Nikon EDG II: First impressions and comparisons (1 Viewer)

After a very long time of anticipation I finally got the opportunity to buy my own sample of this very special binocular. It is no secret that I fell in love with it more than two years ago and I'm finally at home now.
Another well-known fact is my love for the Meopro and Fury 6.5x32's.

When I first bought the Fury I discovered that it could do all, and more than my Minox HG 8x33 did, so I went from 8x33 to the Fury and my old man's trusty Zeiss 10x40 BGAT.
It soon became obvious that the Zeiss wasn't up there with the Fury so when I got the opportunity to replace it with a 10x32 FL, I thought I was done.
I argued that a set of a 6.5x or 7x and a 10x covers the bases much better than a single 8x and used that combo with great success, along with a 10x32 HG/Venturer that made a deep impression on me.

Then an 8x30 E II crossed my path and did so with a vengeance. I was already using Nikon Fieldscopes and had tried the EDG binoculars briefly.
The 8x30 could show every tiny detail as good as the FL despite its lower magnification, which made my theories fall to the earth.

I also bought the Meostar 8x32 as a beater and soon saw it become my favourite to-go binocular, albeit with a lesser image than the E II.
Thus, the FL was largely redundant and the thought of getting hold of the EDG 7x42 by selling the FL was formed in my head.

The time with the FL, and the E II's exquisite image, made me see the slight shortcomings of the Fury. I found it had a clear advantage over both 8x30/8x32's in dense habitats, but that its slightly low magnification and less than stellar sharpness disqualified it from being the only binocular I would use.

My idea with the EDG 7x42 is to try to use it as my stand-alone serious birding binocular when I'm using spectacles, the E II for the same task when I wear contacts and the Fury or Meopro for more casual walks and from indoors.
I expected it to have all of the Fury's virtues and a brighter, overall better image with less CA, sharper edges and more brilliant colours.

These are my first impressions:
The build quality is very solid and reassuring with the start resistance of the focus knob as the only and minor flaw. I also find it hard to push in the objective covers enough to make them stay in place.

A thousand years ago I tried the Bushnell or B&L Discoverer 7x42 and remember the magic feeling of lifting a big, flat, stone-like thing and suddenly see things with an amazing ease.
The EDG feels like a device rather than a big, flat stone but I reckon its image is a lot better and it focuses clockwise towards infinity.
The Meostar 7x42 would mimic the Discoverer's feel but I don't care for that yellow hue of the image.

Eyecups must be lifted about 5 millimeters although I'm wearing spectacles so the eye relief is excessive.

To be continued ...

I have not used it enough yet to see every aspect of its image quality but I have a number of first impressions.
First off, I will hardly sell this one since it's my firm belief that this is the finest 7x42 ever made. Edge sharpness, CA control and colour representation being what sets it apart from everything else. After trying it for a while, I'm still convinced but I also think that the distance to the other top 7x42's may not be as large as I used to think. It does fit the bill as the stand-alone instrument for serious birding I expected it to be, but I'm also somewhat surprised to find how good my other binoculars actually are.

Edge sharpness: Very good but the absolute sweet spot is perhaps 75%. There's surprisingly some field curvature. The 10x32 HG I owned had dead sharp edges with a larger AFOV. I'm thinking about the reports of the SLC and the Meostar having nearly perfect edges.

CA control: There is lateral CA that's easy to see outside of the sweet spot. The false colour remains, but is more tolerable when refocusing the edges.
In real birding, like watching a crow against an overcast sky or a sunlit gull swimming on a dark lake, this is not a problem.

Apparent sharpness: Downright amazing and the great contrast helps. I tried 2.5x, 6.5x and 8x boosting and these are everything one might possible make use of, sharpness-wise.

Brightness: For 24/7 binoculars, I reckoned that I would need larger exit pupils than the 4.9 mm of the Fury. In the middle of the night, the EDG is considerably brighter than the Fury. It's amazing to find a dim lawn seem illuminated and showing individual straws in the middle of the night.
I guess my ol' eyes dilate to at least 6 mm pupil size.

Colours: There's a very slight warmth in the image but all colours seem to sparkle while still looking correct. I will develop this further in the next post.

