[junzhang]

I am buying a pair of buinoculars for my dad, and after researching in BF I decided to have a try on the new favourite brand of BF recently, the ZR. 7x36 sounds the best among but it's out of stock so I get the 8x43 ed2.

I have no "alphas". All I have is this oldie or beauty 8x32se, there's a very rough comparison between the two:

Contrast and colour: I can't really tell the difference: even

sharpness: again, no visible difference in the centre, but quality degrades a bit faster at the edge for ZR. 8x32se has quite much bigger "sweet spot" :nikon wins by a small margin

CA: equiped with newer technology, it's not surprise that the ZR wins, but surprisingly, it's quite a big margin. I would say very well done for ZR! it might be a better bino for sky watching than nikon.

FOV: in paper the ZR should have better FOV (426ft/1000yd vs 397ft/1000yd), but somehow comparing them side by side, I found nikon still provides slightly better FOV. given it's slight, it's strange that I FEEL nikon provides a much better FOV without measuring.

DOF: I can't measure it but nikon still feels a little bit better.

brightness: ZR wins, but not very big a margin. In dark 43mm really shows its advantage.

design: there no comparison, ZR equips with all the bells and whistles, being waterproof and fog proof. Also, being a roof, even it's 8x43, it feels almost the same size and same weight comparing to nikon 8x32. but, to my taste, i don't quite like the appearance of ZR, I like the binoculars design to be as simple as possible, less colours and less little smart things would be better for me. IMHO this is the most obvious disadvantage when comparing to the "alphas",even some other cheaper brands.

build quality: There will not be criticisms against Nikon. For ZR, it's better than I had expected. The attantion to detail is what ZR needs to catch up. But that's part of the reason why we still can get it that cheap, so, no complains.

conclusion: would I recommend it? yes, and highly. would I keep it and give my dad my nikon? ..oh no..but, if I am going to a trip in tropical area, I will definately take the ZR instead, for the weather proof and also, loss less if I loss it. For the view, ZR holds its own against nikon, it is as sharp in the centre, brighter, and much less CA. However the nikon still feels better, for a very present "real" view even in paper the FOV is narrower and has more CA. And also, for collectors, of course nikon is a little gem and ZR maybe just a fasion thing like ipod which will be replaced by another bargain in the future..

[Fireform]

I wouldn't dispute much about this review except the weight. The Zen weighs 5 oz more than the SE, which is (to me) quite noticeable.

[Matt_RTH]

Specimen variances aside, I have yet to see CA in my SE and I am very sensitive to it and have seen in many of my binoculars past and present. For instance, a Great Egret against grey sky is an easy diagnostic. For the ZR to be better seems pretty amazing. I wish I could try them around here.

BTW, as far as not having alphas, anyone trying to say the 8x32 SE is not an alpha would have a lot of explaining to do.

[junzhang]

Originally Posted by Matt_RTH

Specimen variances aside, I have yet to see CA in my SE and I am very sensitive to it and have seen in many of my binoculars past and present. For instance, a Great Egret against grey sky is an easy diagnostic. For the ZR to be better seems pretty amazing. I wish I could try them around here.

BTW, as far as not having alphas, anyone trying to say the 8x32 SE is not an alpha would have a lot of explaining to do.

Thanks for the replies.

The attached file is the scene I compare the CA. I was actually trying to count the posts to compare the FOV, then I noticed that the ZR ED2 presented quite a lot less CA than the nikon.

The photo was taken later, when the light had changed and CA was hard to see from the photo. (maybe the lens are not too bad either?)

Regards to the weight, yes, the ZR is heavier. Maybe it's just sort of phyco that when you look at a bigger thing, thinking a bigger diametre and it doesn't feel as heavy

[kristoffer]

very interesting test. I was curious to see them compared. I am sure this thread will get plenty of replys

[ceasar]

Just a reminder: Junzhang's title to this thread is: "ZR 8x32ed2 vs Nikon 8x32SE:a rough comparison" My emphasis. Take his analysis on that basis. I think it is frank and open but not definitive and I don't think he meant it to be such. Clearly the ZR is a pretty good binocular.

