My take on it (for what it's worth) is this:
when i decided i needed to take birding more seriously in whatever year it was, i decided to dispense with my 23-year-old porros and get with the programme.
After quite a bit of research and considerations of finance, i went with the original ED 8.5x45 which was a complete revelation for me. Of course, as one learns more, one becomes perhaps a little more critical, and - on discovering my tendency towards detecting CA (perhaps more than others) - i sold them on the launch of the EDII.
By now (thanks to Typo communications) my knowledge of what i was looking through had taken a major uplift, and the EDII was just the thing: fitted my hands well, sharp to the edge, relatively bright, fast focussing (for one-hand operation when toting a scope over the shoulder) with a dioptre that never moved.
Hoya glass, the involvement (apparently) of a US academic in the design, fairly flat field - perfectly happy with them, and still am, as the only 8x42 i own.
So, when the EDIV was announced, i expected the tweaking of a couple of areas - particularly moving to dielectric coating and just backing off slightly on the aggression of the focus. Wider view might be nice, but not essential.
I'm not sure if the changes made to the EDIV were the ones i would have regarded as a priority. The locking dioptre on the rh eyepiece was fine, the livery and hinges were fine, the overall ergonomics were fine (but obviously, the latter may just be personal).
It seemed that most opinions posted either liked/didn't like the fast focus, but that could have been solved by a partial back-off. Many inquired why dielectrics hadn't been used when obviously the quality of the glass deserved them....
I just don't know from a company strategy point of view Vanguard seemed to diverge from a product design which seemed to have so many strengths and produced something else.....i still think the EDII is king of the hill within this price band, and knocks down many optics a lot more expensive.
Glad i got that out of my system!
when i decided i needed to take birding more seriously in whatever year it was, i decided to dispense with my 23-year-old porros and get with the programme.
After quite a bit of research and considerations of finance, i went with the original ED 8.5x45 which was a complete revelation for me. Of course, as one learns more, one becomes perhaps a little more critical, and - on discovering my tendency towards detecting CA (perhaps more than others) - i sold them on the launch of the EDII.
By now (thanks to Typo communications) my knowledge of what i was looking through had taken a major uplift, and the EDII was just the thing: fitted my hands well, sharp to the edge, relatively bright, fast focussing (for one-hand operation when toting a scope over the shoulder) with a dioptre that never moved.
Hoya glass, the involvement (apparently) of a US academic in the design, fairly flat field - perfectly happy with them, and still am, as the only 8x42 i own.
So, when the EDIV was announced, i expected the tweaking of a couple of areas - particularly moving to dielectric coating and just backing off slightly on the aggression of the focus. Wider view might be nice, but not essential.
I'm not sure if the changes made to the EDIV were the ones i would have regarded as a priority. The locking dioptre on the rh eyepiece was fine, the livery and hinges were fine, the overall ergonomics were fine (but obviously, the latter may just be personal).
It seemed that most opinions posted either liked/didn't like the fast focus, but that could have been solved by a partial back-off. Many inquired why dielectrics hadn't been used when obviously the quality of the glass deserved them....
I just don't know from a company strategy point of view Vanguard seemed to diverge from a product design which seemed to have so many strengths and produced something else.....i still think the EDII is king of the hill within this price band, and knocks down many optics a lot more expensive.
Glad i got that out of my system!