Zen Ray ED....initial impressions (1 Viewer)

I fixed the always on objective cover to always off. I replaced mine with a set of Bushwacker flip ups (got mine at Eagle Optics) I happened to have on hand. They required a little trimming to slide past the front hinges, but they stay put. Scope covers sold by outfits such as Butler Creek work too. I use these on my Yosemite's. Most decent sporting goods stores have these. Just measure the outside diameter of the barrel. The cap packages have the sizes that a particular size cover will work with.

When and if the USPS ever gets the ZEN ED package here, I'll post pictures. This is a USPS issue, not a Zen-Ray issue.

Steve C said:

When and if the USPS ever gets the ZEN ED package here, I'll post pictures. This is a USPS issue, not a Zen-Ray issue.

Click to expand...

It's a living in Eastern WA issue

The pictures would be a great idea. Could you include the strap and covers (FrankD missed those out).

Zen ED 8x's on the way!! Looking forward to more info and comparisons!!

Kevin Purcell said:

It's a living in Eastern WA issue

The pictures would be a great idea. Could you include the strap and covers (FrankD missed those out).

Click to expand...

You are right. Mail goes from Portland to Seattle. Whereupon the people in Seattle send it clear across the state to Spokane. When in Spokane, the decision is made to send either to Yakima or to the Tri-Cities, so it can take awhile. I live just halfway in between, so the right decision is made half of the time. So maybe there will be a package or delivery notice when I get home. There is no tracking information other than the USPS recieved the shipment on Thursday.

If Frank doesn't post them I will.

halo?

still nothing on the stray light haloing issue that the hawkes had? not trying to push you guys or anything, i am just very curious about these binos.

bobcat said:

still nothing on the stray light haloing issue that the hawkes had? not trying to push you guys or anything, i am just very curious about these binos.

Click to expand...

As I'm the guy who tends to be interested in that and my 8x isn't going out for birding due to the focus issue I haven't had a chance to investigate that.

The 10x has been out a couple of times and seems to do really well. The problem with that is I don't have another Chinese ED 10x to compare it to. I suspect that stray light issues drop

Another issue with the 10x is I don't see the whole field when wearing my eyeglasses which I do with birding. In fact, not wearing them negates the effect of the really good bins i.e. not correcting my astigmatism gives me a noticeably worse view even in the good eye that has only -0.75D of astigmatism. This is a little like the Hawke 8x in which I just don't quite see the whole field. That means that I don't actually see the halo when birding. I only see it when testing (and I took off my eyeglasses). I'm also not 100% sure of the repro case for that problem.

But as you want some sort of an answer here's a preliminary result. In the "close to the sun" stray light the ZR 10x seems to do very well. I took it to within about 10 degrees (really that's as close as I dare) of the sun. You can see bright but not brilliant crescents on the opposite side of the image to the sun but the veiling glare (reduction in contrast across the field) is rather small. The view is still usable (not as good as in the opposite direction of course but you could get a bird ID this way). With the Chinese ED 8x I get to this point at about 20 degrees.

If my idea about this kind of stray light being related to the width of the FOV of the EP then a 10x is going to be better than an 8x in this kind of test. Anyone out there with 8x and 10x of the same bin can try this sort of test but be VERY CAREFUL when close to the sun. Seriously, you know the risks of doing this (and if you don't don't try it).

But it still needs more testing especially on the 8x to say anything definitive about if this is better than the Hawke or not. My null hypothesis is that it will be the same (the rest of the bin so far seems to be the same) but I need to actually test that speculation.

Well surprise, surprise. I went home to check the mail and I had the binoculars. The mailman closed the package between the screen door and front door and I about broke my neck when I tried tripping over the box.

I took about an hour and did a few quick comparisons. I have both the ZEN 8x and 10x43 ED. While the comparisons were quick ones I am fairly confident of what I am posting here. If I reach the conclusion I was a bit hasty on anything, you will all be the first to know.

I have said a lot of good things about the Promaster Infinity Elite ELX ED. I stand by those statements after having the binocular for several months and having had the chance to compare it to a bunch of other binoculars, including the very top end brands. I will also say that whatever I said about the Promaster appears to apply to the ZEN ED. In short, if you have pre-ordered these and are waiting for them, I will be astounded if you are not pleased with them.

Comments applicable to both 8x and 10x 43 ZEN ED:
They both have the same focus rate that the Promaster does, 2 1/2 turns. Both of these have zero focus tension issues. If I could speed up the quickness of the rate, I would. I really would prefer a somewhat less than 2 revolutions of the wheel, more like 1.5 turns or maybe a bit more. But the effort required to run the wheel is just right. Smooth, uniform force, no hard spots, or dragging, or any sort of mechanical interference did I find. The wheel moves easily enough for my taste and is stiff enough to stay put unless the user chooses to move it.

