• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Troubador's Review of Bushnell Legend M 8x42 and Trophy 8x32 (1 Viewer)

Rogers Sporting Goods has been running an excellent special on the 8X42 Bushnell Legend M on their eBay site with a great price of approximately $160. Multiple members have jumped on the offer and so there is renewed discussion of this very good binocular. The sale is discussed in the Binocular Bargains thread.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=124267&page=132

The reason for activating this thread again is to give us members a place to discuss the M in some detail and to still keep the Binocular Bargains thread on track.

Below are comments from C J in regards to the Legend M and the similar Zen Ray ED3. I figured it would be best for me to respond outside of the Bargains thread.



C J ...... Thanks for posting your comparisions of the two models. I was hoping to hear your thoughts on the M considering all of your experience with the ZR ED3. I consider the Legend M a clone of the ZR ED3 but with improved revisions.

I have looked at both internally with a flashlight and they sure look the same to me. Screws, part shapes, placement, etc are all the same. They look to both use the same frame and for the most part, differences are in the armoring. There are however a couple of noticeable changes made to the body.

View attachment 646506

The first noticeable difference is the Bushnell has rings at the eye piece ends of both barrels whereas the ZR has the diopter ring on one side but no corresponding ring on the other barrel. I am not sure why that change was made. It could be for just aesthetic reasons.

The other noticeable change is the bridges, especially the focus knob bridge. The ZR is higher up. It looks like the focus was reworked. The front bridge on the Bushnell is also a little lower.

Speculation is not uncommon practice on the Forum so I will go there for a bit. Bushnell was owned by a couple of investment firms until a couple of years ago. It was then purchased by an outdoor products company and rather than being run by bankers sitting in some big city high rise, it now has some folks who actually use the products. I am thinking these folks who actually know something about outdoor products took a serious look at the base model and found areas that could be improved. It also looks like they are making a serious effort to get consistent quality.

I have both the 8X43 and the 10X43 in the ZR ED3 and also the 8X and 10X42 in the Bushnell M. Both of my original ZR units had to be exchanged due to issues out of the box. One may have been exchanged twice, but I do not remember for sure. That gave me first hand experience with at least 4 and maybe 5 ED3 units. All had free play in the focus when changing rotation. The two I have now are not bad and are much better than the first shipments but there is a noticeable difference compared to the Bushnell units with have near zero free movement. The Bushnell M at the Birdfair may have been an early demo and the assembly has improved with the current production. So far all the recent buyers have not found free play in the Bushnell. I think the focus mechanics it one area where Bushnell put some effort in improvement. I can see a change in the physical housing and in actual use.

C J is right about the Bushnell focus knob being a little smaller and the focus being faster. The diameter of the Bushnell focus knob is about 33mm and the ZR is about 35mm. Travel rotation from close to infinity is about 5/8 of a turn for the ZR and about 1 5/8 for the Bushnell. My ideal is about 1 1/4. I find it easier to lock onto focus at infinity with the Bushnell because of the slower focus and that lack of free play. The ZR would win out in close viewing.

I do pick up a difference in color balance. It is not great but my ZR models do lean a little to the warm side. I can see it on first look without having to switch back and forth multiple times. The Bushnell looks to be very close to neutral. They both work for me although I prefer the balance to be as close to neutral as possible.

Related is the color of the coatings. The Bushnell is magenta similar to the newer Zeiss products. The Zen Ray coating color is the blue green very similar to the Nikon Aculon.

I am not that particular about the handling and they both handle well for me. As C J pointed out, there are differences in the armor on the bride and the focus knob services. One other difference is the thumb cutouts on the bottom side. The ZR is for a specific grip and the Bushnell is more generic. My grip is not quite as ZR had in mind so the Bushnell design works a little better for me but it is not major.

