KorHaan
Well-known member
Hi all!
The new Eden Quality XP 8x42 is tremendous! Best quality for the price I've ever seen! I'm in the Garden of Eden! The end.
Shortest review I've ever written. :king:
Seriously though, I'm not quite sure where and how to begin.
The superlatives are well deserved, but I'm not very fond of using superlatives. Besides, I had never imagined that I would own another Eden Quality after my Eden ED broke last year. Long story short: I was dissappointed with the build quality of the ED and threw them in the bin.
I would have gotten an immediate refund when I had sent them back, but I didn't do that. Case closed for me. Eden adios!
Until last week: the company I had bought my Eden ED off, sent me an email and asked, if they could persuade me to try out the new Eden XP :
http://www.knivesandtools.nl/nl/pt/-eden-quality-verrekijker-xp-8x42.htm
I was hesitant, this came as a complete surprise, but after checking the specs of the XP's and noting that the diopter is in the place where I most like it to be - the right ocular - I decided to give them a try and ordered the XP 8x42.
When they arrived, I didn't immediately open the box. Nor felt I excited as one would normally be at the arrival of new optics. Still a bit of a grudge...?
OK, I thought, had my breakfast, had my coffee, now let's see what's in store. Opened the box. Plain looking pair of smallish 42 mm roofs, in a tight black case, rainguard, objective covers, nice wide neckstrap... nothing out of the ordinary. Then I lifted them to my eyes and looked out of the window.
WOW!!!
- I went.
That plain looking roof gave me a dazzlingly bright image with amazing sharpness over the most part of the FOV and the best edge sharpness I had seen in a long time. An instant roomy "walk-in" view that I had not seen before in my former Eden bins, the ED 8x42. Notwithstanding the larger FOV of the ED of 142m/1000m I felt the 129 m FOV of the XP is more impressive.
That can't be right, I thought, and grabbed my Pentax Papilio's 6.5x21 (FOV 131 m) to compare. The 129 m FOV of the XP proved to be right. Yet, it just felt like.. well..., impressively wide! I never had that "WOW!!!" feeling of the XP in the ED, which I mentioned in my review of these specifically: no wow.
The immediately noticed brightness is due to the fact, that the XP has di-electric coatings that give a stated light transmission of 90 % ( over the whole of the spectrum? I haven't seen a light transmission graph of the XP yet, but I would really like to see one!), which is better than the silver-coated Eden ED.
Is there ED glass in these XP's? The prospect says there's not, yet I've read there are ED lenses in the XP's! I simply don't know, but CA seems well controlled. I'm in no position to say that, as I hardly ever see any CA, apart from rubbish bins that is.
The image is crisp, with a very slight bias to the yellow/green part of the spectrum, which was not immediately visible but only became apparent after comparison to the Zeiss 7x42 FL. (Later more on that.)
I am forced to wear spectacles, and these are fairly big. Yet, with the eyecups twisted down all the way, I experienced some blackouts in the view , so I changed the IPD setting slightly and I twisted the eyecups up in the lowest of the 3 (!) intermediate positions, and the image was superb. Really breathtaking! Sharp almost to the edge, flat field with very little pincushioning, large sweet spot. The eyerelief is stated as 18mm, but the fact I got blackouts in the all-down position of the eyecups made me suspect the ER is even greater, at least 20mm or even more. I was impressed that the XP had 5 eyecup positions, all the way up, all the way down and 3 intermediate positions. They do not click in abruptly into the settings, but they seem to "slide" into the steady positon. They hold all positions splendidly. Amazing detail, excellently executed.
Next I inspected the performance of my usual nemesis, the diopter adjustment. It's on the right ocular, as I already mentioned. The diopter of my former Eden ED was at the rear of the focus wheel on the central hinge, a flimsy plastic ring with a nodge to adjust in click-stops. This ring broke within a week after I received the ED's last year, and infuriated me to no end. Which is why I threw the ED's away and vowed never to buy central focus/diopter designs again. My 2006 Zeiss 7x42 FL's diopter gave up on me after a year. I sold these to a good friend of mine for very little money (probably the cheapest second-hand FL's ever!), who had the diopter in the zero position permanently and saw no problems in using them that way, because of his correcting specs. The Zeiss FL's will emerge in this very review of the Eden XP's because I was able to get my hands on them again, to compare to the XP's. But that later.