Kevin is correct, there is more space between the barrels of the ZEN. My micrometer says .75" in the ZEN and .70" in the ELX. Physically, except for the armor difference, the two look like twins.

The diopter is a bit different on the ZEN. This one has positive, audible and tactile stops. The Promaster is without the stops. The ZEN diopter setting snaps into focus "right now" for me, and at precisely the right position for me. No wishing there was half stop notches. I typically need about -1 diopter on most binoculars. Both the ZEN and Promaster are just a tad bit on the minus side of zero for me. It is stiff enough that when set, it very likely will not move. I have yet had the need to adjust the diopter on the Promaster since I've had it, so I doubt if it will work loose unless the user is a compulsive focus fiddler.

8x43 ZEN and Promaster ELX ED:
The ability to resolve from a chart seems equal. The ELX ED has the water and oil repellent coatings, the ZEN ED does not. The ZEN is perhaps a bit brighter than the ELX ED. However, the ELX ED has the appearance of having a reactive coating, in that it appears more color neutral in bright and somewhat yellow in dim light. The ZEN ED is pretty color neutral throughout. This can be seen using Henry Link's idea of a white paper like the photo he posted on his other threads. I'll see if the apparent difference can be can't be photographed.

The depth of focus is the same. Focused at several miles distant, the close focus, not yet measured, is about 70 feet, I think, is the close focus distance for both. Much of the focus wheel travel is coming in closer than this. I can focus on my toes.

The field of view is larger in the ZEN than the ELX. I do not notice this in use, but it is easy enough to see if you look. So fov advocates have an advantage with the ZEN. The ZEN and ELX seem to me to be about equal in edge to edge sharpness. I did not quite expect this. The sweet spot is large in both. Unless you are sensitive to edge distortions, you will not notice any. The ZEN is clearly better (in whatever aspect you wish to name) than the Nikon Monarch 8x42. And somewhat sharper and brighter than the 8x30 Yosemite.

The 10x43 ZEN:
This is looking to be the one that might interest me the most. It is better optically than the Viper 10x42 I have. It will read more detail from the resolution chart, it is brighter, sharper, and seems to have better color. The differences are not great, but can be seen if the binoculars are side by side. The larger fov of the ZEN is clearly apparent. I need to get these two together for distant viewing.

Comparison to top end glass.
I have posted elsewhere of the comparisons I have of the Promaster and other top end glass from Leica, Steiner, Swarovski, and Zeiss. It is right there optically with those. The comparison here with the ZEN can only be indirect as I will not have the ZEN long enough to do the same comparisons, but I think it is no stretch to think the ZEN will compare as well as did the ELX. I do not believe that these will pass the same intensive, objective tests with the same scores as the alpha glass. That's perhaps a bit much to expect form silver coated prisms in a less expensive instrument. But they will be far closer than any other mid price glass can come.

In short these binoculars are what I will call 99.33 binoculars. That's 99% of the optics of the alpha at 33% of the price. Durability, longevity, service and warranty issues with the Promaster/ZEN glass are yet to be demonstrated, but it is clear to me that you will not get better optics considering the price paid. Calling these the poor man's alpha binocular seems no stretch. More to come, pictures included (I had to charge the camera battery), as I look further.

Steve C said:

They both have the same focus rate that the Promaster does, 2 1/2 turns. Both of these have zero focus tension issues. If I could speed up the quickness of the rate, I would. I really would prefer a somewhat less than 2 revolutions of the wheel, more like 1.5 turns or maybe a bit more.

Click to expand...

On the ZR 10x I found the close focus at a bit under 2m (about 5 feet or so).

I alos roughly estimated the amount of focus turning need to get across "birding" distances (for me 3m/10ft to infinity). That was between 1.5 and 1.75 turns. The other 3/4 of a turn is closer than 3m (which takes quite a lot

For the Hawke 8x the results are similar with 1.125 turns from 10 feet to 5 feet! Outside the normal birding range for me at least. About 1 turn covers my usual birding range from 10 feet to infinity and another 0.5 turn after infinity (to compensate for myopes). So the usual birding "range" is actually not that far on the bin. Depending on your state of vision (this is for corrected vision) your range would move around.

Not tried this with the ZR 8x because of the focusing stiffness issue but I suspect it'll be identical. I'm getting pretty convinced that the optics is the same but perhaps "tweaked" in the ZR. Sort of a 1.2 revision of the bin after the PM 1.0 and the Hawke 1.1.

Steve C said:

The diopter is a bit different on the ZEN. This one has positive, audible and tactile stops. The Promaster is without the stops. The ZEN diopter setting snaps into focus "right now" for me, and at precisely the right position for me. No wishing there was half stop notches. I typically need about -1 diopter on most binoculars.

Click to expand...

I noticed this and it's a little different to most other bins I've used.