The biggest difference for me is ease of eye placement when viewing without eye glasses. ZR products follow the design of a shorter extended eye cup in relationship to the eye relief. The end result is that for my facial structure, I have to brace the eye cups higher up than what is naturally comfortable for me. I do not have not that problem with the Bushnell Legend M. It looks like Bushnell eye cups are slightly longer so that may be part of the reason for the difference. I am also wondering if they tweaked the eye piece design to make it less susceptible to black outs. It seems I can wiggle the Bushnell around a little bit more before seeing blackouts.

When the eye cups are fully retracted, it looks like the edge off the eye cup may be a little bit farther from top surface of the eye piece lens. If so, then there is the possibly that the Bushnell may not work as well for a full view when viewing with glasses. Maybe C J, as an eye glass viewer, can comment on that and if she was able to get a full FOV with the Bushnell.

As C J noted, optical qualities of CA, glare, distortion, and center view appear the same. Both look to be optically the same other than a little difference in color balance and maybe some eye piece tweaking.

There was some discussion on the quality of the diopter ring of the Bushnell M when it first came out. That was a weak point of the previous model where it was made of plastic and frequently broke. I did look at an early version of the M a couple of years ago and had some concerns. I do not know if I had a bias because of what I knew about the previous version or if Bushnell has since made some changes. but I have no issues with the durability of the diopter ring on the two units I now have.

It looks like Bushnell did their homework and made a very good binocular even better. The improvements that work for me are a better focus mechanism, a small improvement in color balance to neutral and easier eye placement when viewing without glasses.

My choice between the two is the Bushnell and the primary reason is the eye placement. That is a personal preference item since different facial structures require different hold points. Some folks may get along better with the ZR approach. Both are very good and the Bushnell is a great buy at the current sales price.

Thought I would repost my post from the Binocular Bargain thread, since it might be easier to find here is someone is interested in the Bushnells, as was Bruce's intention to move the discussion about these here where it is more appropriate to discuss them at length. So here is my post for what it is very subjectively worth:

Just wanted to back this endorsement up having received my 8x42 Bushnell Legend M's today, all I can say is if you don't get them now, you will kick yourself later for being so slow and unaware!

They are even better than the Aculons for value, even though I love my 10x42 Aculons still-they deliver the Porro view so well, that they will be my go to bins (edited to add: in the house) for a long time to come, I imagine. But these Bushnell Legend M 8x42' s are really special too, and at the Roger's price on Ebay, they certainly are a bargain, in anyone's book, if you only try them before they are gone (you may agree). If I was younger, I would have bought 2 pair, had I known how good they really are beforehand just to have a spare. Unfortunately, I already have the spares, though they aren't as good as these, I'm sure.

But, that is my take on them, and I am not a reviewer, just a fan of good optics that work for me. These do that and more. I had an image with them before the sun set today after using them for about a half hour, that really showed how special the optics are. A backlit Willow tree when the sun was going down, looked like it had mini lights strung on it, and it was beautiful to see. I tried two other bins I was using in comparison, and neither delivered such a delightful image as these did. Scientific? Not at all, I am kind of pleased to say-it's very subjective, but that's how I see most things, and how I like to compare bins for myself.

All I know is that these are a screaming deal, and hope you can take advantage of it to find out for yourself how nice these are before they sell out. I can't fault them at all at this price ($160USD)-they are a pleasure to use and view through-they are very good at regular price, but this discounted price is something else for this quality in a binocular.

If they had the 10x42's available too, I would jump in on them too, but sadly not. Though when comparing these to my 10's, they did not actually seem that far off in resolving differnce from 8 to 10x, which surprised me as well how these compared. I feel that I am not missing any details that the higher powers should provide if the optics are the same quality.

But these are for real, and deliver beyond what you would think you would get for the money. The larger size is still comfortable, probably for the ergonomics and great balance they have. They are like an old friend-not hard to spend time with, and very comfortable besides.
 
Bruce,

I had a quick check of the Zens and they have magenta coloured coatings on the objectives, greeny on the prisms, and a bit of a combination on the oculars. I have probably photographed them way back when and posted them on the ED3 thread.
................Chosun :gh:

C J,

Looks like some of our different conclusions come down to personal preference. Lucky for me that the changes made by Bushnell favor my preferences.