I can't see any CA in my 2 SE's unless I hunt it down on bright sunlit edges of vertical house edges and horizontal roof lines and every binocular on earth will show CA under these circumstances. And I am skeptical that any Roof Prism binocular could have as big a sweet spot or equal the edge sharpness of a non defective SE without some kind of "flat field" technology.
Bob

[FrankD]

I think it is frank and open but not definitive and I don't think he meant it to be such.

I would agree.

I do appreciate the comments though. It is nice to have one of the non-regulars chime in about some bin comparisons....not that I don't appreciate the continued efforts from the regulars.

[jaymoynihan]

Originally Posted by Matt_RTH

...I have yet to see CA in my SE and I am very sensitive to it and have seen in many of my binoculars past and present.

I too am very sensitive to CA. I actually compared my 8x SE against my ED bino (Swift Audubon 8.5x44 ED). I used back - lit - branches -not - far -from - Sun -in -field.

Yes there was a difference, the Audubon had zero perceptible CA. The 8x had a barely perceptible, extremely thin, violet outline on the branch. If i actually conciously "centered" my eye in the light path. it would disappear.
I have never seen less in any non-ED glass i have tried or used.

I have never even seen a ZR product, so I cannot really comment on anything about them.

Something else I would like to mention though. When I am using a binocular, i have alot of "eye time", being that my hobby is actually behavior study. I have far from perfect eyes in and of themselves.

I have found very few binoculars, except a couple Alpha's I have, have a visual comfort, non-fatigue comfy for a 1/2 hour stare quality.

The less expensive glasses I have found for that is small. I am sure there are more, not having tried them all.

They boil down to:
The Mostly discontinued B&L Custom series.
The Swift Audubon Series.
The Nikon 8x32 SE.

I would sometime like to hear about the new crop of Chinese ED binoculars as to that aspect. Any animal behavior/bino users out there?

[edz]

some additional measures compared between these two binocularss

Aperture 8x32SE measures 32mm, Zen 8x43ED2 measures 41mm

Fov, 8x32SE measures 7.6°, Zen 8x43ED2 measures 7.7°

Sharp FOV 8x32SE measures to 95% of fov or 7.2°, Zen 8x43ED2 measures to 70% of fov or 5.4°, not at all close.
this is a standardized measure I've been using for about 10 years. Sharpest fov measured to the point of 600 arcsec apparent resolution, or total distortion from collective aberrations if you will. That would be 60" in a 10x binoc, 50" in a 12x binoc, or in this case 75" in an 8x binoc.

Curvature is a portion of the unsharp FOV and it is measurable. In the 8x32SE, curvature is 15 arcsec at 70% out in the fov and 20 arcsec at 90% out. In the 8x43ED2 it is 70 arcsec at 70% out and 130 arcsec at 90% out, approximatel 5x to 6x as much.

Central area of full illumination 8x32SE central 25% of aperture or 8mm, Zen 8x43ED2 central 5%

edz

[junzhang]

Originally Posted by edz

some additional measures compared between these two binocularss

Aperture 8x32SE measures 32mm, Zen 8x43ED2 measures 41mm

Fov, 8x32SE measures 7.6°, Zen 8x43ED2 measures 7.7°

Sharp FOV 8x32SE measures to 95% of fov or 7.2°, Zen 8x43ED2 measures to 70% of fov or 5.4°, not at all close.
this is a standardized measure I've been using for about 10 years. Sharpest fov measured to the point of 600 arcsec apparent resolution, or total distortion from collective aberrations if you will. That would be 60" in a 10x binoc, 50" in a 12x binoc, or in this case 75" in an 8x binoc.

Curvature is a portion of the unsharp FOV and it is measurable. In the 8x32SE, curvature is 15 arcsec at 70% out in the fov and 20 arcsec at 90% out. In the 8x43ED2 it is 70 arcsec at 70% out and 130 arcsec at 90% out, approximatel 5x to 6x as much.

Central area of full illumination 8x32SE central 25% of aperture or 8mm, Zen 8x43ED2 central 5%

edz

it's interesting to see some more scientific comparison against very objective feeling.

even though ZR measures a wider FOV, I still see the nikon provide a wider view. this is not only feeling, but also compared by counting the posts, or CDs in my bookshelf.

