What do we want? (Zen) (1 Viewer)

[Kevin Purcell]

A hybird Nikon SE/EII ~8x32 (or 7x32, or 8x35, etc):

- use the SE body but reduce the ER to midway between that of SE and EII (reduce blackouts)
- increase the SE FOV to ~midway between the two as well (say 430')
- add adjustable eyecups
- increase the bridge stiffness
- increase WP properties ONLY if not a compromise to view - otherwise, leave as is

APS

You don't have to reduce the ER. You have to make the mechanical design of the eyecups (their adjustment range) match the ER for more users. That should be easy with a multistop eyecup rather than a two step rubber eyecup. The problem for blackouts is the all the way in stop needs to be further out (or an option to have a further out one as the all the way in stop is probably a win for a hyperope with not very tight fitting glasses).

As I also suspect these EP have some SAEP an EP redesign might be more useful to reduce blackouts i.e. use some of the EP designs used in the Chinese ED (5 element with LaK glass a decent ER).

 

[Jim M.]

The main deficiencies I have seen in the Chinese ED bins reviewed here so far are the slow focus and the lack of a locking diopter. (I don't care how stiff the diopter is when new--it's down the road that concerns me). Fast focus is critical for a birding bin IMO.

Jim

 

[falcondude]

I actually like the fine focus with the extra turn. It is probably just personal preferences. Some of binoculars need turn clockwise for close focus, while others need ccw movement for close focus. Wondering whether they are made for right-handed people vs left-handed people.

 

[Kevin Conville]

Fast focus is critical for a birding bin IMO.

Yup. I agree.

In addition, the full field of view should be instantly viewable, without hunting for it.

 

[OwenM]

Yup. I agree.

In addition, the full field of view should be instantly viewable, without hunting for it.

On that note, I want removable screw-in eyepieces available in different heights and a winged version. Something along the lines of the Meopta and Swarovski eyepieces, but with the eyecup itself modeled after those used on the screw-up eyepieces that Pentax uses on the SP, ED, and perhaps other series, and Bushnell on the Legend roof, Browning roofs, etc. since those are more comfortable than the thinner, narrower, harder eyecups used on the Meopta, Vortex/Stokes DLS, and a host of others.
Much easier to replace in the event of damage, plus different available maximum heights would allow the user to adjust his/her bins for an individual fit regardless of facial structure.
Perhaps not something we should expect on a budget-oriented binocular, but a worthwhile feature and selling point for those of us who struggle with blackouts and eye relief that forces us to either hold the binoculars out away from our eyes, or cram our eyeballs into the eyepieces to hit that "sweet spot" where the full field is available, yet the binoculars comfortable and natural to use.
I think one of the reasons I like the Pentax SP and ED models with 17mm ER(and the Browning 8x32) so much is that their eye relief and eyecup height at full extension matches my face better than the others I've tried, which makes them easier to use, and gives the immediate impression they are "better", regardless of the optics, than just about anything else I've tried. They are also more comfortable in extended use. For instance, the Meopta Meostar and Vortex/Stokes DLS models are wonderful binoculars, but both leave my brows or eye sockets sore if I use them for awhile.

btw, Alexis Powell's model above almost matches one of my scribblings describing what I would want if I could design a binocular from the ground up-except I don't care if it's open bridge or not.

 

[Alexis Powell]

Some of binoculars need turn clockwise for close focus, while others need ccw movement for close focus.

Whoops! I accidentaly left this spec out on my original post (and I can't edit it anymore). I want the focus to turn clockwise for greater distance so as to be consistent with top-end binos (all recent Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, and all top-end Nikon such as SE, LXL, EII).

--AP

 

[Kevin Purcell]

I actually like the fine focus with the extra turn. It is probably just personal preferences. Some of binoculars need turn clockwise for close focus, while others need ccw movement for close focus. Wondering whether they are made for right-handed people vs left-handed people.

It's bizzare ... not even consistent within the same company sometimes (especially if they use OEMs).

Not an issue unless you are trying to use two bins one after the other with different focus directions. That gets slow rather quickly

 

[Steve C]

It does seem sort of strange there is no focus direction standard. But as it is the ZEN is clockwise to infinity (so are the Promaster and I assume the Hawke).