The color of the objectives is interesting. If I understand your comments correctly on your Zen Ray having magenta coloured objective coatings, it makes me wonder if Zen Ray made some mid stream changes.

Here are some photos I took yesterday of the Bushnell Legend M 10X42 and the Zen Ray ED3 10X42. The Bushnell is on the left and the Zen Ray is on the right. The Bushnell looks to lean toward magenta but not my Zen Ray.

Here is a Wiki sample of magenta which leans toward the reds that I see in the Legend M.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magenta

Here is a Wiki sample of cyan that seems to lean more toward what I see in my Zen Ray.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyan

How do the objective colors of my Zen Ray compare to what you have?
 

Attachments

  • 0-color1.jpg
    0-color1.jpg
    101.6 KB · Views: 315
  • 0-color2.jpg
    0-color2.jpg
    123.7 KB · Views: 281
  • 0-color3.jpg
    0-color3.jpg
    125.5 KB · Views: 380
  • 0-color4.jpg
    0-color4.jpg
    124.4 KB · Views: 281
Last edited:
Thought I would repost my post from the Binocular Bargain thread, since it might be easier to find here is someone is interested in the Bushnells, as was Bruce's intention to move the discussion about these here where it is more appropriate to discuss them at length. So here is my post for what it is very subjectively worth:

Barry ..... Thanks for posting your review. Nice job. Sounds like one of your first views is of a rememberable scene.

Keep an eye on Amazon in a few days during their Black Friday and Cyber Monday sales. There is always a chance they will have a discount on the 10X42 version of the Legend M. They did promote it once as a one day sale item.
 
I just noticed the speculation on this thread about the Zen-Ray ED3 and the Bushnell Legend M being the same binocular. I tested the 10x43 ED3 about six years ago.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=212971

I'm curious to know if any of my findings then apply to more recent ED3s or Bushnell Ms, particularly the eyecup asymmetry, which should be easy to see.

The eyecups on my Zen Ray look good. Setting the diopter retracts the eye piece when setting to the negative side and raises it when setting to the positive side. Below are photos showing my Zen Ray ED3 10X43 at the different position settings.

At max negative diopter setting ........

0-ZRD Neg.jpg

At zero diopter setting .........

0-ZRD1.jpg

At max positive diopter setting .......

0-ZRD Pos.jpg

Here are the eye cups extended, they look about equal to me.

0-ZRD - Level.jpg

Here is the Bushnell Legend M, diopter set at zero ....

0-zrd Legend M.jpg
 
Thank you

Hi Bruce,

Well, I wouldn't exactly say I reviewed it, but more just my first impressions of some very nice optics, and that I wanted to give some more positive feedback for people who might be on the fence about them, or not aware of the great deal at hand on the auction site from Rogers Sporting Goods. It can't last forever, I'm pretty sure, and why I want others to have them too! ; ) Here's the direct link:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Bushnell-8...375162&hash=item440694c323:g:fz4AAOSw1BlZVm2T

One of the best deals I've had so far, and not to be missed if you think it's a match for you. It certainly was a perfect match for me, thank you all who made that possible!

And thank you Bruce(and others), for your help, and reviews, and especially Bruce that the 10's might be available on discount too if I keep watch. I imagine them being great too for me, since I often favor 10's.

But I am warming up to the Cabelas 10x32 Euro HD Instinct binoculars (Meostar B1's) now that I also picked up on special, and think they are a really nice bin in the 10x32 range-sharp, very wide open view, in a compact package that may a little more than the lightweights that cost less, but these have the optics that show a difference from the cheaper lot I have on hand right now (Sightron BSII 10x32, Leupold BX3). I will be returning both of those directly, as they don't live up to the Cabelas Euro HD Instincts 10x32's or Bushnell Legend M 8x42's, which for me are both great to use.
 
Thanks for the photos, Bruce.

