Nikon EDG, flawless? (2 Viewers)

[kimmik]

Could it be summarised that EDG is leica with less CA?

The fact both are predominantly camera lens makers, probably gave them a similar taste.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Had both the ELs and EDG. Outside of brightness I prefer the EDG. Much more immersive than the EL and Way better with glare which is my pet peeve. Not to mention a much smoother focuser. To each their own.

It is just personal preference which one you prefer. I find personally what makes a binocular immersive for me is size of the AFOV and the EL 8x32 has a bigger AFOV than the EDG 8x32. I agree the EDG is better with glare than the EL, but my number one priority in a binocular is a large FOV with a flat field and sharp edges, and Swarovski's tend to be tops in those areas. Almost every Swarovski has a flat field with a large FOV and sharp edges, except the SLC. Even the little Curio 7x21 has a flat field and sharp edges. That is why I prefer it over the Zeiss Victory 8x25, and the fact that you don't have to float it because the eye cups are too short for the ER.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Could it be summarised that EDG is leica with less CA?

The fact both are predominantly camera lens makers, probably gave them a similar taste.

Yes, the EDG has slightly sharper edges, less field curvature and less saturated colors than the Leica.

 

[Scott98]

Another chance to talk about the EDG?? The EDG focuser is the best IMO, only matched by Zeiss SF. Next advantage is flat field/edge correction while minimizing squirrely warping effects.

Another strength is the comfort of the exit pupil...not as sensitive to eye position as SF and NL's. The 7x42 is extraordinary in its ability to absorb various eye wanderings and positions without blacking out/beaning.

I was out yesterday at the shore in 30 knot winds and I swapped out my 8x42 SF for the 7x42 EDG because the long body of the SF acts like a sail, magnifying the wind impact. With the compact body, lower mag, and tolerance of eye placement the EDG was the best choice. In comparison the SF feels a bit "high maintenance" in terms of holding it steady and keeping my eyes centered. The 10x42 EDG is about the same as the 8x42 SF in ease of eye positioning, which seems good considering the exit pupil is smaller.

The EDG colors are probably a little more "realistic" than the SF's, but that is subjective, I like the cooler look of the SF too. The EDG appear slightly warmer, like my Swaro SLC. Don't see any CA whatsoever.

Doing astronomy at night, I perceive a slight advantage in sharpness on the SF - the star images are slightly tighter and cleaner with SF. It's probably visible during the day too, but they're both so good. The EDG was a big leap over my old Nikon 8x42 HG/Premier in sharpness, a larger difference.

 

[hopster]

Looking at the spectrum (allbinos) this is the best i've seen both flat, high and extends well into the violet and deep red.

In theory should be best colour, maybe even above leica?

The NL for example drops from 650nm onwards, thus limiting color accuracy in the reds.

Almost all Zeiss and Swaro start tailing off from 650nm or even slightly before, hence the apparent loss of warmth in their images to my eyes.

Nikon and Leica - the two brands most heavily committed to photographic equipment - avoid that design choice and are better for it in my view. I wonder if that is not a coincidence? Also an honourable mention for Meopta.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Another chance to talk about the EDG?? The EDG focuser is the best IMO, only matched by Zeiss SF. Next advantage is flat field/edge correction while minimizing squirrely warping effects.

Another strength is the comfort of the exit pupil...not as sensitive to eye position as SF and NL's. The 7x42 is extraordinary in its ability to absorb various eye wanderings and positions without blacking out/beaning.

I was out yesterday at the shore in 30 knot winds and I swapped out my 8x42 SF for the 7x42 EDG because the long body of the SF acts like a sail, magnifying the wind impact. With the compact body, lower mag, and tolerance of eye placement the EDG was the best choice. In comparison the SF feels a bit "high maintenance" in terms of holding it steady and keeping my eyes centered. The 10x42 EDG is about the same as the 8x42 SF in ease of eye positioning, which seems good considering the exit pupil is smaller.

The EDG colors are probably a little more "realistic" than the SF's, but that is subjective, I like the cooler look of the SF too. The EDG appear slightly warmer, like my Swaro SLC. Don't see any CA whatsoever.

Doing astronomy at night, I perceive a slight advantage in sharpness on the SF - the star images are slightly tighter and cleaner with SF. It's probably visible during the day too, but they're both so good. The EDG was a big leap over my old Nikon 8x42 HG/Premier in sharpness, a larger difference.

Yes but the EDG is old tech, can’t be repaired and will randomly explode like cars crashing in America movies or bad lithium batteries.

It’s made of dangerous toxic materials mined by small children and will make you insane.

Also, the view is actually not real, it talks to the satellites and sends unknown waves into your brain. I recommend a metal hat or foil!

That’s not my experience though, it’s those small fellas at the bottom of my garden.. lively they are!

 

[NDhunter]

The EDG is not a slug, but more like a beautiful dragonfly.............

Jerry