best low light 7x42s and more choices (1 Viewer)

Hello BF members,

although i know that the best should probably be a 7x50 or a 8x56, i would prefer to stay in the 7x42 category, which combines a less heavy and compact combination.

I need opinions, i am not going to buy one neseccary, at least i have to test them first, so if i am satisfied, i may end up with one of those and sell my current pair.

Reasons i think for a 7x are mainly for my mammal searching and because i do much birding in forest. So low light performance is the greater aspect, and after that the field of view (which i think that with 8 degree and above i would be fine), eye relief, close focus, weight etc. Sweetspot is considered, but if it's like the FL's or better, i find it more than acceptable for me.

I have the 8x42 Zeiss FL, which is very good in low light, so any considerations must be better than this (on low light performance).

The FL 7x42 might was a solution, but i would prefer something different.

My choices, after quite lot of searching, are Nikon EDG 7x42
Looks nice, great eye relief, acceptable fov for an 7x as well as weight, close focus if 3m as on papers is not the best but it wouldn't mind me much.
What makes me think about it, is the color tone, which from what i read is warm (or reddish)? and the price of course.
I looked through a Nikon Monarch 10x42 (i don't know what series) and it was too much warm, i didn' t like it.

The Leica Ultravid HD is generally compact that i appreciate, but the color cast is an issue. I didn't look through them, but i looked through a Geovid 10x42 and a Trinovid BN 8x42. The second was better, but the view had a more brown-red? cast (or might was less bright) than my FL, which i didn't like. Otherwise, the Trinovid was a nice pair.
Is the view of the Ultravid like that as well?
The 3,3 close focus makes me a bit sceptible too.

The Swarovski Habicht although i really like its design, and it's the lightest from the rest, it has an unacceptable fov for me, as well as as eye relief.
Close focus is on the limit for my needs.
But i still wonder about its brightness compared with others, sharpness and sweet spot anf the color cast.

Finally, for my findings i really think for the ZenRay ED3 7x43. Eye relief is good (although i read that the eyecaps don't get out much), close focus great, weight is probably ok, field of view great.
Color cast pretty neutral as i 've read.
I wonder about: brightness, sweet spot, sharpness, especially compared to the Zeiss.

Other pairs like the Mepota Meostar, Swarovski SLC are not in my choices.

The Kite Ibis ED could be, especially as seeing that is priced quite high (so it should be good). Although the fov is dissapointing.

Finally, in general, how much brighter a 7x42 would be compared to a 8x42, and especially a very good one in this aspect?
Well for birds it's sure not neseccary, but for mammals it is. And i would like a pair to combine both, not a pair just for mammals or birds..

Also, is there an other model or even format i should consider? that is not heavier that a 7x42??

Thanks in advance,
George

george,

the Leica 7x42 Ultravid provides natural colours, unlike the Geovid you have seen.

Steve

Steve,
thanks for your comment.
Do you have the Ultravis or you just tried it?
I ask because i would like to know about the focus wheel as well. In some reviews i read that the Ultravid is stiff.
The Geovid and Trinovid i tried were really good with their foucus wheel.

George

George,
I can understand you wanting something different, for variety. But if you think you're going to find a better low light 7x42 than the FL, ha, ha, I say. Almost anything else, however fine in other ways, will be obviously dimmer.

One actual possibility is the Swaro Habicht, if you don't mind its 45 deg apparent field and the other Porro "personalities". That would be really different at least.
Ron

George,

I don't own an Ultravid (unfortunately) but I've tried several Ultravids as I live close to a Leica-Shop. The focus mechanics were always very good. Best focus controll I know, always smooth at any temperature. However, close-focus of the 7x42 Ultravid isn't state of the art anymore.

BTW, you can't compare a Nikon Monarch with an EDG. Regarding optical quality there's quite of a difference between these series. The EDG is neutral, similar like Leica. Having said that, I only know the 8x36 and 10x36 Monarchs and these were pretty neutral for my eyes. But that doesn't necessarly mean that it's the same with the 10x42 you've tried.

Steve

George, a comparison of the Zeiss FL and Zen Ray ED3 7xs:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=235644

You just saved me a great deal of typing Pomp. Thank you.

..and just as a follow up...the 7x43 ED3 I compared to the FL was a prototype and not a production unit. There are some notable differences between the prototype and production unit as I referenced later in that thread.

ronh said:

George,
I can understand you wanting something different, for variety. But if you think you're going to find a better low light 7x42 than the FL, ha, ha, I say. Almost anything else, however fine in other ways, will be obviously dimmer.

One actual possibility is the Swaro Habicht, if you don't mind its 45 deg apparent field and the other Porro "personalities". That would be really different at least.
Ron

Click to expand...

