ZR 8x43 ed2 vs Nikon 8x32SE:a rough comparison (1 Viewer)

[jaymoynihan]

...with the ZR the yellow is gone, the purple still exists, ...

Very interesting. I am not buying any new binocular anytime soon. But curious how the other ED/HD/FL types do on this.

My existing one (Swift Audubon 8.5x44 ED) exhibits neither the yellow nor the purple. Any descriptions of the HD (Leica) and FL (Zeiss)? Do they have decreased CA like the ZR, or are they APO like the Swift?

 

[edz]

Ning (spacepilot) asked if you had done the same comparison between the 10x42 SE and the ZR 10x43ED2?

I have not.

However, you can read all the actual measures on the 10x42SE in either of my Reviews in the Reports section of Cloudy Nights.
Small Binocular Reports The 10x50s
Small Binocular Reports Three Families

FWIW, the 10x42SE has almost exactly the same wide usable fov as the 8x43ED2 and 20% of central aperture of the 10x42SE fully illuminates the fov. The 10x42SE has less than half the total aberration and curvature as compared to the 8x43ED2.

edz

 

[NWBirder]

with the samples I have, it's quite easy to reproduce this. Just look at any of the branches with the bright sky as background, through the nikon I can see purple and yellow fringe at two sides of the branch, with the ZR the yellow is gone, the purple still exists, but need to try very hard to find it.

in real world of bird watching, i have no CA problem with either binos though, or in other more accurate words, the CA problem won't bother me at all.

The CA control was never the strong point for SE since the old design does not have ED glass. Curiously, do you see the color fringe near the center of field or just at the extreme edge of the field? It would not be an issue if the color abberation only occurs at very edge.

If Nikon comes up with a new SE that has ED lens and adds waterproof capability, it will be a real winner.

 

[Kammerdiner]

My 8x32 SE does have some CA, but generally it's not intrusive, and mostly it's off axis. Watching hawks I don't recall seeing it, but I remember watching bluebirds feeding from the tops of tombstones one afternoon (there's a cemetary behind my office--a great place for bluebirds and phoebes and whatnot) and seeing some very bright, but very narrow fringing on the backlit stones. It struck me as more tightly controlled than many (the remarkable sharpness of the SE extends even to the CA I guess!). Nonetheless, some of my older roofs (since sold) had much bigger problems with CA. I don't even think of the SE's CA--it's a non-issue for me.

Mark

 

[junzhang]

The CA control was never the strong point for SE since the old design does not have ED glass. Curiously, do you see the color fringe near the center of field or just at the extreme edge of the field? It would not be an issue if the color abberation only occurs at very edge.

If Nikon comes up with a new SE that has ED lens and adds waterproof capability, it will be a real winner.

I can see the fringe in both centre and edge, but as Kammerdiner has stated, it's very narrow and tight, it won't really bother me in real bird watching. Just if I want to find it, I still can.

Now with the new pricing of ZR 7x36, I am still very tamped to get myself one, there're many positive feedback of it. Does anyone have the comparison between 7x36 and 8x43ed2, in regards to the size of sweet spot, how good the "flat view" and "3D" effect they can provide?

 

[KLS]

For yet another non-definitive comaprison, I actually prefer the ZR 8x43 to my SE's. I spent some time a few weeks ago at dusk and dawn trying to spot deer, and I switched back and forth and found that the ZR were brighter, and I thought the contrast was considerably better. I do like the feel of the SE's better, and they are definitely lighter. I was so attached to the SE's that I thought I might but a second pair just in case of theft - but now the SE's are playing back-up role.

 

[Matt_RTH]

I'm not surprised by the finding that a good 8x43 can put the mighty 8x32 SE to the test.

I was actually rather let down in a couple instances with the 8x32 (it isn't perfect, after all). I was out on a boat and birding in horrid light. Despite all the "eye pupil this" and "exit pupil that", I have the suspicion that a 5mm exit pupil is also useful in harsh light. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Say you have mid-day light, you have a back-lit subject. Does it stand to reason that a "brighter" binocular will have better performance on the poorly lit subjects? Or maybe that's when you want more magnification to compensate?

