Zen Ray and Generation II ED's? (1 Viewer)

Kevin Purcell · Jun 26, 2009

CLRobles said:
But I have to admit that "TO ME" there is some comfort that comes with a company's history, record, and name badge..... So please don't hold it against me if I'm still a little biased towards the German and now (thanks to Nikon supreme SE's) Japanese optics.

I cosider the maker and it's reputation and the warranty/repair coverage to be part of the set of features that come with the bin (it's a big package right!). Same as the price and all the other "intangible" features like customer service.

So picking your bin includes making compromises amongst these features. And of course different people will make different choices. And there is no wrong answer so long as it's a consider decision.

CLRobles said:
Now, If they could only introduce a new Superior E with ED glass, twist out eye cups, and fully sealed I think we would all stop our continued search for the #1 bin! One last question though if you would allow me please? Nikon has always touted the SE as having better glass, is it possible that they already have ED glass in them or at least several elements that are ED?

Well you only want one ED element per barrel (in the objective to control longitudinal CA).

And no I don't think the SE does have ED glass. You can see some longitudinal CA in the image. Nikon weren't using ED glass in bins when this bin was designed. And if they did you can be sure they'd mention it.

The EP may have an LaK (lanthanum crown) or similar element in it as part of the design to control transverse CA (as I suspect most ED bins have). The SE does a good job of this. Controlling transverse CA (getting rid of the "color" at the edge of the AFOV) is a significant part of making better bins.

Again it's not ED magic fairy dust sprinkled on an optic that gives the results it's the optical design and how they choose to optimize certain parameters in the design to get the desired result. More compromises.

FrankD · Jul 4, 2009

Again it's not ED magic fairy dust sprinkled on an optic that gives the results it's the optical design and how they choose to optimize certain parameters in the design to get the desired result. More compromises.

Excellent point. As was the case when phase coating started filtering down through the various price points, ED glass does not automatically make a superior binocular. It has to be coupled with the appropriate optical design to function effectively.

falcondude · Jul 6, 2009

FrankD said:
Excellent point. As was the case when phase coating started filtering down through the various price points, ED glass does not automatically make a superior binocular. It has to be coupled with the appropriate optical design to function effectively.

does anyone know Swaroski EL uses ED glasses? Maybe the "E" in EL refers to ED glass?

Kevin Purcell · Jul 7, 2009

Nope, they don't use a fluorophophate glass (ED/HD/etc) in the Swaro EL. That's what the next one is supposed to bring (for an arm and a leg perhaps next year). They're the last of the Top 4 to go to ED objectives (though we can argue about the Nikon EDG if you can get one).

Perhaps EL is "Extra Length"

FrankD · Jul 7, 2009

Yes, I would be genuinely surprised if the EL had some type of ED glass in its design. Out of the top four (when the Zeiss was the only one with extra low dispersion glass) the EL showed the most CA to my eyes...but it still wasn't bad in the grand scheme of things.

I had my hands on a Nikon EDG the other day Kevin. Sadly it was the 10x42 and did have some issue with the diopter IIRC.

CLRobles · Jul 7, 2009

FrankD said:
Yes, I would be genuinely surprised if the EL had some type of ED glass in its design. Out of the top four (when the Zeiss was the only one with extra low dispersion glass) the EL showed the most CA to my eyes...but it still wasn't bad in the grand scheme of things.

I had my hands on a Nikon EDG the other day Kevin. Sadly it was the 10x42 and did have some issue with the diopter IIRC.

What exactly were the issues Frank?

CLRobles · Jul 7, 2009

Kevin Purcell said:
I've already compared the Zen Ray ED to an SE (search the forum ) and the ZR ED is not better optically. It's close but the SE has the edge optically though almost but not quite as good in color though it is very good for a non-ED bin. And the SE has much better off-axis stray light suppression.

But to link to another thread the Zen's are really (JIS7) waterproof: you can drop the Zen in water and have no problems. You can do that with the Zen Ray. You can't with the SE. You can wash a Zen under a running tap or in a sink full of water. You can't with an SE.

