Hi Brock
i am going to publish my impressions about Nikon EDG 8x42 on binomania.it. As you know I tested the Nikon EDG , for a few weeks with various TOP OF RANGE, and then I also did test it to the guys in the "mega-review". I've used a lot the EDG with my 8.5x42 Swarovision. I can only relate my impressions regarding a single exemplar of EDG 8x42 vs a single exemplar of 8.5x42 Swarovisio. I have noticed this, excuse me for my poor english. Looking at the stars ,on a tripod. The Swaro is perfect: it has no gemetric aberration, no coma, no astigmatism, and the field is "totally flat" The only problem is that a field so flat and perfect generates a slight elongation (is it right the terms) of the images to the edge, and is it noticeable in some cases. The Swarovision 10x50 and 12x50, that i've tested, do not have these performance.They are slightly worse
The Nikon is only slightly lower. A bit 'of astigmatism and coma at the extreme of the edge , and an image that is not "totally flat". The problem is that when there are, at the edge of the field, few astigmatism and coma is quite difficult to understand, what is the aberration that prevails. I hope you understand.
By the way, If I had not the Swarovision I would say that the Nikon, in the diurnal observation, provides an excellent flat field. .This is always the problem: when people try out the binoculars they have to do comparative!And this is equally difficult
I preferred the Nikon, compared to my Swarovision, for three things: focus, contrast,slightly higher thanks also his slightly warm hue and the use in panning. Nikon has few pincushion distorsion .My "eyes and my brain" get a more natural vision by panning with the Nikon EDG
That's all. As soon as I publish this review, I will inform you
Best Regards from Italy
Greetings from Bedford Falls (soon to be renamed a "Pottersville" by the local bankers and developers),
As the American saying goes, "All things in moderation" (of course, if most Americans actually followed this adage, so many of them wouldn't be in debt!
If you read the reviews at Allbinos.com, you would think that regardless of the amount, distortion (pincushion, in this case) was always a bad thing since the less pincushion binoculars have, the more points they give binoculars in this category.
From my perspective, binoculars used for terrestrial pursuits such as birding should have some pincushion to offset the "rolling ball effect" (or as I think you put it "elongation"). Here "elongation" at the edges usually refers to coma, pinpoint stars deforming into "comets".
The Allbino boyz also say that an optical company has not done a good job at "controlling distortion" when there is too much for their tastes. They are referring to pincushion. It's as if the distortion was there in the blank glass and the optical company failed to take it out, but as you know, and I'm sure they know, this is not the case (this phrasing could be a misunderstanding from translation).
Optical companies
add pincushion to binoculars. If they do not add pincushion, for some users, the image will seem to roll over a positively curved surface while panning with the binoculars.
Holger Merlitz has shown that the distortion pattern in the Swarovision is more complex than merely having a low amount of pincushion. As you move from the centerfield, there is some pincushion but toward the edges, it drops off and there's barrel distortion. Holger calls this "anomalous distortion,", which he says "may in certain cases amplify the impression of the globe effect"
Here's his report in case you haven't read it:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/globe/globe_faq.html
I haven't tried the SV EL yet, so I haven't seen the "waving mustache effect" (the "anomalous distortion" that seems to curve up at the ends like a handlebar mustache). Henry Link from this forum has also found this in SV EL (sorry Henry if I didn't properly credit you, not sure if you or Holger were the first to discover this "anomalous distortion," but he has a Website so it's easier link to his comments than dig yours out of the archives).
Since that I am susceptible to "rolling ball," I expect the SV EL would not create smooth panning for me like the EDG does. Panning with the EDG seems as smooth as the Nikon SE series, and in fact, the whole view looks similar to the SE series to me.
You give up a little edge performance with the EDG vs. the SV EL (In a star test, I found the 10x42 model sharp to about 85% from center, so you don't give up much), but you gain smooth panning so the optics do not call attention to themselves.
Surprisingly, Allbinos rated the pincushion distortion as the first curved line appearing 88% from the center in the 10x42 EDG, which would make it virtually distortion free. They rated the 10x42 HGL as having the first blurred line occurring 61% from the center. This is very puzzling to me, because the full sized HGLs have the worse "rolling ball effect" that I've ever seen! The 10x42 EDG is much, much better in this regard. So I question those figures.
http://www.allbinos.com/215-binoculars_review-Nikon_10x42_EDG.html
My ideal binocular is one that acts like an extension of my own eyes. You forget that you're using binoculars because the view is so natural. For people who are immune to "rolling ball," the ideal could be the SV EL. For those who do see "rolling ball," it might be the EDG. For those who don't experience "scrolling" from high levels of pincushion, it could be the Ultravid or FL.
Not everybody notices "rolling ball" or "pincushion" as Holger explains in his report, it has to do with the amount of distortion in our own eyes. So one person's meat is another person's turnips (except vegetarians
.
This is the difficultly in reading a review that is made by just one person. Despite what objective data you might get in the review, whether or not the reviewer recommends the binoculars comes down to his/her individual preferences, which is one reason why I like review sites where a group of people try the same binoculars. You get different perspectives from a number of different users.
It's also helpful to have more than one sample of the same binoculars on hand for reviews since sample variation, while more prevalent at lower price points, can also occur at the premium level as I found from my own experience. But hey, premium binoculars these days are outrageous priced, so to get your hands on two or three samples is no easy feat!
Thanks for your wonderful reviews. I look forward to reading the review of the 8x42 EDG. Please post a photo of Anna holding the EDG. Lei è molto bella!
Brock
