Binoculars - 8x42 or 10x42 - Which one?

I can't decide which one to get.

The two binoculars are the exact same lens and coating and brand and model.

I hunt in south tx. Farthest I look in hunting is 300 yards. 98% of the time it's 150 yards max.

Here's a pic of them.


I'm wanting them for good low light use. Is 8x42 much better than 10x42 in light captured to the human eye?
What would be best for me?

The lower the magnification the better it will perform in low light. Plus, the 8X binocular is easier to hold steady.

Given your two criteria (low light performance important and relatively short yardage use), I think the 8X would suit your needs better.

I prefer 10 power binocs.

I much prefer the 10x. You will get a slight improvement on light gathering from the 8x but not enough in my book. I like the more detailed view of the 10x.

Exactly right. I used to sell binos at Cabelas in college. No reason at all to not get 10x. Now if you get some cheapo binos that are 15x or something then you are going to lose a lot of light...The difference between 8x and 10x will be pretty small, especially on higher dollar binos

Have good 8X and 10X Binos. Like the 8X32 for bow hunting ans 10X42 most of the time for rifle hunting. For years used 8X42 for all hunting and they served me very well, switched to 10X42 this year, eyes being over 50 might have helped with that decesion.

Me too kmon1. Only draw back on the 10X is it's harder to find a good pair with long eye relief which I need. i'm trying the 10x42 vortex talons. they are ok. broke , got fixed, focus good and clear out to 300yds +/- then become harder to focus the right eye piece at long ranges. could be my blind azz.

Do you walk and rattle, where a buck may appear suddenly at close range? If so, you'll appreciate the wider field of view of an 8x. But if you only hunt out of a blind where you can hold your bino steady, you may want to look at a 10x. This is usually my MO for choosing which glass to take on a hunt....if I'm on a stand or in a truck in open country, I'll choose the higher power with a 42 or 50 mm objective. If I'm on foot in brushy or wooded terrain, I reach for a lower power, typically a 7x36 or an 8x32.

I prefer 10x42 over 8x in any terrain. Better glass will in 10x would be the best option. The quality of glass can help in low light conditions with 10x IMO. I hunt from blinds, walk/stalk, rattle or sit/glass long distances with my 10x42. If I am rattling in a buck I can see what I need to see without binos if he is within 50 yards or less of me. 10x also gives you that little edge when glassing a buck at a distance to see extra points or broken points over 8x. Go to a store and look through both 10x and 8x at 300 yard distances if they will allow so you can see for yourself.

I have 10x42 and I can clearly see the feeder 13 minutes before legal light at 180 yards.

Thanks for the replies.



Do you have this exact model?

I hunt mainly mornings and not long in the mornings so I'm wanting good light in low light times. My feeders are at 100 yards and I only have one feeder at a blind that is 150 yards. There are not many times I will need to see 300 yards out at all.

I think I will go with the 8x due to hopefully better light and less shaky. I've always had an issue with them shaking too much.

The math:
8x means what I see at 100 yards with just my eyes, I would be looking at like at 12.5 yards. I think I can see what a deer looks like at 12.5 yards and make a decision. 160 yards would be like 20 yards and that's the max most of the time.

No. I have the bushnell ultra HD. After much research I found them to be the best bino in the $300 range that suited my needs. Other opinions may vary but I'm very happy with them. Better low light performance with a crisper picture than my wife's $299 leupolds. The leupolds do have much better color. I like them much better than the vortex in that price range as well. Since buying mine for $239 on sale I have found them as cheap as $179. They also edged out the $299 steiners. For my use I do not need a better bino.

Ultimately Mathman, you will acquire both an 8x and a 10x. It's like a guy that owns a perfectly capable 7x57 or .270 will soon be faunching for a .243 or a .300WM. And one day he looks up and finds that he's in the market for a second gun safe because he's run out of room in the first one.

It is the natural progression of things.

Very true.

Thanks everyone.

I would definitely get the 10x42!! More magnification is very helpful.

While living in the midwest, the 10x binoculars were a bit too much for the heavy timber we hunted. A 'long' shot there might be 100 yards. I got a pair of 8x32 Leica's and love them.
When I moved back to Texas and started hunting here again, I realized the 8's just weren't enough for detail viewing. I have a pair of the 10.5x43 Brunton Epoch binoculars as well as a pair of 10x42 Conquest. Both are very clear and sharp with the Brunton's having a slight edge to my eyes. Views on the ranch I hunt on range from bow distance out to 800 yards along fence lines and power lines.
Get both, in other words. You'll find a need for one or the other at times and it's good to have both available.

10-42's without a doubt.

I'm still looking. Thanks for the help. I'm going to try some out from a buddy tomorrow morning. Might get some like his.
They are 10x42 Bushnell something...

For performance and value, I love the Vortex Diamondback 10x42. Like them so much that I got rid of the Nikon Monarch X that I was using that were about double the price. And as a few others have stated, the 10x will give you a better all around bino with little appreciable difference in low light conditions IMO.

10X

I went to a pawn shop close to an upscale neighborhood and found a pair of Redfield Rebel 10X42, I also have a pair of 8X42 and I couldn't believe the difference in brightness of the Rebels. I paid more for the 8X42's than I did the Rebels, but to me I'd rather use them than the smaller 8X42. Also from my old telescope days, a larger objective lens gathers more light.