[NDhunter]

Originally Posted by Steve C

If all you can do is complain about a little focus wheel play, like on the ED 3, you have bigger worries. I am sure I have seen more binoculars with a little play than otherwise. Unless it is a whole bunch its pretty much a non issue, unless the nit pickers are out.

The 7x36 ED 2 plays pretty well with the Zeiss 7x42 FL, so why wouldn't a 7x42 do as well. Besides he was comparing the fov anyway, not the optics. Actually not even comparing the fov, just wishing for the 450' fov of the Zeiss. You sure you aren't kidding?

Steve:

I suppose that Frank will reply and you jumped in first. Shazzam, I guess I just
want to temper the big positive push from the testers like you. You are the one
who mentioned play in the focuser, not me.

Pinewood, explains it quite well, the push and then reality. Your review is nicely
done of the ED3, and I mentioned your notice of play in the focuser, so that
is what leads me to have some concern.

Did you know that play in a focuser is not a good thing, no matter the maker,
the price, or whatever.

Your review is good in that it tells all about the challenge of building a quality binocular.

Comparing FOV with Zeiss or whoever, really has not much to do about anything.

Jerry

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Steve C

If all you can do is complain about a little focus wheel play, like on the ED 3, you have bigger worries. I am sure I have seen more binoculars with a little play than otherwise. Unless it is a whole bunch its pretty much a non issue, unless the nit pickers are out.

The 7x36 ED 2 plays pretty well with the Zeiss 7x42 FL, so why wouldn't a 7x42 do as well. Besides he was comparing the fov anyway, not the optics. Actually not even comparing the fov, just wishing for the 450' fov of the Zeiss. You sure you aren't kidding?

Steve,

Are you working for Zen-Ray? Your posts sound more and more like promotions and then I remembered your comment "I spent some time manning the ZR booth, which was why I was there".
http://birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=...5&postcount=82

[NWBirder]

Originally Posted by mmx_4

7x43 ? It will be very interesting !

I have their rev2 7x36 ED2. Judging by the changes (presumably for better) they made on the 43mm ED3, the 7x43 can be quite interesting. hm.. 6mm EP.

[flossiepip]

I have enjoyed reading Steve C reviews here and not just this one! So more power to his elbow and I hope he do's not get put off by people snipping at him! Its the kind of thing that makes this forum run.

[Pinewood]

Originally Posted by NDhunter

Did you know that play in a focuser is not a good thing, no matter the maker,
the price, or whatever.

...
Comparing FOV with Zeiss or whoever, really has not much to do about anything.

Jerry

Hello Jerry,

Play in the focuser is not good, but sometimes it may be tolerated. The positive feel of focussing a truly high quality binocular adds to the knowledge that one is using not just a tool, but a scientific "instrument." My Zen 7x36 has no play but it still does not have the feel of a Zeiss. The Zen is not easy to move; while the Zeiss moves easily, yet comes to a dead stop.

Not all FOV's are made equal. The Zen 7x36 ED has a wide field which is just plain soft, at the edges, perhaps a design choice or compromise but it is not my choice.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

[NDhunter]

Originally Posted by Pinewood

Hello Jerry,

Play in the focuser is not good, but sometimes it may be tolerated. The positive feel of focussing a truly high quality binocular adds to the knowledge that one is using not just a tool, but a scientific "instrument." My Zen 7x36 has no play but it still does not have the feel of a Zeiss. The Zen is not easy to move; while the Zeiss moves easily, yet comes to a dead stop.

Not all FOV's are made equal. The Zen 7x36 ED has a wide field which is just plain soft, at the edges, perhaps a design choice or compromise but it is not my choice.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Arthur:

I agree with you. The review of the ED3 mentioned the play in the focuser, and that is something that I do not like either. I am thinking that will not go away with
use.

As far as FOV goes, I suppose it goes to the useable FOV, and I also like a
mostly sharp FOV at the edges.

Jerry

[Pinewood]

Originally Posted by NDhunter

Arthur:

I agree with you. The review of the ED3 mentioned the play in the focuser, and that is something that I do not like either. I am thinking that will not go away with
use.

As far as FOV goes, I suppose it goes to the useable FOV, and I also like a
mostly sharp FOV at the edges.

Jerry

Jerry,

Are we "nitpicking?"