Both PM and Hawke just have a dial with no click stops which takes different amounts of force on my samples. The PM is about right: easy enough to move without moving on it's own. The Hawke setting is a bit stiffer and is more of a pain to set. Then again one only need set it once in a while.

I do have other bins (Pentax SP? I forget which one has this!) that have a click set dial but it is more lumpy than this. Setting on those is more click ... click ... click. With the ZR it's more like a system to let you keep count rather than to hold it in place. It feels like a freely rotating wheel with soft clicks. I suspect you can set it between clicks though I'm not sure how well it will keep.

After the previous "halo" comments I took the Hawke and the ZR 8x outside just to see if I could get stray light results. As I got out the sun was disappearing into the fog over the Puget Sound. So no results as I couldn't get "halo" like stray light in the Hawke (or the ZR) with that light. It's not actually that easy to find but it does happen in the Hawke (when it does it's outside the field stop ... it doesn't mess up the view ... and as I don't see the full FOV I tend to miss it).

But the result I did get was to walk down a couple of blocks to the site of a failed "town house" development which is now a little nature reserve with resident Annas Hummingbird, assorted small passerines, and the occasional Cooper's Hawk.

The light was turning to twilight some light from the distant sun illuminated fog but more from the blue sky. Better for checking bins (as every bin looks good in the sun!). I ABed the Hawke 8x and the ZR 8x against the trees and sky and a 50m distant fir with a coupe of Starlings and an American Robin in the top. After quite a few checks it became clear that the ZR 8x was brighter (i.e. has higher transmission) than the Hawke. It's a just noticeable difference when ABing but the ZR seems just a little brighter, little more colorful, a slightly bigger contrast range.

So I think there are some tweaks in the mirror coating or the AR coating (or the silver coating in the Hawke is oxidizing )

I thought I saw something on Sunday. And I was more convinced on Monday with some duck birding I haven't written up yet with the 10x comparing it to a 10x porro. But now I'm pretty sure the ZR has higher transmission than the Hawke or PM. Just by a little but I can see it.

Excellent comments guys. Steve, I was glad to see you received your bins and also glad to see that my guesses at the differences and similarities between the ELX and the ED were very close to your actual experiences.

Hmm, then that leads to a big question. Which do you prefer?...ok, ok, give the Zen Ray a few more days and then comment.


Kevin,

For what it is worth I share your observations on focus. You have focusing tension and focusing speed. It requires a unique combination of each to provide at truly satisfying focus. Coupling this with depth of field makes it an even more interesting issue to discuss...don't you think?

FrankD said:

Excellent comments guys. Steve, I was glad to see you received your bins and also glad to see that my guesses at the differences and similarities between the ELX and the ED were very close to your actual experiences.

Hmm, then that leads to a big question. Which do you prefer?...ok, ok, give the Zen Ray a few more days and then comment.

Click to expand...

Frank,
A few more day is certainly indicated. Right now I am tending toward keeping the 8x ELX. That is largely due to the presence of the repellent coatings, which I have demonstrated to my satisfaction the fact they work. So that gives it a leg up for cold, foul and wet weather. That concern is for external fogging concerns, not internal. I also am thinking pretty hard about keeping the 10x ZEN due to its obvious superiority to the 10x42 Viper. Another possibility is keep both 8x glasses, using the Promaster and the ZEN side by side for time enough to decide which is the better of the two.

The 10x43 ZEN:
This is looking to be the one that might interest me the most. It is better optically than the Viper 10x42 I have. It will read more detail from the resolution chart, it is brighter, sharper, and seems to have better color.

Click to expand...

This is kind of what I concluded about the Vipers. I liked the 8x. I had little interest in the 10x there.

The Promaster 10x is one pair where I have the least to worry about with the diopter. I have had bad luck with nearly all others. Somehow I am extra sensitive to getting it just right at the normal range of distances. The fact that it does not lock is OK with me.

At 8x, many pairs have worked for me with the diopter.

Curious if anyone has tried out the Zens with the monocular that came with them? My experiences witha monocular have not been great, so I was wondering how their monocular behaves. I realize everyone has just received their bins and the monocular would not be the priority.

I didn't even notice they also include a small 10x25 monocular and a lens cleaning kit untill checking my order confirmation after your post. Well, I don't expect the monocular will be any useful. But free is free. The lens cleaning kit will come just in time since my old one is about 5 year old and pad was almost worn out.

I just stepped away from the resolution chart and the tripod. As I thought after initial observaton, there is no visible difference in how far down the chart either the ELX or ZEN 8x will read. Both will read nearly two size levels smaller than the Nikon Monarch 8x42. The Yosemite 8x30 is just about in the middle of the difference between the roofs.

The 10x43 ZEN will read two chart sizes smaller than the Vortex Viper 10x42, giving it about the same level of superiority over the Viper that the 8x has over the Monarch.

