Zeiss Terra ED: First Look (3 Viewers)

No typo. I owned the 7x36 ED2 (which had a LOT of pincushion) and then the 8x43 ED3. Now, I haven't owned the ED3 for a while so perhaps my memory of that aspect is flawed... but my recollection was that it also had plenty of pincushion. I could be totally wrong though, but I suspect strongly that it has quite a bit more than the Terra (with the caveat of course, as you point out, that the ED3 has a considerably wider FOV).

Of the binoculars that I have had in possession recently for direct comparison, in ascending order of my estimation of the level of pincushion:

- Minox BD 8x32 BR Asph (very little, has aspherical lens elements)
- Zeiss Terra ED 10x42 (a tiny bit more, but still not much, but not a huge FOV)
- Nikon Monarch 10x42 (wife's old pre-DE "ATB" version)
- Bushnell 8x28 Excursion (wide FOV, a good amount of pincushion)
- Zen-Ray ZRS HD 8x32 (lots of pincushion, starts very early off axis)

I just wanted to mention that I am back here reporting on the
Terra. This time the 8x42 model. After my first try, the same
things I like, are present in the 8X. I like the handling, the size and
weight are nice, and so I wanted to give these another chance.

There have been some reports, even from some who have not
even handled this binocular about CA. I find the CA to be handled
well in the sweet spot, but it does appear toward the edges when
tested and pushed in high contrast situations. I find much the
same on other HD glass, under a severe test. Not an issue at all
in my mind, as it is comparable to others.

These focus smoothly, without any play, and the eyecups fit me
well, I don't wear glasses.

I am giving these very good marks, as I find them to be a nice choice
in this market segment.

Jerry

NDhunter said:

I just wanted to mention that I am back here reporting on the
Terra. This time the 8x42 model. After my first try, the same
things I like, are present in the 8X. I like the handling, the size and
weight are nice, and so I wanted to give these another chance.

There have been some reports, even from some who have not
even handled this binocular about CA. I find the CA to be handled
well in the sweet spot, but it does appear toward the edges when
tested and pushed in high contrast situations. I find much the
same on other HD glass, under a severe test. Not an issue at all
in my mind, as it is comparable to others.

These focus smoothly, without any play, and the eyecups fit me
well, I don't wear glasses.

I am giving these very good marks, as I find them to be a nice choice
in this market segment.

Jerry

Click to expand...

Jerry,
I've had the Terra ED's for about a month and agree with your observations completely. They are a very nice bin at their price point. I compared them to the 8x42 Zhumell Nova ED over in the thread started by FrankD and was a bit surprised at the results.
Tom

I handled the 8x42 terra about two weeks ago. No complaints. I would put it on the short list of binos to consider if not looking to spend a bunch of money.

Handled it again this evening. Hinge was good, focus was smooth, eyecups and diopter was fine. Focuser was better than equivelant priced leupolds I have.

CG

In terms of pincushion, I have done a side-by-side with my Terra, HT and FL, and there is no appreciable difference - slight and unobtrusive.

I'm sure, though, if you're viewing a cityscape and not a natural landscape, your opinion would differ as there would be an abundance of unnatural, straight lines and edges to be seen as 'bending'.

Jerry, glad to see you finally got some Terra satisfaction!

Eitan ... Thanks for the reply. The only model that I have coming close to matching you list is the ZRS HD 8X42. Sounds like the pin cushion is similar to your 8X32. Looks like I need to find a Terra and see how it compares to the ED3.

james holdsworth said:

In terms of pincushion, I have done a side-by-side with my Terra, HT and FL, and there is no appreciable difference - slight and unobtrusive.

I'm sure, though, if you're viewing a cityscape and not a natural landscape, your opinion would differ as there would be an abundance of unnatural, straight lines and edges to be seen as 'bending'.

Jerry, glad to see you finally got some Terra satisfaction!

Click to expand...

The same goes for my Terra and FL, "slight and unobtrusive" on both. I don't have an HT.

Bob

ceasar said:

The same goes for my Terra and FL, "slight and unobtrusive" on both. I don't have an HT.

Bob

Click to expand...

I think that's the first report of excessive pincushion with the Terra. Being that the second sample didn't show the same thing is mysterious.

Generally, wider FOV bins have a lot of pincushion, but not always. I had a Swift 8x44 Ultralite 765ED with 6.5* FOV and the pincushion made the garbage dumpster look saddle-shaped. The 10x42 Ultralite also had a lot of pincushion, but the 8x42 model was fine. So sometimes it can vary from model to model in the same series.

