• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Zeiss Terra ED 8X42 (1 Viewer)

dries1 said:
The armoring on the original EDG I was thicker and heavier than the covering on the current EDG II. It was also prone to bubbling and working loose from the metal frame. The covering on the EDG II is quite a bit lighter, tighter and smoother than the covering on the old EDG I was.

I wonder if there are any EDG I binos around, I would like to see one next to a EDG II.

A.W.
Click to expand...

The EDG I had a rather thick double hinged metal frame. There was a rumor that it resulted in a patent squabble with Swarovski over the double hinges but it was pretty clear that the Swarovski binoculars were much better looking than the Nikons were and Nikon was wise to drop that format. The coverings on the objective tubes of the EDG I did not fully surround them which may have contributed to the bubbling problem which appeared where the coverings met the metal tubes on my binocular. At any rate, the EDG II is a much more attractive binocular.

Bob
 
Sounds like someone did not their calculations (math) right on the 8X32, a major blunder. You would think they could get this right, after all today most binos are made to complement a range for different viewers, or Dennis has a rare eye relief syndrome.

A.W.
 
dries1 said:
Sounds like someone did not their calculations (math) right on the 8X32, a major blunder. You would think they could get this right, after all today most binos are made to complement a range for different viewers, or Dennis has a rare eye relief syndrome.

A.W.
Click to expand...
No, Bruce had the same eye relief problem with the 42mm GPO Passion ED 8x42 and Upland had it too with the 32mm GPO's. Bruce also had the too much focus play issue.
 
It happens now and then. Not that it ever should! Someone falls asleep at the switch!

A few years back Vortex had that problem with some of their less expensive binoculars. Their 8x28 comes to mind. I had to hold it nearly an inch away from my eye to use it. I gave it to my son who wears glasses and he had no problem with it. If he wore his glasses while using it.:smoke:

Bob
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
Yup. I have never seen eye cups on a 32mm extend that little. They extended half the length of my Vortex Viper's HD 8x32.
Click to expand...

But Dennis couldn't you just, you know, make your eyes bulge a little? Next time this happens just write down all the dollars you have spent on binos over the years and add them up. Your eyes will be out on stalks and compensate for the under-sized eyecups.

Lee
 
smack....ouch....bet that leaves a mark

but Dennis is right on this one....
 
Last edited:
[email protected] said:
No, Bruce had the same eye relief problem with the 42mm GPO Passion ED 8x42 and Upland had it too with the 32mm GPO's. Bruce also had the too much focus play issue.
Click to expand...

Just some technical clarification here: I view without eye glasses so I did not have a problem with the"eye relief" of the 8X42 GPO ED, but instead questioned the "eye cup length" in relationship to the eye relief. I would have desired a little longer extended eye cup for the 18mm of eye relief to have less "net eye relief". This would put the eye piece lens farther from my eye for more a more natural eye placement to stop blackouts. Instead I hold them a little higher up toward the eyebrow than I would normally prefer to achieve the extra distance. The actual "eye relief" would probably work for most eye glass wearers.

My GPO ED does have some free play in the focus mechanism but not "too much focus play". It would have been better if there were less but I still found it to be acceptable, although some may not. The 8X32 GPO evaluated by Upland did not have free play.

In my case, these two issues were minor and I kept the binocular. Sorry to hear it did not work out for Dennis.

It would be best to continue the GPO discussion in the GPO sub forums.

Here is my post on the GPO 8X42 ED and it is were Dennis decided to ultimately post his review of the GPO 8X32 ED after moving if from another thread ......

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=348225

Here is the post from Upland on the GPO 8X32 ED which is the model Dennis purchased.......

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=350227
 
Eye relief

[email protected] said:
No, Bruce had the same eye relief problem with the 42mm GPO Passion ED 8x42 and Upland had it too with the 32mm GPO's. Bruce also had the too much focus play issue.
Click to expand...

Dennis,

Just kidding you have inspected much more glass than I ever will, and with your help I have chosen wisely.

A.W.
 
dries1 said:
Sounds like someone did not their calculations (math) right on the 8X32, a major blunder. You would think they could get this right, after all today most binos are made to complement a range for different viewers, or Dennis has a rare eye relief syndrome.

A.W.
Click to expand...

I suspect there are physical limitations that result is models having limited eyecup extension. The eye cup has to retract into the eye piece housing for eye glass wearers and they can retract just so far. The shorter the eye piece housing, then I would think the less room for the retracted eye cup. If the eye cup were longer, then it could not retract far enough for eye glass wearers. Anyway, that is my theory and I have posted it before but have not read much about it.

