Product Review: The Nikon EII 10 x 35. (1 Viewer)

[Dipperdapper]

Evening all,

Please find a link to my latest review of the Nikon E II 10x 35

Product Review: The Nikon EII 10 x 35. | Neil English.net

I hope you find it of interest!

With best wishes,

Neil.

 

[Paultricounty]

Evening all,

Please find a link to my latest review of the Nikon E II 10x 35

Product Review: The Nikon EII 10 x 35. | Neil English.net

I hope you find it of interest!

With best wishes,

Neil.
View attachment 1514319

Another phenomenal in-depth detailed review. Love it 😊.

Paul

 

[Dipperdapper]

Thanks Paul, glad you enjoyed it!

With best wishes,

Neil.

 

[Maximc1]

Has anyone found the 14mm stated eye relief of the 10x35 EII's to be sufficient to allow the entire FOV to be seen while wearing eye glasses?

I've often found that actual usable eye relief varies from one manufacturer to another for the same stated eye relief. For example, I can easily see the entire field in a Leica binocular having a stated eye relief of 16mm yet can just just barely do so in a Swarovski binocular with 19mm of stated eye relief.

 

[Dipperdapper]

Has anyone found the 14mm stated eye relief of the 10x35 EII's to be sufficient to allow the entire FOV to be seen while wearing eye glasses?

Yes you can, but it's a tight squeeze with ordinary glasses.

 

[Scott98]

Neil - excellent review! It covers some things I didn't think about - the stiffness on the diopter setting for example, I notice it stays put better than earlier E's. The E2 really is a pleasing evolution over the older ones in many different ways. I think the edge definition is better with the 10x35 E2 vs. the E-C version in addition to being wider. And somehow the eye placement is easier and more accomodating too.

I took them out yesterday and compared with my 10x56 Swaro SLC's in bright daylight. I think these are very high transmission because I could barely detect any increase in brightness with the SLC. I'm guessing the transmission of the new E2's is among the highest available these days.

I wouldn't hesitate to say the 10x35 E2 is the best value binocular of any of the ones I've used recently. I want to check out that 7.3 degree FOV - the 7x35 E's are also 7.3, I'm going to go check them now and see which one is bigger.

 

[MSP1LT]

Has anyone found the 14mm stated eye relief of the 10x35 EII's to be sufficient to allow the entire FOV to be seen while wearing eye glasses?

I've often found that actual usable eye relief varies from one manufacturer to another for the same stated eye relief. For example, I can easily see the entire field in a Leica binocular having a stated eye relief of 16mm yet can just just barely do so in a Swarovski binocular with 19mm of stated eye relief.

I have the 8x30 EII and, as an eyeglass wearer, find the eye relief not suitable at all for me. Others, I'm sure, will have different opinions, but for me the EII doesn't work well.

 

[Paultricounty]

Neil - excellent review! It covers some things I didn't think about - the stiffness on the diopter setting for example, I notice it stays put better than earlier E's. The E2 really is a pleasing evolution over the older ones in many different ways. I think the edge definition is better with the 10x35 E2 vs. the E-C version in addition to being wider. And somehow the eye placement is easier and more accomodating too.

I took them out yesterday and compared with my 10x56 Swaro SLC's in bright daylight. I think these are very high transmission because I could barely detect any increase in brightness with the SLC. I'm guessing the transmission of the new E2's is among the highest available these days.

I don’t think that should be surprising and would probably hold true with any larger objective size in bright daylight because of the individuals contracted exit pupal during bright conditions. Assuming similar quality optics, I don’t see my 7x50‘s being any brighterthan my 8x or 10x 32’s in bright daylight conditions. But as soon as those clouds roll in , or the sun is very low, then the difference jumps out.

I wouldn't hesitate to say the 10x35 E2 is the best value binocular of any of the ones I've used recently. I want to check out that 7.3 degree FOV - the 7x35 E's are also 7.3, I'm going to go check them now and see which one is bigger.

 

[Dipperdapper]

Dear Scott,

Many thanks indeed for the thumbs up.

The Nikon E II 10 x 35 is all the binocular I'd hoped for and more.

