[JWcamp]

My birthday has brought me: Vanguard Endeavor ED 10x42 binoculars.

They are a good size smaller compaired to my old 10x50 porro binocs.

Things I like: multi level eyecups, locking diopter, smooooooth with no backlash focus wheel, sharp bright image, nice neckstrap, waterproof.

I have used them to do a little star veiwing and am very pleased.

Birding with them I like the brightness, sharpness and nice focus.

Yesterday took them to compare with a friends 2 Pentax and 1 Nikon binoculars and all seemed very close in performance.

Regards,
John

[Caslad66]

Good to see a positive brief review by someone who actually has a pair of Endevours

[JWcamp]

Totally enjoying the Endeavors.
Looking through the kitchen window this morning: Red Bellied Woodpecker, Hairy Woodpecker, Downy Woodpecker, Cardinal, Blackcapped Chickadee, Slate Colored Junco, Gold Finchies, Morning Dove, White Breasted Nuthatch, Gray Squirrel, Red Squirrel...

Checking the close focus, on my pair, I can focus down to 7 feet.

The neck strap is a nice cushy one,
but I might switch over to a binocular harness I have.
Regards,
john

[CarlTN]

Does the focus knob have any play to it? The 8.5 x 45 Endeavors I'm trying, have a bit of play. The focus is so fast, the loose play makes it difficult to focus accurately. They also have quite a bit of "lateral" chromatic aberration, and also some "longitudinal"...or what I call "bokeh fringing". Also the smooth black ring that's immediately in front of the objective lenses, reflects light and causes glare.

I've not even tried the neck strap yet. The fit and feel when holding even in one hand, feels great. They fit down into my plams, rather than forcing me to hold with fingertips...so they feel lighter than they really are. I do miss the cushioning on the bottom thumb indents, that a smaller Bushnell EX had, that I tried.

The field of view is more narrow than it should be, in my opinion. And to have the CA set in and get worse, toward the outside of an already narrow field...makes it seem even narrower.

Otherwise they're certainly the sharpest, brightest, highest contrast binoculars I personally have ever tried...so far. I've not tried any "alpha class" though. At this time in my life, I won't be considering spending over $1k on binoculars...let alone $2k!

Viewing at night through these, the Orion Nebula had some definition and a bit of color...the first time I've ever seen that. Fireflies blink very brightly, almost like a strobe...which was surprising. The disc of Jupiter was sharply defined, and it had a strong peachy color. I could almost see the rings of Saturn, which were barely more apparent through other 10x bino's.

But the CA bothers me a lot, so I will be trying others. The Zen Ray Prime HD looks intriguing, but costs a bit more...and won't be released until May 25.

[JWcamp]

CarlTN,
I grabbed my pair again and had a few views.

My focus wheel has no play, friction/stiffness at 60 degrees F seems great.

I do not wear glasses, so I do not get any glare from the smooth black ring.

The field of view on paper was less than my old 7x50's yet in use they seemed about the same.
When we were compairing it the Pentax and Nikon binoculars, we all felt the FOV was about the same on all of them.

I had not noticed any bad chromatic aberration in the birding I had done so far. So this morning, I went looking for chromatic aberration, using branches against the sky, vertical & horizontal, but really didn't have a good sun to see any CA.
Regards,
John

[bh46118]

Hi Carl

Have you tried the Zen Ray ED2 or ED3 ? They have a big FOV, with almost no perceivable CA. If they work for you, you won't do better for $280 than the ED2 8X43.

Bruce

Originally Posted by CarlTN

Does the focus knob have any play to it? The 8.5 x 45 Endeavors I'm trying, have a bit of play. The focus is so fast, the loose play makes it difficult to focus accurately. They also have quite a bit of "lateral" chromatic aberration, and also some "longitudinal"...or what I call "bokeh fringing". Also the smooth black ring that's immediately in front of the objective lenses, reflects light and causes glare.

I've not even tried the neck strap yet. The fit and feel when holding even in one hand, feels great. They fit down into my plams, rather than forcing me to hold with fingertips...so they feel lighter than they really are. I do miss the cushioning on the bottom thumb indents, that a smaller Bushnell EX had, that I tried.

The field of view is more narrow than it should be, in my opinion. And to have the CA set in and get worse, toward the outside of an already narrow field...makes it seem even narrower.

Otherwise they're certainly the sharpest, brightest, highest contrast binoculars I personally have ever tried...so far. I've not tried any "alpha class" though. At this time in my life, I won't be considering spending over $1k on binoculars...let alone $2k!

