Hi all,
my question is:
Would you be interested in quality porros by ZR?
I emailed ZR recently and put to them that if they produced a high quality porro along the lines of EII 8x30s I would almost certainly buy a pair. So long as they are as good (or very nearly so) optically as EIIS and waterproof and with a modern eyecup design so I could make use of all the 8.8 degree fov.
Or maybe you'd prefer something along the lined of an SE?
What stipulations would you have of a new porro design?
I asked them because I have recently got back into porros and tried out both SEs and EIIs but I can't get on with their eyecups/eyerelief. I really like the eyecups on the Opticron SRGAs which are very small and fit my small deep set eyes very well. I also like the eyecups on the Meopta 8x32s which are small but have a large glass surface (compared to the SRGAs that is).
I wear galsses and contact lenses so ideally would like porros that work well with and without glasses on.
Is it time for a new porro or are they old hat now?
Have a great festive time,
Martin.
By the way, Charles from ZR replied and said that they have had similar feedback from others and he is aware that there is a market for high quality porros. He hopes to look into the possibilities in the New Year. He warned that it takes a long time to design and build binoculars, especially as they haven't made porros before so they would be starting from scratch. So, if they do make them, it will be a long time before I can get my paws on them. I can wait. I think!
Would you I be interested in quality porros by ZR, you asked
If they were as good quality as ZR's roofs, but had the stray light issue fully resolved, you bet your sweet bippy I would!
Over the weekend (when it wasn't snowing), I had a chance to compare the ZR 7x36 ED2 to my Nikon 8x30 EII.
Here's how they stacked up:
Ergonomics: If not for the 2" extensions on the stubby barrels of my EII (made from a combo of Bushwackers and rubber dewshields), the ZR would be by far better in this regard, because the EII is too "short and stout" for my large hands.
The ZR's ergonomics reminds me of the EDG. The Promaster ED while having image quality on par (or nearly) with the 8x32 LX (w/out the CA) was too long even for my large hands and the thumb indents were too deep. There also wasn't enough space between the barrels in the "open" bridge.
With the 7x ED2, I can fit two fingers from each hand opposite each other in the open space. With the Promaster, I had to stagger my fingers to get them to fit in the open space. The smaller aperture probably helps in this regard.
The 7x ED2 is the perfect size for my large hands, and the shallow indents will fit a variety of different size thumbs.
I also like the recessed metal frame that runs along the top in front of the focuser, which my middle finger rests in perfectly, with my index finger on the focuser, and the ring finger and pinky in the space between the barrels.
Kudos to the ZR designers for making an open bridge design that actually works!
If ZR made an 8x30 porro, my advice - make the barrels longer than the 8x30 EII so people have some place to rest their pinkies to stabilize the bin better. (You can add # 5 Bushwacker to the EII to help with this).
However, I would rather they make the body design more like the SE, which fits a variety of hands well, though it too suffers from stubby barrels (not quite as short).
But don't stop there or you will be just "reinventing the wheel". What the EII and SE lines lack are full sized models.
My ideal porro would be a WF 8* 8x or 7x42 SE, but without the finicky eye placement, more like the EII in that regard.
If ZR could make a porro with optics as good as the EII in a full sized bin, they would have something truly unique and would be hard pressed to keep up with demand.
Eyecups. The ZR eyecups are more comfortable than the EII's rubber fold down type, although the EII's eyecups are more comfortable than the 8x SE, which does not fit into my deep eye orbits, so I can't see the entire FOV (I can squish my eyes into the cups, but then I get "blackouts"). The SE/EII eyecups are the same diameter, but the shorter ER on the EII makes for a better fit.
Curiously, I get blackouts with the 7x ED2 too even with the cups all the way up. I found that by carefully setting the IPD I can minimize this but not eliminate it. No blackouts with the EII.
The second detent on the ZR's eycups is too close to the bottom. The best ER for me with the ED2 is a dentent just below the top position.
So if ZR makes porros with twist up eyecups, make them with four detents, one near the top. People with deep set eyes need to get a bit closer than the top position to see the entire FOV, but not so close as to experience image blackouts.
The ZR's eyecups are all plastic, which is bound to wear down the detents with use as it moves up and down over the metal shaft.
The Nikon LX has rubber armor over a metal base, which moves up and down a metal shaft. This is a better design.
There's also a bit too much "play" in the ED2's eyecups, and they could also use more beveling at the edges like the Hawke Frontier eyecups for better comfort.
My final comment on eyecups is that my experience with WF porros with twist-up eyecups has not been favorable. The Audubon 820 is the worst example. The eyecups are too big, too hard, and have no bevel at the edge.
