10x42 or 10x50???

[meathunter]

10 x 42 is a good way to go, especially if you are going to use them in Michigan. I'll use the binocs when walking and use a spotting scope for checking areas when on the road with the truck. 10 x 50s just seem heavy without that much benefit in lower light. A good clear optics in 10x42s are a good choice.

 

[Mule3006Elk]

10x50 for me. I use Vortex Viper HD. There is only 3.8 oz difference between the 10x50 and 10x42 in this series. With a binocular harness strap, I can barely feel the weight anyhow and I don't think I would notice 3.8 oz less if I went with the 10x42. The 10x50 is 0.9 inches longer than the 10x42 but IMO this is fairly insignificant. Exit pupil 4.2 (10x42) and 5.0 (10x50). Better light gathering in the early morning and late evening hours as well.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

With the Viper HDs, you do get a bump in exit pupil, but the cost is in FOV with the 10x50s being quite narrow at 278 ft./1000yards while the 10x42s are less narrow (but not super wide) at 319 ft./1000 yards.

Under 300 ft. at 1000 yards is just too narrow for me in a 10x bin.

 

[Mark]

I had an opportunity to do some testing this weekend in a controlled environment with multiple pairs of binos. We used eye charts, with contrasting comparison letters measured to replicate MOA at the set distance of 25 yards, similar to those used by Optometrists for eye exams.

My experience was there was a huge difference in cheap binos with poor glass (no suprise there) and very little difference between mid to high end with ED glass. I actually preferred my Bushnell Legend HDs to my classmates Leupolds (in fact, he did also) and I noticed almost zero difference between those previous to and the instructors $2300 Sworovskis. Or at least not $1700 worth!?!

Save yourself about $1500.00 and and get mid to upper mid range name brand binos with ED glass. Also, it is difficult to stabilize (under magnification) much more than 10x42. It's just the way the eye works. That's why you get a spotting scope and a tri pod. So spend the $$ you save on bions on a good spotter for up close glassing.

That's my .02 worth.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

Mark, that sounds like an interesting test of raw resolution.

I am a little confused about your "comparison letters measured to replicate MOA" statement. Does that mean you were looking at letters that subtended 1 MOA?

Keep in mind that evaluating resolution on a high contrast target is but one factor to consider when selecting a binocular. Indeed most 8x or 10x binoculars in functional shape and of reasonable quality are capable of resolving to the limits of human vision at the center of the field. If that is your goal, than any low-mid range binocular will serve your uses.

However, there many other factors go into the quality of the image including total transmission (brightness), transmission curves (color bias), aberration control, glare control, field of view, sweet spot, distortion, and others. For instance, that $200 binocular that resolved well on the eye chart, may show an image with so much chromatic aberration in the field that the raw resolution goes unused. Or the image contrast is low and you end up glassing over the bedded buck in the scrub pines.

Then there is the Achilles heel of the bargain mid-range binocular, and that is durable build quality and fit and finish. this is an area where the low-mid ($200 - $600) binoculars haven't closed the gap too much with the "alphas."

I agree completely that hunters can get a good usable binocular in the low to mid range, but the top models are still the very best, when all factors are taken into account. It is a personal decision if the extra expense is worth it, and varies from person to person.

 

[Brady]

I have always used 10x42's because they are cheaper and lighter. If I need more magnification, I pull out my 60x spotting scope.

Brady

 

[Mark]

Mark, that sounds like an interesting test of raw resolution.

I am a little confused about your "comparison letters measured to replicate MOA" statement. Does that mean you were looking at letters that subtended 1 MOA?

Keep in mind that evaluating resolution on a high contrast target is but one factor to consider when selecting a binocular. Indeed most 8x or 10x binoculars in functional shape and of reasonable quality are capable of resolving to the limits of human vision at the center of the field. If that is your goal, than any low-mid range binocular will serve your uses."

Bitterroot Bulls. Yes, more or less you are correct. I'll see if I can scan the math charts we used, unfortunately I don't have the eye charts to share. There were letters on the chart that would fade for contrast comparison and would vary based on distance (or replication of distance). Also we varied light conditions. It was the best test I've ever done with real binos in real conditions. You bring up some great points about birightness etc.

In simple terms we used the scale of 1 MOA = 1" @ 100 yards. (5% error but for simplicity we used this formula)

Number of MOA = height in inches/ range in yards/100
Height in inches = number MOA (range in yards/100)

Assume 36 MOA @ 100 yards 36"=3'=1 yard
36 MOA @ 1000 yards = 360"=30'=10 yards

Anyhow.....I thought it was an interesting way to breakdown the sometimes cryptic measurements the bino manufactures give when stating performance. You've got the level the playing field when comparing stats or it's just garble. Ultimately, the best test is what looks best to the user!