Nikon Action EX 7x35 vs. Zen Ray 7x36 ED2 (1 Viewer)

[looksharp65]

Silly as it may sound, my question is sincere. I am not intending to make some kind of weird fun. So please read on. I would appreciate comments from those of you that have tried both of these in real birding.

First of all, as you can read in my signature, I own a bunch of bins. My Zeiss was a heritage from my father after he passed away. Together with my Minox I consider these two as my primary birding binoculars, and their views are roughly equal.
I bought my Minox 8x33 about half a year ago and it is very bright, contrasty, sharp, and last-but-not-least, absolutely colour-neutral. It is compact, light and very handsome. The field of view is not bad either.

However, I am looking for a 7x35ish or 7x4x-ish bin in order to have a larger DOF and exit pupil. My IOR 7x40 showed an extremely yellow tint, that also (together with the lack of multicoated lenses) minimized the advantage of its 5.7 mm exit pupil. (The IF was not really an issue, however.)

The reason I want to compare the Nikon and the Zen-Ray is that they optically share the same configuration along with a huge AFOV.
I do understand that the ZR is near state of the art, but porros in general can hold their own. Not needing to coat the prism for reflections or phase-correction is one advantage. By construction they also have greater light transmission compared to a RP bin of equal quality. Their 3D-view is also considered far better.

I would prefer to keep my Minox 8x33 as standard bin and use the 7x35/7x36 in woodland or for lending to friends. But I might consider the ZR as my standard, should it be considerably better than my Minox.

How much view (if any?) do I sacrifice by picking the Nikon and not the Zen-Ray?

 

[Martin Fagg]

Hi,
I haven't looked through the ZR but I did try the Nikon at a shop last week and was very impressed. They had a very large sweetspot and were pinsharp inside the sweetspot and were colour neutral to my eye.
The only way they were lacking was that I couldn't see any greater depth of field compared to my Bushnell Legend 8x42 porros. A bit odd as I thought one of the advantages of 7x was greater depth of field. I would like to try the Nikons in woodland to really test this properly. The depth of field is more apparent in woods, I find, as is the 3D effect.

In short, for their price i think they are excellent. Bit I will say that I tried them on a nice clear sunny day so I don't know what they're like in poor light conditions but I wouldn't expect them to be poor. I'm sure they can hold their own. I may buy a pair myself soon.

They are also a lot less expensive than the ZRs and I found they have great eye relief for my glasses.

I have read on BF somewhere that the ZRs have a porro-like 3D effect, by the way.

Best wishes
Martin

 

[looksharp65]

The close focus of the Nikon is a real disappointment and may be the deal breaker. 5 meters close focus could mean they would be unusable at times.

The distance between the front lenses of a traditional porro bin enhances the 3D experience. However it also causes the area of their joint view to diminish - close objects appear near the right edge of the left tube end vice versa. To an extent, this may be overcome by adjusting the IPD.
Still it causes some eye strain due to the forced convergence of the eyeballs.

Another peculiar result from this is that this convergence seemingly changes the magnification!
I have made a test that included an 8x30 RP, an 8x30 PP and my Nikon 6x15 reversed porro. At 4-5 meters viewing distance, the RP's (perceived) magnification was noticeably greater than the PP's. And subsequently, the built-in convergence of the reversed porro caused the perceived magnification to be similar to the 8x30 PP!

Note that this was perceived exclusively on short or very short distance. At longer distance, the convergence is zero and does not affect the perceived magnification.

This is quite well-known amongst optometrists.
I have not been able to find the correct terminology for this phenomenon, so let's call it "physiological micropsia/macropsia".
Putting prisms in front of the eyes, thereby forcing them to converge or diverge, causes the perceived magnification to change.

 

[tpcollins]

I can offer this tidbit. I got a pair of 8x32 non-HD Leupold Gold Rings last Thursday (my 4th binoc I've had home) and today my 5th one arrived - a Zen Ray 7x36 EDII. (The first 3 binocs went back and I was looking to return the Leupold but the only fault I had with it was the 27oz heft).