HI George

I have got to agree with George: if you want bright, you want FL. And its got a great close focus at 2 m.

Lee

I suppose this might be a good time to post this observation. I just finished evaluation, from a QC operation, two brand new, just out of the box, 7x43 ZEN ED 3's.

Suffice it to say that ZR has apparently not been sitting on its laurels since the Prime HD release. These two new 7x43's are better binoculars than the 7x43 ED 3 I had for review and kept for several months after that. Better in every respect that comes to mind. They feel better, focus smoother, are brighter, and better in edge performance than the ones I had from the early run. I'd still wish the eye cups would extend just a mite further, but both of these are enough improved that there is no need for the eye cup extensions I used in the first binocular.

I agree with Frank's assessment of the ED 3 vs the FL. Keep in mind the new ED 3 is better. I'd still say the FL is likely brighter for low light use, but I have no access to an FL in 7x at the present. I do have a yard full of big trees and an active pair of Great Horned Owls, who will draw some attention this evening through the new 7x43's.

I would definitely second Steve's opinions about the Zen-Ray 7x43s. I've been using them for several months now, and have been extremely pleased. They have been my take everywhere binoculars, and if you like a deep field of view, then they are for you.

I do love the view through a pair of 8x56s, and I have a pair of the Edens. The view is expansive. I use a very wide strap (Crumpler Sinagapore Sling) that distributes the weight well, so weight is not an issue at all. When it is really dark and overcast, the 8x56 is my go to pair and the view is oh so comfortable and I love them dearly. But I'm a big guy, and youngish, so the weight of the binoculars don't bother me a bit.

Quite frankly, if cost isn't an issue, I'd check out the Leica Ultraview 7x42s and the Zeiss conquest 8x56s. But if you want 99% of the performance at a substantial cost savings, the Zen-Ray 7x43 are worth a look.

Thanks for your replies,

Rohn, it's more that i want something better in the hand, than to try something new. I know that the FL is probably the brighter and maybe the closest to what i want, besides it's handling. I trully believe that is an amazing bino, but often i feel uncomfortable with its handling. Maybe is the fact that i have small hands?
Anyway, other binos i tried were more comfortable in the hand (Nikon Monarch, Leica Trinovid, Swarovski EL) than the FL.

Pompadour, thanks for the link, i am just looking at it.

Frank, i will let you know if i have some questions about FL and ED3, as i am impressed and interested on the latter, especially for its price.
Any commetns about the other 2 i mentioned (EDG and Ultravid)?

Lee, i was wrong in my explanation, but as i mentioned above, i would prefer a less bright 7x42 if had a better handling than my FL.

George

Steve,

i've read your review on ED3 and reread your answer on my post, and it's great to hear about your last observations on ED3s!

I wonder if you could describe how does the view of the Horned Owls with the 7x43 ED3 and an other format (8x42/10x42), if you finally see them!

It would be great to hear a description/comparison like that, it's not usual in the forum.

'xbted52',
thanks for your comment and help as well,

i really think about the ED3s at the moment..

George

I would like to ask something more.

Although i 've searched a lot, i didn't find many reviews on the Steiner Discovery 8x44.

I wonder if there are opinions on those and about their brightness, since the lens diameter is 44.

Are there any comparisons (graphs and numbers) about the light transmissions on the 8x42s and 7x42s?

My first bino was a Steiner Safari 8x30, the first model, and it was a very nice little one, major disadvantage was the focus which was indepentent on each eyepiece (no central focus).

So i wonder about the Discobery as well, although it's not a 7x42.

George

george-spiridakis said:

Steve,

i've read your review on ED3 and reread your answer on my post, and it's great to hear about your last observations on ED3s!

I wonder if you could describe how does the view of the Horned Owls with the 7x43 ED3 and an other format (8x42/10x42), if you finally see them!

It would be great to hear a description/comparison like that, it's not usual in the forum.

'xbted52',
thanks for your comment and help as well,

i really think about the ED3s at the moment..

George

Click to expand...

Well, wouldn't you know it they have been elsewhere for a couple of days, but I'm on the lookout for them and will answer this when I do see them.

In general terms, the ZEN ED 3 is a quite bright binocular and has very good contrast with a pretty neutral color balance.

Other views of the Owls tell me I can see them as well as I could see them with anything else, and see them as long as I could with anything else for that matter. That's a view I'd like to get side by side with a Zeiss FL, which is the brightest 7x I know of.