In any case, I would not hold a $500 binocular to the same standard as binocular costing three or four times as much. The new Zens may prove to be a good value at its price point.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

[FrankD]

Jerry,

I wanted to clarify my earlier comments. I think everyone knows that the 7x42 FL has been my favorite binocular for some time. When I had to sell my two pairs after the divorce I was quite sad though other issues at the time occupied my focus quite a bit more. I still miss it...not because it was a Zeiss or because of anything to do with construction, handling or warranty service. I loved it because of the view. I loved the 60 degree wide field of view in a 7x. The 420 foot and under crowd just doesn't do it for me as completely in a 7x binocular. I value a wide field of view (both true and apparent) much more so than I do many other binocular optical performance areas that others hold so dear.

Sadly, I can no longer afford any Euro-Japan "Alpha" binoculars and with a new house and a new marriage in the works I cannot imagine being able to afford them any time in the near future. So, that leaves me with having that need for excellent optical performance in a much more reasonably priced package. I make no attempt in hiding the fact that I thoroughly enjoy the optical performance of Zen Ray's products. I think I am one of the few that actually prefers the optical performance of the 8x43 over the 7x36 ED2. I thought/think the 7x36 is a fine binocular but I just couldn't warm up to the type of edge performance it displayed in comparison to that of the 8x43. I don't remember if it was the combination of pincushion and field curvature or what it was but the 8x43's edge performance was more to my liking. That particular issue is what spurred my comments about wanting the 7x43 to perform more like the 8x43 than the 7x36.

If Zen Ray can come out with a 7x43 ED3 that mirrors the 7x42 FL in terms of CA control, apparent sharpness, similar edge performance and with a 450 foot field of view then it would certainly make me happy. I know it won't be as bright as the FL because of the whole ABK vs SP issue (despite what Dennis has to say on the issue... ) but I can settle for being within a few percentage points.

Hope that clears up where I was going with this.

[brocknroller]

Originally Posted by gwsudiro

waah!! at first glance, I thought I saw Swarovision!

its indeed more classy than the previous model, IMHO..

thanks for the info Steve!

best regards
Galih

Galih,

I agree with you, they do look more elegant. Functionally, however, I did like the flat crossbars on the original open bridge since they provided a nice resting spot for my long fingers, which never know where to go with roofs. Two fingers went into the open space but the index finger and pinky rested on the crossbars. So I'm not sure how this will affect my grip, which was excellent in the ED2.

Good to hear about the improvement in field curvature. Both samples i tried had more field curvature in the left EP than the right. The fall off in the left EPs was rather steep at about 60% out, but could be refocused almost to the edge, so not much astigmatism but lots of field curvature. Not an issue in bright light where my accommodation was better, but more noticeable on cloudy days and toward the evening.

The right EPs fared much better, with a more ample sweet spot and a gradual fall off at the edges. I tried the EPs on both samples with both eyes to make sure it wasn't my eyes that were the cause of this difference. Not sure why the left EPs were not up to par with the right, but if the ED3 is even as good as the right EPs in the ED2s I tried, I'd probably be happy with that.

However, I am disappointed to hear is that the level of pincushion distortion has remained the same. Guess one baby step at a time, but I think they could do better since the Nikon 8x30 EII has milder pincushion and is nearly the same TFOV.

I really like the redesigned focuser knob, and had suggested this design in the What's next for ZR thread. Crosshatching similar to the Minox design. Better gripping surface compared to the low profile ribs of the ED, which easily slips with gloves on. It also looks "classier".

The 7x43 configuration is also a welcomed change. Not that my aging eyes can use more than the 5mm exit pupils of the 7x36, but the slightly fatter barrels and the flare being farther out due to the larger exit pupils should help.

All and all, the initial reports show steps in the right direction, but like Arthur, I'll wait until the bugs are worked out. The ED2 v. 2 was definitely an improvement over the original ED2, with much improved flare control, much smoother focuser, sturdier eyecups that didn't fall down, and more focus travel past infinity. Continual quality improvement is the way to go.

I am rooting for Charles and the ZR team since they are really customer focused and produce optics for those of us who can't afford the crème de la crème but who still would like good quality optics.

Brock

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by NDhunter

Steve:

Comparing FOV with Zeiss or whoever, really has not much to do about anything.

