Steve C
Well-known member
I did not have much intention of trying either of these, but my curiosity eventually got the better of me. I have come to like the 7x36 ZEN ED 2 enough that I made arrangements to trade an 8x43 in NIB condition for a second 7x36. I sent it in, and the new one is not in yet, as Charles was getting low on inventory and asked if he could wait until he got his next order with the new ZRS. The second one will be the glare fix version as well. So, as events turned out out, I now have the Vista and ZRS, and another ED 7x36 in route. I really had no particular expectation on either one. I quite liked the original ZRS HD. I had the original ZRS in 10x42, and I wound up giving it to my nephew for a birthday present. I did not think too much of the original non PC Vista.
When ZR says they are new, they mean new, not just revisions or updates of the older versions, but completely different design and housing on both and neither bear a lot of resemblance to their predecessor, neither physically nor optically.
The Vista 8x42
These bear an astonishing resemblance to the Vortex Diamondback, both physically and optically. The Diamondback I have is the 7x36 version, but the interior assemblage of parts looks different. I suppose this may be an example of convergent evolution, as I believe the Vista and DB come from different manufacturers.
The Vista comes in a black armor. It uses a 1.5 turn focus travel. The first 1.0 turns take it from the close focus to 100’. The Vista is 5.0” by 6.1” with the eye cups extended and 5.8” retracted. It weighs 24 oz.
The focus travel is quite smooth, and somewhat easier than the ZRS, but a lot less stiff than the ZEN ED 2. The diopter is right barrel, non-locking. It shows no tendency to shift settings and seems stiff enough to stay where it is set. The IPD range is from 56-75mm.
The ZRS HD 8x42
I really expected to see a similar physical package with the new ZRS and the old ZRS. This is not the case. The new ZRS is quite a bit more compact, not very much larger than the Diamondback 7x36. It has the same rubber armor and thumb indents found in the ZEN ED. It is 5.4” retracted and 5.8” extended. The extended distance is the same as the Vista when retracted. The locking diopter is gone on this model. Like the Vista, it shows no shift and looks to be stiff enough to avoid unintentional movement. The eye cups, diopter, and focus knobs on both look identical. This has 1.75 turns of the focus wheel. Like the Vista, it uses one turn to go from close focus to 100’. The focus tension is a little stiffer than the Vista, but still less than the ZEN ED. This one has an IPD range from 54-75mm, better for closer set eyes. The case and accessories for each are identical. There are typical tethered objective covers that stay put, the rather typical soft rain guard, decent nylon case, and a just right length for around the neck wear black strap with the red and white Zen-Ray on the strap. There is a few degrees of wiggle in the eye cup when they are fully extended.
The views
The comparison line up of binoculars were; 7x36 Diamondback, 7x32 Leupold GR Switch Power, 7x36 ZEN ED 2 (my Swift Eaglets are gone at the moment), 8x42 Promaster ELX ED, 10x42 original ZRS, and10x 43 ZEN ED 2.
The first ZR binocular I unpacked was the Vista. So I set it up and started using it. It was a nice sunny day, and there has been enough of a string of nice days that quite a few birds have showed up, so lots of targets. The edge is a little fuzzy, there is a noticeable double ring of distortion, the inner ring being field curvature, as the distortion can be focused out. The outer ring is pincushion distortion. The on axis view is really quite good, and holds up to more than half of the 393’ fov. There is a little more fall of before you get to the inner of the two noticeable rings mentioned above, but that fall of is slight. All in all, the field appears reasonably wide, and while the edge is not perfect, it is quite good enough to detect movement and color at the edge.
The CA in an inexpensive binocular is controlled a lot better than I thought it might be. I could get it to show up on the edges of distant snow drifts, or ridge tops in bright sunlight, but there was never very much. I am not really bothered by CA, so take that into account. There was more CA here than anything else except the Leupold @ 7x. It also does a very good job controlling stray light, but some can be made to show up panning in the general direction of the sun, or with the bright sun at an angle behind the viewer. The Vista has a slightly warm somewhat reddish color bias.
It is a pretty decent view for $130. I wish I still had the Atlas Radian to compare, but I don’t. I seem to recall the Radian as being a bit more compact. I recall no substantive difference in the view, other than I recall the Radian as having a better edge. I think if the Vista reduced the fov to the same 375’, the edge would improve. Either the Vista or the Radian would be probably two of the best field worthy entry level binoculars, certainly when the price is held to a maximum of $150 or so. I took these and did a day’s worth of birding around the house, the local lake and at the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. The Vista was the only glass I had, and I never felt handicapped.
The ZRS was the next one out of the box. It took awhile, but I eventually came to the realization that there is “something going on here…” So I started to side by side it to the rest. When I came to the Promaster, it “finally” hit me. There were in fact two things here. First is that the apparent image detail is every bit as good as the Promaster (which IIRC is specified at 3.6 arc seconds). I dug out the resolution chart and confirmed that (the quick test I did showed them the same). I’m not saying the ZRS is at that level, I don’t know what the resolution spec is, but to the eye there is no difference. There was a difference with the Vista and Monarch. The next thing is that the view appears every bit as large and wide as the Promaster …and then it hit me, right between the eyes. I recovered from my Alzheimer’s moment and looked at the end of the focus wheel; FOV 393’ @ 1000 yds. It is the same as the Promaster…Duh! Well, one great mystery solved, at least I had a laugh at myself. |8.|
I have had these for about a week now. I really think I prefer the ZRS to the Promaster. A large part of this is the smaller size. The other part is the equally good image and wide field. While the magnifications of the ZEN ED 2’s I now have are different, the resolution/apparent image sharpness of the ZRS appears to be just about the same level.
Color fringing control is at least 98% as good as the ZEN ED. I had to really work in very extreme conditions to get CA to show up. It would show up where in would not in the ED 2. The Color bias of this ZRS is much more neutral than the original, which was on the warm, reddish side. Color bias is just about like the ZEN ED 2. In all the new ZRS appears quite a bit brighter than the original. Stray light control is very good, even a bit better than the ZEN ED. The color rendition is very good as is the contrast. It is not quite the same as the ZEN ED 2, but you will not notice if you don’t have both in hand. There is a bit of pincushion at the edge, but that is all. The edge is better than the Promaster. Overall the field is a lot flatter than the Vista. They are maybe a bit behind the ZEN ED 2’s, but certainly as good as the Promaster or the ED 1. Don’t bemoan the lack of ED glass; you won’t notice it’s not there.
These ZRS quite frankly took me by surprise. While I thought I had no “expectations” it appears that I was expecting not much more than the old ZRS with a difference in color tint, brightness and a bit better contrast. I suppose that is what I got, there was just more improvement than I was prepared for, particularly in the near lack of difference in apparent image sharpness between it and the ED. I was also evidently “expecting” the same fov spec as the old one too.
As to how these stand up to the rest of my crowd… Well, I’ll take either one over the Monarch. The Monarch is better at CA and stray light than the Vista, but the color and contrast is better in the Vista, as is the fov, and the depth of focus. The Monarch has always been too “focus fiddly” for my likes. While I can live with the fov of the Monarch, the narrowness is really apparent in the comparison. The Vista appears to have almost identical image characteristics to the Diamondback, the same level of tint, contrast and color, the same level of brightness, and just about identical edge characteristics. The Vista and Monarch take a back seat to the ZRS, which is a lot closer to the ZEN ED 2 than I was prepared to find. I suppose one way to look at the ZRS is the poor man’s ZEN ED 2. I thought the original ZRS was probably the best sub $200 binocular I had experience with. The new betters the old.
My brother and nephew both spent some time with these. They are both pretty unsophisticated binocular users and they both thought that they would be perfectly happy with either one. I was looking at the waterfowl on Spring Lake (this is a 700 acre lake just about half a mile from the house, lots of birds almost anytime) the other day. I had four or five binoculars on the hood of my pickup. One of the neighbors stopped (he was doing the same thing I was) and asked about all of the binoculars. So I told him. He had a Leupold Cascade 8x42 roof. His reaction to the Vista was “these cost how much?” Man, I know what I’m getting for my two boys!
So it looks like Zen Ray now has a very good low cost entry level binocular in the Vista and for some $70 more the ZRS will compete handily with anything between it and the ZEN ED 2, and with even more expensive glass like the Viper. I’ve about decided that the ZRS 8x42 makes a better fit for me than having two 7x36.
When ZR says they are new, they mean new, not just revisions or updates of the older versions, but completely different design and housing on both and neither bear a lot of resemblance to their predecessor, neither physically nor optically.
The Vista 8x42
These bear an astonishing resemblance to the Vortex Diamondback, both physically and optically. The Diamondback I have is the 7x36 version, but the interior assemblage of parts looks different. I suppose this may be an example of convergent evolution, as I believe the Vista and DB come from different manufacturers.
The Vista comes in a black armor. It uses a 1.5 turn focus travel. The first 1.0 turns take it from the close focus to 100’. The Vista is 5.0” by 6.1” with the eye cups extended and 5.8” retracted. It weighs 24 oz.
The focus travel is quite smooth, and somewhat easier than the ZRS, but a lot less stiff than the ZEN ED 2. The diopter is right barrel, non-locking. It shows no tendency to shift settings and seems stiff enough to stay where it is set. The IPD range is from 56-75mm.
The ZRS HD 8x42
I really expected to see a similar physical package with the new ZRS and the old ZRS. This is not the case. The new ZRS is quite a bit more compact, not very much larger than the Diamondback 7x36. It has the same rubber armor and thumb indents found in the ZEN ED. It is 5.4” retracted and 5.8” extended. The extended distance is the same as the Vista when retracted. The locking diopter is gone on this model. Like the Vista, it shows no shift and looks to be stiff enough to avoid unintentional movement. The eye cups, diopter, and focus knobs on both look identical. This has 1.75 turns of the focus wheel. Like the Vista, it uses one turn to go from close focus to 100’. The focus tension is a little stiffer than the Vista, but still less than the ZEN ED. This one has an IPD range from 54-75mm, better for closer set eyes. The case and accessories for each are identical. There are typical tethered objective covers that stay put, the rather typical soft rain guard, decent nylon case, and a just right length for around the neck wear black strap with the red and white Zen-Ray on the strap. There is a few degrees of wiggle in the eye cup when they are fully extended.
The views
The comparison line up of binoculars were; 7x36 Diamondback, 7x32 Leupold GR Switch Power, 7x36 ZEN ED 2 (my Swift Eaglets are gone at the moment), 8x42 Promaster ELX ED, 10x42 original ZRS, and10x 43 ZEN ED 2.
The first ZR binocular I unpacked was the Vista. So I set it up and started using it. It was a nice sunny day, and there has been enough of a string of nice days that quite a few birds have showed up, so lots of targets. The edge is a little fuzzy, there is a noticeable double ring of distortion, the inner ring being field curvature, as the distortion can be focused out. The outer ring is pincushion distortion. The on axis view is really quite good, and holds up to more than half of the 393’ fov. There is a little more fall of before you get to the inner of the two noticeable rings mentioned above, but that fall of is slight. All in all, the field appears reasonably wide, and while the edge is not perfect, it is quite good enough to detect movement and color at the edge.
The CA in an inexpensive binocular is controlled a lot better than I thought it might be. I could get it to show up on the edges of distant snow drifts, or ridge tops in bright sunlight, but there was never very much. I am not really bothered by CA, so take that into account. There was more CA here than anything else except the Leupold @ 7x. It also does a very good job controlling stray light, but some can be made to show up panning in the general direction of the sun, or with the bright sun at an angle behind the viewer. The Vista has a slightly warm somewhat reddish color bias.
It is a pretty decent view for $130. I wish I still had the Atlas Radian to compare, but I don’t. I seem to recall the Radian as being a bit more compact. I recall no substantive difference in the view, other than I recall the Radian as having a better edge. I think if the Vista reduced the fov to the same 375’, the edge would improve. Either the Vista or the Radian would be probably two of the best field worthy entry level binoculars, certainly when the price is held to a maximum of $150 or so. I took these and did a day’s worth of birding around the house, the local lake and at the Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge. The Vista was the only glass I had, and I never felt handicapped.
The ZRS was the next one out of the box. It took awhile, but I eventually came to the realization that there is “something going on here…” So I started to side by side it to the rest. When I came to the Promaster, it “finally” hit me. There were in fact two things here. First is that the apparent image detail is every bit as good as the Promaster (which IIRC is specified at 3.6 arc seconds). I dug out the resolution chart and confirmed that (the quick test I did showed them the same). I’m not saying the ZRS is at that level, I don’t know what the resolution spec is, but to the eye there is no difference. There was a difference with the Vista and Monarch. The next thing is that the view appears every bit as large and wide as the Promaster …and then it hit me, right between the eyes. I recovered from my Alzheimer’s moment and looked at the end of the focus wheel; FOV 393’ @ 1000 yds. It is the same as the Promaster…Duh! Well, one great mystery solved, at least I had a laugh at myself. |8.|
I have had these for about a week now. I really think I prefer the ZRS to the Promaster. A large part of this is the smaller size. The other part is the equally good image and wide field. While the magnifications of the ZEN ED 2’s I now have are different, the resolution/apparent image sharpness of the ZRS appears to be just about the same level.
Color fringing control is at least 98% as good as the ZEN ED. I had to really work in very extreme conditions to get CA to show up. It would show up where in would not in the ED 2. The Color bias of this ZRS is much more neutral than the original, which was on the warm, reddish side. Color bias is just about like the ZEN ED 2. In all the new ZRS appears quite a bit brighter than the original. Stray light control is very good, even a bit better than the ZEN ED. The color rendition is very good as is the contrast. It is not quite the same as the ZEN ED 2, but you will not notice if you don’t have both in hand. There is a bit of pincushion at the edge, but that is all. The edge is better than the Promaster. Overall the field is a lot flatter than the Vista. They are maybe a bit behind the ZEN ED 2’s, but certainly as good as the Promaster or the ED 1. Don’t bemoan the lack of ED glass; you won’t notice it’s not there.
These ZRS quite frankly took me by surprise. While I thought I had no “expectations” it appears that I was expecting not much more than the old ZRS with a difference in color tint, brightness and a bit better contrast. I suppose that is what I got, there was just more improvement than I was prepared for, particularly in the near lack of difference in apparent image sharpness between it and the ED. I was also evidently “expecting” the same fov spec as the old one too.
As to how these stand up to the rest of my crowd… Well, I’ll take either one over the Monarch. The Monarch is better at CA and stray light than the Vista, but the color and contrast is better in the Vista, as is the fov, and the depth of focus. The Monarch has always been too “focus fiddly” for my likes. While I can live with the fov of the Monarch, the narrowness is really apparent in the comparison. The Vista appears to have almost identical image characteristics to the Diamondback, the same level of tint, contrast and color, the same level of brightness, and just about identical edge characteristics. The Vista and Monarch take a back seat to the ZRS, which is a lot closer to the ZEN ED 2 than I was prepared to find. I suppose one way to look at the ZRS is the poor man’s ZEN ED 2. I thought the original ZRS was probably the best sub $200 binocular I had experience with. The new betters the old.
My brother and nephew both spent some time with these. They are both pretty unsophisticated binocular users and they both thought that they would be perfectly happy with either one. I was looking at the waterfowl on Spring Lake (this is a 700 acre lake just about half a mile from the house, lots of birds almost anytime) the other day. I had four or five binoculars on the hood of my pickup. One of the neighbors stopped (he was doing the same thing I was) and asked about all of the binoculars. So I told him. He had a Leupold Cascade 8x42 roof. His reaction to the Vista was “these cost how much?” Man, I know what I’m getting for my two boys!
So it looks like Zen Ray now has a very good low cost entry level binocular in the Vista and for some $70 more the ZRS will compete handily with anything between it and the ZEN ED 2, and with even more expensive glass like the Viper. I’ve about decided that the ZRS 8x42 makes a better fit for me than having two 7x36.
I enjoyed reading your comparison.