Out of the box the first thing I noticed was how looong the Zens were - that's why I've been reluctant to order them. Comparing them side by side, the Zen's 477' FoV is smaller than the Leupold's 420' - go figure. There is much more edge distortion, and although it has a gradual focus, once it stops there is some play in the knob which I really find annoying. The only plus for the Zen is it's lighter, and may be a tiny bit brighter in the center view due to it's 1mm+ larger exit pupil.

I''m keeping the 8x32 Leupold @ $339 and returning the Zens.

 

[looksharp65]

@tpcollins:

Thanks! Any information on the Zen is welcome. Nice to know you are satisfied with your Leupold. I imagine it is equal to my Minox, but with a slightly larger FOV. It seems as this model is discontinued, from what I can read at Leupold's website.

Still waiting for replies on the original subject, the Action EX vs the Zen, and also on porros vs roofs.

 

[Martin Fagg]

The close focus of the Nikon is a real disappointment and may be the deal breaker. 5 meters close focus could mean they would be unusable at times.

I have read a review that said that the close focus was nearer ten feet (I think it was Kevin Purcell's review here on BF). I have noticed that close focus specifications are often wrong. I think it is dependant on your eye as much as the bins so always worth testing for yourself.
How often do you focus on birds that close anyway? I seldom do so close focus has never been a deciding factor on buying a bin or not. I guess it depends what type of birding you do or whether you want to watch insects.

The distance between the front lenses of a traditional porro bin enhances the 3D experience. However it also causes the area of their joint view to diminish - close objects appear near the right edge of the left tube end vice versa. To an extent, this may be overcome by adjusting the IPD.
Still it causes some eye strain due to the forced convergence of the eyeballs.
Unfortunately, this comes with the 3D effect, as you say, and you can't have one without the other, as far as I've seen. Whether this is acceptable depends on the distance of what you're looking at, I guess. That is, again, what type of birding you are doing.

Another peculiar result from this is that this convergence seemingly changes the magnification!
I have made a test that included an 8x30 RP, an 8x30 PP and my Nikon 6x15 reversed porro. At 4-5 meters viewing distance, the RP's (perceived) magnification was noticeably greater than the PP's. And subsequently, the built-in convergence of the reversed porro caused the perceived magnification to be similar to the 8x30 PP!

Note that this was perceived exclusively on short or very short distance. At longer distance, the convergence is zero and does not affect the perceived magnification.

This is quite well-known amongst optometrists.
I have not been able to find the correct terminology for this phenomenon, so let's call it "physiological micropsia/macropsia".
Putting prisms in front of the eyes, thereby forcing them to converge or diverge, causes the perceived magnification to change.

You're right, porros of the same magnification do seem to have a smaller image than roofs. It's odd but, in use, I don't find it a problem. It's just a quirk that comes along with the sense of 3D. I can still ID and enjoy watching a bird even though it looks smaller. I quite like the way it makes the fov seem bigger, that is, it seems like there is more room around the bird, if you see what I mean.

Hi Looksharp,

The joys/tribulations of binoculars: you can't have it all in one binocular. Hence discussions like this and the keeping of (sometimes huge) collections of optics. By some at least (you know who you are!

Best wishes
Martin

 

[looksharp65]

Thank you very much, Martin!
Like I wrote before, my 8x33 will continue being my primary bin. But on occasions like walks in the forest and parks, I would prefer a smaller magnification in combination with a huge FOV. If there were any 6x bin, or even 5x (!) meeting my demands it might be of interest as well, but I found none this far.

At times I have watched birds as close as 2 meters away with my Minox. I doubt that this would have been possible with any ordinary porro bin, not only because of the close focus ability, but more so because of the "built-in divergence" that diminishes the area of the binocular view like I described earlier.(binocular in physiological meaning, not the optic tool)

For very long-distance viewing and/or with high magnification, the constructions are equal when it comes to 3D-perception. Mid-distance will be decidedly advantageous with a porro bin in this respect. Close viewing goes to roofs, and very close viewing will be best with a reversed porro thanks to its built-in convergence.