Comparisons:

EDG vs. E II: Let me start with saying that the EDG brings you closer and the E II brings you into the scene. Both have exceptional and very similar image quality with similar CA handling and colour rendition. The fact that the EDG is several times more expensive does not devaluate it, it points out what a sublime binocular and great value the E II is.

EDG vs. Fury: The most valid comparison would be with the Fury and again I'm impressed with the Fury. The 0.5x magnification difference is visible.
Their colour representations are extremely similar, possibly with the Fury being fractionally more neutral. The colour difference between my two eyes is hugely greater than the difference between the EDG and the Fury. The EDG is more brilliant and bright, though this is only obvious when having both in hand. The Vortex people made a great job with the lens coatings to neutralise the warm image that comes with silvered prisms, but I think the brightness suffered a little. Filtering does reduce the transmission rate. The dielectric coatings of the EDG allow for a greater freedom to combine colour neutrality with great transmission rate of all wavelengths, hence the increased brightness and brilliance.

The Fury has softer edges and more CA. On the other hand it seems to have greater perceived depth of field, it is lighter and has a focus knob that turns easier.
All this ensures the Fury keeps its position as the uncrowned king of speedy birding.
The EDG, as expected, feels more like a generalist. It does most things better, but for speed it is beaten by the Fury.

EDG vs. Meostar: The Meostar 8x32 is surprisingly easy on the eye. I love the big AFOV and how easy it is to find the proper eye placement.
Please read about eye placement with the EDG further down.
The wonderful ergonomics stand out even more after handling the considerably heavier and thicker EDG.
It handles CA very well and I actually can't say it's inferior to the EDG in that regard.
Unfortunately, the yellow hue stands out more than ever after looking through the EDG. The blue cap on the Blue Tit's heads is rendered inanimate and dull through the Meostar. I can't wait to exchange it for the HD version whenever it emerges.

The EDG II 7x42. What can I say?
I'm thinking of how I called the 10x32 FL "an 8x32 with 10x magnification" because of its wide FOV and bright image.
I might call the EDG 7x42 "an 8x42 with a wide FOV and large exit pupil for night birding". This is my explanation:
I found that it's a bit critical about eye placement and eyecup extension. Furthermore, I find the focus critical just as if it had a small depth of field.
In this regard it's similar to my criticism of the Minox HG 8x33. It is not difficult to find focus with the EDG, but there's decidedly a difference between "in focus" and "out of focus" that makes it similar to an 8x binocular. I believe that this is an effect of the extreme sharpness this binocular is capable of, in combination with a quite , but not completely flat field.
Another, maybe more positive thing with the EDG 7x42 is that its super sharp view delivers a detail recognition that rivals many 8x42's.
It will probably stay my primary and stand-alone allround binocular for serious birding for years and years to come.
But it does better in the company of the other binoculars I own and use.

//L

Lars how do you really feel about this EDG II 7x42? I was going to send you a message to find out, but figured you would let us know. I am very glad you like it!!

The focus wheel starts a little hard and it is ok then?

looksharp65 said:

.....

The EDG II 7x42. What can I say?
I'm thinking of how I called the 10x32 FL "an 8x32 with 10x magnification" because of its wide FOV and bright image.
I might call the EDG 7x42 "an 8x42 with a wide FOV and large exit pupil for night birding". This is my explanation:
I found that it's a bit critical about eye placement and eyecup extension. Furthermore, I find the focus critical just as if it had a small depth of field.
In this regard it's similar to my criticism of the Minox HG 8x33. It is not difficult to find focus with the EDG, but there's decidedly a difference between "in focus" and "out of focus" that makes it similar to an 8x binocular. I believe that this is an effect of the extreme sharpness this binocular is capable of, in combination with a quite , but not completely flat field.
Another, maybe more positive thing with the EDG 7x42 is that its super sharp view delivers a detail recognition that rivals many 8x42's.
It will probably stay my primary and stand-alone allround binocular for serious birding for years and years to come.
But it does better in the company of the other binoculars I own and use.

//L

Click to expand...