The diopter adjustment ring on the right ocular is not locking, but is treated with special grease that hardens out after a while of not touching the ring, which makes it "stick" in the set position. It stays put very well, I've not experienced any unforseen movement when using the bins in the field. Yet, when you readjust, the diopter responds smoothly with some resistance to the new position, in which it then "sticks" again. It's trim and well-engineered.
10 points out of 10, so to speak.
The ocular lenses are wide, 24 mm in diameter, and show a deep-green coating. The objectives are well set back from the tubes' ends and also show a deep-green coating. The inside of both tubes is reasonably well black-matted, and immaculate. According to the prospect, the XP is waterproof and filled with dry nitrogen, which guarantuees moist- and fog-free performance in temperatures to -20 Celsius.
The focus wheel is quite large, and turns smoothly with some resistance, counter-clockwise from close focus of 1.2 m (!) to well past infinity in 1 full turn. In ordinary birding this would mean about 3/4 turn from 1.2 m to infinity. It's a fast focuser, but the DOF is sufficiently wide not to have to refocus all the time, and the slight resistance of the focus wheel will allow for fine adjustment easily. The fact that the focusing is in the counter-clockwise modus, is something that I have to get used to, as my former bins were all clockwise to infinity. Practice should improve my errors in turning the wheel to the wrong side in a reflex when a bird flies by. I consequently use my left index finger to focus, as I always have, and in fact CCW focusing is easier in this way, I found out. You pull to infinity, instead of pushing, as I was used to on my CW focus-bins.
The binocular is covered entirely in black rubber armour, that is neither slick nor sticky, with no ridges whatsoever, it fits tightly without giving way when held firmly, and feels very comfortable in the hand. I find the balance to be real nice; I'd never thought I'd own a full-size roof again, but the feel of the XP's is excellent. I put them on the kitchen scale and note that they weigh 664 grams, without strap and covers. For a full-sized 8x42 that is lightweight. The build quality seems to me to be real sturdy, they feel rugged in use; the housing is made of some high-quality polycarbonate which is called PPS.
The ocular rainguard is made of a simple but effective flexed-bridge rubber piece, and fits rather tightly onto the eyecups, yet is removed without much effort and quickly. It attaches with a bracket on the left to the thin end of the strap. The ojective lens covers are soft, well-finished rubber parts that can be attached to the objective tubes with a tight-fitting rubber ring. As both rubber armour and rubber rings are fairly rough in texture ( don't know how to put this in words precisely) the covers stay firmly in place.
The neckstrap has a 1.5 inch wide neck part, which is slightly padded and eases the weight of the already lightweight XP even more. I had no trouble carrying the bins for a day in the field ( and I am used to carrying 300 gram compact reverse porro's for the last few months, so that is saying something).
I liked the XP instantly.
Now for the beefier part:
How would the XP hold up when compared to alpha's?
My only other bin to compare was the Pentax Papilio 6.5x21, no match really for the XP.
A friend of mine owns the 8x40 Zeiss Victory mark I, bought new in 2004.
I paid him a visit and took the XP.
I compared the two for half an hour, switching from one to the other. The Zeiss has a very neutral, to my eyes even slightly blue-ish colour hue, the XP is slightly warmer in tone. Sharpness was excellent on both, and it took me a while to find that the Zeiss had an ever so slight edge in sharpness, going back and forth between the two. FOV was a toss-up, and on edge sharpness I favoured the XP. I had relaxing views through both overseeing a vast stretch of moorland from my friend's back garden. Close focus went to the XP. The stated 1.2 meter is precisely right on the XP.
The sticky rubber armouring of the Zeiss Victory was slightly annoying in my hands, the rubber armour of the XP is non-sticky but firm. I like that better.
I was impressed, as I had never expected the XP to hold up so well against the Zeiss Victory. But the Zeiss was not the FL.
So a few days later, I paid a visit to my dear friend, who bought my 2006 7x42 Zeiss FL off me ( as I mentioned before ). First thing I noticed was, that the end cap on the focus wheel was missing on the FL. Apparently he'd lost it after he purchased the FL, but never mind that. It's mentioned in earlier threads, so I'll ignore it here. The FL also felt lighter in my hands than the XP, which was another surprise regarding the weights of both: 664 grams for the XP, 740 grams for the Zeiss FL. The FL is superbly balanced, but rather bulky compared to the trim XP. The XP actually feels heavier than it is!