I agree with you about the unsharp fov of the ZR comparing to nikon. The centre is very close I would say, while the edge nkon shows it's advantage. I guess this, together with the narrower FOV, makes the view less "real" when comparing to Nikon, and that's why I prefer nikon's view despite that ZR has less CA and a bit brighter in my test.

for brightness, in my test the ZR wins by quite a margin. I use them in my living room with lights turned off, only leaving the lights on in the bedroom. I watch the CDs stacked in my bookshelf. Through the nikon I can't read the title, I can only recognize the brand name of the CDs, while through the ZR I can see the title clearly in every letter without guessing.

[spacepilot]

Jun, thank you for relating your experience with the Zen ED2. It seems that they still cannot touch the 8x SE's for a birder's bin.

Ed, those are very interesting measurements for the Zen and SE. Looks like the real parameters, at least on your particular sample, are rather off from the advertised values. Do you have similar measurements for the 10X Zen EDs and SE? I'm very interested to know how large the measured sweet spot is for the 10x Zen ED.

Ning

[kristoffer]

I fail to see how a non waterproof bin can be a "birders bin". My bins get soaked every then and then. A non gasfilled bin, is not really an option for ones primary tool, imo.
As a optical reference on the other hand, I am sure they are among the best.

Originally Posted by spacepilot

It seems that they still cannot touch the 8x SE's for a birder's bin.


Ning

[spacepilot]

Ok, I'll say fair-weather birder's bin then.

Ning

[Fireform]

I guess using SEs for 12 years or so as one's primary birding and hunting bin in all kinds of weather and tropical humidity without mishap fails to establish them as a primary birding bin on the order of, say, a Zen-Ray.

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

I fail to see how a non waterproof bin can be a "birders bin". My bins get soaked every then and then. A non gasfilled bin, is not really an option for ones primary tool, imo.
As a optical reference on the other hand, I am sure they are among the best.

I bird many hours per week, more depending on the season. I use my SE 8X32 probably 90% of the time; the remaining 10% is reserved for my Leica. In time, I plan to replace the Leica with the EDG or new EL. I will not replace the SE.

This summer we spent another ten days in Alberta, birding continuously. I used my Leica for about three hours. My wife used her 8X32 SE exclusively.

Admittedly, if you live in a wet climate and want only one bin, a fully sealed model is the smart choice.

John

[Jonathan B.]

Originally Posted by kristoffer

I fail to see how a non waterproof bin can be a "birders bin". My bins get soaked every then and then. A non gasfilled bin, is not really an option for ones primary tool, imo.
As a optical reference on the other hand, I am sure they are among the best.

Here in New Mexico's high-mountain desert at the southern tip of the Rocky Mountains, we have spectacular weather about 325 days of the year. On those days I use my SE, which has an unsurpassed, brilliant, crystalline, three-dimensional view all the way to the edge of the field. On the other forty days I have to resort to a terribly disappointing so-called "alpha" bin, because it is waterproof.

[Tero]

I also bird about 90% out of the rain. We do have rain but I usually do not go. My roofs have got tested in some rain, never took any porros into rain.

[Matt_RTH]

As a follow up to my original message on CA in the 8x32 SE, I went out today at high noon to try to get some hawks (very slow day) and also really tried hard to get CA. There was one situation that got me... It was a very white sign on a dark phone poll which was right in the sun. Sure enough, if I focused on the sign, I did notice the absolute slightest CA. Not enough to be objectionable or really even notice unless looking for it. Then as my eyes got calibrated to it, I'd say that I probably sensed it the tiniest bit, just nothing close to objectionable. Still I'm not surprised that the ZR would be better in this respect as an ED bin.

[junzhang]

Originally Posted by Matt_RTH

As a follow up to my original message on CA in the 8x32 SE, I went out today at high noon to try to get some hawks (very slow day) and also really tried hard to get CA. There was one situation that got me... It was a very white sign on a dark phone poll which was right in the sun. Sure enough, if I focused on the sign, I did notice the absolute slightest CA. Not enough to be objectionable or really even notice unless looking for it. Then as my eyes got calibrated to it, I'd say that I probably sensed it the tiniest bit, just nothing close to objectionable. Still I'm not surprised that the ZR would be better in this respect as an ED bin.

with the samples I have, it's quite easy to reproduce this. Just look at any of the branches with the bright sky as background, through the nikon I can see purple and yellow fringe at two sides of the branch, with the ZR the yellow is gone, the purple still exists, but need to try very hard to find it.

in real world of bird watching, i have no CA problem with either binos though, or in other more accurate words, the CA problem won't bother me at all.