 

[jaymoynihan]

My 8x32 SE does have some CA,...It struck me as more tightly controlled than many (the remarkable sharpness of the SE extends even to the CA I guess!). ...

Yeah, it does appear different. The CA is not only minimal, but it is extremely "thin" and sharpely defined, not fuzzing or "bleeding" at all.

 

[jaymoynihan]

... I was so attached to the SE's that I thought I might but a second pair...

Did so, recently, :eek!: while i could still find a new pair. Discountbinoculars.com

 

[jaymoynihan]

... Say you have mid-day light, you have a back-lit subject. Does it stand to reason that a "brighter" binocular will have better performance on the poorly lit subjects? Or maybe that's when you want more magnification to compensate?

Interesting. Experienced that just yesterday (birds, in bare branches, bright white sky background). Was using the 8x SE, which (at least my copy) does extremely well in that situation. Markings distinct but less colorful.

Sometimes more magnifcation will help (since the field is narrower, and admitting less "stray" light), but i think the most important thing in that situation is the binocular's coatings and/or control of flair (do not know if that is the right term.... EDZ, is that the right term.... )

 

[John M Robinson]

Although nowhere near 12 years I have had my SE's in the rain plenty of times this year and they still look and work like new???? I haven't had any issues yet in the wet weather????
I think they are pretty weather proof people. I wouldn't go swimming with them but I sure as heck would take them ANYWHERE I wanted a really good view regardless of conditions. Saying that I know I'm lucky to have good backups (strange when a Swaro EL is your backup/truck glass:-O).... The SE in my opinion is that good. And because I consider it that good I am willing to to take them anywhere and will not settle for a lesser view :t:
Here's my thanks again for the Nikon SE :flowers:


And no I don't work for Nikon:-O

I do the same thing, only I have 8x42 Ultravids as back up to my SEs.

John

 

[brocknroller]

Specimen variances aside, I have yet to see CA in my SE and I am very sensitive to it and have seen in many of my binoculars past and present. For instance, a Great Egret against grey sky is an easy diagnostic. For the ZR to be better seems pretty amazing. I wish I could try them around here.

BTW, as far as not having alphas, anyone trying to say the 8x32 SE is not an alpha would have a lot of explaining to do.

Matt,

What are the first three numbers of the serial number? 5_ _?

I'm wondering if you have the earlier lead glass version.

 

[Matt_RTH]

Matt,

What are the first three numbers of the serial number? 5_ _?

I'm wondering if you have the earlier lead glass version.

I have the 505. Is that good or bad? I remember that being a subject but I don't recall the consensus.

 

[Pileatus]

I have the 505. Is that good or bad? I remember that being a subject but I don't recall the consensus.

There were no facts and no consensus. Enjoy your SE.

 

[NWBirder]

For yet another non-definitive comaprison, I actually prefer the ZR 8x43 to my SE's. I spent some time a few weeks ago at dusk and dawn trying to spot deer, and I switched back and forth and found that the ZR were brighter, and I thought the contrast was considerably better. I do like the feel of the SE's better, and they are definitely lighter. I was so attached to the SE's that I thought I might but a second pair just in case of theft - but now the SE's are playing back-up role.

I haven't got a set of ZEN ED glasses yet. But it sure is on my holiday wish list.

 

[brocknroller]

I have the 505. Is that good or bad? I remember that being a subject but I don't recall the consensus.

Good thing, they have better coatings than earlier models, though I don't know which year/model the switchover occurred.

I had the 501s and the 505s, the 2nd and 5th year they were made. The 505's have more contrast and better color depth.

The only SEs newer than yours is the 2007/8 550, which has lead glass. Not sure about the glass on the 505 since they came out the same year Nikon states that it switched over to lead-free glass. It may have already been in "the pipeline" before the switchover to lead-free glass.

 

[brocknroller]

I'm not surprised by the finding that a good 8x43 can put the mighty 8x32 SE to the test.

I was actually rather let down in a couple instances with the 8x32 (it isn't perfect, after all). I was out on a boat and birding in horrid light. Despite all the "eye pupil this" and "exit pupil that", I have the suspicion that a 5mm exit pupil is also useful in harsh light. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Say you have mid-day light, you have a back-lit subject. Does it stand to reason that a "brighter" binocular will have better performance on the poorly lit subjects? Or maybe that's when you want more magnification to compensate?

A larger exit pupil for poorly lit subjects, yes, back-lit subjects, no, since your entrance pupils will contract to the same size looking at a brightly lit background in either bin.

Here's a couple ways to eek out more detail from your SE in a back-lit situation. Pull your eyes back from the EPs until only the bird fills up the view.

Your entrance pupils will open up more and you will see more detail on the bird, because in bright light, your eyes switch from the rod system to the cone system, better for color but not as light sensitive.

You might also try using averted vision to eek out even more detail after you've backed off from the EPs and reduced the background light.

Instead of looking right at the bird with your central vision, look just off-center so your peripheral vision, where most of your rods are, picks up the bird.

This technique is used in amateur astronomy with dim celestial objects, but I've tried it for birding, and it also works in this situation.

However, it's hard to master this techique if you're not used to it, because your brain keeps drawing your eyes back to the bird and your eyes are constantly scanning the image.

Try this indoors. Stare at a thumb tack at the top of a picture of photo on your wall or put a push pin in the wall and concentrate on it.

Try not to move your eyes (it's harder than you would think). If you can do this, you will notice that in a while, the picture or area below the pin will start to "disappear".

Yes, it's good to have a full sized bin to back up your midsized bin on overcast days and in the winter.

I mentioned on another thread that I sometimes find the 8x32 SE lacking when light levels dip low on completely overcast days or during the winter.

 

[The Kingfisher]

Good thing, they have better coatings than earlier models, though I don't know which year/model the switchover occurred.

I had the 501s and the 505s, the 2nd and 5th year they were made. The 505's have more contrast and better color depth.

The only SEs newer than yours is the 2007/8 550, which has lead glass. Not sure about the glass on the 505 since they came out the same year Nikon states that it switched over to lead-free glass. It may have already been in "the pipeline" before the switchover to lead-free glass.

How do you know wich version of the 8x32 SE you have? I can´t find such information on my own SE. Maybe it´s under the XXXXXX-number?

My SE has the number 504938. I bought it in jan 2005. Is it possible to say (or guess) wich coatings I have with this tiny information? 505 is my own guess..

 

[brocknroller]

How do you know wich version of the 8x32 SE you have? I can´t find such information on my own SE. Maybe it´s under the XXXXXX-number?

My SE has the number 504938. I bought it in jan 2005. Is it possible to say (or guess) wich coatings I have with this tiny information? 505 is my own guess..

Holy mackerel! Kingfish,

You have a lead-free SE.

According to Nikon, the changeover to lead-free glass happened in 2002.

From what I have been able to painstakingly piece together by reading threads, posting inquires about 8x32 SE serial #s on public forums, and through PMs and emails, the 504 model was made in 2001.

Did you buy it new from a store or second hand? If new, was it sold by a small camera shop or big online dealer?

Hard to believe it took five years to sell, although a BF member did mention that camera stores were having trouble moving the SEs after the "Roof Revolution," and my local camera store still has leftover Minolta Classics (the original series)!

The general consensus was these serial #s match these years:

500 = 1997
501 = 1998
502 = 1999
503 = 2000
504 = 2001
505 = 2002
550 = 2007 or 2008

From comparing the color of the coatings verbally on one 504 with one 505, it appears that the upgrade in AR coatings might have occurred in 2002, but I would need harder data to confirm that (by comparing them visually instead of verbally).

However, since Nikon changed the glass in 2002, it would make sense that it would also change the coatings.

Amos, Fresh Air Taxi Company, Chicago

 

[The Kingfisher]

Holy mackerel! Kingfish,

You have a lead-free SE.

According to Nikon, the changeover to lead-free glass happened in 2002.

Did you buy it new from a store or second hand? If new, was it sold by a small camera shop or big online dealer?

The general consensus was these serial #s match these years:

500 = 1997
501 = 1998
502 = 1999
503 = 2000
504 = 2001
505 = 2002
550 = 2007 or 2008

I really don´t get it. You say I have a lead-free SE. And the version 504, right? But the changeover to lead-free glass happened first in 2002. If my SE is a 504, it can´t be lead-free according to your table..??! :eek!:

I bought it new from a small camera shop.