The optics of the 7x42 FL were overwhelmingly superb, as I remembered them to be from the days I still owned this FL. Bright, extremely sharp, yet quite relaxed. The sky was overcast and the light was rather harsh ( coming through thin cloud covering, rather white/milky) and the Fl excelled in detail recognition of tree tops foliage, with little loss of resolution and brightness on the foliage slightly below the tree tops, and no glare. A characteristic of well-controlled CA, I believe, though I'm not sure if that's rightly stated.
The XP, pointed onto the same spot, against the harsh light, showed very good detail, but a bit more glare, and the foliage just below the top was slightly darker in the image. I felt that I had to "work" a little more with the XP, whereas the FL was spot-on, razor sharp and very relaxed.
The white bark of a beech tree was superbly white in both the FL and the XP.
The FOV of the FL was wider than that of the XP (I held both binoculars now, on top of each other, to be able to quickly go back and forth between them) but the difference with the XP was less than I thought it would be. The FL being 7x and the XP being 8x might have accounted for that, in AFOV.
The edge sharpness was definitely better in the XP.
For good measure, my dear friend went into the house to get his 1998 8x42 Leica Trinovid BA and add them to the comparison frenzy I was involved in.
The coatings of this battered beast had suffered, which was more than a little obvious when looking through them; the colours seemed washed out seen through the old Leica, yet the insides of the tubes were clean.
The Leica Trinovid had a very fine and relaxing view still in them, and sharpness was on par with the XP. Colour hue - as far as visible - was warm-toned in the Leica, about the same as the XP; the FL had a very neutral colour tone, and was in this respect better than all the others, including the earlier mentioned Zeiss Victory mark I.
I treated myself to a beer, now. After comparing the Eden XP to the Zeiss FL and the Leica Trinovid for over an hour, I felt quite chuffed. The Eden XP has a retail price of € 279.- ! So what did I expect? I expected the XP to be blown out of the water by both the Zeisses and the Leica! But the Eden XP held up quite admirably against the alpha's. It's nothing short of a miracle that Chinese roofs can reach a level like this, nowadays.
I've neglected looking at threads about Zen-Ray and Hawke binoculars, but I'm glad I have refreshed my acquaintance with the Eden brand. The Eden XP 8x42 is a da*n fine pair of roofs.
Other reviewers have made comments on the Eden HD and ED line, and were mostly astonished by their performance. I think the new Eden XP series is the top performer of the current Eden models.
Best regards,
Ronald
The new Eden Quality XP 8x42 is tremendous! Best quality for the price I've ever seen! I'm in the Garden of Eden! The end.
Shortest review I've ever written. :king:
Seriously though, I'm not quite sure where and how to begin.
The superlatives are well deserved, but I'm not very fond of using superlatives. Besides, I had never imagined that I would own another Eden Quality after my Eden ED broke last year. Long story short: I was dissappointed with the build quality of the ED and threw them in the bin.
I would have gotten an immediate refund when I had sent them back, but I didn't do that. Case closed for me. Eden adios!
Until last week: the company I had bought my Eden ED off, sent me an email and asked, if they could persuade me to try out the new Eden XP :
http://www.knivesandtools.nl/nl/pt/-eden-quality-verrekijker-xp-8x42.htm
I was hesitant, this came as a complete surprise, but after checking the specs of the XP's and noting that the diopter is in the place where I most like it to be - the right ocular - I decided to give them a try and ordered the XP 8x42.
When they arrived, I didn't immediately open the box. Nor felt I excited as one would normally be at the arrival of new optics. Still a bit of a grudge...?
OK, I thought, had my breakfast, had my coffee, now let's see what's in store. Opened the box. Plain looking pair of smallish 42 mm roofs, in a tight black case, rainguard, objective covers, nice wide neckstrap... nothing out of the ordinary. Then I lifted them to my eyes and looked out of the window.
WOW!!!
- I went.
That plain looking roof gave me a dazzlingly bright image with amazing sharpness over the most part of the FOV and the best edge sharpness I had seen in a long time. An instant roomy "walk-in" view that I had not seen before in my former Eden bins, the ED 8x42. Notwithstanding the larger FOV of the ED of 142m/1000m I felt the 129 m FOV of the XP is more impressive.
That can't be right, I thought, and grabbed my Pentax Papilio's 6.5x21 (FOV 131 m) to compare. The 129 m FOV of the XP proved to be right. Yet, it just felt like.. well..., impressively wide! I never had that "WOW!!!" feeling of the XP in the ED, which I mentioned in my review of these specifically: no wow.