Based on them I would say the ED3 eyecups are now nearly or exactly the same length, however looking at your photos in post #19 as well as post #25 I have some doubts that the ED3 and Legend M are the same binocular. The metal hinge parts are quite different and it looks like the distance between the front of the objective glass and the back of the eyelens glass is shorter for the ED3 than the M.

One sure way to determine if optics are identical is to observe the reflection patterns that return from the lens elements. The photo below shows the identical (but mirror imaged) reflections of the camera flash returning from Zen-Ray and Swarovski 20-60x eyepieces. It's a little tricky to set up a single light source and angle the two binoculars so that the reflection patterns will reach the eye (or camera lens) from exactly the same angle.

Henry
 

Attachments

  • attachment-1.jpg
    attachment-1.jpg
    128.5 KB · Views: 107
...One sure way to determine if optics are identical is to observe the reflection patterns...The photo below shows the identical...reflections...from Zen-Ray and Swarovski 20-60x eyepieces...
Henry, others (e.g. David, Steve),
Does that mean that Swaro. is also on the Japan list?
What else (from Japan) do Swaro. share with what other makes (unless the list is too long)?
Thank you!
 
IIRC, what it means is that the ZR eyepiece is a Chinese clone of the Swaro. As you know the Chinese pay no attention to copyrights, patents, etc.
 
The Bushnell looks closer to the Zen ED2 than the ED3, but even then the castings don't quite line up. There were many versions of this basic design, sold by Zen, Hawke, Atlas (Eagle Optics), even Bushnell before now if memory serves. Provided the quality control is there I'd call it a classic design at this point. And I think a real Chinese design at that. It's a nice combination, but unfortunately my ED2 crapped out and Zen did a ridiculously bad job of "repairing" it. I wrote it off. None of these clones are really repairable, at least not from a bottom line perspective. It makes more sense to replace.

As I recall the Chinese reverse engineered that Swaro spotting scope eyepiece. They also reverse engineered a 30x fixed from the Nikon SE eyepiece I think. Henry has a much better grasp of all that history than I do.
 
#29: If that is so it that is astonishing to me. Surely ZR observe intellectual property rights? If this matter has been dealt with before in the forum let me not take this thread off topic. I did not think of this at all, but of collaboration in design and/or manufacture, that is why I was reminded of Japan, as there is a current thread on that connection.
 
I didn't intend to change the thread subject either. The photo was just to illustrate how to determine if the optics of two instruments are identical.

I doubt that the copying of the Swarovski eyepiece design was done with Swaro's knowledge or permission. I imagine quite a few of these appropriations are just flying under the radar. It's possible that Zen-Ray didn't know where their OEM got the design. That same eyepiece also turned up on the original Vortex Razor scope, an Orion 7.7-23.1mm zoom eyepiece and probably others
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the photos, Bruce.

Based on them I would say the ED3 eyecups are now nearly or exactly the same length, however looking at your photos in post #19 as well as post #25 I have some doubts that the ED3 and Legend M are the same binocular. The metal hinge parts are quite different and it looks like the distance between the front of the objective glass and the back of the eye lens glass is shorter for the ED3 than the M.

One sure way to determine if optics are identical is to observe the reflection patterns that return from the lens elements. The photo below shows the identical (but mirror imaged) reflections of the camera flash returning from Zen-Ray and Swarovski 20-60x eyepieces. It's a little tricky to set up a single light source and angle the two binoculars so that the reflection patterns will reach the eye (or camera lens) from exactly the same angle.

Henry

I agree that the two are not exactly the same but the it looks like Bushnell started with the Zen Ray design and made a few modifications where they thought it was needed. An examination of inside the barrels with a light looks the same. I consider them clones with some differences.

The most noticeable area modified is the focus mechanism. That was an area that needed improvement because of all the free play. There is a noticeable difference in the focus housing between the two so that does make them different in that regard but they are still basically the same in many regards. I suspect the front hinge was changed to better match up with the changes to the rear that houses the focus mechanism.