Viewing at night through these, the Orion Nebula had some definition and a bit of color...the first time I've ever seen that. Fireflies blink very brightly, almost like a strobe...which was surprising. The disc of Jupiter was sharply defined, and it had a strong peachy color. I could almost see the rings of Saturn, which were barely more apparent through other 10x bino's.

But the CA bothers me a lot, so I will be trying others. The Zen Ray Prime HD looks intriguing, but costs a bit more...and won't be released until May 25.

[CarlTN]

JWCamp, I don't wear eyeglasses while viewing either, and I can clearly see that there is a reflection off the smooth black ring, and I suspect yours has it as well. Regardless, I don't see how eyeglasses would be a factor in this particular aspect, since the smooth black ring is on the OBJECTIVE (front) end, and not the rear, or eyepiece end. I'll freely admit that eyeglasses detract from all aspects of a bonocular's performance...which is why I personally see more resolution, brightness, contrast, and color...without wearing my eyeglasses when I view binoculars. Others with different vision than mine, likely need to use their eyeglasses or contact lenses when using binoculars...but thankfully I do not.

Bh46118, no I have not tried either of those Zen Ray models yet, but based on my own research, I doubt they have much less CA than these Vanguards (if any)...despite claims to the contrary. The below comparison test showed the 8x42 Vanguard to also have a resolution advantage over the Zen ED3. I suspect the 8.5x45 has a tad more resolution than the 8x42...and it surely has more relative brightness than its 8x42 brother. The FOV is a few feet less than the 8x42, of course.

http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2...hart_2011.html

However, I am considering pre-ordering the Zen Prime HD, besides considering trying other brands and models. Without the added pre-order discount, the Prime HD would be far less appealing to me. I have other things I have to spend money on. If binoculars and observing, was my only hobby or I made a living with them, that would be different.

Bh, would you care to name all the binoculars you have directly compared the ED2 or ED3 with, and highlight their differences and/or advantages, to each?

[JWcamp]

Carl,
I Totally Missed that you said: smooth black ring is on the objective end.

So I looked over the objective end on my binoculars and I am not sure about a smooth ring on my pair?

Looking at mine the rubber cover wraps over the end of the barrels.
The first ring is matte black, a threaded ring with two small notches for removal or tightning [about .060" thick].
The next ring is matte black, like the first ring [no notches, about .080" thick].
The next ring is slightly glossy but it is very thin and up against the glass lens [it is about .030" thick].

Good luck with your shopping.
John

[bh46118]

I am EXTREMELY sensitive to CA, and I see practically none at the outer edge of the FOV in the ED2. CA issues in the Vanguard are almost universal in the reviews I have read.

I have the Vortex 6.5X32 Fury and the Minox BD 10X44 BP. Both are wonderful binoculars, but the ED2 has FAR LESS CA.

Good Luck
Bruce

Originally Posted by CarlTN

Bh46118, no I have not tried either of those Zen Ray models yet, but based on my own research, I doubt they have much less CA than these Vanguards (if any)...despite claims to the contrary.

http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2...hart_2011.html


Bh, would you care to name all the binoculars you have directly compared the ED2 or ED3 with, and highlight their differences and/or advantages, to each?

[CarlTN]

I beg to differ bh, of the pro reviews I have read, none mention a high degree of CA in the Vanguard. They either say it is low, or don't mention it at all. I notice it looks like you haven't tried the Vanguard, yourself...Are you just going by what others say, and then guessing the ED2 has less CA than the Vanguard, without directly comparing?

I also wonder why anyone would be less or more sensitive to lateral CA. It's either there, or it isn't. The only factor that allows it to be seen or not, is subject matter having edges of high contrast. Unless we are talking about red/green color blindness, in which case I could understand the CA being invisible to someone who is red/green color blind...since the CA is a yellowish-green/magenta.

JWCamp, on these 8.5x45, the outer rubber does wrap around, and that is about .08 inches wide. Then there's a groove of about .02 inches, behind it...I presume a sort of glue gap. Then there's a black ring about another .08 inches thick. It has an anodized looking finish, but with very fine, microscopic ridges in it...that aren't really "threads", but rather the way the ring is machined. This is the ring that I am referring to, which reflects so much light. It does have two tiny square "keyhole"-looking notches in the front of it, 180 degrees from each other.

Behind this, there is a much more matte looking, black ring, which extends to the edge of the objective glass element. It is wider, at about .15 inches wide. If the problematic ring in front of this one (mentioned above), was the same matte finish as this one, then there would be very little problem with "c" reflection in the view, or whatever you guys like to call it. But it isn't.