The immediately noticed brightness is due to the fact, that the XP has di-electric coatings that give a stated light transmission of 90 % ( over the whole of the spectrum? I haven't seen a light transmission graph of the XP yet, but I would really like to see one!), which is better than the silver-coated Eden ED.
Is there ED glass in these XP's? The prospect says there's not, yet I've read there are ED lenses in the XP's! I simply don't know, but CA seems well controlled. I'm in no position to say that, as I hardly ever see any CA, apart from rubbish bins that is.
The image is crisp, with a very slight bias to the yellow/green part of the spectrum, which was not immediately visible but only became apparent after comparison to the Zeiss 7x42 FL. (Later more on that.)
I am forced to wear spectacles, and these are fairly big. Yet, with the eyecups twisted down all the way, I experienced some blackouts in the view , so I changed the IPD setting slightly and I twisted the eyecups up in the lowest of the 3 (!) intermediate positions, and the image was superb. Really breathtaking! Sharp almost to the edge, flat field with very little pincushioning, large sweet spot. The eyerelief is stated as 18mm, but the fact I got blackouts in the all-down position of the eyecups made me suspect the ER is even greater, at least 20mm or even more. I was impressed that the XP had 5 eyecup positions, all the way up, all the way down and 3 intermediate positions. They do not click in abruptly into the settings, but they seem to "slide" into the steady positon. They hold all positions splendidly. Amazing detail, excellently executed.
Next I inspected the performance of my usual nemesis, the diopter adjustment. It's on the right ocular, as I already mentioned. The diopter of my former Eden ED was at the rear of the focus wheel on the central hinge, a flimsy plastic ring with a nodge to adjust in click-stops. This ring broke within a week after I received the ED's last year, and infuriated me to no end. Which is why I threw the ED's away and vowed never to buy central focus/diopter designs again. My 2006 Zeiss 7x42 FL's diopter gave up on me after a year. I sold these to a good friend of mine for very little money (probably the cheapest second-hand FL's ever!), who had the diopter in the zero position permanently and saw no problems in using them that way, because of his correcting specs. The Zeiss FL's will emerge in this very review of the Eden XP's because I was able to get my hands on them again, to compare to the XP's. But that later.
The diopter adjustment ring on the right ocular is not locking, but is treated with special grease that hardens out after a while of not touching the ring, which makes it "stick" in the set position. It stays put very well, I've not experienced any unforseen movement when using the bins in the field. Yet, when you readjust, the diopter responds smoothly with some resistance to the new position, in which it then "sticks" again. It's trim and well-engineered.
10 points out of 10, so to speak.
The ocular lenses are wide, 24 mm in diameter, and show a deep-green coating. The objectives are well set back from the tubes' ends and also show a deep-green coating. The inside of both tubes is reasonably well black-matted, and immaculate. According to the prospect, the XP is waterproof and filled with dry nitrogen, which guarantuees moist- and fog-free performance in temperatures to -20 Celsius.
The focus wheel is quite large, and turns smoothly with some resistance, counter-clockwise from close focus of 1.2 m (!) to well past infinity in 1 full turn. In ordinary birding this would mean about 3/4 turn from 1.2 m to infinity. It's a fast focuser, but the DOF is sufficiently wide not to have to refocus all the time, and the slight resistance of the focus wheel will allow for fine adjustment easily. The fact that the focusing is in the counter-clockwise modus, is something that I have to get used to, as my former bins were all clockwise to infinity. Practice should improve my errors in turning the wheel to the wrong side in a reflex when a bird flies by. I consequently use my left index finger to focus, as I always have, and in fact CCW focusing is easier in this way, I found out. You pull to infinity, instead of pushing, as I was used to on my CW focus-bins.
The binocular is covered entirely in black rubber armour, that is neither slick nor sticky, with no ridges whatsoever, it fits tightly without giving way when held firmly, and feels very comfortable in the hand. I find the balance to be real nice; I'd never thought I'd own a full-size roof again, but the feel of the XP's is excellent. I put them on the kitchen scale and note that they weigh 664 grams, without strap and covers. For a full-sized 8x42 that is lightweight. The build quality seems to me to be real sturdy, they feel rugged in use; the housing is made of some high-quality polycarbonate which is called PPS.
The ocular rainguard is made of a simple but effective flexed-bridge rubber piece, and fits rather tightly onto the eyecups, yet is removed without much effort and quickly. It attaches with a bracket on the left to the thin end of the strap. The ojective lens covers are soft, well-finished rubber parts that can be attached to the objective tubes with a tight-fitting rubber ring. As both rubber armour and rubber rings are fairly rough in texture ( don't know how to put this in words precisely) the covers stay firmly in place.
