Hi Dave:
There is strong support for bigger objective lensed binoculars in this discussion. I recently moved from Washington state. East of the Cascades Mountains ranges and terrain are such that you might think a hunter would need high magnification and improved light gathering.
I didn't find this to be correct. I owned Zeiss 10 x 56s and EDF 7 x 40s, Leitz Trinovid 10 x 40Bs among many. In all cases, these are excellent machines. They were also large, heavy, cumbersome. I found them unpleasant -- uncomfortable -- to use elk hunting.
I found that lightness and compactness -- not to a ridiculous extent -- made a binocular usable. I also find that a mil scale (rangefinder) is useful if you practice with it. I'm a fan of simplicity -- mil scale rather than laser; individual focusing rather than central.
I disposed of all binoculars except two Zeiss 8 x 30 B/GA IF Olive. They are not too small, more durable than any binocular I've used.
Something I've mentioned in similar threads is that German and Austrian optical glass seems to be more abrasion resistant than any other. Yeah, I know these brands are more expensive, but you buy a binocular for life. To get one repaired means to send it to Japan, or Germany, or Austria for warranty service.
A binocular is two telescopes mounted to work together. Central focusing does not directly move lenses. Gear assemblies are between you and your lenses. And these assemblies must be sealed. Traditionally, most modern armies have used IF focusing. I don't think it's for ease of use.
For the most part, I'm nit-picking. Every binocular identified in this thread is acceptable. All that I suggest you consider is that some binoculars remain acceptable longer.