If you could only have one, where would you start?

[Blueranger]

Curios to get some input from others that have spent some serious time behind glass to offer some guidance. Wanting to upgrade from Leupold Pro Guide 10X42's. Leaning toward Swarovski's 10X50's. I understand, that the initial opinion would be that it will be easy to upgrade, but they have served me well for 6 hunting seasons. Primarily deer hunting in at my ranch in Kansas. I like their light weight, but light gathering could be better and would like to be able to better judge trash/irregularities on bucks up to distances of 150 yards, which is common max distance from many stand locations, but recent clearing of some areas has increased that to 300 yards, but a lot of the glassing is in pretty heavy timber. Going with a bino and spotting scope won't work for my situation or future plans. Have borrowed by brothers Leica's and have not been impressed. Although I believe they are 8X42's. They were heavy, and could not notice any better light gathering or ability to judge bucks, given they were 8 power versus 10 power. I think the 10X50's will be the sweet spot for me for wide angle viewing in heavy cover and the ability to closely judge antler specifics at longer distances. Now for an added wrinkle, planning a 14 day plains game safari in SA for July/August and curious to what is best for that, even if the PH is judging all the animals, I would like to help spot game. Also planning an AK moose hunt as a retirement gift for next fall. So should I go with 8X, 10X or 12X? I know there are a lot of opinions about the best brand, but have not heard anything of consequence detrimental to Swarovski's.

[stokesrj]

If you move to Swarovski even in the same size, 10X42 you will notice better low light vision. I personally have several pair of Swarovski, Zeiss, and Leica binos and favor the Swarovski. Most of the time I use 10X42 SLC for general hunting and initial spotting of game, paired with my Swarovski STX 25-60X65 spotting scope for trophy evaluation. I also have larger Swarovski binoculars such as 15X56 SLC but use them rarely due to the greater size and weight. They are also more difficult to use freehand. The Swarovski 10-42 or 10X50 will be more than what is needed for Africa plains game or Alaska moose. I have used my 10X42 SLC for both and been perfectly pleased. I also have a pair of 10X42 EL as well, they have a flatter image that is more pleasing but also increase the weight and height to achieve that flat image. I see no advantage for hunting and find the SLC version to be more than adequate. I favor the 42mm objective over the 50mm objective but you will get a bit more light using the 50mm but not sure it would help you evaluate trophy details. I have found that only important when hunting in Europe at night by moonlight, the 42mm has served me well if there is any sunlight even post sunset with the Swarovski but not with the leupolds I've owned.

[ebrownw2]

The 10x42 is the best all around binocular for hunting. So, if I could only have one set that is what it would be. NL Pure if you prefer a separate rangefinder or do not need a rangefinder. Otherwise the EL Range is the one.

Either way, I have them in stock

[deerhunter338mag]

10x42 for sure are the best all rounder's for binos.

[secondtry]

10x50s have a lot going for them if the added bulk and weight over 42s aren't an issue for you.

Out to moderate ranges, say 200/300, I find 8x42 better than 10x42. The much better FOV is more useful than the slight increase in magnification at those distances. Also much better in bad light, but this doesn't show until well past sunset. Past 300 (roughly) I like the extra definition of 10s.

8s will have less image shake than equivalent model 10s when not on a tripod or other solid rest.

10x42 NL Pures have the same FOV as most 8x42s which is great; but no RF, if that is important to you. Price tag is a tad eyewatering, but the upside of that is that Swaro seem to have dropped the price of EL 42s to achieve some separation in their range. The updated Swaro 8or10x42 RFs seem to have addressed the shortcomings of the previous model and are an attractive option if a built in RF is required

As always, a lot depends on your usage.

[UPEgger]

8x32. I have two pair(the wife said she also needed a pair) of Leitz 8x32 trinovid binoculars that I purchased in 1968 for hunting and ???. They weigh 17.5oz/497gm. Still have them and still use them. High enough power to determine what I need to and "steady" enough hand held. Small enough to just tuck down in the top of my shirt to keep from flopping around while walking while strapped around the neck Also very clear. If I ever purchase another set of binoculars they will be the same model and power, if they still manufacture that model.

I also have a set of Leica 10x42 Geovid, with RF, that I do not carry anywhere. Weight 2 lb 4 0z/1.04kg. I do not even remember when I got them, but I do know I "had to have them". Regardless, they stay in the safe when I go hunting.

Carl L.

[slugslinger]

Varying opinions for sure, with lots of personal preference. I have the Leica Geovid 10x42 (built-in rangefinder) and use them for all my hunting. They are indeed heavier than standard binos, but I also don't have to carry a separate rangefinder, and there's no switching between binos and rangefinder either. (which can happen during the time-critical moments just prior to a shot.) Lastly, this rangefinder is 10 power vs the usual 4 or 6 power found in most rangefinders. I find 10 power the strongest magnification I can hold steady, and field of view is adequate, but I surely understand folks that prefer 8 power for added stability and FOV.

Regards,

[yukondelta]

If you're used to 10x then it might feel strange to drop power. I hunted 8x Swaros for years with no regrets. When Leica came out with 10x and built in range finding, I picked those up and love them too. It's great that you are putting some $ into optics. I've never understood why guys will have a bunch of rifles and then have a cheap pair of binos. You hunt with your eyes first and your feet second. Maybe you could try some options at your local source (Cabelas or whatever). Try to pick out something among the clutter across the store...a close hanger in the Camo clothing section, something in the shadows, etc. Another thing that helps a lot is having the option of a tripod or using shooting sticks to steady your viewing.

[Pigeon]

Well, You mentioned the Swarovski EL - not a bad decision, but to be honest:I have sold my after 10 years, because the new NL Pure came out and I compared them both for several hours on the high seat. Even my boys could see a huge difference and so I ended with the NL Pure 8x42. The biggest advantage is the wider field of view (159m with the 8x42) but even brilliance and sharpness have increased much (what I thought would be impossible so far, but they did it). And at nighttimes in the dark You see much more due to finer "grain" and a slightly brighter image.


https://www.titanium-gunworks.com/swaro ... -8x42.html

OK, I am hunting mainly in the forrest and even in the night for wild boar (no artificial lights are allowed so far - now some NV, but I am still hunting the traditional way). So if I would hunt more in plains or mountains, I would probably take the NL Pure 12x42 or as a compromise the 10x42.

But definetly have a look first though the NL Pures before buying anything else. Sure they are expensive, but the big smile in Your face will last longer...

[secondtry]

I agree with Pigeon.

If I could own only one binocular, it would be an 8x42 NL Pure. (unless I needed built in RF)

The improvements are subtle, but well thought out and definite. It is also my impression that the depth of field/focus has been improved with the NLs. I also spent some time in the high seat comparing, but with 10x42 NLs and 8x42 Zeiss HT. There was no discernible difference in depth of focus between the two (or in FOV) whereas typically, higher powers means reduced depth of focus/field.