has530
Well-known member
Earlier this year I found a good deal on a clean pair of the Nikon XL zooms. I had always been curious about these as conversations about zoom binoculars generally go "all zoom binos are bad...except the Nikon XLs". I have to say, they are very impressive optically and mechanically. The focus and zoom action are smooth and precise and the image is sublime. So today I set out to compare these to various other models at different magnifications so see if it could replace multiple pairs (like how some use zoom eyepieces to replace multiple fixed length eyepieces for telescopes). All comparisons were done unmounted and braced because I do not have a way to mount the Nikon.
8x - vs. Bushnell Legend M
This is the weakest point for the Nikon Zooms. With a field of only 5.2* at 8x they give severe tunnel vision and at close distances the image circles from each side barely overlap due to the wide spaced objectives. By comparison I measured the Bushnells to be more than 50% wider. However, the Nikons are completely sharp edge-to-edge while the Bushnell have some field curvature. In total the Bushnell still has a wider "pristine" image area but not by much. The Nikon shows a dimmer image (outdated coatings probably more to blame with a yellowish cast compared to the brighter slightly green in the bushnell) but does control veiling glare better with practically none. CA is well controlled in both but the Legend wins with practically none while the Nikon has a bit at the very edge. All in all the Nikon has very nice optics while the modern ED glass and coatings give the legend an edge in brightness and CA control. However the 5.2* FOV is a real non-starter and given the Nikons limited utility at this magnification.
10x - vs. Vortex Viper HD (pre-2018)
Again the FOV of the Nikon is very narrow although a little wider by 10x. The Vipers have an AFOV of around 60* while I measured the Nikon at ~50*. While still obviously narrower than most modern fixed zoom binos the Nikon already feels much less restricted. Again the Nikon controls glare better than it's opponent (even with a bino bandit on the Viper) and is completely sharp edge to edge while the viper rolls off a bit in the last 10%. The Viper still has a marginally wider sweet spot but the difference at this magnification is practically negligible. The Nikon is again dimmer with it's warm cast while the viper is bright and pretty white. In this case the Nikon has better control of CA with still practically none in the middle and a trace at the edge despite being a classic achromat while the viper as ED glass. The Nikon also has a noticeably clearer image giving the classic alpha-like image where it feels as though you are placed in the scene while the viper slightly feels like looking through glass. At this magnification I would say except for the slightly narrow FOV, older coatings, and lack of waterproofing the Nikon is the superior all-around bino at this magnification.
15x - vs. Canon 15x50 IS (IS not activated)
A little cheating because I do not have a 15/16x42 so the Canon have a 10mm aperture advantage. Again, even near their widest the Nikon are narrower than their competition. Both are sharp edge-to-edge but the canon has an AFOV around 65* and the Nikon around 61*. Again, the Nikon has less CA despite the Canon advertising ultra-low dispersion glass (which is only worse when the IS turns on). Both present a yellowish image but the Nikon is yellower and dimmer while the Canon is a little greener and much brighter (but also gathers 56% more light with their larger aperture). Both give a nice clean image and if it weren't for the IS I would likely pick the Nikon for it's lighter weight.
Overall the Nikon's hold their own in image quality against 3 modern pairs of binoculars all advertising ED glass (and dielectric/phase coatings on the roof prisms of the Bushnell and Vortex). However as is the problem with all but a few very new zoom eyepieces they are held back by narrow AFOVs, especially at low magnifications. Anyone who has used a roughly 40-60* zoom eyepiece will know about how it feels. Despite this disadvantage and the outdated coatings (which are in my opinion better than the Nikon E coatings and nearly up to snuff with the Criterion coatings I have seen) they give a really nice image which is practically free from abberations; a remarkable achievement for a 30-year-old zoom binocular. While I wouldn't say they would replce any one binocular at a given magnification they are certainly a jack of all trades master of none type of gear. They are also very well built and a whole lot of fun to use.
8x - vs. Bushnell Legend M
This is the weakest point for the Nikon Zooms. With a field of only 5.2* at 8x they give severe tunnel vision and at close distances the image circles from each side barely overlap due to the wide spaced objectives. By comparison I measured the Bushnells to be more than 50% wider. However, the Nikons are completely sharp edge-to-edge while the Bushnell have some field curvature. In total the Bushnell still has a wider "pristine" image area but not by much. The Nikon shows a dimmer image (outdated coatings probably more to blame with a yellowish cast compared to the brighter slightly green in the bushnell) but does control veiling glare better with practically none. CA is well controlled in both but the Legend wins with practically none while the Nikon has a bit at the very edge. All in all the Nikon has very nice optics while the modern ED glass and coatings give the legend an edge in brightness and CA control. However the 5.2* FOV is a real non-starter and given the Nikons limited utility at this magnification.
10x - vs. Vortex Viper HD (pre-2018)
Again the FOV of the Nikon is very narrow although a little wider by 10x. The Vipers have an AFOV of around 60* while I measured the Nikon at ~50*. While still obviously narrower than most modern fixed zoom binos the Nikon already feels much less restricted. Again the Nikon controls glare better than it's opponent (even with a bino bandit on the Viper) and is completely sharp edge to edge while the viper rolls off a bit in the last 10%. The Viper still has a marginally wider sweet spot but the difference at this magnification is practically negligible. The Nikon is again dimmer with it's warm cast while the viper is bright and pretty white. In this case the Nikon has better control of CA with still practically none in the middle and a trace at the edge despite being a classic achromat while the viper as ED glass. The Nikon also has a noticeably clearer image giving the classic alpha-like image where it feels as though you are placed in the scene while the viper slightly feels like looking through glass. At this magnification I would say except for the slightly narrow FOV, older coatings, and lack of waterproofing the Nikon is the superior all-around bino at this magnification.
15x - vs. Canon 15x50 IS (IS not activated)
A little cheating because I do not have a 15/16x42 so the Canon have a 10mm aperture advantage. Again, even near their widest the Nikon are narrower than their competition. Both are sharp edge-to-edge but the canon has an AFOV around 65* and the Nikon around 61*. Again, the Nikon has less CA despite the Canon advertising ultra-low dispersion glass (which is only worse when the IS turns on). Both present a yellowish image but the Nikon is yellower and dimmer while the Canon is a little greener and much brighter (but also gathers 56% more light with their larger aperture). Both give a nice clean image and if it weren't for the IS I would likely pick the Nikon for it's lighter weight.
Overall the Nikon's hold their own in image quality against 3 modern pairs of binoculars all advertising ED glass (and dielectric/phase coatings on the roof prisms of the Bushnell and Vortex). However as is the problem with all but a few very new zoom eyepieces they are held back by narrow AFOVs, especially at low magnifications. Anyone who has used a roughly 40-60* zoom eyepiece will know about how it feels. Despite this disadvantage and the outdated coatings (which are in my opinion better than the Nikon E coatings and nearly up to snuff with the Criterion coatings I have seen) they give a really nice image which is practically free from abberations; a remarkable achievement for a 30-year-old zoom binocular. While I wouldn't say they would replce any one binocular at a given magnification they are certainly a jack of all trades master of none type of gear. They are also very well built and a whole lot of fun to use.