It sounds like the model you have, has the "shiny" ring perhaps smaller in size, or else maybe it is somehow behind the rubber lip a bit...I don't know. Or it could be basically identical to mine, and you're just not noticing the reflection, even though it's really not difficult to see.

Try this. Point the binoculars toward the horizon, out a large window in your house, where you can see some sky above. It will be easier if the sky is hazy, or thin clouds, and brightly diffused. Pull your eyes back from the eyepieces, and look toward the bottom of the objective lens...and see if there isn't a narrow, bright edge down there...reflecting the diffuse but bright light from the sky above. Wave your hand in front of, and above the front lenses, to see this reflection get dark. That is what I see with these, and it's coming from that machined ring which is .08 inches wide.

It could be solved by putting some kind of ultra thin, matte tape...preferably that is as matte as black felt, if not more. I'm not sure there is such a thing, but there might be. The problem would be in its thickness. If it's much thicker than paper, it will obscure some of the outer edge of the FOV. The FOV in these is already more narrow than I want.

[JWcamp]

Here is a picture of my objective end of the 10x42 endeavor ED
It sounds like about the same set-up as mine... but my two large rings have a matte finish.

[NWBirder]

I also had 8.5 endeavor for a brief period of time before I returned it. The resolution is excellent, right at the 7x36 ZEN ED2 level. I also noticed the CA on Endeavor. It's worse than the ED2. Don't know why there is a difference as both binos should have ED glasses. maybe different magnification power?

[bh46118]

You can beg to differ all you want to, but it doesn't take Perry Mason to see that the Endeavor has a CA problem, while the ED2 clearly does not. You said your Endeavor has bothersome CA in a post on this very thread, so I have no idea where you're headed with this. If you want to find out for sure, get the Zen's and compare the two. I have no desire to compare them as I am quite happy with the ED2.

I don't know why you're on here asking questions anyway, as you seem to be quite the optics authority. I'm sure you will have a wise comeback for this, but I have zero tolerance for a smart mouth, so this is my last response to you.




www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/6069048/3


www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=205824



www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=221467

Originally Posted by CarlTN

I beg to differ bh, of the pro reviews I have read, none mention a high degree of CA in the Vanguard. They either say it is low, or don't mention it at all. I notice it looks like you haven't tried the Vanguard, yourself...Are you just going by what others say, and then guessing the ED2 has less CA than the Vanguard, without directly comparing?

I also wonder why anyone would be less or more sensitive to lateral CA. It's either there, or it isn't. The only factor that allows it to be seen or not, is subject matter having edges of high contrast. Unless we are talking about red/green color blindness, in which case I could understand the CA being invisible to someone who is red/green color blind...since the CA is a yellowish-green/magenta.

JWCamp, on these 8.5x45, the outer rubber does wrap around, and that is about .08 inches wide. Then there's a groove of about .02 inches, behind it...I presume a sort of glue gap. Then there's a black ring about another .08 inches thick. It has an anodized looking finish, but with very fine, microscopic ridges in it...that aren't really "threads", but rather the way the ring is machined. This is the ring that I am referring to, which reflects so much light. It does have two tiny square "keyhole"-looking notches in the front of it, 180 degrees from each other.

Behind this, there is a much more matte looking, black ring, which extends to the edge of the objective glass element. It is wider, at about .15 inches wide. If the problematic ring in front of this one (mentioned above), was the same matte finish as this one, then there would be very little problem with "c" reflection in the view, or whatever you guys like to call it. But it isn't.

It sounds like the model you have, has the "shiny" ring perhaps smaller in size, or else maybe it is somehow behind the rubber lip a bit...I don't know. Or it could be basically identical to mine, and you're just not noticing the reflection, even though it's really not difficult to see.

Try this. Point the binoculars toward the horizon, out a large window in your house, where you can see some sky above. It will be easier if the sky is hazy, or thin clouds, and brightly diffused. Pull your eyes back from the eyepieces, and look toward the bottom of the objective lens...and see if there isn't a narrow, bright edge down there...reflecting the diffuse but bright light from the sky above. Wave your hand in front of, and above the front lenses, to see this reflection get dark. That is what I see with these, and it's coming from that machined ring which is .08 inches wide.

It could be solved by putting some kind of ultra thin, matte tape...preferably that is as matte as black felt, if not more. I'm not sure there is such a thing, but there might be. The problem would be in its thickness. If it's much thicker than paper, it will obscure some of the outer edge of the FOV. The FOV in these is already more narrow than I want.