Regards,

Neil.

 

[albie...]

Has anyone found the 14mm stated eye relief of the 10x35 EII's to be sufficient to allow the entire FOV to be seen while wearing eye glasses?

I've often found that actual usable eye relief varies from one manufacturer to another for the same stated eye relief. For example, I can easily see the entire field in a Leica binocular having a stated eye relief of 16mm yet can just just barely do so in a Swarovski binocular with 19mm of stated eye relief.

I had both the 8x30 and the 10x35 Nikon E2's . 3-4 years ago I had to start wearing glasses for a few reasons , one of them being significant astigmatism . I ended up selling both E2's because with my glasses on I couldn't see the entire field of view with either E2 . There are some people out there that claim they can see the entire fov of either E2 with glasses on . I replaced both the E2's with the 8x42 Monarch HG . The Monarch HG's eye relief of 17.8 mm is just enough for me to see the entire field of view comfortably .
I do miss the E2's and considered them to be the best value of any binoculars I have ever owned although todays prices for either E2 is slowly pushing them out of the best value category .

 

[Scott98]

FWIW I checked the 7x35 E and 10x35E2 and the 7x35's true FOV was indeed a little bit larger, about what you'd expect from its 7.3 FOV versus the 7.0 in the 10x. Yes, the eye relief in a bit tight in the 10x35 E2 and also my 12x40 E. Long eye relief for glasses and the sealed body are probably the two advantages the expensive roofs have over the E's.

Looks like Mr. Weir was ready for anything with those knee-high boots! They would come in handy around here. Will have to check out his book.

 

[Scott98]

I don’t think that should be surprising and would probably hold true with any larger objective size in bright daylight because of the individuals contracted exit pupal during bright conditions. Assuming similar quality optics, I don’t see my 7x50‘s being any brighterthan my 8x or 10x 32’s in bright daylight conditions. But as soon as those clouds roll in , or the sun is very low, then the difference jumps out.

yes, agree, but the SLC's rock the transmission spec at 93%, so I figured if the E2's can keep up they're doing prety well. I don't think anyone's going to be left wanting with the contrast, brightness and sharpness of the E2's. That's where the real value is for the price point they're at. The only imperfection vs. the best roofs would be color correction, and once I got the diopter set correctly, it stopped bothering me, I rarely notice it. The contrast and clarity, the light weight for the 35mm aperture, and the ease of holding them are my favorite qualities.

 

[looksharp65]

3-4 years ago I had to start wearing glasses for a few reasons , one of them being significant astigmatism . I ended up selling both E2's because with my glasses on I couldn't see the entire field of view with either E2 . There are some people out there that claim they can see the entire fov of either E2 with glasses on .

When I first got my 8x30, I didn't have access to the best contact lenses like the ones I use nowadays.
So I made a pair of spectacles for the sole purpose of use with the E II. I chose a model in thin titanium, with a fairly wide space between the lenses, I ditched the nosepads and wrung the nose pad arms away so the front rests solely on the inner edges of the rim (the space between the lenses mustn't be too wide because the specs will rest too low then)

I adjusted (flattened) the angle between the lenses to zero and compensated at the corners so it would't be too wide. If I remember correctly, I also had to adjust the inclination to be more vertical and thus perpendicular to the temples. Pretty they aren't 🤓

I used standard lenses, which isn't the best choice when their position is so heavily modified. Vertex distance, front angle and inclination all affect performance, so ideally individualised single-vision lenses should be used. I can use these spectacles, but the view outside the binoculars feels a bit weird and distorted.
Bottom line: Yes it can be done, in particular if you're a myope.

//L

 

[Dipperdapper]

Good Point Looksharp65: where there's a will there's a way!

Scott:

I just got back in from a six mile trek up the Crow Road with the 10 x 35, a route linking our village of Fintry with Lennoxtown on the other side. I'm in training to do the West Highland Way, a 96-mile scenic trek from Milngavie outside Glasgow to Fort William in the Northwest Highlands. The light this evening was excellent, sunny, bright, with wonderful long-range visibility. I enjoyed spellbinding views of the hills leading out of the village, with the valley below and the hills soaring about 1000 feet into the sky. The combination of 10x in a lightweight(612g) Porro and that wonderful field of view was absolutely addicting! The stereoscopic views I experienced with this glass were just heaven sent; beyond describable really!

