[Steve C]

OK, not really a review yet . I will however post more as I use these more. These are the 10x42 and have a 6.4* fov.

This comes in the standard black ZR looking box, but is clearly labeled Prime HD. Same green color as the ED 2 & 3. It has a softer textured rubber armor and...PRAISE THE LORD... no thumb indents, I hate those things (and I do realize that I may well be in the miniority here )! It has a different style bag from the ED's, nice sized, big enough to not have to cram on the binocular to fit it back in the bag with eyecups extended. It is about the same color green as the binocular. Made from ballistic nylon with a fold over the top flap with latch.

This focuses counterclockwise to infinity. There is 1.5 turns with plenty of room past infinity. Close focus looks like about 6 feet. The focus knob is as good as any binocular I have tried. Soft, smooth, buttery slick, and there is NO slack in this one, NONE, not even a little bit. More on focus distances later.

This is a larger diameter in barrel cross section than the previous ZEN ED variants. I can wrap my thumb and middlefinger around those, but not the Prime. Overall it will remind us of the ZRS HD, and is noticeably shorter than the ED series, but still a fairly large binocular. Larger than the prototypes I saw, but those were naked.

This is going to reignite the alpha view vs the less than alpha $$$ view all over again. I don't see where it is real possible to cram much more useful "stuff" into an image than what there is here. This is a bright binocular, brighter than the ED 3. It is very similar in color bias, so I tend to think it is due to an increase in light transmission compared to the ED 3.

ZR looks to have achieved their goal of considerably improving the edge and flattening the field when compared to the ED 3 binoculars. There is 2% pincushion here in the 10x. I was thinking I might get the "rolling ball" here, but for whatever reason I don't. The image is most similar to the Swarovski SLC-HD in terms of sharpness, brightness, contrast, and tone. However, I will have to bend some effort in the days to come to get some side by sides set up.

Brief looks tell me this is about as much better than the ED 2-3 than what I could tell as a difference between the ED 2-3 and the alphas. As I said above, the sweet spot is very much noticeably wider with the Prime vs the ED 2-3. The edge is very much improved, but not quite with the Swarovision. The improvement is mainly wit the size of the sweet spot nad edges. There is a little improvement in centerfield sharpness, but not a lot by any means.

The only downside I can see right off is the diameter of the ocular and the resultant large diameter eye cups. They are the same size as the Kruger Caldera and may be problematic for some.

Anyway, there is the first installment, more to come.

EDIT to add: I would be remiss to fail to point out that there seems to be a fairly significant improvement in overall "feel and quality" with the Prime vs the ED series.

[FrankD]

My Primes have arrived as well

[Newbflat]

Originally Posted by Steve C

EDIT to add: I would be remiss to fail to point out that there seems to be a fairly significant improvement in overall "feel and quality" with the Prime vs the ED series.

Sweet!...

[eitanaltman]

Originally Posted by FrankD

My Primes have arrived as well

wow, you can really see it in the photo -- those are some BIG oculars!

[Kammerdiner]

Interesting. When we first saw CGI versions of the Prime I wondered about the size of those eyecups. They are BIG.

The SV ocular is maybe 24-25mm across but those look even bigger! The SV eyecup is around 40mm across. Care to measure?

As understated as the bins are, the case looks a bit like something your kids would put their Gameboy in.

Anyway, we all look forward to your thoughts!

Mark

[stereotruckdriver]

Originally Posted by eitanaltman

wow, you can really see it in the photo -- those are some BIG oculars!

I like! Can't wait to here more! No, i can't wait to get my hands on them! :-)

[FrankD]

Ok, I just spent the last half hour out on the patio with the Prime HDs, the ZR 7x43s and the Vixen Foresta 7x50s. Both of the latter two binoculars have served as a form of reference standard for me for roof prism and porros prism binoculars respectively. I will get a comparison a bit later after I give my initial impressions of the Prime HD.

I didn't read Steve's post yet so some of this may be redundant. Upon opening the box and removing the binocular my first thoughts were "heavier than expected" and "nice armor". Surprisingly the smell of the binocular was the second thing to register on my senses. It is sort of funny how we take our sense of smell for granted. Smells stick with us long after the experience itself has faded. Smelling these binoculars reminds me of both the Meopta and the Swarovski SLC Neu series. They have that odor to the armor. Different from previous ZR models.

Focusing is counterclockwise (to the dismay of some) from close focus to infinity. I believe this is contrary to what was originally posted. The focusing speed is very close to ideal. It feels slightly slower than the ED3s but faster than the ED2s. From a nitpicky perspective I think I would prefer another 1/4 turn to the speed. Focusing tension is excellent. No slop, no backlash and excellent resistance. The overall feel is also enhanced by the texture of the knob itself. It has a similar series of small bumps in a checkerboard like pattern in comparison to the ED3s. I can feel them grab a bit on the tip of my finger as I work the focusing knob. I doubt my fingers will slip on it even under wet conditions.