 

[mikfoz]

Well, when I posted the thread, I wondered how long this would take. Not long it seems.

My thought was to give an optics company who has its president monitoring the proceedings some rerasonably concrete and maybe achievable wants.

Not that I have anything against humor. Or a nice digital camera built in, but let's stay real.

Heh! You caught me in flippant mood.

I'm quite happy with my porro prism binoculars apart from their lamentable lack of waterproofing compared to the roof prism models. I know there are waterproof porros out there but everyone seems to have moved over to roof prisms.

I even like the feel of the traditional shape binoculars!

Yet all the present development seems to be into roof prisms.

Maybe I'm getting it all wrong and don't know enough about binocular-building, but is it not still viable to throw some money at developing affordable, waterproof, full-size binoculars of a high standard that won't die horribly if dropped in a puddle? I've not got teeny tiny hands and I like the feel of a big, fat pair of bins in my hands!

 

[Steve C]

Heh! You caught me in flippant mood.
Maybe I'm getting it all wrong and don't know enough about binocular-building, but is it not still viable to throw some money at developing affordable, waterproof, full-size binoculars of a high standard that won't die horribly if dropped in a puddle? I've not got teeny tiny hands and I like the feel of a big, fat pair of bins in my hands!

Yes, I framed the original post for ideas about ideas for binoculars and features we want.

I also spend much time in a flippant mood. What twigged my response was "10cm close focus and thought activated focusing". When that sort of stuff starts, things can go south real quick.

On the other hand, if it does plunge in frivolity, then I admit that the original post was likely futile. And I will then join all in the festivities. I figured it was not often we have the attention of an optics company, and I figured this was perhaps the proverbial "Golden Opportunity".

But by and large, there are good ideas. Thanks all.

 

[James Bean]

I agree with Alexis, preferring the focus to be clockwise to infinity. I was relieved to find both the Pentax 8x36 HS and Hawke 8x43 ED (most recent purchases) go that way. It's possible to get used to binoculars which focus 'the wrong way', but I'd rather not. My favourite 'keepers' all go clockwise to infinity: Swift 8.5x44 Audubon and 10x50 Kestrel, Zeiss 10x40 BGAT, Zeiss Octarem 8x50 B/GA, Docter 8x22, and 'old habits die hard'. It's become instinctive, like car driving: we have a Honda Prelude, Toyota Celica and Mazda Xedos, all with right-hand indicator stalks; odd one out is an Audi 80 Sport, on the left, and I have to consciously adapt to this; if I forget, I put the windscreen wipers on! It's not critical, but it is less 'comfortable'. With binoculars, it seems 'natural' (for me) to go clockwise to infinity. No doubt there will be others who disagree...

 

[Peewee]

If I could only have one pair I would like it to have the next features:

8x36 (maybe 8x40 if not to heavy)
Roof/ waterproof
Focus from near (1,5 meters) to infinity : 1,5 turn clockwise
Max 850 grams (including batteries)
Min 130m/1000m FOV
Decent optics (ED , sharp to the edges etc.)
ImageStabilization (IS)

It keeps on surprising me that I hardly read about IS here. I think I am the first to mention this in this thread. I value this feature highly and I am willing to trade in a little FOV or weight as long as it has IS. Today I experienced again what a difference IS can make. I went with 7 others in search of geese. We saw 1 goose that was marked with a numbered ring around the neck. No one could tell what the numbers were (and some even had Swaro EL) except for me (canon 12x36IS). (BTW: the number was: Z02 . Anyone know if and where this can be reported?) IS is such a powerful feature. So my ideal bin must have IS. I just wonder if the Chinese manufacturers are capable of making such a bin. (Come on Zen Ray, Hawke, Promaster. You can do it. Just try and make us all happy (or at least me))

Cheers Peter

 

[orbitaljump]

6x24 reverse porro compacts with a moderately wide fov of 9 to 9.5 degrees, high quality 4 to 5 element eyepieces with large eye lenses. Eye relief at 13 to 15mm. Some curvature of field acceptable but nice 70 to 80 percent sweet spot. Good multi-coatings, shaped like the later production run Bushnell Legacy 8x24 Reverse Porro that has been discontinued (or the older original style of the Opticron Tagia compact reverse porros). With nice large center focus wheel. Water Resistant (absolute waterproofness not necessary). Dont obssess over weight, aluminum or magnesium alloy framing preffered over plastic or carbon fiber. A little heftier than most 9oz compacts would actually be preferred...in the 12 to 15 oz range. Black body color with understated styling accents if at all (see Legacy/Taiga).

Half the price of the 7x26 Customs.


Or maybe a slightly larger 7x28 reverse porro similar but with 8 to better yet 8.5 degreeish fov.

 

[orbitaljump]

I killed the thread.

 

[Tero]

I think Vortex Vanquish could easily add a 7x to their line of 8x and the useless...dim...10x.

 

[Steve C]

Well, after having the ZEN ED for awhile now, I'm going to suggest to Zen Ray the following changes and/or additions.

First a binocular of this quality in 7x36. Let it weigh in the 20 oz vicinity. Give it a 1.5 turn focus wheel rate. Use 8-8.5* view angle. Personally, I'd like the water repellent coating on this one. I don't care if it is the open bridge design, or the more traditional piano hinge style. As this is my nearly ideal binocular, I have high hopes! A 9x version would also interest me.

Next I'd like to see a 7x43 ZEN ED with something like 450' fov. Speed up the focus rate on this one as well as the 8x and 10x. Standard rate focus or fast rate focus might be a nice option, depending on the nature of the change.

I'd also have some personal interest in a 12x-15x55ish Big Eyes binocular.

Oh yeah, tether those objective covers too.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

I guess I'd differ with my usual stray light obsession showing through.

The Legend 8x42 (and the Pentax HS 8x36) are both very good at dealing with stray light (the Legend is up there with the Zeiss FL in my tests). Both have small (by today's standards) FOV of 6.4 or 6.5 degrees.

I'd like to see the Chinese ED makers try a 6.5 degree or 7.0 degree FOV. It shoudl be an easy fix (change the field stops). And I suspect will rather improve the view of critical views. And would be sharp edge to edge. With the other ED and LaK EP features this would give a pseudo-alpha bin for a very low cost. Sort of the tallest-dwarf approach.

The problem of course is a lot people just key their choice of bin on either bin numbers or just looking through it and saying "this looks big".

And yes you (well I) can track passerines in a wood with 6.5 degree bins. People used to do it with a lot less.

Don't think it will happen but one can hope.

 

[Steve C]

Well Kevin, I really don't disagree with you on the fov. The 8-8.5* thing was at least in part, me thinking I'd be more likely get the rest of what I want because that wide fov is more likely to sell more binoculars than if you knock a degree or so off to control stray light. In some ways I have come to like the wide fov, but I have no trouble with a tree full of warblers or in flight passerines with the Nikon Monarch @6.3*. However, neither the Promaster or ZEN has enough problem with stray light for it to be an issue for me.

I do hunt as well, and that wide fov is nice for glassing lots of territory at way out there distances.

 

[Kevin Purcell]

I know I'm preaching to the choir to some extent

I think part of persuading people to take this route is to point out that other premium bin makers take this approach (most notably Pentax)

Marketing has to change too. The trick is to market them as premium or "close to alpha" bins. And emphasize other features ("edge to edge sharpness").

But even a compromise FOV might work well. It might be that 7 degrees is a more pragmatic FOV for this style of bin e.g. Bushnell Elite does this (7.1 degrees) and has very good stray light control. Plus it looks better when people are "spec checking".

So maybe I'm arguing for a ED version of the Elite at lower price point

 

[Steve C]

Looking at Zen Ray's present lineup, this seems to be an approach they might want to consider with the ZRS. Looks like it already has a pretty good value/price status, Also has the bit smaller fov and the "edge to edge sharpness" marketing plan. Along with a different ergonomic package. Depending on the cost of changes, they opught to be able to stay close to or under $300.