What is the difference between x32 and x42

Between the two Vipers, there is no way I would get the 42mm version. The 42mm costs more, but yet you pay a weight penalty of almost a quarter-pound, and you get much less F. Even the 32mm Viper's FOV isn't that great, but it is still a lot better than the 42mm version.

I know you didn't ask about this, but I'm going to post this anyway -- do yourself a favor and investigate the Nikon Monarch 7 8x This is a great 30mm bino that costs less than the Viper HD, but yet has a very sharp and bright view that is even greater in FOV than the Viper.

It also weighs much less than the Viper too. If you compare these side-by-side, you will probably start to wonder why the Viper costs so much, or why the Nikon costs so little. Even if they were to cost the same, I would still go with the Nikon M7 over the Viper As has been pointed out, the big difference is size. If you are not needing a lot of twilight use, then typically a 32 mm is enough.

I happen to think the Vortex 8x32 Viper HD is a top notch binocular. It is a lot better IMHO than its x42 mm big brothers. Give me a couple of days and I'll have a better handle on the Leupold Mojave 8x Probably worth a look along with the Monarch 7.

Steve "Everything that can be counted does not necessarily count; everything that counts cannot necessarily be counted". William Bruce Cameron. Thanks, I would be interested in your input on the Leupold Mojave 8x I have also looked ,on other forums too, and the the Leupold 8x42 Mckinley have good reviews.

I have a old pair of Nicon Monarch 10x42 and I am looking for a 8x that has the best glass that I can afford. I am in my late 60's , retired, and spend more time looking so I want glass that will be clear and gentle on my eyes. Klamath wrote: As has been pointed out, the big difference is size.

Wood wrote: Klamath wrote: As has been pointed out, the big difference is size. In that case, the Leupold Acadia 8x32 is really worth a look. It is one of the smallest 8x32 glasses I have, or have seen. Nice optics too. Ambient Light Conditions are Important As well as this during the day in normal light conditions, a good quality 8x32 binocular is perfectly capable of capturing and transmitting more than enough light to your eyes so that you will observe a bright, high-quality image.

Therefore, under ideal, normal and even fairly average light conditions it is likely that you will not be able to differentiate between the views of an equal quality 8x32 and an 8x42 binocular. However, when the light level is not optimal like you are likely to experience just after sunset, before sunrise and even in a forest or dense woodland, the additional capability of the larger lenses on the 8x42 come into play and this is where you will start to observe the difference in brightness between the two configurations.

Much of the difference in the respective low light capabilities of an 8x32 vs 8x42 binoculars can be explained by the relationship between the size of the shaft of light exiting the ocular lenses exit pupil and the size of the pupils in your eyes and any given time.

As the outside conditions get let bright, your pupils begin to enlarge until, in very low light, they can reach a maximum of around 7mm in diameter. Thus in these situations, the amount of light your eyes are receiving is less than ideal and so binoculars with larger exit pupils the 8x42 in this case brighter, better quality view this is assuming all else is equal between the two.

More info on all of this can be found in my complete guide to the Exit Pupil. A larger Exit Pupil also makes it easier for you to line your eyes up with the light exiting the eyepieces and thus an 8x42 binocular may be a little simpler for the more novice user to use because they make it easier to achieve an image without black rings on the edges of the view. How Much More Expensive?

I hope you can see that as with almost any differing configurations, there really is no single best option, instead, it comes down to which particular one is more ideal for your specific requirements and preferences. So in this example:. Can someone provide an executive summary of sorts? Can it be explained a bit more succinctly?

Binastro Well-known member. The 8x magnification is far too low for normal eyes to see any difference in resolution. Binoculars are two poor quality telescope side by side.

In actual fact a 32mm binocular is likely to be sharper than a 42mm because the eyes may be stopped down to nearer their best pupil size. The focal length of the 42mm is longer than the 32mm, so this goes the other way and increases resolution if the eyes are say 2. The quality of the optics is what determines the sharpness seen. Also the choice of glass, focal length of objectives. The balance of the binocular is critical. An image stabilized binocular has a far higher resolution in actual use than a normal hand held binocular.

A tripod mounted binocular has a far higher resolution than a normal hand held binocular. The actual photons reaching the eye depend on the square of the objective size not the simple linear factor. It is far too simplistic to just compare a low powered 32mm and 42mm binocular. Regards, B. Binastro said:.

As far as the instrument alone is concerned. The resolution of a binocular is determined more by magnification than aperture with the type of binoculars being discussed here.

With a high quality 32mm telescope of astro quality I would expect to regularly use 65x on planets and also x. With a high quality 42m telescope of astro quality I would expect to regularly use 85x on planets and also x. An 8x binocular is just too low a magnification. As to actual binoculars. Until a few years ago I could split the unequal double star Mizar with This is with my eyes at night. Persons with better eyes would do better. In the daytime one can do better with a 2.

The Pentax 8xx24 binocular had a far higher resolution on the Moon at 16x or 20x than an 8x42 binocular. The Canon 18x50 IS could split 8. The Zeiss 20x60S and Yukon 30x50 binoculars 6. That's the calculation.

The explanation which is what I was really interested in is primarily due to the larger objective x42 vs. Is that not correct? Post reply. Insert quotes Similar threads.