George,
I have thouroghly investigated quite a few of 42 mm binoculars, an extensive English report of such a test is published on Peter Abrahams WEB-site (HOME.EUROPA.COM etc., and among others the Steiner Discovery 8x44 was tested.
Some data of the Steiner Discovery: weight 856 g., Close focus 2 m., number of rotations of the focussing wheel from close focus to infinty: 1,6, light transmission at 500 and at 550 nm= both 81% and that is rather low compared with other binoculars, eye relief 20 mm, color reproduction is good, FOV = 130m/1000 m.
It may be interesting to compare this with the 7x42 Kite Ibis ED:
weight 729 g, close focus 1,6 m, rotations focussing wheel from close focus to infinity 1,6, eye relief 19,5 mm, FOV = 122 m/1000 m, light transmission at 500 and 550 nm resp. 90 and 92% (these are values which are found in a number of top quality bioculars only), very high level of user comfort because of perfect balance in combination with open bridge, color reproduction is good. Kie optics has an excellent after sales service for those readers who are not familiar with Kite.
Data for the Zeiss Conquest 8x42 HD to compare: weight 800 g, FOV 128m/1000 , close focus 2 m, rotations focussing wheel from close focus to infinity 1,2, eyerelief 20 mm, light transmission at 500nm and 550 nm resp. 87% and 90%, color reproduction is good.
I hope that ths helps you with your choice, but it is advisable to try them by yourself before deciding which one to buy.
Gijs

The best low-light 7X42 is the Zeiss FL. This shouldn't even be debated.

I will respectfully disagree with Pileatus opinion that the Zeiss FL's are the best 7x42's.
I had both the FL's and the Ultravid HD, six out of seven people who tried the two glasses thought that the Ultravid HD had both better resolution and color fidelity and lower CA.
That is only a limited sampling..you probably need 10,000 people to do a meaningful test but it was the best I could do.
Most people perceive a slightly yellow color palette with 7x42 FL's.
I have not had a chance to look through the Nikon EDG 7x42 so can not give an opinion of their color palette..the Meopta shows a little yellow like the Zeiss.
Maybe Henry Link has some comments since he has tested many of the 7x42's.
Art

gulf1263 said:

I will respectfully disagree with Pileatus opinion that the Zeiss FL's are the best 7x42's.
I had both the FL's and the Ultravid HD, six out of seven people who tried the two glasses thought that the Ultravid HD had both better resolution and color fidelity and lower CA.
That is only a limited sampling..you probably need 10,000 people to do a meaningful test but it was the best I could do.
Most people perceive a slightly yellow color palette with 7x42 FL's.
I have not had a chance to look through the Nikon EDG 7x42 so can not give an opinion of their color palette..the Meopta shows a little yellow like the Zeiss.
Maybe Henry Link has some comments since he has tested many of the 7x42's.
Art

Click to expand...

Better CA control in the Ultravid HD than the FL?
I have to check this out this week end. You are the first person saying the HDs handle better CA than the fluorites.
Could it possibly be just with the 7x42 model (that i did not try). I find this interesting as Leica isn't really known to handle CAs that well. As i'm very sensible to CAs, the 7x42 model is to be checked. So far the lonely part i liked with Leica bins is their extreme contrasts, like it's a TV image with contrasts boosted to max.
But their apparent resolution is to me,beaten by Swaro Zeiss and Nikon.

Gijs van Ginkel said:

It may be interesting to compare this with the 7x42 Kite Ibis ED:
weight 729 g, close focus 1,6 m, rotations focussing wheel from close focus to infinity 1,6, eye relief 19,5 mm, FOV = 122 m/1000 m, light transmission at 500 and 550 nm resp. 90 and 92% (these are values which are found in a number of top quality bioculars only), very high level of user comfort because of perfect balance in combination with open bridge, color reproduction is good. Kie optics has an excellent after sales service for those readers who are not familiar with Kite.

Click to expand...

Gijs,

for 7x-binoculars 122m/1000m would be much too narrow for me. Do you know who produce these? Is it just another Kamakura OEM product?

Steve

gulf1263 said:

I will respectfully disagree with Pileatus opinion that the Zeiss FL's are the best 7x42's.
I had both the FL's and the Ultravid HD, six out of seven people who tried the two glasses thought that the Ultravid HD had both better resolution and color fidelity and lower CA.
That is only a limited sampling..you probably need 10,000 people to do a meaningful test but it was the best I could do.
Most people perceive a slightly yellow color palette with 7x42 FL's.
I have not had a chance to look through the Nikon EDG 7x42 so can not give an opinion of their color palette..the Meopta shows a little yellow like the Zeiss.
Maybe Henry Link has some comments since he has tested many of the 7x42's.
Art

Click to expand...

The Ultravid, hands down, has the better color quality. I thought CA was better handled in the FL but that could be individual preference.

Brightness was a primary consideration for the OP and I thought the FL was clearly brighter in low light conditions.