Tobias Mennle
Well-known member
First impression: This is now a bright glass with neutral colours! I tested the E2 in 2015 and 2017 and came to the conclusion that it was not good enough to keep it. Now with a third sample, this time from the 100th anniversary edition (I played around with it for about two hours over a course of two days) I believe that Nikon has improved this binocular design from 1999 with new coatings again. Something which has happened before over the last 20 years, as the transmission measurements of Gijs van Ginkel suggest. But it seems a bit long since the last time. And I have always been unhappy about the not state-of-the-art brightness of some Nikon glasses (8x30E2, SE 8x32 550xxx, EDG 8x42).
I assume the change is not exclusive to the anniversary edition. But where and when did it happen? Nikon hides this with an inconsistent serial number system. My sample from 2015 was 810057, the anniversary sample is a 081923, so a different system of numbering.
The E2 to my eyes has now a better transmission, is visibly brighter and has a better colour reproduction. Brightness is a bit higher than in the Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD Plus, but a bit lower than in the Habicht 8x30 (with 96% transmission). But no longer dramatically, awkwardly lower. And colours look neutral with just a touch of yellow to me now instead of reddish/magenta biased. This is very good.
My evidence is both from visual observation and direct comparison with my reference glasses (mainly Habicht 8x30) as well as from the results from and memory of my observations with older E2 samples (granted, that is always problematic). But also from photographic comparison of the coatings of the new and the older sample (also not bulletproof).
The new coatings are low intensity, with slight magenta and greenish blue/cyan reflections (don´t believe what you see in the Nikon product shots - a very bright clear blue). A similar amount of magenta and cyan being reflected should mean neutral colour reproduction. The older coatings used to be of higher intensity (reflecting more light, transmitting less).
But I am again not won over by the E2. Sample variation is definitely a problem in this glass.
- sample no.1 and no.3 strained my eyes too much, ease of view was simply not sufficient, probably due to suboptimal collimation.
- sample no.2 was easy enough on my eyes, but belonged to the older, darker generation.
- No sample had the outstanding contrast of my reference glasses. And I would dare to generalize that for the E2 as a type. Nikon could easily change that I am sure. It is probably just a matter of manufacturing accuracy.
This glass started out as a solid middle class bin and prices have since risen to a point that easily lets you forget that origin. To get a good sample will take some effort. Nikon´s margin on this glass must be VERY high. And the Habicht 8x30 is now only EUR 150/23% more expensive and a premium bin (but with strong flaring as the Achilles heel).
E2 users who own both fairly new samples and older samples, can you detect any differences, especially in coating colours and intensities? Also, how is ease of view compared with your reference glasses?
Please check out my images and whole story on my website.
Plus: Favourite bins 2018
Wishlist to Leica, Swaro, Zeiss...
I assume the change is not exclusive to the anniversary edition. But where and when did it happen? Nikon hides this with an inconsistent serial number system. My sample from 2015 was 810057, the anniversary sample is a 081923, so a different system of numbering.
The E2 to my eyes has now a better transmission, is visibly brighter and has a better colour reproduction. Brightness is a bit higher than in the Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD Plus, but a bit lower than in the Habicht 8x30 (with 96% transmission). But no longer dramatically, awkwardly lower. And colours look neutral with just a touch of yellow to me now instead of reddish/magenta biased. This is very good.
My evidence is both from visual observation and direct comparison with my reference glasses (mainly Habicht 8x30) as well as from the results from and memory of my observations with older E2 samples (granted, that is always problematic). But also from photographic comparison of the coatings of the new and the older sample (also not bulletproof).
The new coatings are low intensity, with slight magenta and greenish blue/cyan reflections (don´t believe what you see in the Nikon product shots - a very bright clear blue). A similar amount of magenta and cyan being reflected should mean neutral colour reproduction. The older coatings used to be of higher intensity (reflecting more light, transmitting less).
But I am again not won over by the E2. Sample variation is definitely a problem in this glass.
- sample no.1 and no.3 strained my eyes too much, ease of view was simply not sufficient, probably due to suboptimal collimation.
- sample no.2 was easy enough on my eyes, but belonged to the older, darker generation.
- No sample had the outstanding contrast of my reference glasses. And I would dare to generalize that for the E2 as a type. Nikon could easily change that I am sure. It is probably just a matter of manufacturing accuracy.
This glass started out as a solid middle class bin and prices have since risen to a point that easily lets you forget that origin. To get a good sample will take some effort. Nikon´s margin on this glass must be VERY high. And the Habicht 8x30 is now only EUR 150/23% more expensive and a premium bin (but with strong flaring as the Achilles heel).
E2 users who own both fairly new samples and older samples, can you detect any differences, especially in coating colours and intensities? Also, how is ease of view compared with your reference glasses?
Please check out my images and whole story on my website.
Plus: Favourite bins 2018
Wishlist to Leica, Swaro, Zeiss...