Nikon Premier LX vs Sightron SII
One of the forum members here was kind enough to lend me his Nikon Premier LX (Venturer/HG) 8x32s so that I could compare them to a few of the other 8x32 models that I have on hand. Thank you Yippeekiay.
The Sightron SII was the one model that I think was of particular interest considering how well it has fared against some very stiff competition.
Speaking of which, if you go back a page or two you will see that I picked up a Meopta Meostar to compare to the Sightron. Well, it was sold on Ebay a couple weeks back. It is an excellent binocular but, as noted, the Sightron was a bit better in several key areas that I prefer. Price wasn’t much of a concern as I picked up the Meopta for roughly half of what it typically sells for new.
So, how does the original Nikon 8x32 Premier roof compare to the Sightron…..
Ergonomics:
I have always found the Nikon to be very ergonomic overall. That opinion originated with the 8x42 Venturers that I owned for several years and continued with the smaller 8x32 version. Probably the only ergonomic issue that the 8x32 model has going against it is its overall weight. It is notably heavier than the binoculars it was originally designed to compete against not to mention many of the 8x32 models currently on the market. Other than that one issue I don’t see any ergonomic concerns and actually find it to be one of the better high performance 8x32s currently available.
Build Quality:
Tough call. I haven’t found anything objectionable about the Sightrons at this point. I have owned them for about two months and they have held up quite well. I have not noted any issues with the eyecups, diopter, central hinge or any of the other areas where build quality issues become apparent. I am not sure as to the age of the Nikon unit but it still appears to have held up very well overall. The eyecup rubber appears to be the “weak spot” if I had to pick one. A little Armor-all “bath” every year though should help keep them in good condition for years to come.
Optical Comparison:
Everyone’s favorite.
After having these two models side by side I do believe they share some similarities but several differences. Starting with the similarities…
They both have good apparent sharpness. The Nikon is a bit tricky for me as the focus speed is fast so getting that perfect focus takes some practice. Once you are accustomed to it though the image snaps very readily into a sharp, defined focus. The Sightron’s focus is a bit slower and therefore a bit more precise for my tastes. Both have very good tension and feel with the Nikon a bit smoother/free flowing.
Apparent brightness seems to be very close as well. I cannot really tell if one is notably brighter than the other because of the next issue…..apparent contrast.
Both bins appear to have very good contrast levels. The difference lies in the fact that both have different color biases to my eyes. The Nikon seems to be more towards the yellow range of the spectrum while the Sightron tends more towards the red. The Nikon reminds me a bit of the Meopta in this area. Because of the color biases I tend to see the contrast levels differently. I prefer the Sightron’s representation but I cannot honestly say that one has “better” contrast in this case than the other. Both levels are above average in my experience.
The other area where they have an observable difference is in the size of the sweet spot/type of edge distortion. Upon casual inspection the Nikon appears to be truly sharp from one edge of the field stop to the other. It utilizes field flattener elements and I do see a very small amount of pincushion distortion in the image but not much. I am not overly susceptible to the “rolling ball” effect so I am not going to comment on whether or not it is present in this model. Suffice to say that I find the Nikon’s overall image representation because of the field flatteners to be very comfortable and enjoyable. It feels very much like a natural image. The Sightron has some field curvature around the outer 20% of the image so the sweet spot isn’t as large. The image isn’t quite as “natural” as the Nikon’s but I don’t find it any less comfortable.
Color fringing seems well controlled in both bins. I can see it a bit in the 1/3rd of the Nikon a bit more than I can in the same percentage of the field of view in the Sightron. The centerfield performance in this area appears to be equally good in both binoculars.
Conclusion:
So, there you have it. Each of these models has its strong points and one model may appeal to an individual over the other. It is going to come down to personal preference. The interesting part though is that I do find the Sightron to be in the same optical “league” as the Nikon. Both are sure to please all but the most discerning optical aficionados.
Pics to follow at some point.