[CLRobles]

Originally Posted by Fireform

I guess using SEs for 12 years or so as one's primary birding and hunting bin in all kinds of weather and tropical humidity without mishap fails to establish them as a primary birding bin on the order of, say, a Zen-Ray.

Although nowhere near 12 years I have had my SE's in the rain plenty of times this year and they still look and work like new???? I haven't had any issues yet in the wet weather????
I think they are pretty weather proof people. I wouldn't go swimming with them but I sure as heck would take them ANYWHERE I wanted a really good view regardless of conditions. Saying that I know I'm lucky to have good backups (strange when a Swaro EL is your backup/truck glass).... The SE in my opinion is that good. And because I consider it that good I am willing to to take them anywhere and will not settle for a lesser view
Here's my thanks again for the Nikon SE


And no I don't work for Nikon




EdZ,
A few posts up Ning (spacepilot) asked if you had done the same comparison between the 10x42 SE and the ZR 10x43ED2..... I'm sure many of us would like to see your findings if you have done so..... Especially the difference in resolution between the two......

Ning,
Trust me the SE is NOT just a fair weather bin. But who really birds in a heavy downpour?

[jaymoynihan]

Originally Posted by junzhang

...with the ZR the yellow is gone, the purple still exists, ...

Very interesting. I am not buying any new binocular anytime soon. But curious how the other ED/HD/FL types do on this.

My existing one (Swift Audubon 8.5x44 ED) exhibits neither the yellow nor the purple. Any descriptions of the HD (Leica) and FL (Zeiss)? Do they have decreased CA like the ZR, or are they APO like the Swift?

[edz]

Originally Posted by CLRobles

Ning (spacepilot) asked if you had done the same comparison between the 10x42 SE and the ZR 10x43ED2?

I have not.

However, you can read all the actual measures on the 10x42SE in either of my Reviews in the Reports section of Cloudy Nights.
Small Binocular Reports The 10x50s
Small Binocular Reports Three Families

FWIW, the 10x42SE has almost exactly the same wide usable fov as the 8x43ED2 and 20% of central aperture of the 10x42SE fully illuminates the fov. The 10x42SE has less than half the total aberration and curvature as compared to the 8x43ED2.

edz

[NWBirder]

Originally Posted by junzhang

with the samples I have, it's quite easy to reproduce this. Just look at any of the branches with the bright sky as background, through the nikon I can see purple and yellow fringe at two sides of the branch, with the ZR the yellow is gone, the purple still exists, but need to try very hard to find it.

in real world of bird watching, i have no CA problem with either binos though, or in other more accurate words, the CA problem won't bother me at all.

The CA control was never the strong point for SE since the old design does not have ED glass. Curiously, do you see the color fringe near the center of field or just at the extreme edge of the field? It would not be an issue if the color abberation only occurs at very edge.

If Nikon comes up with a new SE that has ED lens and adds waterproof capability, it will be a real winner.

[Kammerdiner]

My 8x32 SE does have some CA, but generally it's not intrusive, and mostly it's off axis. Watching hawks I don't recall seeing it, but I remember watching bluebirds feeding from the tops of tombstones one afternoon (there's a cemetary behind my office--a great place for bluebirds and phoebes and whatnot) and seeing some very bright, but very narrow fringing on the backlit stones. It struck me as more tightly controlled than many (the remarkable sharpness of the SE extends even to the CA I guess!). Nonetheless, some of my older roofs (since sold) had much bigger problems with CA. I don't even think of the SE's CA--it's a non-issue for me.

Mark

[junzhang]

Originally Posted by NWBirder

The CA control was never the strong point for SE since the old design does not have ED glass. Curiously, do you see the color fringe near the center of field or just at the extreme edge of the field? It would not be an issue if the color abberation only occurs at very edge.

If Nikon comes up with a new SE that has ED lens and adds waterproof capability, it will be a real winner.

I can see the fringe in both centre and edge, but as Kammerdiner has stated, it's very narrow and tight, it won't really bother me in real bird watching. Just if I want to find it, I still can.

Now with the new pricing of ZR 7x36, I am still very tamped to get myself one, there're many positive feedback of it. Does anyone have the comparison between 7x36 and 8x43ed2, in regards to the size of sweet spot, how good the "flat view" and "3D" effect they can provide?