Anyway, I am tempted to test the Nikon. Like you wrote, close focus is partly a matter of accommodation. Worst-case scenario would be that I get forced to hand it over to my son. "Minor threat", since it can be had for peanuts

 

[Martin Fagg]

Peanuts indeed! They are only £89.99 here

http://www.uttings.co.uk/Category/505/binoculars/?frombrand=0&manuf=161&series=0&rows=48&sort=Sequence&setviewtype=List&price_min=Any&price_max=Any

The cheapest I could find

 

[looksharp65]

£90! Amazing...
From what I have read from your posts it seems we are alike - indecision is our partner for life. Not only that I have two alternatives of very different pricing, now I found another contender, a real rookie in fact:

Vortex Fury 6.5x32

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-fury-6-5x32-binocular

Seems to me it lacks only one thing - a huge AFOV. In this model it is 55 degrees but I think it is a reasonable trade-off considering its other features, including the attractive pricing. The TFOV of 148 m/1000 m is very appealing and the build quality is considered very fine.
I can bet Meopta's Meopro is the same bin in slightly different clothes.

"When I get rich" I might get the Meostar 7x42 that also has a slightly limited AFOV, but still is highly praised.

 

[Martin Fagg]

£90! Amazing...
From what I have read from your posts it seems we are alike - indecision is our partner for life. Not only that I have two alternatives of very different pricing, now I found another contender, a real rookie in fact:

Vortex Fury 6.5x32

http://www.vortexoptics.com/product/vortex-fury-6-5x32-binocular

Seems to me it lacks only one thing - a huge AFOV. In this model it is 55 degrees but I think it is a reasonable trade-off considering its other features, including the attractive pricing. The TFOV of 148 m/1000 m is very appealing and the build quality is considered very fine.
I can bet Meopta's Meopro is the same bin in slightly different clothes.

"When I get rich" I might get the Meostar 7x42 that also has a slightly limited AFOV, but still is highly praised.

Viking Optical sell a 6.5x32 bin as well. Maybe the same bin with a different brand on it, perhaps?
There is also a Minox 6.5x32.
And the Vortex Raptor porro 6.5x32. Or the Leupold Yosemite 6x32 porro.

The Meostar 7x42 is one that I have been wanting to try for a long time. The fov is 7.8 degrees so pretty good really. Like you, it's a "when I'm rich" bin for me. I should buy lottery tickets more often!
I have the 8x32 Meostar which is excellent (but I'm going to sell it because I decided I prefer full size bins). From my experience of the 8x32, I think the 7x42s will be fantastic.

 

[looksharp65]

Viking Optical sell a 6.5x32 bin as well. Maybe the same bin with a different brand on it, perhaps?
There is also a Minox 6.5x32.
And the Vortex Raptor porro 6.5x32. Or the Leupold Yosemite 6x32 porro.

From the measures and specs, the Viking seems to be another species. The Yosemite is a little gem, or rather some of them are. From other threads here I have understood the sample variation is significant.
I like the Minox - I am a Minox fan - but will not cope with the IF.

The Meostar 7x42 is one that I have been wanting to try for a long time. The fov is 7.8 degrees so pretty good really. Like you, it's a "when I'm rich" bin for me. I should buy lottery tickets more often!
I have the 8x32 Meostar which is excellent (but I'm going to sell it because I decided I prefer full size bins). From my experience of the 8x32, I think the 7x42s will be fantastic.

In many respects it surely is fantastic, but the restricted FOV is a major drawback. Also one heck of a mill-stone to carry around for a day. Guess it has to be carefully tested before buy.
Have you tried the Minox HG 8x33? If so, do you consider it inferior to the Meostar you own?

 

[Martin Fagg]

Ah, I didn't know the Minox are IF. Never tried any Ifs but they don't appeal. There is a device to turn IFs into Cfs but the name ascapes me at the moment. It surely can't be as good as proper CFs though?

Do you think 7.8 degrees is restrictive? The top gun 7x42s all seem to be 8 degrees, apart from the Zeiss FLs at 8.5 degs, so the Meoptas aren't far from them. 7x42s in the mid-price point all seem to be 7 degrees. That's restrictive, I don't like the narrowness of 8x bins with 7 deg fov. I haven't tried 7x 7 deg bins but I imagine that they are like looking down a gun barrel.