The neckstrap has a 1.5 inch wide neck part, which is slightly padded and eases the weight of the already lightweight XP even more. I had no trouble carrying the bins for a day in the field ( and I am used to carrying 300 gram compact reverse porro's for the last few months, so that is saying something).
I liked the XP instantly.
Now for the beefier part:
How would the XP hold up when compared to alpha's?
My only other bin to compare was the Pentax Papilio 6.5x21, no match really for the XP.
A friend of mine owns the 8x40 Zeiss Victory mark I, bought new in 2004.
I paid him a visit and took the XP.
I compared the two for half an hour, switching from one to the other. The Zeiss has a very neutral, to my eyes even slightly blue-ish colour hue, the XP is slightly warmer in tone. Sharpness was excellent on both, and it took me a while to find that the Zeiss had an ever so slight edge in sharpness, going back and forth between the two. FOV was a toss-up, and on edge sharpness I favoured the XP. I had relaxing views through both overseeing a vast stretch of moorland from my friend's back garden. Close focus went to the XP. The stated 1.2 meter is precisely right on the XP.
The sticky rubber armouring of the Zeiss Victory was slightly annoying in my hands, the rubber armour of the XP is non-sticky but firm. I like that better.
I was impressed, as I had never expected the XP to hold up so well against the Zeiss Victory. But the Zeiss was not the FL.
So a few days later, I paid a visit to my dear friend, who bought my 2006 7x42 Zeiss FL off me ( as I mentioned before ). First thing I noticed was, that the end cap on the focus wheel was missing on the FL. Apparently he'd lost it after he purchased the FL, but never mind that. It's mentioned in earlier threads, so I'll ignore it here. The FL also felt lighter in my hands than the XP, which was another surprise regarding the weights of both: 664 grams for the XP, 740 grams for the Zeiss FL. The FL is superbly balanced, but rather bulky compared to the trim XP. The XP actually feels heavier than it is!
The optics of the 7x42 FL were overwhelmingly superb, as I remembered them to be from the days I still owned this FL. Bright, extremely sharp, yet quite relaxed. The sky was overcast and the light was rather harsh ( coming through thin cloud covering, rather white/milky) and the Fl excelled in detail recognition of tree tops foliage, with little loss of resolution and brightness on the foliage slightly below the tree tops, and no glare. A characteristic of well-controlled CA, I believe, though I'm not sure if that's rightly stated.
The XP, pointed onto the same spot, against the harsh light, showed very good detail, but a bit more glare, and the foliage just below the top was slightly darker in the image. I felt that I had to "work" a little more with the XP, whereas the FL was spot-on, razor sharp and very relaxed.
The white bark of a beech tree was superbly white in both the FL and the XP.
The FOV of the FL was wider than that of the XP (I held both binoculars now, on top of each other, to be able to quickly go back and forth between them) but the difference with the XP was less than I thought it would be. The FL being 7x and the XP being 8x might have accounted for that, in AFOV.
The edge sharpness was definitely better in the XP.
For good measure, my dear friend went into the house to get his 1998 8x42 Leica Trinovid BA and add them to the comparison frenzy I was involved in.
The coatings of this battered beast had suffered, which was more than a little obvious when looking through them; the colours seemed washed out seen through the old Leica, yet the insides of the tubes were clean.
The Leica Trinovid had a very fine and relaxing view still in them, and sharpness was on par with the XP. Colour hue - as far as visible - was warm-toned in the Leica, about the same as the XP; the FL had a very neutral colour tone, and was in this respect better than all the others, including the earlier mentioned Zeiss Victory mark I.
I treated myself to a beer, now. After comparing the Eden XP to the Zeiss FL and the Leica Trinovid for over an hour, I felt quite chuffed. The Eden XP has a retail price of € 279.- ! So what did I expect? I expected the XP to be blown out of the water by both the Zeisses and the Leica! But the Eden XP held up quite admirably against the alpha's. It's nothing short of a miracle that Chinese roofs can reach a level like this, nowadays.
I've neglected looking at threads about Zen-Ray and Hawke binoculars, but I'm glad I have refreshed my acquaintance with the Eden brand. The Eden XP 8x42 is a da*n fine pair of roofs.
Other reviewers have made comments on the Eden HD and ED line, and were mostly astonished by their performance. I think the new Eden XP series is the top performer of the current Eden models.
Best regards,
Ronald
Last edited:
