BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="brocknroller" data-source="post: 3220578" data-attributes="member: 665">The first batch of M7 8x30s (and I would guess 10x30s) had a manufacturing defect. Some of the rings inside the objective housing were not painted black but retained the sheen of the bare metal, which caused light to reflect off those parts and create veiling glare. Frank D. took of photo of the unpainted rings, and Nikon admitted to a customer who returned his sample because of glare that there was a defect. They replaced his unit with a good sample. There still might be some early samples that have been sitting on the shelf or in a warehouse from that first batch that haven't been sold. I've been waiting it out. Almost pulled the trigger on an 8x30 EII for $229 new on eBay, but before I could transfer the money into my paypal account, it was Gone in 60 Seconds. The low price made me suspect it was one of the early defective samples, but Nikon will replace it for the cost of shipping it to them, so that would up the price to $249, still a great deal. The 8x30 M7 I tried had painted internal parts and the flare control was very good. I had to point the bin near the sun to get the image to flare. So a good sample will deliver images that are relatively free from flare in most situations. I saw some glare in the 10x42 EDG I tried, but nothing unusual or excessive. I used it in the winter when the sun was low in the sky and in the direction of the woods near my house. The most flare resistant bins I've owned were the Nikon SE series bins. The least resistant was the first generation ZR 7x36 ED2, 45* off axis from the sun, it was still flaring, right under the sun, the bottom half of the image was "veiled." In both cases, I have to wonder why the manufacturer didn't take a few samples of the prototype into the field to test them, which would have shown the problem. Seems that manufacturers are too much in a rush to go to market these days. That was true with the first batch of EDG binoculars (EDG I), the 10x42 and 7x42 in particular, which were the first models made. Both had defective focusers that would not lock in place and would come loose and spin rather than engage the focus mechanism. Some also had problems with drifting diopters. Even reviewers of the prototypes noted this issue yet Nikon went on to make a whole production run with this defeat and ended up replacing them with more expensive redesigned EDG IIs. Not what one would expect from an experienced company such as Nikon, particularly in its top of the line roof. When BF members complained about the delays with the Zeiss HT and the Zeiss SF, I was glad they were delayed, because at least in the case of the SF, for the HT, I think there were distribution problems, that Zeiss found something underpar and went back to fix the problem. Better to fix the problem before unleashing defective $2,600 binoculars on the public and getting bad PR and perhaps even losing sales. I've wondered why companies announce bins before they are fully tested for defects? That "rush to market." I've concluded that the marketing dept is caught between a rock and a hard place. If they don't announce in advance of release, buyers could end up buying another brand. We recently had a thread by someone who was going to buy an SF, but wondered if he should wait in case Swaro had something new coming out soon. If they did have a new premium bin in the works, and they didn't announce it, he would end up buying SF. When a defect is found and the launch is delayed after the announcement, customers start to grumble. But if they didn't announce, would-be buyers wouldn't know about the bin and would have bought another brand's model. So I think that's something that those frustrated with delays should think about. They wouldn't want an SF with veiling glare or a loose focuser, etc. Better to wait and get a sample with the bugs all worked out. Brock</blockquote>

Verification