Ergos are different too. The SE is famous for the EP pickiness (needing precise centering on the eye) and excess ER compared to the rubber eyecups. Part of the trade off in the EP design to get the optical qualities they wanted. These are not issues with the Zen. And it is easier to hold a roof prisms steady (especially and open bridge roof) than it is a porro even though the SE is better than a lot of porros out there (a proto-open bridge with that gap at the hinge). The focus on the SE is slow mainly due to higher tension. either of these are warbler bins but the Zen wins this one. Both get stiffer in the cold.

But talking about 10 year old "alphas" comparison. It knocks the Zeiss Victory 8x40 into a cocked hat. Better sharpness, better color and better image contrast/on-axis stray light in the Zen. The Victory is fractionaly brighter (though AK prisms do help). Though I've not tried them I expect the same of similar era non-ED top bins except the difference should be rather less (as the Zeiss was consider the weakest of the Top 4 at that point) though the difference in color and sharpness, I think, should be obvious.

Ultimately I like both the Zen and the SE. Perhaps the SE more as I have both 8x32 and 10x42 but only the 8x Zen.

Used SEs are great value if you can find them at a good price.

As I've pointed out many times: all bins are compromises. Make your pick of the properties you like and get that bin. Or get more than one

Kevin, I have searches the forum several times and just can't seem to find your comparison between the Zen and SE? I would really like to read it..... Is there any way you could give me some direction on finding it? Chuck:hi:

kristoffer · Jul 7, 2009

Kevin Purcell said:
Nope, they don't use a fluorophophate glass (ED/HD/etc) in the Swaro EL. That's what the next one is supposed to bring (for an arm and a leg perhaps next year). They're the last of the Top 4 to go to ED objectives (though we can argue about the Nikon EDG if you can get one).

Perhaps EL is "Extra Length"

Wow, no EDish glas in the EL and it´s anyway one of the best out there. Isn't that amazing? I might confuse terms here but does not even the viper got ed glass?

Steve C · Jul 7, 2009

kristoffer said:
Wow, no EDish glas in the EL and it´s anyway one of the best out there. Isn't that amazing? I might confuse terms here but does not even the viper got ed glass?

The Viper does have ED glass but untill you get to thr 50mm size the design is too short to make proper use of the qualities of the glass.

FrankD · Jul 7, 2009

The Viper does have ED glass but untill you get to thr 50mm size the design is too short to make proper use of the qualities of the glass.
__________________

My experiences with the 8x42 Viper mirror Steve's comments. I noticed CA fairly readily in the Viper though it did have a noticeably sharper (apparent) centerfield.

What exactly were the issues Frank?

If I remember correctly there was an issue with the diopter knob overextending to the point where it did nothing to address either diopter correction or the focus (it is built into the focusing knob). It came out to this position relatively easily. It was about a month ago that I examined it. I forgot to comment at that time as I was looking for another bin at the time. I will see if I can make another trip up to Hawk Mountain to re-examine it further.

Wow, no EDish glas in the EL and it´s anyway one of the best out there. Isn't that amazing? I might confuse terms here but does not even the viper got ed glass?

As I commented previously, ED glass does not a perfect binocular make. Or, in another words, there definitely are some superb bins out there that do not use ED glass. CA can be controlled through the optical design itself and not just through the use of ED glass. I got the impression though that most manufacturers were headed in the ED glass direction for some reason. Cost? Marketability? Ease of design?

I don't have an answer for that one.

kristoffer · Jul 7, 2009

Steve C said:
The Viper does have ED glass but untill you get to thr 50mm size the design is too short to make proper use of the qualities of the glass.

I think I would need a glossary to fully understand what you pro´s talk about

I assumed ED was a way to handle CA, viper got CA and ED glass. So without ED they would have even more CA but with a better build they would not even need it? And further more, the ELs are built so well they dont wont benefit from ED?
I learn new stuff every day at bfs optic department

henry link · Jul 7, 2009

Kristoffer,

I think Steve was given a piece of bad information or some misunderstanding took place. A properly designed ED objective will always have lower longitudinal CA than a conventional crown and flint objective of the same aperture and focal length, no matter how short the focal length. Build quality has no influence on longitudinal CA.