[Caslad66]

If, as it appears to be the case, that CA is more of an individual phenomenon in that some people are more sensitive to it than others .There seems little point in making a big issue of it. In any case, any comments made should always be prefaced "I perceived some CA" rather than "there is some CA" when evaluating a pair of binoculars.

[JWcamp]

Kudo's to Vanguard Optics.
The $50 dollar mail-in rebate check came extremely Fast.

The other posts about Chromatic Aberration got me wondering about C. A. with my new Endeavors.
So for the last week or so, I used a couple of different techniques to see how much Chromatic Aberration I would see in my Endeavors.

Well, with my eyes and my pair of Endeavor ED 10x42's it was hard to cause Chromatic Aberration, and it seemed very, very minimal what I could produce.

YMMV,
John

[CarlTN]

John, thanks for posting the picture, it looks the same as mine. It's the ring in the middle that is causing the "c" reflection. I took some photos of mine as well, and will post them later, if anyone cares to see.

Ok bh, there is a lot of chest pounding going on here, and it's quite juvenile. Let's speak with our brains, and not our testosterone.

I don't feel the need to copy and paste an entire post from above...anyone can simply scroll up to read what was said before...it's just redundant and a waste of page and server space to keep pasting. So kindly stop it.

Yes, I will beg to differ all I want...thanks for understanding. I however, am not a person who is going to bully somebody just because he might have a question about something I own. Act your age.

Caslad, I disagree, CA isn't perceived, it is simply there. The only way it couldn't be perceived, is if you are color blind to the colors which show as fringing...in this case a magenta color and a green color. Or if you choose to ignore it...or if you don't ever look at any subject matter other than very smooth surfaces with soft, even lighting.

That said, I have pretty much decided to keep my Endeavor 8.5x45, since it compared favorably with one aspect of optical performance, to some "alpha class" binoculars which I compared it to, directly...including the Zeiss 8x42 FL, and the Swarovski 8.5x42 EL. I will elaborate more when I post my own review of this Vanguard binocular.

As for the 10x42 Endeavor ED, I can't say how it compares to the model I have, regarding CA, because I haven't actually tried the 10x42, nor do I want to. Just as you, John, haven't tried the model I have.

I'm glad you can see very little CA with yours, John...you're obviously happy with them, which is great. I am happier with mine now, than I was. As I said before, what I see with mine is noticeable when viewing high contrast edges, such as narrow tree limbs against sky...when birdwatching, etc. I notice both longitudinal and lateral CA, but it is the lateral that bothers me a bit more, personally.

But no, there is no perception issue here, it's just there. I'm not imagining it, and unless anyone else who happens to look through my pair, is color blind, or otherwise has very poor eyesight...they have had no trouble in seeing it.

The real question is, how MUCH of a bother is it? I've decided it's not enough of a bother...even though if this were a camera lens, I would describe the CA as quite prominent. As many of you probably know, in photography, CA can be corrected in post editing...mostly...but not always. It certainly can't be corrected while viewing live with the naked eye. The amount here would be approximately 5 to 10 pixels of CA, in the outer 50% of the FOV...and perhaps 2 to 5 in the center (based on my guesstimate, and relating to my crop sensor DSLR). Even some of the worst CA offenders in the realm of camera lenses, don't seem to have this much.

[CarlTN]

And Bruce, to be fair, it's certainly possible that the ED2 8x43 has vastly less CA than this Vanguard does. I just may be missing out on something great with the ED2...I'll admit that. If you got a new pair for only $280...that's one heck of a good price! But they aren't currently in new stock on Zen-Ray's website, and the price shows over $400. There are demo units for $285, which is $5 more than you paid. I may consider trying a demo one...either them, or the 7x36, which seems to get rave reviews.

I do think I'll keep the Vanguards though...because the CA isn't always as bothersome, depending on the subject matter (and amount of light)...and they do seem to have very low astigmatism...with a "global" contrast to the extreme. I also like the 45mm size, the brightness, and the extra bit of magnification over an 8x. I can live with a narrower FOV as well...because...I also will have a smaller 36 or 32mm size, having the wider FOV, which will be easier to carry and wear on the neck for longer periods in daytime.

I consider the 45mm a "dusk" time binocular, because in daytime, they're just too bright for me. The brighter half of everything in view, is just overwhelming in its luminosity, while the darker half appears nice and dark...but again...that's exactly the character I want in an optic, when trying to see in low light. Even fireflies at night, blink as bright as strobes via these Vanguards. I also like the intense and slightly warm color saturation.

