The catch
Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42
Lower magnification for distant detail
Side by side
If glasses stay on and you want the longer eye relief, look at the Prostaff P7 8x42 first. The 10x42 is the choice for distant detail, adding 25% magnification at a small cost in field width, though eye relief falls from 20.2 to 15.7 mm.
Before you buy
Only 10 ft of listed field width is lost on the 10x42, and it gains 25% magnification. For a distant stationary subject, that trade is more interesting than the 8x and 10x labels by themselves would suggest.
Where this comes from
At 1,000 yd the fields are 377 and 367 ft, a reduction of 10/377, or 2.7%. Magnification goes up from 8x to 10x.
The catch
Lower magnification for distant detail
The catch
Published eye relief is 4.5 mm shorter


We may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon purchases. How we make money
Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42 vs 10x42. You get 25% more magnification from the 10x for just 2.7% less field width, though it gives up 4.5 mm of eye relief. See how your glasses fit.
Two P7 models of almost the same size, where the gap in eye relief is far bigger than the gap in field width.
Which one fits
The 8x42 has more eye-relief allowance to try out.
With the 10x42 you get more magnification and only a small stated loss in field.
Each needs the subject farther away.
The exit-pupil geometry isn’t the same, yet this research doesn’t name a winner for low-light image quality. Compare the view and eye fit for yourself.
In practice
Only 10 ft of listed field width is lost on the 10x42, and it gains 25% magnification. For a distant stationary subject, that trade is more interesting than the 8x and 10x labels by themselves would suggest.
At 1,000 yd the fields are 377 and 367 ft, a reduction of 10/377, or 2.7%. Magnification goes up from 8x to 10x.
Published eye relief is 4.5 mm shorter on the 10x42. A buyer who wears glasses could lose more usable view through a poor personal fit than the field table implies.
The eye relief figures are 20.2 and 15.7 mm. This doesn’t measure the usable field with any particular pair of glasses.
Close focus ends at 9.8 ft on both models. When a small balcony puts the feeder 8 ft away, neither model works for that setup.
Both official model pages list 9.8 ft close focus, and both adjust across 56–72 mm of eye spacing.

Nikon, Prostaff P7 8x42
The 20.2 mm eye relief and the locking diopter are what earn this model a spot on your shortlist. On a small balcony, a feeder may still be too close, as close focus is 9.8 ft.

Nikon, Prostaff P7 10x42
A 367 ft field and a locking diopter come together in the 10x42. The body looks much like the full-size 8x42, but eye relief is shorter.
Spec by spec
| Spec | Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42 | Nikon Prostaff P7 10x42 | In practice |
|---|---|---|---|
| Magnification | 8x | 10x | 10x is a 25% step up from 8x. |
| Scene width | 377 ft at 1,000 yd | 367 ft at 1,000 yd | The 10x gives up just 2.7% of listed width. |
| Eye relief | 20.2 mm | 15.7 mm | For glasses fit, the 4.5 mm loss is the check that matters more. |
| Closest focus | 9.8 ft | 9.8 ft | An 8 ft feeder is beyond both. |
| Calculated exit pupil | 5.25 mm, calculated | 4.2 mm, calculated | The geometric beam is larger on the 8x42. |
Trade-offs
Change of plan
Go with Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42. That fit is worth more than the extra magnification.
Go with Nikon Prostaff P7 10x42. In that case the 10x is worth more, since the field-width loss is limited.
Neither model fits. A model with shorter close focus is needed.
Decision guide
Start with the Prostaff P7 8x42 if you wear glasses and want the longer eye-relief candidate. Take the 10x42 for distant detail, since a small field-width reduction buys 25% more magnification, with eye relief dropping from 20.2 to 15.7 mm.
Listed field width drops by only 10 ft on the 10x42, and magnification goes up 25%. With a distant, stationary subject, that trade is more interesting than the 8x and 10x labels alone would suggest. The fields are 377 and 367 ft at 1,000 yd, a reduction of 10/377, or 2.7%, and magnification climbs from 8x to 10x.
Published eye relief is 4.5 mm shorter on the 10x42. Someone who needs glasses could lose more usable view to a poor personal fit than the field table implies. The figures are 20.2 versus 15.7 mm, and usable field with any particular pair of glasses is not measured here.
Close focus ends at 9.8 ft on both models, so neither one handles a small balcony that puts the feeder 8 ft away. The two official model pages each list 9.8 ft close focus, and both use 56–72 mm eye-spacing adjustment.
By the numbers
What we found across the binoculars we compare, plus the checked facts behind each finding.
| Product | Needs it meets | Facts we checked | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42 |
|
| |
| Nikon Prostaff P7 10x42 |
|
|
Ready to buy
Open either model on Amazon for the current price, customer reviews and delivery options.

Glasses are on and you want the option with longer eye relief
See price & reviews on Amazon
You mostly watch distant subjects that stay still
See price & reviews on AmazonEach link opens in a new tab.
We may earn a commission from qualifying Amazon purchases. How we make money