I hope they have also solved their gluing problems: too many rubber grip sheets peel off from Nikon's cameras and binoculars - IMHO
.Ilkka
-
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.
Have Nikon given up competing with the big three? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Dorian Gray
- Start date
I hope they have also solved their gluing problems: too many rubber grip sheets peel off from Nikon's cameras and binoculars - IMHO
.Ilkka
trealawboy
Well-known member
Any news of the eyecups on the EDGs? I hope they are improvement of those on the HGs which are prone to excessive wear and are not easy to remove sand and grit from.
Last edited:
henry link
Well-known member
Here are the basic specs for the all the Nikon EDG series binoculars (pronounced like the word "edge" I am told).
8x32- weight, 700g
fov, 7.8 degrees
eye relief, 18.5mm
close focus, 2.5m
10x32- wt, 700g
fov, 6.5 degrees
er, 17.3mm
cf, 2.5m
7x42- wt, 835g
fov, 8 degrees
er, 22mm
cf, 3m
8x42- wt, 835g
fov, 7.7 degrees
er, 19.3mm
cf, 3m
10x42- wt, 835g
fov, 6.5 degrees
er, 18mm
cf, 3m
8x32- weight, 700g
fov, 7.8 degrees
eye relief, 18.5mm
close focus, 2.5m
10x32- wt, 700g
fov, 6.5 degrees
er, 17.3mm
cf, 2.5m
7x42- wt, 835g
fov, 8 degrees
er, 22mm
cf, 3m
8x42- wt, 835g
fov, 7.7 degrees
er, 19.3mm
cf, 3m
10x42- wt, 835g
fov, 6.5 degrees
er, 18mm
cf, 3m
Specs on my (current) 8 x 32 LXL:
Weight: 695 g
FOV @ 1000 Meters: 136 meters. ( 7.8 degrees)
Eye Relief: 17.0 mm
Close focus: 2.5 meters.
Bob
PS: According to the spec sheet supplied with my 8 x 32 the ER of the new 8 x 32 and 10 x 32 is longer. (old ones were 17.0 and 16.0) The ER of the new 8 x 42 and 10 x 42 is slightly shorter than the old LXL. (old is 20.0 and 18.5 respectively) The new 42's are also 50g heavier. The 7 x 42 roof prism configuration seems to be completely new to Nikon.
Weight: 695 g
FOV @ 1000 Meters: 136 meters. ( 7.8 degrees)
Eye Relief: 17.0 mm
Close focus: 2.5 meters.
Bob
PS: According to the spec sheet supplied with my 8 x 32 the ER of the new 8 x 32 and 10 x 32 is longer. (old ones were 17.0 and 16.0) The ER of the new 8 x 42 and 10 x 42 is slightly shorter than the old LXL. (old is 20.0 and 18.5 respectively) The new 42's are also 50g heavier. The 7 x 42 roof prism configuration seems to be completely new to Nikon.
Last edited:
Robert / Seattle
Well-known member
Greetings, Ronald ...
This statement intrigues me. Once you set it, tricky or not, it's set for life, right? Doesn't that make the issue of diopter adjustment a 2 minute red-herring. If the long-term, day to day ergonomics and optics are at question then, sure, you have a real issue. But if the diopter settings are ultimately accurate, even if a bit cumbersome, then this whole issue is nothing less than silly.
That's my 2 cents.
Robert / Seattle
Yes, that's great and I have a pair, but without CA and perhaps with even better handling, they'll be awesome. I am only concerned about the price. Street price for Nikons has always been better than the European competition, and should be here, too. We'll have to wait and see. The advantage of ED/FL glass--at least for me--is significant. I prefer the Nikons to my FL's for overall feel and focus. They are the only bins I can one hand with ease. These could really be great if they hold on to the best of the past and improve on it. David
Robert,
I see that you are still a young man...
Seriously, I never gave much thought to diopter adjustments until I was some 44 or so. I set it and forgot it, just like you. Then my accommodation began its inevitable decline, and now I not only need to set the diopter much more precisely than before, but the needed setting can also vary from day to day or hour to hour. So, today, I much prefer the diopter adjustment to be continuously variable (not notched by 1/4 or 1/3 diopter increments) and separate from the focus knob. My ideal solution thus is something like what the Nikon HG's have, but with sufficient friction to keep the setting instead of the locking feature.