There are three factors that I am aware of that come into play for natural eye positioning. They are eye relief, eye cup length and eye cup diameter. A smaller diameter eye cup allows the eye cup to be placed closer to the eye. That implies a longer extended eye cup is needed but that may not be possible due to a lack of space when the eye cup is retracted, otherwise eye glass wearers will not get a full FOV. Smaller binoculars seem to have more eye placement issues than larger models. There are a lot of trade-offs in binocular design.

Dennis also had issues with too short of an eye cup with the Nikon Monarch HG 8X42 that he tried so he may be more on the outside limits of the curve compared to the general buying public.
 
Troubador said:
But Dennis couldn't you just, you know, make your eyes bulge a little? Next time this happens just write down all the dollars you have spent on binos over the years and add them up. Your eyes will be out on stalks and compensate for the under-sized eyecups.

Lee
Click to expand...
Like this? This was me when they told me how much the Zeiss SF was.
 

Attachments

  • bulging eyes.jpg
    bulging eyes.jpg
    8.8 KB · Views: 27
That is a very good explanation, Bruce. I have never thought about the eye cup having to retract into the housing but I will consider that on my next purchase. I seem to have less eye placement and eye relief problems with Swarovski's and now I am finding Vortex are good in that respect also. I imagine there is a lot of thought in their design to try to accommodate different eye sockets and facial structures. But it is just an interplay of a lot of variables to make a binocular acceptable to the greatest majority of people. Also, I notice you are a lot more tolerant of what I consider a defect you seem to consider it a minor weakness. I feel there are too many binoculars that don't have these defects to waste time on the ones that do unless they offer something special. Maybe I am over critical but I don't want any free play in my focus nor do I want eye cups that I can't rest my eyes on.
 
Last edited:
Revisiting this model, I took my wife's out in the field today - cold, sunny with lots of snow on the ground. I've mentioned the optical short-comings before [high CA, small sweetspot, moderate transmission / colour fidelity] but should also highlight the positives. Build is very solid - this unit has been dropped and bumped with no problems - the whole package is just solid all-around and works perfectly in very cold temps.

Best of all, this unit has almost zero glare / flare or veiling glare - better than the Conquest HD, better than an FL, better than any Swaro I have tested. Internally, very black and nice and clean.

The Terra 8x42 is also nearly immune to blackouts - just stick your eyes in there, eyecups all the way down or all the way up, and you get a good view with no flickers or vignetting. So, it would be a very user friendly bin for a 1st timer. In optics it falls short in many ways but still provides a tough and usable package if not compared to more expensive binoculars.
 
Last edited:
I have a quick story about my recent experience with Zeiss service.
I have a Terra 8x42 and I like the binocular. The only problem I have had is the blue Zeiss label sticker on the front of the binocular has came off and lost.

I sent through an email service request, and I simply asked for
a replacement label, by mail, so I could glue it back on my binocular.
The phone cue was busy, so I went this way.

I got instructions to mail the binocular back to Wetzler, Germany for this serious issue. ;)

I now have asked Zeiss Germany to forward this to the US, so we will see what
happens next.

Jerry
 
I had the blue emblem fall off my Terra 10X42 not long after I received it in the summer a few years ago. The AZ heat in the UPS truck must have done in the adhesive. I called Zeiss USA support, then in Virginia, and they mailed me a replacement that showed up less than a week later.

I believe the Zeiss reps usually have some with them at the shows so that is another source under the right timing and location.

If you use Super Glue, just use a very small amount because it sure does spread!
 
My logo also fell off. Looks like they used cheap double sided tape.
An email to Germany had them send me one which was super glued on.
 
This is an update, I got my Zeiss emblem today, and I am pleased it did not take long
at all.

I give Zeiss high marks for the fast service.

Jerry
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

O
Zeiss Victory HT 8x42 vs. Victory SF 8x42
Replies
4
Views
510
Scott98
S
N
SF 42 & 32 Brief Comparisons
Replies
8
Views
2K
Scott98
S
D
A Zeiss Conquest HD on steroids.
8 9 10
Replies
183
Views
12K
ArchStanton
A
A
Zeiss terra ed 8x32 loose Central hinge
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
BryanP
BryanP
J
Nikon ProStaff/Travelight compared to Zeiss Terra ED?
Replies
3
Views
720
Jaywalk
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top