Nikon Edg vs Pentax ED vs Zeiss Conquest HD (1 Viewer)

absolut_beethoven said:

I really don't understand why they aren't mentioned and recommended more often. The Pentax badge might lack the snob appeal, but they more than make up for it by their excellent optics and outstanding view.

Click to expand...

FrankD said:

I would like to see it as well.

I have never owned or tried the Pentax ED but I may have some explanation for the lack of enthusiasm on them from a larger consumer base.

1) They were/are basically a Pentax SP with ED glass in the objective design. The SPs were highly thought of when they first debuted as they offered excellent optical performance compared to the Alphas of that time but at a fraction of the cost. The ED glass addition to their design certainly improved one of their optical deficiencies (CA control). The problem though is that, at least with the 8x43 model, the field of view is notably narrower than any other model they compare to optically. Since the 8x40-something configuration is the most widely used and most "all purpose" it does bear mentioning despite the fact that the 10x43 and 8x32 configurations are still more comparable to other models.

Click to expand...

2) The price increase from the SP to the ED was substantial considering the only notable addition was the use of ED glass in the design. Nothing else, to my knowledge, changed. Many folks have suggested that the price increase was not proportional to the cost of the change in design. If I remember correctly the 8x43 SP originally sold for $599 at most retailers. What was the original cost of the 8x43 ED? $900? That is a $300 markup for a glass change.

Still, having said that I would still love to look through an 8x32 ED some day. I am sure the optics would be impressive. Now if it were just priced in the $500-$600 range I think you would see it in the hands of more consumers.

Click to expand...

Kammerdiner said:

Agreed.:t: Although I have since sold my 8x32 ED, I had it for a year or so alongside my 8x32 FL and it truly held its own. In fact, I liked the color/contrast of the Pentax better than the Zeiss. I think I kept the Zeiss because it is 3+ ounces less, had a touch more eye relief for glasses, and the focus was a bit quicker and lighter, but optically it was practically a toss up. An excellent binocular.

Yes, the 8x43 have a narrow FOV, and the design (except the eyepiece) dates back to something like 1999. I bought the first generation back then, the 8x42 DCF WP. That, too, was nice, but the 8x32ED has a much better FOV.

Good deals come up on the 8x32 ED, probably because they aren't too popular. I got mine new for $560 as I recall.

Kinda wish I hadn't sold it, but heck at one point I had three or four 8x32's. Enough is enough--well, not for everybody.

Mark

Click to expand...

absolut_beethoven said:

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I was very fortunate to buy a used Nikon 8x32 first generation Edg in excellent condition at a very reasonable price. Up until now I haven't been able to compare them to my Pentax 8x32 DCF ED that I bought almost a year ago, because I moved to Texas a few months ago and only received them recently. Being the nutcase that I am I also went ahead and ordered a pair of the new 8x42 Zeiss Conquest HD's, which hopefully I should receive sometime next week.

The last time I compared alpha binos was at B&H in New York over 10 years ago. I avoided checking out the latest toys up until now as raising 3 children in Los Angeles leaves very little change to spare. I bought the Pentax based solely on Stephen B's excellent and enthusiastic review of them...

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=208904

I wasn't concerned about their quality as the above review put things in excellent perspective for me, coupled with the fact that I'd have no problems exchanging them, or even getting a full refund from B&H.

I had NO intention of buying another pair of binos for a long time - yeah right!! - but opportunity and my inability to resist temptation has landed me in my current situation.

My intention is to compare these three as critically as possible, and then keep the one that gives me the most viewing pleasure with the least amount of effort on my part.

If anybody has any questions about these binos, I'll be happy to answer your queries to the best of my abilities. Hopefully my upcoming review of these 3 will educate you about my biases so that most readers should be able to make a reasonably informed choice. If my review is half as good and informative as Stephen B's aforementioned review, I'll be a happy camper.

A short preview note in order to whet your anticipation...

I am exceptionally happy to see that the Pentax more than holds its own versus the Nikon Edg. While the Pentax is obviously not perfect, nor the absolute best of what's available out there, I completely understand Stephen B's enthusiasm and do believe that they offer outstanding value for money. I really don't understand why they aren't mentioned and recommended more often. The Pentax badge might lack the snob appeal, but they more than make up for it by their excellent optics and outstanding view.

Click to expand...

[email protected] said:

That's not exactly a fair or even interesting comparison. You know the Nikon EDG is going to win. A 2K binocular against $500.00 binoculars! Gimme a break!

Click to expand...

[email protected] said:

That's not exactly a fair or even interesting comparison. You know the Nikon EDG is going to win. A 2K binocular against $500.00 binoculars! Gimme a break!