Lars,

I'm disappointed to hear that you feel the 7x42 EDG has a shallow apparent DOF because: (1) 7x bins actually have better DOF than 8x bins, which usually makes the apparent DOF in a 7x bin look very good, as I found with the ZR 7x36 ED2, Vixen 7x50 Foresta, and Nikon 7x35 WF; (2) Mike Freiberg from Nikon was just remarking how he thought the EDG series had great "depth of focus," and (3) I had the 7x42 EDG on my bin wish list.

The 10x42 EDG I tried had a fairly fast focuser, not quite as fast as the 10x42 HGL, but fast enough that I had to be somewhat careful not to overshoot my target at medium to close distances. Comparing the EDG to the Nikon 10x42 SE, the apparent DOF of the EDG seemed shallower.

I'm not sure how the HGL and EDG focusers compared in terms of degrees of rotation, but the EDG focuser itself didn't have much dampening. That might be the issue with the 7x42 EDG, because it should have a deeper apparent DOF. Fast focusers tend to make the depth look shallower, as I found out with the HGL series, particularly the very speedy 8x32 model, which took less than 1/2 turn to go from close focus to infinity and gave little resistance when focusing.

Brock

Brock, the not stellar DOF of the EDG 7x42 is not a real issue.
It is not the result of a fast gearing of the focus knob and I can handle fast focusers.
If it's something optical, it can be the big exit pupil if my pupils are big too, the flat field, the awesome sharpness that separates 'in focus' from 'nearly in focus' or simply that a 6.5x yields a better perceived DOF than a 7x.

If it's something mechanical, I rather think it's the resistance in the knob which is much greater than in the Fury.

It could also be a combination. When the spring light comes I may feel different.

//L

Steve, the initial start resistance is greater when picking it up. If it was used a minute ago, it is less. I guess I'll wear it in.

//L

LS, do you dare to do the overnight freezer test ?

Anders

brocknroller said:

Lars,

I'm disappointed to hear that you feel the 7x42 EDG has a shallow apparent DOF because: (1) 7x bins actually have better DOF than 8x bins, which usually makes the apparent DOF in a 7x bin look very good, as I found with the ZR 7x36 ED2, Vixen 7x50 Foresta, and Nikon 7x35 WF; (2) Mike Freiberg from Nikon was just remarking how he thought the EDG series had great "depth of focus," and (3) I had the 7x42 EDG on my bin wish list.

Click to expand...

I found the light levels made a dramatic difference to the perceived DOF with the EDG 7x42. The centre of the view is exactly like any other 7x as you would expect. When the pupils are dilated the peripheral view is good but not remarkable, but in summer sunshine when your pupils contract then something special appears to happen. I got from around 20ft to a mile in reasonable focus at the edges. Looking out over a lake to the hills on the other side an ELSV showed distinct patches of blurring, The whole scene looked great with the EDG. Stunning!

David

LS, do you experience the issue with the dioptre moving if you press on the front (smooth) edge of the focus wheel when focussing?

mooreorless said:

Lars how do you really feel about this EDG II 7x42?

Click to expand...

Though it may look like I have mixed emotions, I'm mightily inpressed with it.
My remarks are more descriptions than grumblings, really. :t:

Binoseeker said:

LS, do you dare to do the overnight freezer test ?

Click to expand...

I dare to but don't really see the point since I can't influence the outcome.
If there's never cold weather, and I mean -15 C or so, the result of the freezer test is of no importance. And if it is that cold and I manage to be outside for hours, I will get empirically proven facts whether I or the binocular is the first to give up.

Grando said:

LS, do you experience the issue with the dioptre moving if you press on the front (smooth) edge of the focus wheel when focussing?

Click to expand...

There's a short answer: No.

//L

typo said:

I found the light levels made a dramatic difference to the perceived DOF with the EDG 7x42. The centre of the view is exactly like any other 7x as you would expect. When the pupils are dilated the peripheral view is good but not remarkable, but in summer sunshine when your pupils contract then something special appears to happen. I got from around 20ft to a mile in reasonable focus at the edges. Looking out over a lake to the hills on the other side an ELSV showed distinct patches of blurring, The whole scene looked great with the EDG. Stunning!

