s
"Selective Memory" Bob,
Sorry, that was supposed to be the salutation not ending. I copied and pasted your denial quote at the end so people could see what I was addressing rather than them having to re-read the entire post and find it, but in the process, I pasted the end quote code
after the saluation. UPDATE: Corrected. See post #16.
I think Kevin might have had problems with the diopter too. At least three BF members as I total recall, two of which were "regulars". It's an internal diopter, which is on the focuser, so if the focuser mechanism is faulty, anything can go wrong. And ths was the first of this kind of focuser that Nikon ever made.
From the way you wrote above, it seems like you are trivalizing the focus knob problem. It's not just that it would come loose, though it was annoying to be looking at a bid in a tree and have the focus knob fall back and hit you between the eyes, but more importantly, without the knob being locked, it couldn't engage the focuser so it would just spin. I had to poush dowh and back (in this positon) to keep it enaged, and just push down on it to keep it enaged when the bin was in a horizontal position.
This would even be unacceptable in entry level priced bin, but such a flaw at the alpha level was very disappointing. You don't even expect "fit and finish" problems at the alpha level, let alone common mechanical flaws.
One of the earliest reviewers noted this on a "prototype" Nikon gave him to try and said he was confident that Nikon would fix this on production models. They didn't. Or rather, as Mike Freiberg commented, they "tightend down" on the focusers in subsquent runs, which explains why some users do have EDG I's that work properly like yours.
Besdies which, the 8x32 model was made after the 7x42 and 10x42, which were the first to appear on the scene, and those had the most returns.
Even though Swaro either sued or threatened to sue Nikon if they didn't stop production, which I think still needs further explanation since just think of how many open bridge roofs there are out there today by various manufacturers who are not gettng sued, Nikon still would have had to go "back to the drawing board" because their first attempt at making an on the focuser pull back knob was flawed. If they did copy Swaro's design, they missed something.
In fact, there was recently a report on the forums of a drifting diopter in the
EDG II by a member, which caused us to revsit this issue.
Externally, the focuser was certainly different enough since the EDG's diopter isn't turned by the knob like Swaro's, but instead has a separate diopter ring. I dont like the design myself. Too hard to find that flat, smooth ring and turn it, particularly with gloves. I find Swaro's pull and turn knob design easier to use with or without gloves. Although the SLC's "push and turn" diopter was the easiest diopter I've ever tried. Nothing to pull out and turn like the EL or any bin with a right EP diopter, you can keep your hands positioned just as they are and make the adjustment while looking through the binoculars.
I havent read any reports about problems with the old SLC diopter design, but I guess Swaro wanted to make the SLC-HD with an EL diopter to give it more "class". While I do pay attention to aethetics, functinality and "user friendliness" are higher priorities.
The reason I gave you the moniker "Selective Memory Bob" is because you consistently miss things on the forums that I would think would be obvious to a regular reader, and it's almost always things mentioned in my posts, which forces me to take time out and go back through the archives to find the references, which I usually do, but no more. Too much work. I will just let your memory be selective.
Somethings are best forgotten, and the EDG I's focus problems are one of them.
"Selective Copy and Paste" Brock[/QUOTE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brock,
You must be patient with me on this while I respond. Because you are now using your professionally trained journalistic skills to accuse me of resorting to selective memory to ballast my argument while at the same time you are saying it is best to forget the EDG I's focus problems.
I was aware that Kevin had problems with his as he got his about the same time I got mine. His seemed to have "wandered." Others did not stay locked. There was, and still seems to be, an intermediate position where the focus remains locked and the focus wheel will spin until it is pushed back down into the 1st position. I also discussed this wandering problem diopters had when integrated with focus wheels in my response to you in thread #20.
But all that aside, if you will go back to my original post at thread #16 I believe you will see I was lampooning the overstated, in my opinion, problems with the new Nikon's diopter by comparing it with the casual way that Zeiss's diopter problem is being handled here. Nikon handled theirs and apparently have corrected it but they are still being hounded by it. Will this happen to Zeiss?
Which is why I have spent this time explaining why I find your description of my memory as "selective" troubling.
I agree that it is too much work to go back through the archives as you state. But "selective memory" has nothing to do with it when it comes to the nature of the EDG I's diopter problems. To date we have no evidence that Nikon changed the diopter when it replaced the EDG I with the EDG II.
The change that took place in the EDGII was a complete redesign of the EDG I's exterior. We all know that. Nikon got rid of the open frame design introduced with the EDG I and made the new single bridge longer. If that involved changing the focusing somehow or somewhat; so be it. We do not know that.
I was always under the impression that the open bridge design was the issue involving Nikon's alleged patent infringement dispute with Swarovski.
It did not involve the design of Nikon's focus/diopter knob. AFAIK that remains unchanged. As I noted in my original post I have been informed that Nikon "tweaked" it a bit to make the ridged rubber cover around it's circumference more durable but it still works the same way; that is to say it is still an awkward procedure to set it's diopter; using a thick finger on a cramped narrow ring which has small indents.
I have not read that the procedure to set it has changed: (1) Pull the cover all the way back to expose the diopter ring in order to set it. (2) Push it all the way back to lock it. There is still an intermediate setting to lock the focus if it is needed while in use. If this procedure has changed, I stand corrected, but no one here to my knowledge has said that it has changed.
Somewhere back I had a post about the creation of IBLs: Internet Binocular Legends. In a way, this is an extension of that post.
Bob