For some reason -- experts can chime in here -- porro eye lens housings on WF bins seem to be larger than comparable FOV roofs.
Not the EP lens diameter itself, but the EP housing diameter. So manufacturers make the twist-ups to run along that wider housing, which makes the eyecups too W-I-D-E.
Not sure what could be done about this, but it's made me live with fold down eyecups (on my 804 Audubon vs. 820 Audubon, for example).
Focuser.
The focuser on the EII is identical to the SE. Front positioned with a tiny wheel. Don't like it.
I do like the front position vs. middle position to keep the open bridge design, but a wider focuser would be better.
The 7x ED2's focuser is wide enough, but considering how stiff the focuser is, it really needs thicker rubber grips on the focuser to make it easier to turn. With gloves on, I have a hard time gripping the focuser.
So larger focuser with larger or at least higher rubber grips.
Given that people want WP bins, the ZR porro would have to be WP. That tends to make the focus stiff in my experience with WP porros.
The ED2 focuser is stiff enough, if the porro version were stiffer, that would be intolerable to many people.
The ED2's focuser is stiffest at about 15 ft. After that it loosens up a bit, not sure why it's designed like this, but I need the focuser to be smooth so I can quickly move from close distance to medium range (15 to 40 ft.) since that's the range I do most of my birding (backyard feeders, trees, habitat surroundings).
At longer distances, the ED2's focuser speed and tension is fine.
DOF/DOFocus:
1 turn from cf to infinity would be ideal but only if it didn't make the depth of focus too shallow. If it did, then 1 and 1/2 turns.
I haven't tried the 7x42 FL and it doesn't surprise me that it would have better depth of focus, but compared to the 8x32 LX, which takes only 1/2 turn from cf to infinity, I find the depth of focus on the 7xED2 quite good.
The DOF is also quite good for a midsized roof.
The DOF, depth of focus, and 3-D effect are all better on the EII, and this is what makes porros appealing to me.
Optics.
Aside from the stray light problem, which I understand has been addressed, when the bins are not pointed toward the sun, the views are marvelous through the 7x ED2.
Looking at birds against a snowy background w/out the CA I often see in my LX was very nice.
But there was one thing I don't see in the LX - pincushion.
Both the EII and ED2 have noticeable pincushion, though the ED2 is more extreme.
Looking at the rectangular computer screen, the edges are saddle shaped with the ED2, just a bit bowed with the EII, and straight with the SE.
It seems with WF bins, you need to have more pincushion than with more moderate fields of view.
The pincushion causes a bit of "scrolling" (similar to rolling ball but in this case, "rolling saddle"), but it's not bad in either the EII or ED2 while panning, but it is a bit disturbing at close distance with the ZR, because it distorts the shape.
So I prefer the less pincushion (but no rolling ball!) of the EII to the ED2.
Although I do like sharp edges and find fuzzy edges distracting, particularly while panning, the edges on 7x ED2 fall off gradually, so they are not distracting.
The EII is better in this regard - wider sweet spot and even more gradual fall off at the edges. I prefer that design. That's the famous "Nikon view".
If ZR could design a WF porro with sharp optics, wide sweet spot, gradual fall off at the edges, excellent contrast and color depth, low aberrations, with ED glass and WP, they would two legs up Nikon, and fill the gap left by the demise of the EII and the SE lines.
Color and contrast (except when pointing toward the sun) were similar in the two bins, though colors are a bit more vivid in the the EII and truer to life despite its lack of exotic glass. This surprised me. The LX is a step ahead of the EII in terms of contrast and color depth, two steps ahead of the ED2.
CA control was better, of course, in the ZR, but the EII was no slouch in this dept. either despite its lack of exotic glass. The LX could use ED glass to control CA in high contrast situations. Double that for the LX L.
Cost. Henry said on another thread that if porros had all the features that top roofs had, they would cost the same (or nearly the same).
Not if they were manufactured in China. ZR already proved that with its roofs.
The biggest cost in Zeiss, Lecia, and Swaros is probably labor costs. Germany has the highest wages of any country in Europe. Austria is right behind Germany.
There's no reason why either roofs or porros couldn't be built with similar quality in China, but they would need to get more on par with Japanese QC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming
If not for Deming, the label "Made in Japan" would still make people wince and equate the product with junk.
Chinese products get similar reactions now from some people, but with more attention paid to quality control and safety (no lead, no Melamine, etc.), that can turn around like it did in Japan.
As far as the customer demand: Build it (right) and they will come.
Happy Festivus to you too, Martin!
Brock
