Why I like a refined Nikon EII 8x30 porro binoculars? (1 Viewer)

[jring]

Just don't tell Lee about this thread... He once compared holding a Porro binocular to shaking hands with an alien. 😂😂

Have to agree, though - I love my E-II.

Hi,

I would love to shake hands with an alien... maybe that's why I love my E2...

Joachim

 

[tenex]

I've considered an E2 numerous times based on threads like this, and it's an economical option for someone who hasn't used 8x for a long time and is unsure how much I would, so I finally got one. (822xxx; I realize there's also a 10x35, but we have enough 10x bins already... really...)

Initial impression: I'm simply stunned by the view, which is quite similar to my familiar UV32, possibly with even better central resolution (as dorubird suggests), and in some lighting better contrast. Brightness seems difficult to judge, and must be fairly close. I haven't seen earlier E2s to compare coatings, but definitely recall SEs having the odd reddish cast mnich refers to, which I disliked, and was glad to know the E2 no longer has, as I can now confirm. (Jerry, do you not see this difference in your examples?) Focusing seems a bit slow, but focus is tack sharp, even beautiful in some limpid way. And the FOV rivals NLs. This is a lovely instrument that I'll have to get to know better.

 

[[email protected]]

Very nice! What other binoculars do you have? I am curious how they compare. Your picture of the HGL makes me want one again. They are a very nice high quality binocular. I do disagree on a few things, as far as, the comparison to the Habicht. The Habicht without a doubt has better sharper edges, better white rendition, better control of CA, but more distortion than the E2. The distortion level is the weak point of the Habicht, but it has IMO almost perfect white rendering, but the E2 is excellent also. I think the Habicht has slightly better contrast also. My S/N is, 821870, so I have the newest E2. Comparing the brightness of the E2 to the Habicht and other binoculars I own, I would say the 88.4% Gijs van Ginkel got on his most recent test of the E2 is in the ballpark. The Habicht is noticeably brighter and more so than 2 or 3% if the E2 truly had 92% transmission. Although the E2 has very good build quality, I think the Habicht is on a little higher level. You didn't have a category for waterproof and fog proof, either. To some people who use their binoculars in harsh weather or in tropical climates, being waterproof and fog proof and nitrogen filled is a very important feature. Also, a porro that is not sealed like the E2 or SE for that matter will actually suck dust inside like an accordion when you focus it because of the unsealed focuser so in time you will have to get the binocular cleaned. The advantages of the E2 are the bigger FOV, an easier smoother focuser and the bigger eye cups. Both are very nice porro's.

 

[dorubird]

tenex,​

I'm glad you like E2 so much. I'm sure you'll use it with even bigger pleasure!

[email protected],​

Nikon HGL 8x32 I sold it, with pricks of conscience, but diserved for the cause of my trusty E2 . Then I bought a Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 which is now my workhorse bino, much closer optically to E2 than HGL. A bino jewel too! In the same 30mm/35mm category I also have a Nikon E 7x35, another spectacular porro. So in the "32mm" category I have three Nikons.

These are my observations: E2 8x30 is better at CA and edge clarity than Habicht 8x30. It is true that these two (CA and edge clarity) are quite difficult to estimate in percentages without a very accurate measurement, being a degree of subjectivism and disputes.
1 A pair of binoculars, like Habicht 8x30, which has only 7.8 degrees FOV if it still has clarity on the edges that starts to degrade about 30% of FOV, this is a disappointment. Nikon E2 has about the same 30% FOV as blurred as Habicht but has 8.8 degrees, resulting much wider sweet spot. Also the blur on the edges goes more unnoticed due to the larger field of view, even if it is present there. But when you have a smaller field of view you notice all the FOV at a glance and then the correction on the edges is more important, it becomes more crucial!
2 On sunny days if I look for the chromatic aberrations (CA) in E2 only with some effort I was able to see them only on the edges, in Habicht I noticed them a little faster (without proposing).
3 In conlusion the differences of adge clarity and CA are not colossal, being two binoculars more similar than different in these two aspects, but for me these nuances matter!

 

[[email protected]]

tenex,​

I'm glad you like E2 so much. I'm sure you'll use it with even bigger pleasure!

[email protected],​

Nikon HGL 8x32 I sold it, with pricks of conscience, but diserved for the cause of my trusty E2 . Then I bought a Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 which is now my workhorse bino, much closer optically to E2 than HGL. A bino jewel too! In the same 30mm/35mm category I also have a Nikon E 7x35, another spectacular porro. So in the "32mm" category I have three Nikons.

These are my observations: E2 8x30 is better at CA and edge clarity than Habicht 8x30. It is true that these two (CA and edge clarity) are quite difficult to estimate in percentages without a very accurate measurement, being a degree of subjectivism and disputes.
1 A pair of binoculars, like Habicht 8x30, which has only 7.8 degrees FOV if it still has clarity on the edges that starts to degrade about 30% of FOV, this is a disappointment. Nikon E2 has about the same 30% FOV as blurred as Habicht but has 8.8 degrees, resulting much wider sweet spot. Also the blur on the edges goes more unnoticed due to the larger field of view, even if it is present there. But when you have a smaller field of view you notice all the FOV at a glance and then the correction on the edges is more important, it becomes more crucial!
2 On sunny days if I look for the chromatic aberrations (CA) in E2 only with some effort I was able to see them only on the edges, in Habicht I noticed them a little faster (without proposing).
3 In conlusion the differences of adge clarity and CA are not colossal, being two binoculars more similar than different in these two aspects, but for me these nuances matter!