Click to expand...

coolhand68 said:

I recently had a chance to compare the Pentax 10x42 ED to the Swarovski EL 8x32 & 8x42, as well as my Nikon Premier LX 10x42, Superior E 8x32, Zeiss Victory 10x42 T FL, Bushnell 10x42 Elite ED, and a set of 8x42 Pentax SP and DCF WP.

The Pentax ED 10x42 were only a fraction of a hair behind the Swarovskis and Nikons. In fact, they were right alongside the two Nikons I listed, though the Superior E gave a wider field of view which gave a more pleasing overall view. I liked the Pentax ED's better than the Zeiss, Bushnell, and other two Pentax models I tried/own.

When I say they were behind, I can't really place my finger on what it was that I liked better than the Swarovski's, perhaps they were a smidge brighter and focus was quicker, but the Swarovski's didn't perform twice as well for twice the price. It was a very slight difference which took me multiple attempts to deterimine a winner by a very narrow margin. The Pentax line is very impressive. I did see a significant improvement between the Pentax ED and SP. Worth the extra $300 IMHO. The SP line is a little brighter than my DCF WP, but that was the only edge I saw.

Not sure what it is about the new Bushnell ED's, but for some reason I have to keep adjusting the diopter to get just the right focus under different conditions (low light, distance, etc). They are great binoculars for under $500 though.

FWIW, I have an old pair of Nikon 7x50 featherweights that are brighter and about as sharp as any binocular I've listed in this post. They are amazing considering their age.

Click to expand...

[email protected] said:

Better than the FL and equal to the Nikon SE! OK, I am going to have to try a pair of these. I wonder how they would compare to the new Vortex Talon HD 8x32.

Click to expand...

coolhand68 said:

I recently had a chance to compare the Pentax 10x42 ED to the Swarovski EL 8x32 & 8x42, as well as my Nikon Premier LX 10x42, Superior E 8x32, Zeiss Victory 10x42 T FL, Bushnell 10x42 Elite ED, and a set of 8x42 Pentax SP and DCF WP.

The Pentax ED 10x42 were only a fraction of a hair behind the Swarovskis and Nikons. In fact, they were right alongside the two Nikons I listed, though the Superior E gave a wider field of view which gave a more pleasing overall view. I liked the Pentax ED's better than the Zeiss, Bushnell, and other two Pentax models I tried/own.

When I say they were behind, I can't really place my finger on what it was that I liked better than the Swarovski's, perhaps they were a smidge brighter and focus was quicker, but the Swarovski's didn't perform twice as well for twice the price. It was a very slight difference which took me multiple attempts to deterimine a winner by a very narrow margin. The Pentax line is very impressive. I did see a significant improvement between the Pentax ED and SP. Worth the extra $300 IMHO. The SP line is a little brighter than my DCF WP, but that was the only edge I saw.

Not sure what it is about the new Bushnell ED's, but for some reason I have to keep adjusting the diopter to get just the right focus under different conditions (low light, distance, etc). They are great binoculars for under $500 though.

FWIW, I have an old pair of Nikon 7x50 featherweights that are brighter and about as sharp as any binocular I've listed in this post. They are amazing considering their age.

Click to expand...

absolut_beethoven said:

Nikon vs Pentax vs Zeiss part 1:

This part of the test is the apples versus apples i.e. the Nikon vs the Pentax as both are the premier binos of their respective companies and both are 8x32. The second part will obviously give the Zeiss an unfair advantage as it sports the larger objective lens, but more about that later.

Complete specifications can be found online at the manufacturers sites, so I won’t repeat them here. Suffice to say that the Pentax is shorter and fatter than the Nikon. Even although the latter is slightly heavier at 670g vs 645g (on my wife’s food scale), the Pentax actually feels heavier to me, probably due to its weight distribution in a smaller package, and it’s larger diameter tubes.

I measured the Nikon’s EP as 23mm, and 21.5mm for the Pentax. Looking into the objective lens the internal baffling and lack of internal reflections looks absolutely excellent on both. But one can easily see that the Nikon uses an oversized prism and the Pentax appears to use the smallest prism size one could use and still avoid any vignetting. Turning them around and viewing the eye pieces from a short distance in order to check how close to perfectly spherical the shape of the exit image is, I could see no difference between the two. I don’t have any instruments to measure this, just my well trained eyes eyeballing it. I know that Allbinos found the exit image to be quite oval on the Pentax 8x43 ED, but fortunately that’s not the case here. But the smaller prism does manifest itself in that one has less leeway going slightly off axis before the image does become oval.

Note that all tests were done both indoors and outside in both bright and quite dark conditions. The following is based solely on my own opinion on what I see comparing these two models without eyeglasses and only handheld. Just the way that most users would use these binos. I did sit down and brace myself in order to keep things as steady and consistent as possible. This review comes with the usual caveat, namely your mileage may differ.