Ok, on to what everyone wants to hear...the view. I think this is what everyone has been expecting from Zen Ray. The centerfield apparent sharpness that is often praised on the ED3s has now been extended over a much larger portion of the image. If I had to rate the ED3s that I have in possession at 65-70% sharp from the center then I would have to rate the Prime HDs at sharp out to at least 90% of the field but probably closer to 95%. It is impressive and makes the image feel very natural. One caveat to that though.... as I have heard in reference to some other models there is an area of excellent apparent sharpness through the center 2/3rds of the image followed by a very narrow band that seems to lose a very slight amount of apparent sharpness under close inspection. The last 5-10% of the image seems just as sharp as the center.
I want to bring up color fringing here because it seems tied in to the various levels of performance throughout the full field of view. In the center 85-90% of the image CA is wonderfully well controlled. I certainly cannot see it and I am moderately susceptible to it. The outer 5-10% does exhibit a mild level of CA. This seems tied into the area that is "back in focus" with the center of the field.

Apparent brightness anc apparent contrast are excellent. Certainly as good as the ED3 series. From talking to Charles I believe the average measured light transmission level is 89%. Going by memory of other light transmission tests (prior to All Binos) I believe that puts it on par with the original Swarovski EL and the Leica Ultravid but just behind the Zeiss FL.

Color representation appears entirely neutral at first glance and even after extended use. It isn't until I compare it to the Vixen Foresta porro that I note a slight "blue-green" coloration to the image. The Vixen is what I would call neutral (white) to every so slightly warm (extremely mild red) so it stands as a good reference when looking to compare color "biases".

The field of view is fairly flat. Pincushion distorition has been added to help rectify any rolling ball issues associated with the dual field flattener elements. I can see the distortion when panning up and down but not left to right.

Apparent sharpness is first rate. In both handholding and resting the binocular I can see extremely fine detail on just about everything I look at. The image is anything but "soft". Close focus appears to be about five feet.

All I can think of for now. I will post more as time allows.

[stereotruckdriver]

Need more photo's guy's! And hopefully since i didn't get the e-mail maybe i will get my hands on them in a wk or two?!!!

[FrankD]

Ocular lens diameter is between 25 and 26 mm. Total eyecup diameter is 45 or 46 mm.

[FrankD]

3 way comparison

[FrankD]

Ocular lens comparison

[FrankD]

Eyecups extended...nice, solid feel to the extension

[FrankD]

Bottom shot...as Steve mentioned...no thumb indents

[FrankD]

Objective pic

[FrankD]

Ocular lenses again...last pic

[Kammerdiner]

Wow, I didn't think they'd be that compact! The ED2/3 is much bigger.

I better go out for a steak and drinks before I place an order.

Mark

[jgraider]

Originally Posted by stereotruckdriver

I like! Can't wait to here more! No, i can't wait to get my hands on them! :-)

Reminds me of the Leupold GR HD's eyecups from the pics. I loved 'em!

[Steve C]

They are pretty compact, but be prepared they are definitely fatter through the barrels than the ED series. They have a unique ergonomic presence.

Eye relief may prove an issue for glass wearers. I can't see the whole fov on these 10x wearing sunglasses. The lens is recessed 3.89 mm below a rim around the lens and the total distance on extension seems to be about 13 mm.

Overall very nice feel. However they will definitely appeal more to those with large hands.

My camera battery was dead and is charging, but Frank's photos show the Prime pretty well. I'll side by side some photos of some other binoculars I have alongside the Prime.

What Frank and I have are more or less final pre production runs and the final run will likely be a little better.

Looking a little closer it seems that there may be some room for a more rounded eye cup with maybe a little smaller diameter.

There does not seem much I'd want to change here. I do have the idea I'll stick with 8x here, but won't know that till I see one. That will take some time.

[stereotruckdriver]

Originally Posted by jgraider

Reminds me of the Leupold GR HD's eyecups from the pics. I loved 'em!

Yep, same here!

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by jgraider

Reminds me of the Leupold GR HD's eyecups from the pics. I loved 'em!

Actually these are quite similar to a shorter, lighter Leupold Gold Ring come to think of it.

[Newbflat]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Eye relief may prove an issue for glass wearers. I can't see the whole fov on these 10x wearing sunglasses. The lens is recessed 3.89 mm below a rim around the lens and the total distance on extension seems to be about 13 mm.
.

This is a real bummer for me.. I put in an order for these in big part because of the advertised 20mm eye relief....

Any more observations/ thoughts about that would be helpful...

Bill...

[NWBirder]

Originally Posted by FrankD

Ocular lens diameter is between 25 and 26 mm. Total eyecup diameter is 45 or 46 mm.

Is 25-26mm exposed ocular lens diameter on your 8x?

[huntabsarokee]

Frank

Do you have a way to weigh them? Thanks!

[FrankD]

Originally Posted by NWBirder

Is 25-26mm exposed ocular lens diameter on your 8x?

Yes

[FrankD]

Originally Posted by huntabsarokee

Frank

Do you have a way to weigh them? Thanks!

Not unless they have an app for that. :-)

Steve usually has a scale to use.