I agree, the biggest difference between the E2 8x30 and the Habicht 8x30 W optically is the Habicht is brighter and the E2 has a bigger FOV. Ergonomically, the E2 has an easier to turn focuser and bigger eye cups, which will fit most people's eye sockets better. Build quality wise the Habicht is waterproof and fog proof and the E2 is not. For example, if I lived in Costa Rica and birded in the Monteverde rain forests, I wouldn't buy an E2. It depends on your priorities and where and how you are birding. You have to decide which feature is more important to you. Because the E2 is not waterproof and sealed, you can also have fungus problems. With the Habicht you never have to worry about fungus, dust or moisture getting in your binoculars.

Fungus on Nikon EII 8x30. What to do? Ideas and comments welcome

I’ve had my 2018 Nikon EII 8x30 fogged up internally several times, the last time it displayed an odd looking «noodle patter» that was probably not fungus. However, yesterday while cleaning the lenses I spotted something worrying that I’m afraid this time is indeed fungal growth, is it? I’m...

www.birdforum.net

 

[William Lewis]

Excellent write up and photos as always Dorubird! I got a nikon 10x35 e c recently and it's pretty good too. I don't reach for them quite as often as the 7x42 habichts but there still very good for brighter days, depth of field is not amazing and there not quite as stable at 10x mag.

I had a peregrine cruising high above Brentwood in Essex with the nikons at the weekend as well as a common buzzard doing a very impressive dive, wings folded way back, its surprising how fast they can move when they want to! 10x35 seems to be quite a nice sweet spot in a porro for handling and magnification when the sun shines, I bet the eii versions even better!

 

[tenex]

What is the actual design history of the Nikon E? I read somewhere that it was based on a West German Zeiss 8x30 of the early 1950s, which I've never seen. Did it resemble the notably compact (short focal length) Oberkochen 10x50 that I grew up with, more than the longer Jena models, or Habichts?

 

[dorubird]

some interesting data

Legendary binoculars - Nikon 8x30 EII - Nikon 8x30 EII - 1999- now

The golden age of Porro binoculars lasted several dozen years and started right after the World War II ...

www.allbinos.com

 

[tenex]

Thanks. So that Zeiss West 8x30 had air-spaced tele objectives like the 10x50, whereas the Nikon A/E line used a traditional cemented doublet, like older/CZJ models... but continued to innovate with improved ocular designs in the E and E2.

Incidentally, the AllBinos transmission graph clearly shows the dip around 500nm that was previously responsible for the reddish tinge.

It seems strange that Nikon won't market the E2 in North America; at least they could sell it directly themselves (as Leica does the Retrovids) if dealers aren't interested, and offer warranty support.

 

[tenex]

I am shocked, shocked to find field curvature here...

Following up on my glowing first impression in post 22: I am no flat-field fanatic, but the one thing that surprises me about the E2 is the amount of field curvature, given its twice improved, six-element eyepiece. The usably sharp center area is decent but smaller than I would expect in a modern binocular, which makes me wonder whether Nikon may actually have chosen to retain this characteristic out of nostalgia for instruments of sixty years ago? (Holger Merlitz rated the sweet spot at 70% but that seems a bit generous to me, and it does soften visibly and rapidly from there.) In other respects the E2's optics seem very competitive with models costing several times as much today.

 

[NDhunter]

I am shocked, shocked to find field curvature here...

Following up on my glowing first impression in post 22: I am no flat-field fanatic, but the one thing that surprises me about the E2 is the amount of field curvature, given its twice improved, six-element eyepiece. The usably sharp center area is decent but smaller than I would expect in a modern binocular, which makes me wonder whether Nikon may actually have chosen to retain this characteristic out of nostalgia for instruments of sixty years ago? (Holger Merlitz rated the sweet spot at 70% but that seems a bit generous to me, and it does soften visibly and rapidly from there.) In other respects the E2's optics seem very competitive with models costing several times as much today.

I think there is an easy answer to your wondering about the sweet spot. Remember the E2, has a very wide FOV, and
this means there must be some compromise.
You are correct, the view is very good, so we should just enjoy that.
Jerry

 

[dorubird]

In order to benefit from the entire FOV of 8.8 degrees with the glasses on, I removed the rubber cups from the eyepieces and glued a thin leather cord with rubber glue. Thus, I gained about 2mm over the initial 13.8mm, so the eye relief became somewhere around 15.8mm. Now I can enjoy the entire FOV much more comfortably, without scratching the glasses. I can see the whole AFOV, that is like a large window with a perfectly defined field stop, and no blackouts. It is like a rediscovery of this extraordinary pair of binoculars. Also I think it doesn't look too bad with my modification!

 

[John M Robinson]

How does the 8x30 E II compare to the 8x32 SE? I have the 8 and 10 power SEs, love them both.

 

[albie...]

I had the 8x32SE,10x42SE , 8x30E2 and 10x35E2 I preferred the E2's . The E2's for me had better ergonomics , more comfort , wider fov and loved the retro look they had .
The need for eyeglasses because of significant astigmatism among other things caused me to sell them . I imagine I would have gotten along better with the SE's and their increased eye relief now that I wear glasses while viewing .
I now own the Nikon MHG 8x42 so problems solved .

 

[tenex]

There's been much discussion of this, but briefly EII has wider FOV and by now more recent coatings, SE a flatter field and feels a bit more robust. More here seemed to prefer SE, but some (including me) prefer EII which of course is still being produced. What it offers is unique today.