As for the weight of the 7x42 Meostar, I always used to consider light weight important in selecting my bins but now I actually prefer something with a bit of heft. They are easier to hold steady. I use a harness if I'm carrying heavy bins for long. It's actually more comfortable than light bins on a neck strap, I think.

I've never tried the Minox HG 8x33s so I don't know how they compare with the Meostar 8x32s.

 

[looksharp65]

Do you think 7.8 degrees is restrictive? The top gun 7x42s all seem to be 8 degrees, apart from the Zeiss FLs at 8.5 degs, so the Meoptas aren't far from them. 7x42s in the mid-price point all seem to be 7 degrees. That's restrictive, I don't like the narrowness of 8x bins with 7 deg fov. I haven't tried 7x 7 deg bins but I imagine that they are like looking down a gun barrel.

Martin, according to Meopta's own website the 7x42 has a TFOV of 137 m/1000m which is almost identical to the 138 m of your 8x32. (with >62 degrees AFOV). The Zeiss FL has 150 meters referring to Zeiss' own website...The Ultravid has only 140 m.

I don't like the narrowness of 8x bins with 7 deg fov.

8x 7 means a AFOV of 56 degrees, like the Meopta 7x42, how comes you can cope with it easier in a 7x bin?

The Meostar is not astronomically pricey, either. But it is expensive enough to have to pass many needle's eyes before a purchase.
That said, it might still be the most ideal bin anyone could ever ask for. I yearn for the day I can see the first light through one.
But after all, the Zen-Ray 7x36 has its extremely generous FOV. Back where I began...
I like great AFOV but I think I will hit the "Buy" button on the Fury.

Very sorry about the many edits, folks. This is the final version!

 

[Kevin Purcell]

I've reviewed the Nikon ATB EX 7x36 to the ZR 7x36 ED2 in another thread (searching is good ).

My Nikon ATB EX 7x36 have a close focus of < 3m (not 5m) but that's more than the ZR < 2m. You could butterfly with the ZR but not with the Nikon.

The Nikon ATB EX 7x36 have more effective ER. I can easily see the whole FOV with the Nikon wearing glasses not so the .

The magnification "roof illusion" (mentioned above and on other threads) is quite noticeable between the two: the ZR "appears" to have more magnification.

CA control is much, much better in the ZR with both ED objectives and LaK in the oculars. They look sharper in normal use.

Both have "fuzzyish" edges: in both it's all field curvature. The Nikon has more "distortion" than the ZR.

Contrast is much better in the ZR. The Nikon coatings are not the top of the line coatings and I can see the black's aren't quite black (there is some diffuse stray light).

I can't recall about glare performance of both but the current ZR is good but I talked about it on previous threads.

Nikon is more bulky (it's a porro) but it isn't a "flat" porro but the prisms/objectives are canted at about 45 degrees so it fits in the hand well. I've written more about this in another thread.

The Nikon is quite a bit heavier than the ZR. You notice the difference.

Nikon warranty is 25 year $20 fixes it even if you broke it. The ZR is lifetime for manufacturing defects.

The Nikon is much cheaper (by a factor of almost 4x with the current discounts). So it's not quite an Apples to Apples shoot out.

The Nikon is a great "old school" starter bin: wide field, 7x, waterproof (as porros get), good ER, easy to hold. It was the Cornell recommended entry bin for the last couple of tests. And I concur with that.

But the ZR 7x36 is clearly a step up (and a step in-between the Nikon and the Zeiss 7x42FL). It's a good bin and best at dealing with glare (with the version 2 fixes) of all the "Chinese ED bins".

I'm finding that the 7x36 is an excellent bin for urban/woodland birding with a useful set of compromises for my usage. And rather good for all around use and behavior watching (as are all 7x bins).

I was using a ZR 7x36 during the July 4th weekend in Central Oregon (high desert ... scrubland and farm land with plenty of raptors in flight). I rather prefer lower magnification bins for raptor watching too -- knowledge is more useful than magnification if you have "Hawks in Flight". And got three new life birds with it. A few times Canon IS 10x30 was handy too but you can really see the heat haze in a 10x

 

[looksharp65]

Thanks a lot, Kevin!