I look at it as what the auto industry does. I bought the first year of a new Ford truck design some years ago. I then bought the last year of that generation about six years later. It was still basically the same truck but there were some styling changes and mechanical improvements and the newer version was a better truck than what first came out for that design.

My take is the ED2 is gen 1.0, the ED3 is gen 2.0, the Bushnell is gen 2.1 and the ED4 is gen 3.0.

The length from the objective surface to the eye piece surface looks the same to me. I think they look different in the photo (post #19) due to placement and camera angle. Also the eye cup looks to extend just a little bit more on the Bushnell. I made a crude modification to my caliber and the measurement looked the same. This was not the most precise measurement possible but I doubt there is any difference. I may try to come up with something with more precision.

The reflection test is pretty neat. I will give it some thought about recreating something similar within my limited means of equipment and technique.
 
I agree that the two are not exactly the same but the it looks like Bushnell started with the Zen Ray design and made a few modifications where they thought it was needed. An examination of inside the barrels with a light looks the same. I consider them clones with some differences.

The most noticeable area modified is the focus mechanism. That was an area that needed improvement because of all the free play. There is a noticeable difference in the focus housing between the two so that does make them different in that regard but they are still basically the same in many regards. I suspect the front hinge was changed to better match up with the changes to the rear that houses the focus mechanism.

I look at it as what the auto industry does. I bought the first year of a new Ford truck design some years ago. I then bought the last year of that generation about six years later. It was still basically the same truck but there were some styling changes and mechanical improvements and the newer version was a better truck than what first came out for that design.

My take is the ED2 is gen 1.0, the ED3 is gen 2.0, the Bushnell is gen 2.1 and the ED4 is gen 3.0.

The length from the objective surface to the eye piece surface looks the same to me. I think they look different in the photo (post #19) due to placement and camera angle. Also the eye cup looks to extend just a little bit more on the Bushnell. I made a crude modification to my caliber and the measurement looked the same. This was not the most precise measurement possible but I doubt there is any difference. I may try to come up with something with more precision.

The reflection test is pretty neat. I will give it some thought about recreating something similar within my limited means of equipment and technique.

Bruce and others:

I have a question about the Bushnell L and the M models.

They look identical from photos, and their site mentions the M adds
dielectric prism coatings.

I wonder why the deep discounts at this time. Does anyone know, I suppose
it is a new model coming out.

Jerry
 
I had read up widely on the Bushnell Legend-M (looking for an 8x42 in the low-medium price range with very good optics for the price and a wide field of view) before the recent plunge in price at several retailers (and my tip-off which led to a bit of a buying spate!) Many reviews, in websites such as this, and by users in retailers' sites, strongly criticized a very stiff focus knob. See the first post in this thread, 7-8 months ago. The problem seemed to me to be too widespread to be a QC issue in a factory batch. Now it seems that Bushnell has fixed it. So maybe it is 2.11 on Bruce's scale! The price plunge after this is a mystery to me. As I am about to send this in this I see Jerry's post.
 
Last edited:
Bruce and others:

I have a question about the Bushnell L and the M models.

They look identical from photos, and their site mentions the M adds
dielectric prism coatings.

I wonder why the deep discounts at this time. Does anyone know, I suppose
it is a new model coming out.

Jerry

Jerry.... I wonder if we are looking at different models when it comes to the Legend L. What I understand to be the Legend L is on the left and the M is on the right. Specs show a length of 5.5 inches for the L and 6.5 for the M. Do you have a link to the picture of the Legend L you are looking at?

0Legend M L.jpg

You might be right about it being discontinued. That was my thought when the 10X42 M was offered as a one day sale a couple of months ago on Amazon. I called Bushnell at the time and the rep said he had not heard of it being discontinued and his information at that time showed it as being current. Sometimes the reps are the last to know of these changes!