Jerry

Jerry,

I warms the bottom of my heart to see this. That was the point of my post. Glad to see you got it, but you didn't get up early enough this morning to push it back in my lap. Frank simply wished that the new Zen ED 3 would have the same field as the Zeiss. In jumps Jerry and starts raising objections about comparisons to the Zeiss, that was YOUR comparison (a comparison that had not much to do with anything), not Frank's and not mine. I purposely only used the ZED ED lines in the review. For one thing it is all I have had time to do any real comparison with. For another, I decided to leave out any reference to anything alpha to avoid your stuff. I guess it didn't work.

Any mechanical contrivance designed by mankind has the potential for flaws. One can be overly nit picky and, like you, look for any reason to be critical of anything not named Swarovski or Nikon. "Flaws" which are not fatal to operation will be viewed as flaws by some, but not others. I have no expectation of perfection in a sub $500 glass, so frankly I don't worry much about a degree or so of play in the focus wheels of he ZEN ED 3 I have. Make of that what you will, but I think you make too much of it.

Pileatus,

No, I don't work for Zen Ray. I also don't suspect you work for Swarovski, I don't expect Jerry works for Swarovski or Nikon, I never have suspected anybody who makes favorable posts for a particular glass as being somehow in "cahoots" with that maker. Yes I spent some time at the Zen Ray booth at the Winter Wings Festival last February. Not that this is really any of your business, Zen Ray initially was a little late in getting a Vendor application to the festival, because they were going to another show elsewhere. Winter Wings then granted his application, so in the midst of some bad winter weather, and since I happen to live in Klamath Falls, where the festival has been held for decades, I told Charles I'd spend time in the ZR booth. This let them ship the show specimens to me so they didn't have to worry about bringing them over possibly bad roads. I did it because it sounded interesting, not because I work for them. When I get it done to my satisfaction, I will post more direct comparisons to other glass I have.

Flossiepip,

I am glad you like the reviews and whatever sniping there is does not bother me greatly.

Frank,

I for one am glad to see you got squared away and are back on the forum. Like you I also am impressed with the performance to value level of the Zen Ray products.

[ZEN-RAY]

Originally Posted by brocknroller

I really like the redesigned focuser knob, and had suggested this design in the What's next for ZR thread. Crosshatching similar to the Minox design. Better gripping surface compared to the low profile ribs of the ED, which easily slips with gloves on. It also looks "classier".
Brock

Brock, glad you like it. I know I got the idea some where in that thread. I couldn't locate it when I reported back our score card. Thanks

I also want to point out that the new tripod adapter socket was first suggested to me by Manuel (Mayoayo).

Essentially, I view the ZEN ED3 as a birdforum community driven project, collectively improving the original ZEN ED2 binoculars. What we have done is to preserve whatever works for ED2, and to improves its user friendliness. For example, the eyecup design as mentioned by Steve is one noticeable change to better accomodate glasses wearers. Another minor change is to shift the neckstrap anchor up by 3/4 of inch to make handholding more comfortable. Had we not redesigned the chassis and armor to give it a cleaner outfit, we would have probably called it ZEN ED2 Rev3.

[ZEN-RAY]

Originally Posted by WiscTJK

Steve or Zen-Ray,

Does the diopter lock on the ED3 model like the 7x36?

Thanks,

Todd

Todd, we decided not to include locking mechanism for the diopter. With secured clicking diopter ring, we have never seen diopter ring position shifted by itself.

[Kammerdiner]

Originally Posted by Pileatus

Steve,

Are you working for Zen-Ray? Your posts sound more and more like promotions and then I remembered your comment "I spent some time manning the ZR booth, which was why I was there".
http://birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=...5&postcount=82

I don't suppose anyone on BF is getting paid for reviews. Who needs to pay them? Send the fanboys a pair to review and they'll jump all over it.

And to their credit, Zen-Ray and others seem happy to take constructive criticism. Smart move. Publicity + R&D for $0. That'll improve anyone's bottom line.

The concern is that some reviewers are getting a little too cozy with the distributors/manufacturers (whatever you want to call them). This can and probably will lead to questionable assessments.

As for the ED3, I'll wait for the ED4, in which the SV eyepiece is ripped off, reverse engineered and sold for $500. Call it what you want, but I'm a little less impressed than I was with some of these "marketing decisions."

