and so was selling to finance the purchase of an EDG in 8x32. He never mentioned having a problem using the EDG 10x32 under English skies.



It seems most of us 10x32 boosters freely admit it's a small club even in bright light locales. But I agree with others - don't dismiss the 10x32 out of hand.

Mike
 
Last edited:

tenex

reality-based
Antarctica
...so much depends on the conditions you'll be using it in. I can't help but observe at this point that for many months of the year the light in the UK is very different to the conditions you might expect in San Diego (Eitan), Australia (Chosun), Colorado (tenex) or the other locations where those who have voiced their support for the 10x32 format live.
It has to get quite dark indeed for the pupil to dilate beyond 3.2 mm... we do actually have clouds here on occasion (songs to the contrary notwithstanding) and I have never found the UV+ 10x32 wanting in any sort of actual daylight.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top