The Bushnell site still shows the M as current model on the web site under the hunting category. It is not listed under the Wildlife category and that was also true a couple of months ago when I checked. It is strange not to list it as a wildlife binocular because I think the wide FOV and natural color balance are great attributes for bird watching.

The way it is currently being sold sure indicates it is a closeout but who knows. What is interesting is there are not currently any great discounts on the 10X right now. If the model is going away, then it I would think it should also be heavily discounted. Beats me!
 
I had read up widely on the Bushnell Legend-M (looking for an 8x42 in the low-medium price range with very good optics for the price and a wide field of view) before the recent plunge in price at several retailers (and my tip-off which led to a bit of a buying spate!) Many reviews, in websites such as this, and by users in retailers' sites, strongly criticized a very stiff focus knob. See the first post in this thread, 7-8 months ago. The problem seemed to me to be too widespread to be a QC issue in a factory batch. Now it seems that Bushnell has fixed it. So maybe it is 2.11 on Bruce's scale! The price plunge after this is a mystery to me. As I am about to send this in this I see Jerry's post.

I am just speculating here, but maybe the internet seller mentioned on the bargains thread on this model, received a large shipment of the lots that had some complaints about the focuser. If changes were made, this makes sense.

They show over 100 sold at the 50% off deal, and more available.

I suppose those who have purchased one of these will report back.

The rest of the sellers I have looked at do not have any discount like that.

Jerry
 
I am just speculating here, but maybe the internet seller mentioned on the bargains thread on this model, received a large shipment of the lots that had some complaints about the focuser. If changes were made, this makes sense.

They show over 100 sold at the 50% off deal, and more available.

I suppose those who have purchased one of these will report back.

The rest of the sellers I have looked at do not have any discount like that.

Jerry

Jerry,

I take it your speculation is that the Rogers Sporting Goods deal on eBay for the 8X42 M is a sellout of a batch of factory seconds.

I doubt that is the case. First, Rogers seems to me to be a very reputable seller. I would expect them to state if it were a second and they do not. The model is listed as New.

Second, all the reports posted so far on the focus in the bargain thread have been good.

- BruceH: The focus checks out fine. There is no free play. It is slightly on the stiff side but I can rotate it with one finger .....
- RioTuitoBirder: .... the focus dial is not too tight or loose. There is no free play in the focusing mechanism .....
- WDC: Focuser is ok, just a bit stiff. Returned due to eye relief not working out.
- [email protected]: The focus is perfect ....
- Bluespiderweb: Says he is very pleased but no specific mention on the focus.
- Chill6X6: Still waiting for Chuck to report in.

Note: Looks like RioTuitoBirder did not go through eBay but may have ordered off the Rogers site, but not sure.

It may be that you are right in your previous speculation that the model is being discontinued. It could be that what was left was sold at a large discount to Rogers to liquidate. That approach is not uncommon. It looked like EuroOptics was a big liquidator of the pre Profield EL SV units at great price and similar for Red Hawk Rifles with the gray SF units.

As someone pointed out, B & H Photo is listing it as discontinued but it is not clear if that means B & H has discontinued carrying it or Bushnell has discontinued making it. I did call Rogers and the rep said he was not aware of the model being discontinued, but they did a big order and needed to move some of them. As I mentioned in another post, the reps are sometimes the last to know the real story. Your guess is as good as mine. Whatever the reason for the sale, it is looking to be a very good binocular and is a great deal for the buyer.
 
Bruce,

I had a quick check of the Zens and they have magenta coloured coatings on the objectives, greeny on the prisms, and a bit of a combination on the oculars. I have probably photographed them way back when and posted them on the ED3 thread.

The colour representation seems pretty neutral to me, if anything the transmission peak seems to be in the very bright green region. I have noticed that the blue colour (as on a Superb Fairy Wren etc) seems a little weaker than on other bins I have seen - such as a Zeiss HT or Swarovski SV for instance. I wouldn't call the Zen colour rendition warm by any stretch.