The CA control on my particular Pentax binos is absolutely outstanding and as close to zero as I’ve ever seen. Believe it or not it’s actually marginally better than the Nikon in the proverbial sweet spot. Unfortunately this only extends to about 50% of the image and is slightly worse, but still very low right up to the edge. I believe that most people won’t see any difference between these two binos. I’m sure I probably wouldn’t notice any difference in actual use, but I can easily pick it up if I look for it under the right conditions.

The CA control on the Nikon is also outstanding, but has the advantage in that it’s exceptionally low until about the 60% to 65% mark, and pretty much on a par with the Pentax until the edge.

Sharpness on the Pentax is well above average, probably due both to the ED and aspherical lenses, and extends to about 80%, with the image getting slightly softer and less defined until the edge. I couldn’t really see any difference in softness from about 90% right up until the edge. In other words, unlike some binos, image degradation doesn’t increase as one views closer and closer to the limit of the FOV.

Sharpness on the Nikon is just as outstanding as the Pentax but has the advantage in that it extends almost to the edge. About 90% to 95% IMHO. This is very difficult to quantify accurately because one’s peripheral vision is not as sharp, or have the same resolution as one’s central vision. Needless to say that even although the image is slightly less well defined in the last 5% to 10%, it’s still more than sharp enough to be usable right up to the edge of the FOV.

Speaking of apparent FOV, I take back what I said earlier about the Pentax having a slightly wider FOV. Under more controlled and stringent tests, I honestly could not see any difference in the FOV. If there is, it really can't be more than 1m difference between them.

Parallel lines on the Nikon look parallel until about the 60% mark, the last 40% has very,very slight pin cushion distortion that I can see. Both looking up and down. Pincushion distortion starts on the Pentax around the same point that its low CA kicks in, around the 50% mark, but is more pronounced than the Nikon's. Not quite double, but much more noticeable.

The Pentax appears to have the edge in the apparent brightness and contrast department. I believe that the slightly brighter and better contrast image is due to its slightly stronger reddish bias. Please note that in low light situations I can’t see any difference in brightness between them. Although this slight reddish bias is easily seen, in no way do I mean to imply that the image has a reddish tint. This is a comparison between two exceptionally competent binos known for very accurate color rendition.

Colors are rendered virtually the same between the two and are exceptionally close to what one sees with the naked eye. The one exception being the most difficult color of all and that is white. Both render clean bright white as a slightly cream/ivory color. This comes as no surprise to me because in all my years as a watchmaker, amateur photographer and binophile, I’ve only ever seen one lens system that leaves white as virtually unchanged, and that is the Zeiss 10x loupe made especially for diamond grading. This is a doublet with a very pale but effective AG. I’ve owned my Zeiss loupe for about 15 years. Some of the worst culprits render the aforementioned bright white as almost dirty brown!

A lot of people on these forums always want to know about the focus direction, limits etc. So I made an effort to take note of these things for you.

Focus past infinity is about ¼ turn past infinity for both. The Nikon focus from near to far is clockwise and is 1 full turn plus the additional ¼ turn past infinity. The Pentax focuses in the opposite direction i.e. near to far is counter clockwise and is about 1¼ turns to cover the full range, plus the additional ¼ turn past infinity. Both feel exactly the same focusing in either direction with zero free play or backlash. The focus on the Pentax is quite a lot stiffer, but I can still manage it quite easily with only one finger – usually my forefinger. The Nikon has almost ideal tension and I wouldn’t complain if mine was a tiny bit tighter. Due to its low tension and exceptionally smooth feel it can be focused very fast.

Lastly is the depth of field. By that I mean once perfect focus on infinity is achieved how close can you observe before one needs to adjust the focus. Of course this will change as the distance decreases. Note that photographers have a lot more flexibility in controlling DOF by changing both the focal length and F stop of the lens. The Pentax has slightly better depth of field so I guess this partially makes up for its slower focusing ratio.

Besides comparing these 2 to the Zeiss Conquest HD when I receive it, I only have one more test that I’m going to do, and that is mount them on a tripod in order to check the absolute sharpness and resolution that these binos are capable of.

No final conclusion yet, as this is only part one. But as is quite clear from my observations above, the Pentax does an excellent job of holding its own against the Nikon which costs twice as much. It only falls short of the Nikon in a few areas, so it’s up to you to decide if you want to spend additional dollars for those extras. IMHO it’s a real bargain for the quality of the image delivered. It will be interesting to see how well the Pentax fares against the latest generation of Chinese offerings from Vortex, Vanguard, Zen-Ray etc.

Stay tuned for part two which will also include some pics |=)|

Click to expand...

absolut_beethoven said:

Nikon vs Pentax vs Zeiss part 1:
This part of the test is the apples versus apples i.e. the Nikon vs the Pentax as both are the premier binos of their respective companies and both are 8x32. ....
Stay tuned for part two which will also include some pics |=)|

Click to expand...