David

Click to expand...

I can second this. Today was sunny and the EDG performed superiorly.
The sharpness at a distance of about 4 kilometers was stunning and I doubt I'll ever feel underpowered with this 7x.
Again, there was no CA visible with sunlit swans and gulls. A crow flying by showed awesome feather detail. I'll develop this further in another post.
It performed extremely well when pointed towards the sun too, no veiling glare or reflections.

Tonight there's also a clear sky and stars are pinpricks over much of the FOV.
The edge can be refocused to a better sharpness, but some astigmatism remains very close to the edge. Jupiter and four or five of its moons like tiny pinpricks and no CA or colour bleeding, extremely beautiful view.

As a package and as generalist binoculars, these are the best I've used, hands down.

//L

I posted this off-Nikon forum since I think it is valid for a few more binoculars than my new love:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=276970

LS thanks for the link on my old post. I`m glad you like the EDG, I`v yet to try the 7x but the 8x42 I found the best 8x42 I`v tried.

Look forward to reading more as you get better acquainted.

Torview said:

LS thanks for the link on my old post. I`m glad you like the EDG, I`v yet to try the 7x but the 8x42 I found the best 8x42 I`v tried.

Look forward to reading more as you get better acquainted.

Click to expand...

Torview, since I know you like 7x42's I really think you should try the EDG.
I'm sure the EDG 8x42 is a fantastic binocular, but I somehow doubt that 8x is needed when the 7x is so sharp. But the bigger AFOV would surely be a treat.
Pity that there are no big-AFOV 8x50's, the EDG would be fantastic in that configuration if they could fix a 140 m/420 ft FOV.

I'd also love to see a 6x32 but that's not happening, unfortunately.

//L

LS65, thanks for the review (so far!) with the v. useful comparisons. Sorry if you have given this info in some other thread already: what are the other 7xs you've used? And could you say (even briefly), how does the EDG compare optically?

Just as a comparison with the one 7x I have access to at present, vs the Nikon EX 7x50? Or, another I used some months back, the Zen-Ray ED3 7x43? (I do know that if a comparison is not done at the same time it can mislead.) Thanks. I'm now much drawn to 7x.

Frank, I'm a bit disappointed to find no reports yet on the new ZR ED2 7x36. Time you used your old ZR link for this! I'd reckon your review will benefit them also.

LS, what kind of warranty did you get?

Binoseeker said:

LS, what kind of warranty did you get?

Click to expand...

Gentlemen's agreement, you know. He's a great guy!

//L

pompadour said:

LS65, thanks for the review (so far!) with the v. useful comparisons. Sorry if you have given this info in some other thread already: what are the other 7xs you've used? And could you say (even briefly), how does the EDG compare optically?

Just as a comparison with the one 7x I have access to at present, vs the Nikon EX 7x50? Or, another I used some months back, the Zen-Ray ED3 7x43? (I do know that if a comparison is not done at the same time it can mislead.) Thanks. I'm now much drawn to 7x.

Click to expand...

pompadour,

you're welcome! I've used the Vortex Fury and Meopro 6,5x32's extensively, I have owned a Nikon Tropical IF HP WP 7x50 and a IOR Valdada 7x40 for brief periods. I also own an old Meopta 6x30 porro and a Nikon Mikron 6x15 CF Anniversary MC.
I have looked through a few Zeiss Classic 7x42 and find the Fury/Meopro better, considerably better apart from the field cachet.
The 7x42 FL surely has its good sides, but after looking through an EDG 7x42 it appeared to have a narrow sweet spot and uninspiring, pale colour rendition.

//L

Yes, I knew about your Meopta 6.5x - you have praised it in Bf. more than everyone else on the internet together! Actually, I, too, have found it v. attractive, in my case only as a prospect yet, going by the config., specs. and a few reviews even before yours.

Sorry one thing is not too clear - what is meant there by "the field cachet"?

So the EDG is "inspiring" - ha - the old Leica and Nikon spectrum trick - of which I too am a willing victim! (There may be more to it, of course.) I remember your rendition of this effect - a comparison of L., N., Swarovski and Zeiss? - by image editing, a year or two back.