The chart was under well lighted indoor conditions at a measured 22', which was just how the distance I had to set up in happened to work out.

Now I'm waiting for the weekend to get them outside.

Does this imply Viper 10x42 is substantially worse than Viper 8x42? I got the impression that Viper gets similar optics to Stokes DLS which has been on sale price of $399 for the 10x42 model lately. Nice price, but I guess I'll wait for the price drop for the 8x42 Stokes.

Steve C said:

The 10x43 ZEN will read two chart sizes smaller than the Vortex Viper 10x42, giving it about the same level of superiority over the Viper that the 8x has over the Monarch.

Click to expand...

Interesting result, Steve.

I've noticed that some of my older tests (that worked fine on lesser bins) like sharpness seems pretty silly for the "Chinese ED" bins because they don't distinguish between the bins (or other alpha bins like the Zeiss FL).

It seems that when you get to this level you have to start changing tests that focus interest to more subtle features (and often more subjective features) like brightness/transmission, contrast, color saturation, CA (on and off-axis) and the like.

I'm finding that these ED bins are changing the way I do the evaluations.

The other thing I've found with the ZR ED 8x and 10x is that there isn't a significant difference is optical quality of the view (brightness, contrast, color saturation: all those things that seem to drop off in lesser bins). I've been really happy birding with the ZR ED 10x.

fguo

I did not even mention the Vortex Viper 8x42. What I said was that was that in regard to the 10x43 ZEN ED and 10x42 Viper was the ZEN was better at resolving detail. What I said was that both the 8x42 Promaster and the 8x43 ZEN were equal in their ability to resolve detail, and that both of those 8X glasses were better at resolving detail than the 8x42 Nikon Monarch, and the 8x30 Yosemite was in between, and did not make any comparisons between the 8x and 10x. Those comments were 8x vs 8x and 10x vs 10x.

I suppose that I should have added ZEN after the 8x in that part of my post you quoted. The point was the 8x43 ZEN and the 8x42 Promaster have about the same level of superiority over the 8x42 Monarch as the 10x43 ZEN showed over the 10x42 Viper. I said nothing about 8x Viper vs 10x Viper.

How you got there .....sorry??? |:S|

Kevin Purcell said:

The other thing I've found with the ZR ED 8x and 10x is that there isn't a significant difference is optical quality of the view (brightness, contrast, color saturation: all those things that seem to drop off in lesser bins). I've been really happy birding with the ZR ED 10x.

Click to expand...

Ditto. I'm really liking that 10x43.

I really only tried the resolution chart thing more or less for the heck of it. I guess it showed a better binocular will resolve better than a lesser one. That and that a higher magnification will read farther down the chart than lesser magnification. Wow!

Steve, my assumption is that Viper 8x42 has better resolving power than Monarch 8x42. Then Viper 10x42 w.r.t Zen 10x43 is relatively worse than Viper 8x42 w.r.t Zen 8x43.

Fguo,

Ok, I see a little better where you are coming from. Stepping back in time a little, about the time the Viper came out, I had owned the 8x42 Monarch for several years and was looking for an upgrade. One of the binoculars I had for awhile in this search was the 8x42 Viper. So, in general, yes I would agree with you that the 8x42 Viper is sharper than the 8x42 Monarch. I sold the 8x42 Viper when I got the 8x42 Promaster ELX ED. So in general, I would say that when comparing equal magnifications, The ZEN/Promaster/Hawke binoculars are better instruments than the Vipers of equal magnifications. But I didn't have the Viper 8x to compare to th ZEN ED 8x, nor a 10x Promaster to compare to the 10x ZEN ED. Now as to the comparison between the 8x and 10x Vipers, I thought those I had were about equal in image characteristics. But the comparison is 8x to 10x, so it is not an equal comparison. Some people strongly prefer 8x, some 10x. So I guess the opinion of the 8x vs the 10x Viper is that you will prefer whichever has the magnification you prefer. So I do not think an assumption can be made, that in general the 10x Viper is worse than the 8x.

As another general comment, The Stokes DLS is a better glass than the Viper and is more directly comparable in image quality to these Chinese ED binoculars we are discussing. SO, if you prefer the more traditional close hinge roof style, and value a fast focus, then you may prefere the Stokes. But that is only my general impression, as I have not had a chance to compare the Stokes DLS to any of the Chinese ED's.

There is some thought that in mid price binoculars, that since it is easier to make better quality with lesser magnification, that on average, the 8x may be better than the 10x. That seems to hold more true for the Monarchs of 8x and 10x I have looked at. But, like I said, I thought my Vipers were pretty equal in terms of general optical characteristics. That potential 8x vs 10x quality difference certainly has entered into the discussions of the 8x vs 10x ZEN class glass. It appears that at least with whatever differences exist between my eyes and Kevins, the 10x ZEN ED seems equal to the task.