Mark

PS: Oh, and before someone quotes Urban Dictionary or something to the effect that, "fanboys usually accuse others of being fanboys," let me add that I currently have a Swaro, a Zeiss, a Leica, a Nikon, a Zen, and, uh, some others I probably lost track of. I like them all, but credit is due where credit is due.

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by Kammerdiner

I don't suppose anyone on BF is getting paid for reviews. Who needs to pay them? Send the fanboys a pair to review and they'll jump all over it.

And to their credit, Zen-Ray and others seem happy to take constructive criticism. Smart move. Publicity + R&D for $0. That'll improve anyone's bottom line.

The concern is that some reviewers are getting a little too cozy with the distributors/manufacturers (whatever you want to call them). This can and probably will lead to questionable assessments.

As for the ED3, I'll wait for the ED4, in which the SV eyepiece is ripped off, reverse engineered and sold for $500. Call it what you want, but I'm a little less impressed than I was with some of these "marketing decisions."

Mark

PS: Oh, and before someone quotes Urban Dictionary or something to the effect that, "fanboys usually accuse others of being fanboys," let me add that I currently have a Swaro, a Zeiss, a Leica, a Nikon, a Zen, and, uh, some others I probably lost track of. I like them all, but credit is due where credit is due.

Your edit is commendable, but do you not suppose that Swarovski is getting a tremendous boost from all of the fanboy praise being heaped upon that binocular ? I don't suppose that Swarovski paid much for that either. Or is that not fanboy praise because it is a Swarovski? Do you suppose thay just maybe some of the SV fanboy praise might be a tad bit exaggerated? Your critical sword cuts both ways.

[mmx_4]

>>"The focus is completely different on the ED 3. This has to be about the fastest focus I have ever seen. There is one turn total wheel travel. It takes less than one half turn to go from the close focus distance of about 6 feet to 100 feet. "

yehh. Slow focus in ED2 was very nice 8(

[Steve C]

[quote=mmx_4;2188167 yehh. Slow focus in ED2 was very nice 8([/QUOTE]

Well Evgeniy, seems one focus rate will sure not suit everybody. But the ED 3 is sure faster than the ED 2.

[FrankD]

I don't suppose anyone on BF is getting paid for reviews.

You mean I could get paid to do what I love? Sweet. Sign me up!



Seriously, I wish. Can you folks imagine that? Getting binoculars and spotting scopes shipped to you so that you can evaluate and review them. Then getting paid for it? I cannot imagine a better job.

Do we even have any true professional optics' writers now that Ingraham "retired" to a career with Zeiss? I don't even know if he got paid for what he did but, in one sense, I truly envy what he contributed.

[Kammerdiner]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Your edit is commendable, but do you not suppose that Swarovski is getting a tremendous boost from all of the fanboy praise being heaped upon that binocular ? I don't suppose that Swarovski paid much for that either. Or is that not fanboy praise because it is a Swarovski? Do you suppose thay just maybe some of the SV fanboy praise might be a tad bit exaggerated? Your critical sword cuts both ways.

True enough. But Swaro has deeper pockets, and sends the pros to Extremadura.

They also don't copy other people's work and sell it as there own.

[ZEN-RAY]

Originally Posted by mmx_4

>>"The focus is completely different on the ED 3. This has to be about the fastest focus I have ever seen. There is one turn total wheel travel. It takes less than one half turn to go from the close focus distance of about 6 feet to 100 feet. "

yehh. Slow focus in ED2 was very nice 8(

My engineers told me that I should stop reading those Birdforum posts, which make their lives quite miserable. I think they are right.

Evgeniy, thanks a lot for submitting the review. It's greatly appreciated.

Charles

[mmx_4]

Originally Posted by ZEN-RAY

Charles

I'm understand your engineers. If most of users want fast focus ...
--------------
Can you say anything about characteristics of future 7x43 ?
--------------
1 important question - with 7x36 I was I was pleasantly surprised with very deep diopter correction (for both eyes), when focused.
(May be, make sense wrote on site about it - not many binoculars has same limits for correction.)
Are you planned same level of correction in new 7x43 ?

[looksharp65]

Originally Posted by FrankD

Shazam! I am in love and I haven't even seen it yet.

:-)

Oh baby, I hope it is somewhere between the 8x43 and 7x36 in terms of field of view. Something similar to the Zeiss FL with around 450 or so feet...same type of view as the 8x43 (in comparison to the 7x36). Count me in to be the first to buy one.

I too can see myself buying the 7x43 if it adds something significant and extraordinary that my Fury 6,5x32 lacks (whatever that would be, fantastic CA control maybe, though the Fury is quite good too).

Also wondering what a good doubler would do with it. A 14x43 is not too dim with nearly 3.1 mm exit pupil.

[mmx_4]

Charles, can you write about optical scheme of new ED 3, compared with ED2 ?

[ksp48]

Thank you Steve

[FrankD]

I wanted to take the opportunity to chime in about my experiences with the Zen ED3 at this point. I received the 8x43 model at the beginning of last week. Since then I have had the opportunity to compare it with my ED2 and the Pro Optic 8x42 (as well as a few other roof and porro prism models).

Steve's review covered everything about the ED3 quite nicely. All of the key changes from the ED2 design are addressed. To reiterate some of those points with regard to my experience......

Upon removing the binocular from the box the first change that is easily noticed is the armor. Yes, the color is slightly different. It is a more subtle green tone. As Steve mentioned, all of then flashy "descriptors" are gone. The result is a binocular that looks much sleeker and "classy" for lack of a better word.

The second issue that immediately grabs your attention is the texture of the rubber armor. It is almost "smooth" without being slick to the touch. In other words it is very pleasing from a tactile standpoint. Once you pick it up you don't really want to put it down.

It is at this point that you want to put it up to your eyes but you are a bit afraid that the image won't live up to your performance preference.

The good news is that the optical performance is still there...and maybe then some. I say this for a few reasons. One, no, none of the major optical components have changed to my knowledge. The dielectric prism coating has been upgraded and the outer antireflective coating have been changed so there may be a slight increase in overall performance because of it. The glass itself has not changed though so do not expect a huge jump in performance level.

Optically the two areas where I do notice the difference from the ED2 is in the color rendition and in the apparent field of view. Again, as Steve mentioned, the color representation went from a relatively warm tone (slight yellow/red) to a cold one (blue/green). The color representation almost seems to be a bit of a "hybrid" Zeiss/Leica. Overall the color seems Zeiss in nature. However, I do remember using the Ultravids on a few occasions and almost feeling like they were "too bright" in certain situations. I get the same impression from the ED3. The colder color representation certainly gives the impression of a brighter overall image. It also give the impression of slightly greater detail. Direct resolution comparisons between the ED2 and ED3 though do not reveal any measurable difference.

I also mentioned the apparent field of view. Though the true field of view has not changed there does appear to be less field curvature in the image. As a result the apparent field of view "appears to be" larger in the ED3. Again, this is an impression because of the specific type and degree of edge distortion. Not the result of an increase in the true field of view.

Other notable changes worthy of mention....

Eye relief is definitely enhanced. With the eyecups now closer to the same level as the eyepiece surface there definitely is more usable eye relief. This was very noticeable to me after only a brief bit of use. With the ED2 I can have the eyecups fully collapsed and let my eyes scan around the entire image. When I attempt to do much the same thing with the ED3 I end up getting blackouts. I have to back the eyecups out about a half a turn before the blackouts disappear completely. I will probably do a little digging for some rubber o-rings to stick inside the eyecups.

Two, the focusing knob and focusing speed are definitely improved. The texture of the ED3 focusing knob is definitely better. Thank you to whichever forum member suggested it. It gives much better traction and therefore better control of the focus. When you add that to the faster focusing speed then you get a much better focusing design. Admittedly, I do occasionally overshoot perfect focus because the focusing speed is so much faster. But, after repeated use, one becomes accustomed to the new design.

So, the question then whether this "ED3" is only a minor upgrade to the "old" design or if it is really a major upgrade should be posed. I don't have an opinion on it at this point. Just when I think the ED3 is a serious upgrade I pick up the ED2 and am reminded by how a warmer color bias can still be attractive for different reasons. I am also reminded of how a slightly slower focus can give the user more of a sense of control.

I am going to have to give it a bit more time before I draw any definite conclusions.

[mayoayo]

Frank...Is there any improvement or changes in the way the binocular handles glare or inner reflections,due to the difference in coatings?..the Original ZEN ED 8x43 suffered from a bit of glare..was this addressed in the ED2 version,or improved in the ED3?