I did decide to pass on the Zen Ray presale of the Prime HD. I figure in the future, if I decide to spend that much on a single binocular, maybe there will be demo units of it available. Given what I saw via the Swarovski EL, though...as nice as it was...I think I can live with what this Vanguard does wrong, because of what it does right, and at such a vastly lower price.

[JWcamp]

Glassing at a Red Bellied Woodpecker last evening just before sundown...
I was looking toward the sun in a stand of black walnut trees and there it was...




Chromatic Aberration!!! on the trunks and branches purple CA.


Interesting, I looked back at the same spot and no CA?
It took a while, but to be able to reproduce the CA, I had to have the binoculars opened up too far for my eyes, and I was never able to get it as strong as I had first noticed.
With the binoculars set correctly for my eye spacing It does not have CA.
It was an interesting evening, neat to learn a little as I play around with the Endeavor bino's.

Regards,
John

[CarlTN]

John, try this:

During mid afternoon, when there is a bright sky, go out and "glass" at a small tree limb set against the brighter sky (preferably at a distance of 50 feet or closer to you).

Make sure the tree limb is oriented more vertically, rather than horizontally, in your field of view. Slightly diagonal is ok. It need not appear "black" against the bright sky...in fact it is better if the limb is lit up some...just as long as the sky is very bright against it.

Now center the limb, and focus until it is sharp. Keep the limb centered, and slowly move the focus back and forth, making the limb go slowly in and out of focus. Keep the focus range where the limb is only barely out of focus as you pass what is the sharpest focus. Notice the edges of the tree limb, and see if they exhibit a color fringe during focus.

Now, with the tree limb left perfectly in focus, slowly move the tree limb within your field of view, from left to right, back and forth...stopping as it passes center field. Again, make sure this is a limb which is oriented more vertically than horizontally within your field of view. See if you don't notice the left edge of the limb having a color fringe while it is on one side of your field of view...with the right edge of the limb having a different color as it meets the sky (perhaps one is greenish, one is pinkish...sometimes it's more blue, like you saw). These will reverse as you move the limb to the other side of your field of view.

The side that was one color, is now the other, and vice versa...as the limb (or whatever your test object is) moves from one side to the other.

Try to avoid getting "blackouts" as you follow the limb with your eyes.

Now, try moving your eyes out of the center of the eyepiece exit pupil (as you mentioned you did, when you had the interpupil distance adjusted too wide or too narrow), and see if this "corrects" the chromatic aberration, while the limb is on one side, or the other of your field of view.

This has been my experience. For me, it's not difficult to notice such things, but I guess for some people, "glassing" is more of a casual thing, where they don't think about the optics and what is actually taking place in order for them to see what they are seeing...but rather they are more focused on subject matter, such as birds, and the emotional (and usually uplifting) experience.

If you want to evaluate an optic, try not to get caught up in the more emotional side of the glassing experience, and try to be more objective and scientific about it. The easiest way to do that, is to view something that is less interesting and more static, such as a boring tree limb. Just my two cents.

[JWcamp]

I have no interest in evaluating or reviewing optics, I'm too busy just using them to try and see things.

I do hope my "seat of the pants" comments and observations were of some value to fellow BirdForum readers.

Best Regards,
John

[CarlTN]

John, I have tried to shed light on the performance of Vanguard optics, and even purchased some myself. I hope those who read this, who actually spend their hard earned money, will find MY comments of value.

Your binoculars I believe were a gift to you (and yet you are collecting the rebate for yourself). So in effect, you're being paid $50, on top of getting a pair of binoculars for free. I'm paying for mine myself.

Then you start out by trying to make a comparison between yours and Pentax, etc. Frankly I see no value in any of your comments, no offense. You're contradicting yourself, because you started this thread by trying to make qualitative observations about something you now admit yourself, you have no interest in evaluating, or even trying to be objective about. Based on this, I see no point in you posting in the binocular section at all, regarding these, or perhaps any optics.

I do wish you happy birding though.

When I post in the optics section, I'm interesting in learning and sharing about optics, not about emotions, or to brag that I got a gift, and then make vague observations about it which don't really say anything at all. Maybe that's just me, but I hope there are others on here who have a similar approach to mine.

[Dimon Hell]

Well...
Now i'm a little confused!
I was planning to buy Endeavor ED 10x42 as my new full size bin, a though they're really good, but now i see many unhappy ppl!
Can anyone tell me, is they good or don't worth that money?