[308CAL]

I can get the zeiss new for about 350$ less.....i am intrigued by the EDG and its flat field though....basically like getting a swarovision in 7x42....

I dont like leica focus so they are out

Has anyone compared these 2?

Henry?

[steve@37n84w]

Originally Posted by 308CAL

I can get the zeiss new for about 350$ less.....i am intrigued by the EDG and its flat field though....basically like getting a swarovision in 7x42....

I dont like leica focus so they are out

Has anyone compared these 2?

Henry?

I have briefly looked through a friend's 7x42FL and was very impressed.View was very similar to my 8x42FL the obvious difference being the larger FOV in the 7x.

If you want a flatter field of view in a 7x roof I highly recommend the 7x EDG. I have the original open bridge 7x42EDG and it is my favorite roof prism. I use my binos a lot for astronomy and when I want a 7x at night I often use my EDG in lieu of my 7x50 IF-SP. The 7x50 IF-SP (Prostar) is the reference standard for flatness of field and the EDG is almost as good at the edges which is saying a lot.

While being sharp to the edges is very important for star gazing because tiny out of focus stars against a very dark background are so obvious I don't find a flat FOV paramount for field use. I use my EDG for daytime use in the field for it's great ergonomics, color fidelity, etc. not for it's flat FOV. When in the field and something of interest enters the outer edge of the FOV I naturally shift my view to "center it up".

If I truly needed a flat FOV I would pay more the EDG; however, if only for hunting/birding use in the field I would save some money and go with the 7xFL.

Steve

[typo]

Henry,

I was able to try the Leica, Zeiss and EDG 7x42s at a bird fair in August. Not side by side but in fairly quick succession from similar vantage points over water, reed beds etc..

My own choice would have been the EDG for a couple of reasons. Due to whatever trick they manage with the field flattener, the EDG delivered a much greater proportion of the field of view in focus than the other two. The whole field from about 30ft-200yds from some viewing angles. With the other two there were peripheral patches which were somewhat fuzzy by comparison. I'm not normally concerned by fuzzy edges, and even prefer a bit of field curvature. With the EDG 7x42 I'm a convert. I much preferred it to the EDG 8x and the Swaro 8.5 where I found the blurring at points in the middle ground quite distracting.

The conditions were very bright, with a lot of glare. With the Zeiss and Leica, the colours appeared to fade a little beyond about 50 yards due to the conditions. The Nikons held the colour brightness to a much greater distance. At close range the Nikon's colour seemed more vivid than the other two. Perhaps not quite natural, but enjoyable all the same.

For some reason, the Nikon seemed a lot heavier than the other two. I was surprised to see it was only a 1-2oz when I read the specs. Maybe it's just that I needed to flex my hands further with the more parallel tubes.

Hope it helps.

David