Bruce. I did compare the Nikon MHG 8x42 to my Tract Toric 8x42 for sharpness and although they are two really different binoculars I did observe that the Tract was sharper on-axis. Even though the Tract has a smaller FOV the clarity and resolution in that FOV was sharper and more transparent and if you will more "REAL". In fact the Tract was about as sharp on edge as the MHG which surprised me. For some reason to my eyes the MHG did not seem exceptionally sharp. I think it has something to do with the difficulty correcting such a big FOV. The MHG seems to me like Nikon was trying to copy an SF but didn't quite make it. It is kind of like a budget SF. The problem with the MHG was the eyecups are not long enough for the eye relief for MY eye sockets. I have to hold the binocular about .5mm from my eyes to avoid black outs even with the eye cups fully extended. I did have them fully extended. I must have shallow eye sockets. I use the Canon 10x42 IS-L at the first click from fully closed so that tells you my eye sockets are shallower than yours. I think my problem with the MHG is expectations. Since I am used to the sharp edges of an SV or SF I was expecting that from the MHG and when it didn't deliver i was disappointed. I shouldn't expect a $1K binocular to equal a $2K binocular. The MHG just didn't WOW me like an SF, SV or Canon 10x42 IS-L. It is not so much the big flat FOV that WOWS me as it is the sharp edges. For me there is something about having a big 65 degree AFOV that is sharp all the way across. That is a WOW!
Last edited: