falcondude
Well-known member
someone mentioned there would be 9x36 ED2 coming out soon? I have been checking their website for the last few weeks and didn't see any sign of it. Does anyone know when they will be released? and spec?
-
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.
ZEN ED2 9x36 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter falcondude
- Start date
See posts # 4, #22 and #24 here:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=166556&highlight=9x36
Bob
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=166556&highlight=9x36
Bob
falcondude
Well-known member
thanks. I have been reluctant to go beyond 8/8.5x range. The 9x power seems to be good compromise for me without sweating over the stability of 10x.
Visually, for 2x jumps in power, I generally agree with you; but if you want to keep the same 4mm Exit Pupil you will get a big difference in size with the 2x jumps. It's not so noticeable going from 8x to 9x though. My 9x36 Diamondback isn't much bigger than my 8x32 Nikon LX L or my 10x32 LX L. In fact, it is slightly shorter and not significantly wider.
Bob
Last edited:
That makes sense. The exit pupil will be 3.6mm if they make 10x36. May not be a big deal for day use. But at twilight, a 4mm EP (hence 9x36) seems to be a natural step for the next 36mm ED2.
Tero,
What ever works.
Based on my very rudimentary math, it seems a 28mm f4 objective for a 7x would require an eyepiece of 16mm focal length and a 7.5x would need one of 14.9333 (15mm). It's a 4mm exit pupil vs 3.7mm; not much difference.
I will stand corrected on the above math if it is wrong. And, of course, I realize that things aren't that simple in making bins!
Bob
What ever works.
Based on my very rudimentary math, it seems a 28mm f4 objective for a 7x would require an eyepiece of 16mm focal length and a 7.5x would need one of 14.9333 (15mm). It's a 4mm exit pupil vs 3.7mm; not much difference.
I will stand corrected on the above math if it is wrong. And, of course, I realize that things aren't that simple in making bins!
Bob
Last edited:
Tero
Retired
I have a 8x28 Bushnell, and it does in fact have decent optics. It has other faults. I do not actually believe others than the alphas can make a decent pair at 20 to 28mm in a roof prims. It is actually quite a challenge. But whatever ZR comes up with, we will be to give it a spin. I still like the idea of an 8x28. It fits in my coat pocket.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Tero,
Correct me if I'm wrong (which I'm not
, but ever since I registered on BF, you've been asking for a 9x36 bin, haven't you? I thought you would wet your pants when someone finally made one, with ED glass no less, but from the above statement "The 9x is not all that different from 8x" it would seem your passion for this configuration has waned.
If 9x is not all that different than 8x, why have you pined for a 9x36 or 9x by anything. It seems that every time a new bin comes out, you would like to see a 9x version.
What's the appeal (or was the appeal) of 9x for you?
I can see a noticeable difference in resolution between my 8x bins and the 8.5x EL or even my older 8.5x 804 Audubon.
I mentioned a while ago that I was trying to ID some symbols on a car bumper (which turned out to be symbols of several religions), but other than the cross, I couldn't make out the others (such as the Islamic crescent moon and star).
But then I trained my 8.5x Audubons on the bumper, and lo and behold, I could see the various symbols. The car was over a block away and the symbols were rather small - like reading a bumper sticker.
The 8x bins were no slouches - 8x32 SE, 8x30 EII, 8x32 LX. Granted, they were all midsized bins, but according to Kevin's Axiom, this should make no never mind since it was sunny out (I don't agree that his axiom applies to all daytime situations, for example, looking at birds in the shadows of dense woods, aperture rules, all other things being equal).
The only thing that could negate the benefits of a 9x bin is if you couldn't hold it as steady as an 8x or if the optics were under par.
Last edited:
collinvue
Active member
+
:king: Charles did post in another thread,..just in case it was missed
http://www.zen-ray.com/shop/binoculars/zened2-9x36.html
..
:king: Charles did post in another thread,..just in case it was missed
http://www.zen-ray.com/shop/binoculars/zened2-9x36.html
..
brocknroller
porromaniac
Is your nose closer to your right ear or your left ear? :-O
You raise an interesting question perhaps unintentionally.
If you check out Edz's technical reports on bins on Cloudy Nights, you will see that many bins don't match their specified magnification.
For example, in his report on "Three Families" (Nikon SE, Nikon EX, and Fuji FMT-SX), he shows that only three out of eight bins actually match their stated magnification. Most are over spec, and one is under.
http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1772
This begs a further question, which is how far over or under does a bin's magnification have to be before the user realizes it's not up to spec?
That is, are these "bench measurements" too negligible to be noticed by the unboosted naked eye? Or is there some point (e.g., .5x) where the user begins to notice the difference?
Or does that point vary from person to person?
Brock the Sophist
This question popped in my head when I was listening to Science Friday on NPR radio the other day. That was about how our brain treats the number natively. The question is what's the median between 8 and 10? For binoculars, is it linear scale or logarithmic scale? If it is linear scale, 9 is right in the middle. But if it is logarithmic scale, maybe 9x is closer to 10x than we think.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Okay, Bill Nye, the Science Guy, I will take back my nose joke.
Geez, I assume (and apparently made an ass out of me, not u) that optical magnification was always linear.
A logarithmic magnification scale in optics? That's too complex an argument for my "Old Brain" (not enough Neocortex, a Klingon needs to save room in the cranium for the bumps).
I don't even have a logarithm button on my simple calculator. But here is a primer if anyone is interested:
http://www.math.utah.edu/~pa/math/log.html
Better call in the Geek Squad. Henry? Ron? Kevin P? Holger?
Brock the Mathephobe
Last edited:
Tero
Retired
The 8x and 10x refer to how the dimensions appear. A bird x high goes to bird 8x high. It is linear.
Some people prefer to say 8 times closer. But if you draw a right triangle, 8x closer is also 8x taller.
But of course not everything is linear. If you are looking at the entire field of view, the area is also being blown up and with the same amount of light spread over more area, it may quickly appear dim.
Some people prefer to say 8 times closer. But if you draw a right triangle, 8x closer is also 8x taller.
But of course not everything is linear. If you are looking at the entire field of view, the area is also being blown up and with the same amount of light spread over more area, it may quickly appear dim.
Last edited:
