8x42 Zeiss Terra ED vs Nikon Monarch 7 - detailed comparison from an Optical Engineer (1 Viewer)

perterra said:

For me the fast focus is more of a problem in the store than the field. In the field it takes a few minutes but I adapt.

Might be an issue if you went between a slow focus and a fast focus a lot.

Click to expand...

So far, for me, swapping from slowish to faster, hasn't been a problem, but muscle control doesn't get better as one ages so trouble could be down the line just waiting.

Lee

MarinerBlue said:

You know, it was another cloudy day here and just for the heck of it, I did a comparison again and the images in the Zeiss really are more vibrant. I'm so torn now.... Do I get something for the coast or for the cloudy days? Maybe I should just keep one of each for me and my wife.

Click to expand...

Day 1: Sunny skies on the back porch.
So when I would look at a common cardinal in a bush through the Terra, the feathers seemed to jump out more through the glass. I could appreciate the subtle hues of red on each feather, even see some blue sheen to the feathers that seemed so vibrant that I could reach out and tough it. The Nikons were great too, but somehow seemed slightly more subdued. The blue sheen got lost and the red feathers just looked a little more dull. However, when I would look up at an American tree sparrow on a branch, I could notice more plumage details when looking through the Nikons. The Zeiss would offer just enough chromatic aberration to confuse my eyes and be annoying.
Winner: basically even. I could be equally happy looking through both.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you returned to this subject, since to me it's a largely unappreciated visual perception. Almost a decade ago (it flies fast, time does) we had an extended discussion about the distinctive visual qualities of the Swift Audubon 804ED: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=566566&highlight=Swift+804ED+bluebird#post566566, in which I emphasized its ability to produce subtle color gradations. Until then, the only other reviewer who had made a point of this several years earlier was Stephen Ingraham, who's original comment in "Better View Desired" is shown at the bottom of post #77.

Since then, your's is the first mention I've come across about this kind of perception, (assuming it's the same) so to my mind it's worth exploring. I don't have any knowledge or experience with either binocular you reviewed.

Before saying more, however, I'd like to elicit comments from other members to determine who, if anyone, experiences the same kind of subtle color rendition that you described about the Zeiss Conquest, and Steve Ingraham and I described about the 804ED? Can anyone else identify with it?

In any event, MB, if our perceptions coincide, it's understandable why you would again consider buying the Zeiss. In my case I used the Swift Audubon 804ED exclusively, until my eyesight forced me to buy a binocular with greater eye relief. The Swaro 8x42 SLC-HD is my current choice, but as excellent as it is it does not produce the effects we are talking about.

Ed

Troubador said:

ON
.....
The bins manufacturers must feel like they are banging their heads against brick walls as half of us shout 'faster' and the other half, 'slower'.

Lee

Click to expand...

I know....
people do have strong preferences.
I suppose the ultimate consession would be a 'fast' and a 'slow' model.


I think I got some clues recently...that it isn't just
close-range focusing. Some people who complain about not always
finding a focus that sticks also dislike slow and IF focusers.
One theory that covers these observations is:
a fast focus is very valuable when your eyes have trouble
sticking to their own focus...some eyes do actually keep 're-training'.

Now....some complain the left and right don't stay in sync with
multiple models they own. Mine stay together all the time.
This further covers the theory, but also points out the limits for focal-aid..

It also suggests a strategy for adding to the ultra-super product lines.
It is technically conceivable that Zeiss could auto-focus onto your retina,
for sharpest center field. Now....you might start out at $50K, but what's
a little money.

elkcub said:

Before saying more, however, I'd like to elicit comments from other memebers to determine who, if anyone, experiences the same kind of subtle color rendition that MB described about the Zeiss Conquest, and Steve Ingraham and I described about the 804ED? Can anyone else identify with it?
Ed

Click to expand...

I don't know if this will help, but one of the things which really impressed me when I got my EL SV 10X42 was the subtle color variations, which I had not seen in other binoculars. Now that I have gotten used to it, I just accept it, and it doesn't blow my mind anymore. (or at least as frequently)

My previous glass was a Nikon Venturer LX 10X42.

I don't think fast focus is a problem, per se, the problem often stems from less than stellar sharpness which contributes to focus hunting.

I have a Conquest HD with very fast focus but excellent sharpness - sharpness that ''clicks-in'' with ease and certainty - very little hunting required. I also have a Terra that has a fast focus and lacks the HD's sharpness. The result is more rocking back and forth and hunting to find the perfectly sharp image.

I bought the Terra ED 8X42 before reaching BF and the Monarch 7 8x30 after, both after much market research. They would be good for 99% of the people interested in observation with binoculars. Both have their faults and some faults are subjective. For example I count the Zeiss focuser as an advantage. Most of Terra's disadvantages are corrected in Conquest, except the high price which goes even higher. On the other hand I couldn't believe the Nikon costs 250€. I paid 400€ and someone gave me a heads up which resulted in a coupon for the price difference (and a nice Docter 8x21 monocular with that). It has residual color, that flare which is annoying at times, a more difficult eye placement and a slower focuser than the Terra, but for an EDC binocular that costs 1/10 of today's Alphas and half the price of Terra (in Greece) it is very good. Regardless of how much I value Zeiss philosophy and quality, I would suggest the Monarch to newcomers with a budget.

Maljunulo said:

I don't know if this will help, but one of the things which really impressed me when I got my EL SV 10X42 was the subtle color variations, which I had not seen in other binoculars. Now that I have gotten used to it, I just accept it, and it doesn't blow my mind anymore.

My previous glass was a Nikon Venturer LX 10X42.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, in particular mentioning that your prior experience was a Nikon LX. Sequence effects and adaptation come into play, making it difficult to sort out nominal perceptions.

At the moment I'm not convinced that many people see the effect, for whatever reason. In my case it's quite reliable, although it is somewhat affected by lighting conditions. Even today, I experience the effect with or without glasses.

Thanks again,
Ed