Nikon 8/10x32 LXL vs. Zeiss 8/10x32 FL

[justin2992]

Has anyone directly compared these binos? I have the Nikon in 8x and the Zeiss in 10x. I like the focus on the Zeiss almost as much as the Nikon. I don't have much experience comparing the optical performance of binoculars in general. These two are close enough that I can confidently report that the Nikon is a better value. I also found their build quality and feel very analogous to a comparison between BMW and Lexus.

Why does the Nikon 8x32 HG only get a score of 4.3 for image quality by Cornell when I always see it placed in the same league as the top rated "Top Gun" models with image quality scores of 5.0? They gave the Zeiss Conquest 8x30 an image quality score of 4.4 also. What's the explaination for this?

[henry link]

I think the explanation would be that the folks playing with the binoculars in the Cornell break room didn't have a clue, and their rating system doesn't mean a thing. There are a couple of long threads on the subject which you can probably find by using "Cornell" for a search.

[Grousemore]

Why does the Nikon 8x32 HG only get a score of 4.3 for image quality by Cornell when I always see it placed in the same league as the top rated "Top Gun" models with image quality scores of 5.0? They gave the Zeiss Conquest 8x30 an image quality score of 4.4 also. What's the explaination for this?

Surely just a matter of opinion...and everyone is entitled to one.

Further truth in the adage to 'try before you buy'.

[brocknroller]

Has anyone directly compared these binos? I have the Nikon in 8x and the Zeiss in 10x. I like the focus on the Zeiss almost as much as the Nikon. I don't have much experience comparing the optical performance of binoculars in general. These two are close enough that I can confidently report that the Nikon is a better value. I also found their build quality and feel very analogous to a comparison between BMW and Lexus.

Why does the Nikon 8x32 HG only get a score of 4.3 for image quality by Cornell when I always see it placed in the same league as the top rated "Top Gun" models with image quality scores of 5.0? They gave the Zeiss Conquest 8x30 an image quality score of 4.4 also. What's the explaination for this?

I think it may be partly due to the lack of experience by some of the testers.

Check out these two tiny testers (taken from Cornell Lab Test Webpage): http://www.birds.cornell.edu/Publications/LivingBird/Winter2005/Age_Binos.html

Britney: Look at those awange birdies, Brenda, this Zeiss 'nocular is weally, weally sharp. I give it a 5.

Brenda: My Nikon 'nocular is okay, but it doesn't turn into ninja Terrorcon like a Divebomb Transformer. I give it a 4.4.

Brock

[jacquot]

I have both 8x LX and 10x FL, and like both. The FL is brighter, sharper, has no noticeable CA (the Nikon has plenty), and the focus mechanism is unaffected by temperature. Meanwhile the Nikon is a fine binocular. I got mine as Demos at a great price and they are definitely good glass, but the FL's are definitely superior.

[Kevin Purcell]

The Cornell test is not run by noobies ... I suspect the ornithology department has a few people who know their bins too. The photos are just for illustrative purposes they're not the people doing the test ;)

It might also be the lack of ED (i.e. FL) glass in the Nikon too controlling the longitudinal CA. And the Zeiss also have very good transverse CA control too (something the Nikons really do fall down on). But if you can't see it. Don't go looking for it.

But the real answer is if you are happy with the the bin you have don't read the review ... just use it. That way happiness lies!

[denco@comcast.n]

Has anyone directly compared these binos? I have the Nikon in 8x and the Zeiss in 10x. I like the focus on the Zeiss almost as much as the Nikon. I don't have much experience comparing the optical performance of binoculars in general. These two are close enough that I can confidently report that the Nikon is a better value. I also found their build quality and feel very analogous to a comparison between BMW and Lexus.

Why does the Nikon 8x32 HG only get a score of 4.3 for image quality by Cornell when I always see it placed in the same league as the top rated "Top Gun" models with image quality scores of 5.0? They gave the Zeiss Conquest 8x30 an image quality score of 4.4 also. What's the explaination for this?

I have compared the Nikon 8x32 HG to the Zeiss FL 8x32 and the Leica 7x42 Trinovid and the Zen Ray 8x43 ED and I found the Zeiss, Leica, and the Zen Rays to be quite a bit superior to the Nikons optically. They were sharper with less CA and brighter to me. That is to my eyes though you may see different. I guess I agree with the Cornell Study then. I like the ergos and the smooth focus of the Nikon's but even my $370.00 Zen Rays were quite a bit better. I sold my Nikon's and my Leica's and kept the Zen Rays because they were better optically to me.

Dennis

[elkcub]

The Cornell test is not run by noobies ... I suspect the ornithology department has a few people who know their bins too. The photos are just for illustrative purposes they're not the people doing the test ...


Kevin, you might want to re/read the paper. Leaving aside how many people in the ornithology dept know their bins, the test itself was run by survey design and analysis noobies. This report can be used as a poster child to illustrate the need for such courses ... er, in the Stat department, of course. ;)

Ed

[FrankD]

Brenda: My Nikon 'nocular is okay, but it doesn't turn into ninja Terrorcon like a Divebomb Transformer. I give it a 4.4.

Now that was funny Brock. It makes me think of the new movie..partly shot in my neck of the woods IIRC.

;)