Thanks Henry, for the spec sheet.
As far as the specs and design changes, many of us have argued that the current Nikons are just as good as any, except for three or four more or less significant shortcomings, depending on your priorities and sensitivities. These are: more CA than in most premium rivals, silver-coated prisms that compromise overall light transmission, somewhat small field of view in the 8x42 (and to a lesser degree the 10x42) and somewhat higher weight compared to rival model lines. Of these issues, the EDG seems to correct all but the last. For me, the published weights are also easily within my comfort range for the corresponding sizes, although the 32mm models at 700g are quite a bit heavier than, say, the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD at 532g (measured without any straps and covers).
And there seems to be a tripod adapter.
However, the EDG still lacks image stabilization.
Kimmo
I see that you are still a young man...
Seriously, I never gave much thought to diopter adjustments until I was some 44 or so. I set it and forgot it, just like you. Then my accommodation began its inevitable decline, and now I not only need to set the diopter much more precisely than before, but the needed setting can also vary from day to day or hour to hour. So, today, I much prefer the diopter adjustment to be continuously variable (not notched by 1/4 or 1/3 diopter increments) and separate from the focus knob. My ideal solution thus is something like what the Nikon HG's have, but with sufficient friction to keep the setting instead of the locking feature.
Thanks Henry, for the spec sheet.
As far as the specs and design changes, many of us have argued that the current Nikons are just as good as any, except for three or four more or less significant shortcomings, depending on your priorities and sensitivities. These are: more CA than in most premium rivals, silver-coated prisms that compromise overall light transmission, somewhat small field of view in the 8x42 (and to a lesser degree the 10x42) and somewhat higher weight compared to rival model lines. Of these issues, the EDG seems to correct all but the last. For me, the published weights are also easily within my comfort range for the corresponding sizes, although the 32mm models at 700g are quite a bit heavier than, say, the Leica 8x32 Ultravid HD at 532g (measured without any straps and covers).
And there seems to be a tripod adapter.
However, the EDG still lacks image stabilization.
Kimmo
Robert / Seattle
Well-known member
Kimmo,
Now that's a horse of a different color. Very valid, of course, and in such cases I'd agree that a user friendly diopter would be highly desireable.
Cheers,
Robert
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Kimmo/Robert: My 8x32 LX L diopter control is continuous, although the scale is marked in .5D increments. Overall, it's the most user friendly control I've found. I reset it constantly depending on whether or not I'm using my glasses.
IS would push the price way over the EDGe.
Regards,
Ed
Last edited:
Ed,
Yes, the LX L diopter can be used so it is continuous, but Nikon intends you to click it back down to its locked position after adjusting it, and these positions are placed at intervals. I don't recall right now if these were every 0.2 or 0.25 diopter, but if you observe the ring carefully when you lock it, you'll notice that it does not lock in just any position.
I do like the LX (L) diopter adjustment just fine, since if the indexed position does not happen to fit my requirements, I can leave the ring unlocked with no harm done. And, I like being able to adjust the overall focus at any time during this process without having to push or pull focus knobs or temporarily losing the diopter control option.
Kimmo
Yes, the LX L diopter can be used so it is continuous, but Nikon intends you to click it back down to its locked position after adjusting it, and these positions are placed at intervals. I don't recall right now if these were every 0.2 or 0.25 diopter, but if you observe the ring carefully when you lock it, you'll notice that it does not lock in just any position.
I do like the LX (L) diopter adjustment just fine, since if the indexed position does not happen to fit my requirements, I can leave the ring unlocked with no harm done. And, I like being able to adjust the overall focus at any time during this process without having to push or pull focus knobs or temporarily losing the diopter control option.
Kimmo
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Kimmo,
I am unfamiliar with the Nikon LX L. In other binoculars, not pushing the dioptre adjustment back down, compromises watertight integrity. Is this the case with the LX L?
Happy bird watching,
Arthur :brains:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Kimmo,
Within a marked .5D increment on the scale, I've been able to set the ring to at least 10 different positions, and these were retained after snapping it back in place. Beyond that I can't discriminate much based on the scale, but there was no sense of going into a detent. Maybe you have a slightly different model than I have. Very curious.
Ed
PS. In contrast, the 10x42 SLC is continuously adjustable, but pops into a single notch midway between calibration marks (dots). Assuming the range is ±3D (and linear), as advertised, adjustment precision is only .25D.
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Arthur,
I don't know, but wouldn't be surprised.
Although I'm interested in the performance of the new EDG series, I'm so pleased with my little 8x32 LX L that it would take a major event to get me to replace them with something else. Among other things, the focus control is absolutely superb, and low light viewing is remarkable.
Kimmo/Henry (or someone else): have you examined its axial CA? Center image color contrast is almost ED-like already. Lateral CA is present, but only slightly more than other high end bins.
Ed
KorHaan
Well-known member
Hi Robert,
You're absolutely right, it shouldn't be an issue and I agree with you it sounds silly; but I prefer a separated diopter adjustment like the one I described, due to personal experience with my former Zeiss FL 7x42. :C
The FL's have only one clickstop in the diopter ring under the focus knob, a very firm one on zero. Changing the diopter and locking it is easy, but I noticed that when I moved the hinged barrels in or out to change the IPD, the diopter had shifted somewhat. Not all the time, but every now and again, very irregularly, it had moved up to 0.5 diopter unintendedly. Since it didn't move the slightest bit in the clickstop position, it really had me wondering if Zeiss had done the right thing and not found it necessary to put in more clickstops. After I read that more people were having trouble with the FL diopter I was convinced it could be a design fault.
As I said, it didn't happen very often, but the unpredictability of the self-moving diopter made me check the scale every 5 minutes or so. It could have been a faulty specimen, but I'm more inclined to think the whole design is the issue here.
Perhaps I should have written this straightaway in my first post, because the Swaro EL's with clickstop diopters seem fine, and no problems with Leica as well, that's why I DO wholeheartedly agree with you that a well-designed system is very good and not worth arguing about. :t:
The FL's gave me trouble with my eyesight ( lazy eye could not cope with the huge FOV ), so I changed them for a pair of midpriced 10x roofs. A birding mate of mine is now very happy using the FL's, even when I told him about the diopter issue. He didn't mind, he's using the zero position. But I felt obliged to charge him only € 250 ( euro's, not pounds! ) for the Zeiss, as he's a mate and he very much wanted them.
My new roofs have a clickstop diopter on the right ocular, very simple, very good. No locking necessary. No unintended moving. That's what I like. I can SEE my preferred diopter position, and I can trust it not to move when I don't want it to.
I wonder if the Nikon EDG's have a clickstop diopter adjustment, and if it's under the focus knob, should have been my initial question in my first post.
But I still think the LXL's have the best system ( though I don't own them ) as long as you want one permanent diopter position. It has proven its value, hasn't it? So why change it?
Greetings, Ronald
P.S. : What on earth is a 2 minute red-herring?? I tried to look it up but it's
not mentioned in my English dictionary.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
This definition should suffice. A two minute red herring is probably one that is short lived.
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/redherring
Robert / Seattle
Well-known member
Hi Ronald,
What a great conribution to the diopter discussion - very exhaustive and all well conceived. I want to take some time to respond with a reply worthy of your time and interest, and I promise to do so when the local work load recedes a bit. Give me a day or so, thanks.
In the meantime ... a "red-herring" may be considered to be an irrelevant distraction issue; one that "throws a dog off the scent" (literally) from the main chase, or main issue in this case. The issue here being any number of serious optical considerations worth evaluating between nikon/leica/swaro/zeiss. The "2 minutes" is my personal estimate on just how long it takes to set a diopter adjustment, check it, and set it again if necessary. Generallly, (thanks to Kimmo for my enlightenment to less common but notable exceptions), this procedure is "said and done".
I'll try to be more sensitive to my international friends for whom English is a second language. Unlike most English speakers, at least you have great facility with a second (or possibly more) language.
My hat is off to you ...
Robert
No problem as long as we can ask without being regarded as silly non-natives.
Actually, I enjoy these terms, but particularly so when I either find the explanation myself or when I get it provided later-on as did happen here!
Your mate sure got a great bargain!
As for the Zeiss diopter setting, I also feel it is a design fault. Both because it can shift unintentionally and also because one can't see the setting right away. Luckily, I can also leave mine at zero as I need to use my binoculars with my glasses on. But nevertheless, I check the setting on my 8x42 FL every so often. I don't see why Zeiss could not do things in such a way that the setting can be checked in a glace, without having to lift the focus knob. Leica has it right, ever since the Trinovid BAs.
Last edited:
