• 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.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

What new 8x to compliment my 10x42 (1 Viewer)

Bluben79

Member
United Kingdom
After a lot of reading on this forum over the winter I bought my first 'proper' binoculars, Viking ED Pro 10x42. They've been great over the winter and spring where I've used them near estuaries and marshland. I'm finding the limitations of the limited field of view when using them in Woodland looking at smaller birds and while wearing a T-shirt the weight can be noticeable after a couple of hours. This isn't an issue with the support of jackets, hooded tops in the winter.

I'm not sure which size of 8x I should go for. Really like the idea of the Victory Pocket 8x25 for their portability and the fact that they may be on my person more often but then have recently seen some good feedback on The Hawke EDX and APO in 8x42. Also considering something like the Opticron Traveller 8x32 as a middle of the road.

Should I have any other considerations? Budget would be £500 ish
 

winginit

Well-known member
I have 10x42 and 8x42 binoculars but my 8x32 bins have been getting more use recently. I like the smaller form factor and lighter weight for walks and hikes. I also looked for something with good FOV and close focus. Specs for the newest version of the Opticron Traveller 8x32 look very good. Or you could probably find the Victory Pocket 8x25 used for close to your budget.
 

mwhogue

Well Known Member
Supporter
Bluben,

Right one of the compromises with most 10x42 is the relatively narrow FOV for the size and weight. Purely from an optical standpoint, IME a 7x is the better compliment to a 10x than an 8x as the combination of 7x / 10x covers more ground so to speak. You might consider the Opticron 7x42 roof which is well within budget, is well reviewed here and is reportedly small and light for a 42mm. Of course one of the Opticron 8x32 models would be even smaller and lighter. As Winginit notes, the Zeiss VP 8x25 is an excellent option as well.

In terms of use with summer versus winter clothing you might try a harness in summer for your 42. The issue there is for different body types and carry preferences, you may need to experiment with the various different types of harnesses to find one you like.

Let us know how it goes.

Mike
 

Maljunulo

Well-known member
My personal preference would be for one better glass as opposed to two of lesser quality.

That's just a personal quirk though.

(or maybe it's a foible, I'm never sure)
 

jcnguyen09

Well-known member
I am not familiar with Viking ED Pro 10x42, so I don't know the quality of it. I think a good 8x32 could be one of the best option to compliment: One of these series should do: SF, NL, EL, Ultravid, Trinovid, Conquest.... Victory pocket 8x25 is a specialized for convenient, by the way kind of bino, anywhere any time things but that sacrifices quite many performance factors: easy of use, brightness, built qualities, FOV/AFOV,....One thing I found....whatever the format, if you go with alpha quality, it is hard to go back to your other sub alpha bino with less optical quality
 

jring

Well-known member
I am not familiar with Viking ED Pro 10x42, so I don't know the quality of it. I think a good 8x32 could be one of the best option to compliment: One of these series should do: SF, NL, EL, Ultravid, Trinovid, Conquest.... Victory pocket 8x25 is a specialized for convenient, by the way kind of bino, anywhere any time things but that sacrifices quite many performance factors: easy of use, brightness, built qualities, FOV/AFOV,....One thing I found....whatever the format, if you go with alpha quality, it is hard to go back to your other sub alpha bino with less optical quality

Hi,

first of all, if you want the best optical quality, Nikon EDG series is probably your best bet. They don't have an easily recognizable logo though, like the teutonic trinity listed above.

In general, getting one of the alpha models will give marginally better results than a well chosen pair in the 1000$/€/UKP class at about twice the price.
Getting the 2nd line models of those will certainly not give the best results for the money either.

Joachim, who would recommend an 8x32 pair along with the 10x42.
 

dries1

Member
The OP said his budget is 500 pounds, so that rules out many of the aforementioned suggestions. I would look at Opticron, they are readily available in the UK. Try and decide what format (7X42, 8X32, or 8X42) works best for you with your 10X42.
 

jcnguyen09

Well-known member
The OP said his budget is 500 pounds, so that rules out many of the aforementioned suggestions. I would look at Opticron, they are readily available in the UK. Try and decide what format (7X42, 8X32, or 8X42) works best for you with your 10X42.
Ohp...I missed the budget line! Vortex viper, Kowa, Meopta or Nikon have good options within 500-750 price range
 

qwerty5

Well-known member
United States
From my research, I believe the absolute best in the mid-range is the Vortex Viper. It is very close optically to bins double the price. Vortex Viper HD 8x42 Review However, the Vipers do not come in 8x32.

Personally, I would sell your 10x42 and buy a premium binocular in the $1000 range. In that range, your best bet is Nikon Monarch HG, Zeiss Conquest HD, or Vortex Razor HD.
Each have pros and cons, the Zeiss is heavier by 4 oz than the others, while the Monarch has a 60 ft wider FOV than the Zeiss and Vortex.
 

ZDHart

Well-known member
United States
I would suggest 7x42 as a great compliment to the 10x42. As long as the weight isn't too bothersome to you.

You did mention weight of your 10x42s being objectionable to you, and if lower weight is the primary selection factor, then I'd go 8x32.

I wouldn't step down to 25s, unless very small size, very low weight, and most convenience are the highest priority selection criteria for you.
 

mpeace

Well-known member
I would go with the Opticron traveller 8x32. It's very capable and a good compliment to a 10x42. You get a wider fov and smaller form that lends itself to different situations to the 10x42. I have the Zeiss pocket 8x25 and it's amazingly sharp even compared to my swaros, but I still like the 8x32 format and the Opticron can't be beat for the money in my opinion. I don't own it however, but have tried it. I own the Nikon 8x30 MHG, so am experienced in using the similar format.
 

Rg548

Retired Somewhere
United Kingdom
I had a similar dilema, and a similar budget. I pushed to Swarovski CL 8x25.
In my opinion, by far the best pocket binoculars, and worth the extra money all day long.
However, Leica's 8x20 are also impressive, and cost less.
As always, you get what you pay for, although it's diminishing returns the higher you go.
 

DrewskiMT

Observer
Good ideas above. But my recommendation based on extensive use of 8x32s would be Opticron Traveler 8x32, Kite Lynx HD+, or Kowa BDII 8x32 or 6.5X32. A last resort choice could be the Zeiss Terra ED 8x32 as well. All are quite good for their prices and have good sharpness and wide angle specification. You have to spend about $1000 USD to get better image quality than any of these options. Otherwise, save up for a $1000 binocular. You really do get what you pay for in optics. Cheers.
 

AlphaFan

Well-known member
United States
Some great suggestions across the board. Personally, I’m a big fan of 42mm binoculars but can see the value of a 32mm glass if someone already has a 10x42. At the $500 and under price point would recommend a Nikon Monarch 7 in 8x42 (great performance at that price), or a German Precision Optics 8x32ED. Lee did a review of the GPO a while back - I have one and am very please with both the optics and build quality. Very portable and comfortable to handle.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 2 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

Top