I was in two minds about which instrument to use on the up-and-coming trip; the 8x 30 EII or the 10 x 35, but my experiences glassing the hills this evening have helped me make my mind up. I will be using the 10 x 35.

An absolute powerhouse of ergonomics and optics!

That said, my wife has taken quite a shine to the little 8 x 30 EII, so we'll likely bring both anyway!

Pic of the hills leading up to the Crow Road I took last summer with a soaring Buzzard


Regards,

Neil.

 

[Holger Merlitz]

Nice review, Neil! Years ago I owned the 10x35 EII and I used it quite a lot for astronomy. Now that I got the Nikon WX there is no way I would use any other glass under the skies, but the EII was in fact a great performer in a small package.

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Dipperdapper]

Dear Holger,

Thanks for the heads up!

Great to hear of your positive astronomical experiences with the 10 x 35 EII.

Agreed on the WX; 9 degrees at 10x over a perfectly flat field I can only imagine is awe-inspiring!

Alas, this far north(56 degrees latitude), we have twilight until the end of July, so no true darkness. So for now, it serves as a 'sky darkening glass' lol but I still enjoy star fields around the brighter summer luminaries like Altair, Vega and Deneb. M13 in Hercules and the Coathanger in Vulpecula are also favourite targets too. If we get a chance to visit my relations down in Pembrokeshire South Wales over the summer, I might get a few hours of truly dark skies.

With best wishes,

Ps Hope the book is going to schedule!

Neil.

 

[Scott98]

Neil, you live in a beautiful area! That trek sounds like a great trip. I would definitely prefer the 10x35 for that wide-open terrain, you'll appreciate the extra magnification and aperture. At the cost of carrying another 2 ounces, that's no problem. I like the 35mm aperture, I can't bring myself to buy a pair of binos any smaller, I want the glass. Probably from decades of using apo refractors for astronomy, I'm in love with big glass, the bigger the better.

I'm headed out for a local 3-hour bird tour tomorrow, it's open terrain too, I'll probably have to take my 8x42 Zeiss for the weatherproofing as it looks like a cloudy misty day, we've been stuck in an onshore flow pattern for a couple weeks now. It's good because it's keeping the smoke away, we've got a major crisis this year with the boreal forests of Canada burning up in apocalyptic fashion

 

[Dipperdapper]

Hi Scott,

The Zeiss will do just fine. I used to hanker after refractors and still own a long focus 127mm F/12 classical achromatic but it's a pain to set up and mount. Several years ago I discovered the virtues of high quality Newtonians. My workhorse instrument is a 20cm F/6 Newtonian with a small secondary(~20 per cent) which is a breeze to set up and use. My speciality is double star visual astronomy.

Enjoy your birding tour!

Regards,

Neil

 

[Scott98]

20% CO, that sounds like a nice scope. Must be very high contrast.

It turned out dry today so I did take the 10x35's. It was 3 1/2 hours so I appreciated the light weight. Got one new lifer - brown billed cuckoo

 

[Dipperdapper]

Nice one Scott!

We have a few Cuckoos here in the valley. I've memorised what they look like, but I've not laid eyes on one yet! Even when you follow their calls they just always seem to be in the next tree and then the next.... ad infinitum lol.

So the 10x 35 went well! Very good!

One thing that I'm in two minds about is the supplied neck strap; it's decent quality alright with the 1917 anniversary logo on it, but I'm always wondering whether I'd be better off using a better padded neoprene neck strap for both the 8 x 30 and 10 x 35, especially for longer excursions. I usually invest in a better strap if the supplied one is not up to scratch. I've bought a couple of BlueCabi branded straps that are very comfortable on some other binos I use:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07GVQKHF8?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details

Gonna try them out this evening to see how they fare. I'll go to great lengths to making these instruments as comfortable as possible, so worth a test drive methinks.

How do you find the neck strap on yours?

Best,

Neil.