Henry

Steve C · Jul 7, 2009

Henry,

That came from a talk with Vortex about whether or not the glass really was ED glass of the proper Abbey number. My assumption was/is that "maximum attainable effect" from CA control in binoculars with ED glass was linked to longer focal length in the design. My comment of "proper use" in that regard in the above post was intended to reflect that, not that there was no effect from ED glass in the Viper design. So, sometimes I can type faster than I can think.

So, I guess my question becomes what is most important the effectiveness of ED glass? Is it the proper design of the objective, or proper use of focal lengths? I suspect the answer is both (in context of the entire design) when done right.

In that vein, I once asked Zen Ray if they were considering ED glass in the ZRS HD. The answer was "maybe". They said the ZRS would have to be stretched a little because the focal lengths of that design were too short for the simple addition of an ED objective, requiring a few design tweaks. They were still working on the ZEN ED and were not seriously considering upgrading the ZRS, hence the "maybe". That was sort of what the Vortex conversation got into as well. Not that it didn't work, it needed to be longer to work and they were satisfied with the performance/price aspect of the Viper.

There is a lot of questions about ED glass. Maybe a thread on ED glass, what it is why it works, and what sort of design is necessary to make it work might be useful. I'm a biologist, not an engineer, and acknowledge my engineering shortcomings.

FrankD · Jul 7, 2009

There is a lot of questions about ED glass. Maybe a thread on ED glass, what it is why it works, and what sort of design is necessary to make it work might be useful.

Excellent idea. The topic has been discussed a few times in the past but always in the context of a certain binocular (so it is not easy to just go and look up). A separate thread titled something along the lines of (ED glass in Binoculars) would be sufficient.

A properly designed ED objective will always have lower longitudinal CA than a conventional crown and flint objective of the same aperture and focal length, no matter how short the focal length.

Henry,

I think the key phrase in your comment is "properly designed". Would it not be possible for a design to be less than optimized for the ED glass that it utilizes?

henry link · Jul 8, 2009

FrankD said:
Henry,

I think the key phrase in your comment is "properly designed". Would it not be possible for a design to be less than optimized for the ED glass that it utilizes?

Frank,

It's pretty much guaranteed that no ED binocular objective has an "optimal" design for correcting longitudinal CA or any other aberration. That would be an an expensive and unnecessary extravagance in an instrument intended only for non-critical low magnification use.

Henry

FrankD · Jul 8, 2009

I thought that ED objectives were utilized to correct longitudinal CA and not necessarily transverse CA or do I have that backwards?

I think you answer my question then with your following statement. However, would it be fair to say that some ED objective binoculars are more well designed to use that ED objective more effectively?

RJM · Jul 8, 2009

Binocular magnification is generally so low, CA is really only noticeble most of the time in poorly made, generally cheap bins.

That said, the main benefit I've seen in bins that use ED or Fluorite is increase contrast and color saturation, particularly reds.

cheers,
Rick

kristoffer · Jul 8, 2009

RJM said:
Binocular magnification is generally so low, CA is really only noticeble most of the time in poorly made, generally cheap bins.

That said, the main benefit I've seen in bins that use ED or Fluorite is increase contrast and color saturation, particularly reds.

cheers,
Rick

Well CA is noticeable in my vipers 8x42. I really like the image other then that and I would not call them poorly made cheap bins but you guys maybe disagree.

edz · Jul 8, 2009

FrankD said:
There is a lot of questions about ED glass. Maybe a thread on ED glass, what it is why it works, and what sort of design is necessary to make it work might be useful. I'm a biologist, not an engineer, and acknowledge my engineering shortcomings.
__________________
Steve

Excellent idea. The topic has been discussed a few times in the past but always in the context of a certain binocular (so it is not easy to just go and look up). A separate thread titled something along the lines of (ED glass in Binoculars) would be sufficient.

Hmmm, something along the lines of...
ED glass in binoculars

edz

FrankD · Jul 8, 2009

Very nice timing Ed. Thank you.

Zen Ray and Generation II ED's? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Used Register

Well-known member

Well-known member

Used Register

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Don't Worry, Be Happy!

Used Register

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread