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: 1577429" data-attributes="member: 665">Most often true, but not always. I had a couple bins that were literally sharp to the edge. However, 90% is close enough for me with the EDG. And if that weren't enough, I could refocus the tiny bit of field curvature at the very edge. The 10x42 LX I had was literally sharp to the edge (horizontal). I could take a star out to the very edge w/out distortion. I tried two other samples, and they went to 90%, but this one was the best. So was the Nikon 8-16x40 XL Zoom, though not an alpha bin, and with narrow FOV at 8x (5.5*), better at 15X (4*), the image was literally sharp to the edge. I guess they defied the Laws of Physics! <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />My 12x50 SE was sharp to 90%+. Even my 8x32 SE was 80-85% at the horizontal edges. My 10x30 IS also had very sharp edges (much better than what some others have reported, I must have had a cherry sample). While these binoculars were not literally sharp to the edge (except the 10x LX and XL Zooms), the fuzz was so far from the center that I would have to move an object to the edge to get it out of focus. In actual use, I never saw the blurriness unless I was looking for it off-axis. There was a bit of field curvature or astigmatism on the top edge of all the premium-quality Nikons (EII, SE, LX, LX L, EDG). Better on the bottom and best at the horizontal edges. But what's remarkable with the 10x42 EDG is that the image is sharp to 90% on the horizontal edges of a 6.5* FOV, which is wide for a 10x42 roof. At the mid-price point, many roofs have 6.5* at 8x. I took the EDG up to a scenic overlook today, not far from where my friend works. I was meeting him so we could do so more testing since it was a sunny day. The first tests we did were on an overcast day. Looking at the town from up on the mountain was spectacular. Unlike birding, there was no target to center. I was taking in the entire the landscape and the "fuzziness" was so far toward the edges, I couldn't see it. And with the eyecups down to the first click stop, I couldn't see the field stop, so it was as if my eyes were 10x.I watched a buzzard ride the thermals. He came all the way down within a few feet of a farmer's field and then rode the thermals back UP without once flapping his wings! He must have been at least a mile away or more at that point and later came up the mountain and flew overhead.  What an ugly looking neck and head close up! I think the sharp edges are a significant part of what people call the "Nikon view". Besides being distracting, obvious fuzzy edges call attention to the fact that you are looking through binoculars. Same with binoculars with small fields of view. When you are using a premium Nikon, you forget about the optics (except the full sized LX/LX L, which have "rolling ball"). That "natural view" is what I find most appealing about Nikons. For $499-$599 (SE), it's definitely worthwhile. For $2K (EDG), I think a bin should also have text messaging and 500 video channels. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />But if I had deep pockets, I would buy an EDG. Not only for the excellent optics, but for the excellent ergonomics. The EDG provides the steadiest views I've seen through a 10x bin. And I have shaky hands. Those who have steadier hands should be able to do even better. Brock</blockquote>

Verification