Yes, I have tried to search here and through Google, but I wasn't using "ATB EX" as a search term, but "Action Extreme", thus failing to produce the desired search results.

It is clear that the Nikon's view is inferior to the ZR's. No wonder considering its price. There are some folks here that are not overly impressed by the ZR however, and at the moment I am not ready to pay $555 which will be the final after tax and duty.

So I have made up my mind on the Vortex Fury 6,5x32 which will be some $375 for me. The retailing company has a nice return policy so I will not jeopardize anything.

 

[Martin Fagg]

Thanks a lot, Kevin!

Yes, I have tried to search here and through Google, but I wasn't using "ATB EX" as a search term, but "Action Extreme", thus failing to produce the desired search results.

It is clear that the Nikon's view is inferior to the ZR's. No wonder considering its price. There are some folks here that are not overly impressed by the ZR however, and at the moment I am not ready to pay $555 which will be the final after tax and duty.

So I have made up my mind on the Vortex Fury 6,5x32 which will be some $375 for me. The retailing company has a nice return policy so I will not jeopardize anything.

Hi Looksharp,

I got a look through another pair of Action EX 7x35s again today and they were no where near as good as the last pair I tried. So I think sample variation must be quite high. This pair had a very rapid and severe fall of image outside of a small sweetspot.

If you do ever buy a pair, try before you buy or be fully prepared to send them back.

Best wishes
Martin

 

[looksharp65]

Hi Looksharp,

I got a look through another pair of Action EX 7x35s again today and they were no where near as good as the last pair I tried. So I think sample variation must be quite high. This pair had a very rapid and severe fall of image outside of a small sweetspot.

If you do ever buy a pair, try before you buy or be fully prepared to send them back.

Best wishes
Martin

Wow,
sort of good news for me; I will not have to live in doubt about the Fury.
It seems as high sample variation comes with cheap price, and maybe it's a more significant property than the specifications or features are.
Today I am selling my IOR 7x40 and couple of other bins that are useless to me. I will share my impressions of the Fury later on.

Kind regards

L

 

[NWBirder]

Thanks a lot, Kevin!

Yes, I have tried to search here and through Google, but I wasn't using "ATB EX" as a search term, but "Action Extreme", thus failing to produce the desired search results.

It is clear that the Nikon's view is inferior to the ZR's. No wonder considering its price. There are some folks here that are not overly impressed by the ZR however, and at the moment I am not ready to pay $555 which will be the final after tax and duty.

So I have made up my mind on the Vortex Fury 6,5x32 which will be some $375 for me. The retailing company has a nice return policy so I will not jeopardize anything.

To get close to ZEN ED2's quality, you will have to get Vortex Razor. But sometimes, the mid-price binoculars should just do the job with slight sacrifice of performance.

 

[looksharp65]

To get close to ZEN ED2's quality, you will have to get Vortex Razor. But sometimes, the mid-price binoculars should just do the job with slight sacrifice of performance.

Of this I am fully aware. There is no Razor in this configuration and the Viper is narrower. Like I wrote in the OP, I just want to make a complementary to my little 8x33 rather than exchanging it.

I live half a mile from the coast so my 10x is also in use quite often, for distant plovers and snipes.
In one of my early threads I was asking for suggestions about a "last" bin of 10-12x50-56. Maybe that will happen, we have prolonged dusk hours up here in the North because the sun hits the horizon from a shallower angle. Anyway, the expense, heft and bulk may not be worth it after all.

In the long run I can possibly see myself using only a 7x42 (Sw,Me,Zs?) together with a 10x44ish, but for now I am into testing. With this current set I can always lend a bin to my son or a girlfriend.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

The Meopta 7x42 is another one to look at if you go that route.

It's a shame there aren't more 7x36ish roofs.

It's a very useful format especially for the multiple bin owner (like yourself ... pick the "right" bin for the task/habitat). Though for close to dusk/twilight (especially in winter) or owling a 7x42 be useful I often feel it's a bit of overkill.