The ED3's use 2nd generation Vividbrite dielectric prism coatings of 40 layers. It is interesting that the 3rd Gen coatings used on the new ED4 are still 40 layer. :cat:

I didn't notice any significant differences between the Bushie and the Zen, but the day was quite dull. I know that of a late sunny afternoon my two eyes have very different colour casts anyway - one blue/green, the other golden/orange - this is very distinct and kinda cool :cool:

The Bushie tested on Allbino's certainly has a pretty nice transmission curve that bins 10x the price struggle to better, and as to my knowledge no-one has actually seen a transmission curve for the Zen ED3, I would say they would be identical. Can anyone confirm for sure the number of layers used in the Bushie M's dielectric prism coating ??

I much prefer the ergos and particularly the focus speed of the Zen - they are pretty much perfect. I use the thumb indents to brace my thumbs crossed over from the opposite hand (I comfortably hold a 50mm SV), and also find this a super stable hold. I also like the smoother contoured (and unarmoured) bridge of the Zen which I rest my middle fingers on - this gives me absolutely zero gap between focusing forefingers and gripping middle fingers (puts the Zeiss SF to dog-legged shame! :) - the next two I have wrapped around the barrels. :t:

The Bushie is definitely a different (though derivative chassis). The focus wheel I tried had a small amount of backlash of a mil or two. From conversations with Zen-Ray it seems that those that exhibit more tension (stiffer focusers) correspond to less backlash, and vice versa. At least my unit has a nice light smooth focus! :)

I didn't pay great attention to the standoff of the eye cup rim from the ocular lens on the Bushie, but that of the Zens is absolutely minimal - any less and the surface of my glasses might risk contacting the ocular lens. When checking the distortion of the Bushie I could pretty much see all the field, so the difference is not great (I didn't pay great attention to that either as I was marking time until I could get my hands on the 10x SF. :cat:

Overall, I wouldn't necessarily say the Bushie is an 'upgrade' to the Zen. The different body and smaller slower (jeez, that would really annoy me) focuser may be more conducive to better backlash tolerances. As you and I have both noted, unit to unit variability is going to play a part in both brands. The eye cups of the Bushie may also suit non-spectacle wearers better, but that's as far as I would hang my hat on differences going.

One thing is for sure, that even if the Bushie's ergos run 2nd to the Zens (for me), if you can get them at half the price ~$200 you are getting a great buy !


Chosun :gh:
C J,

Looks like some of our different conclusions come down to personal preference. Lucky for me that the changes made by Bushnell favor my preferences.

The color of the objectives is interesting. If I understand your comments correctly on your Zen Ray having magenta coloured objective coatings, it makes me wonder if Zen Ray made some mid stream changes.

Here are some photos I took yesterday of the Bushnell Legend M 10X42 and the Zen Ray ED3 10X42. The Bushnell is on the left and the Zen Ray is on the right. The Bushnell looks to lean toward magenta but not my Zen Ray.

Here is a Wiki sample of magenta which leans toward the reds that I see in the Legend M.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magenta

Here is a Wiki sample of cyan that seems to lean more toward what I see in my Zen Ray.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyan

How do the objective colors of my Zen Ray compare to what you have?
Bruce,

I double checked and my ED3's were as I described - definitely magenta coatings on the objectives - looks like your photo of your Bushies.

Anyone have any concrete info on the number of coating layers for the dielectric mirror on the Bushie ?

Note: The ED3 and Bushie M definitely have different (though dimensionally similar) bodies. The bridge of the ED3's have no rubber armour over them (just a pleasing textured painted or coated finish), and the top lines up flush with the larger focus wheel.

Also, anyone want to have a crack at putting together some precisely defined stats to see if the backlash extent/ focus stiffness correlation hypothesis holds any water ? (though not as much water as a Leica ! :) ;)

Note also that the diopter adjustment mechanism of my Zens is very positive and precise, and despite what some! on here would say :brains: the rather price level appropriate eyecups of the Zens slay those on the 6x more expensive SF for quality for mine ! :eek!:



Chosun :gh:
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top