For example with the FL, some members found that certain model FLs had "a noticeable amount of pincushion," for one it was enough to be "distracting."

The OP for the thread was posted by Galih (whatever happened to him? hehehehe) about the 10x32 FL and the second (post #9) by Ronh who said the 8x42 model had "a noticeable amount of pincushion."

pincushion in Zeiss victory FL 10x32

My Nikon 8x30 EIIs have "a noticeable amount of pincushion," which can be disturbing under some conditions. In thick brush, it's not that noticeable, and that's what I primarily use them for.

<B>

horukuru said:

Has anyone got the chances to compared this with Monarch 7 and 5?

Click to expand...

I have handled both SxS in store and briefly on two occasions.
I think it is a case of which bundle of qualities (price, build q, ergos and optics)fit your preferences.

The terra at $383 (w/case) the 7 at $475... or the Viper HD at $550.

I think each is a benchmark at its price point.

I'm a little less price sensative and currently lean toward the 7, but would have to investigate further before purchasing. The trade-offs compare closely, but the fov of the 7 really stands out.

I'd take the Terra over earlier monarch incarnations, but recall those to be upper $200 lower $300 offerings.

CG

cycleguy said:

I have handled both SxS in store and briefly on two occasions.
I think it is a case of which bundle of qualities (price, build q, ergos and optics)fit your preferences.

The terra at $383 (w/case) the 7 at $475... or the Viper HD at $550.

I think each is a benchmark at its price point.

I'm a little less price sensative and currently lean toward the 7, but would have to investigate further before purchasing. The trade-offs compare closely, but the fov of the 7 really stands out.

I'd take the Terra over earlier monarch incarnations, but recall those to be upper $200 lower $300 offerings.

CG

Click to expand...

Yeah based on the market in my place, I can see the Monarch generation users before Monarch 5 and 7, the price offered by Zeiss Terra ED will be the main choice over Monarch 5 and 7 due to the warranty offered and also the brand itself.

I can see the market dominance of Monarch in Malaysia will be replace by Terra ED once dealers here starts offering it at nature and bird festivals

I went to a local cabelas on saturday. The store opened thursday. All the terra ed were gone. I don't know how many were available, the platform in the display counter was empty too.

CG

Am entering this thread late. When the president of Zeiss says the Terra is no alpha, he is in a prettiy good position to make that comment. That I won't challenge. Yet constant use of the 8x42 for a month now leaves me pretty darn impressed with the package. First, let me say that the manufacturing taking place in China is not an issue. Nor can the issue of longevity and ruggedness be ascertained with such brief use.

But I initially like the entire package for the following reasons:

1. the covering to my touch is excellent
2. the colors rendered are excellent to my eyes
3. the sweet spot is fairly wide, and although the edges aren't comparable to the
Nikon SEs, the center resolution where one concentrates while viewing is quite good
4. the focus wheel is ergonomically perfect for me and moves smoothly back and forth
without being cursed by difficulty in fine tuning - also it isn't so sensitive that the
slightest touching moves it - no apparent back lashing
5. the diopter mechanism location and adjustment is mechanically sound - none of
lift and push the focusing wheel and adding to the mechanical complexity found in
many alphas of today - moving the diopter takes some effort as it should, no
accidental changing and no slop and loose or tight spots - the location allows for
fine tuning where eye differences exist.
6. the relief for eye glass wearers allows for the full field of view
7. the close focus is superior - 5.25 feet - not a butterfly binocular but certainly
OK for birds
8. the FOV at 375 feet is adequate
9. the 5.3 exit pupil is good even into dusk - makes easier eye alignment
10. the coatings render a bright image - and the hydrophobic Zeiss MC
coatings, whatever that is, is effective in keeping the lens dust and water
free
11. claim to be waterproof
12, suppose to be operable over wide range, including sub zero weather as
low as - 14 degree F
13. compact package
14. good eye piece covers, stay put yet easy to remove
15. carrying strap is contoured and comfortable to use

What is questionable? Objective covers and way they attach


This may become a very viable addition to the Zeiss line since there is nothing chintzy or lacking for either casual or sophisticated users. And it is affordable for many users. Only time will tell whether the mechanical reliability is up to Zeiss standards. If it is then it is a "best" buy.

John

Excellent summation John!

I've been using my 8x42 TerraED since Zeiss brought it out and your comments are spot on!:t:

Bob

cycleguy said:

I handled the 8x42 terra about two weeks ago. No complaints.

Click to expand...

I think that should be the marketing slogan: "Zeiss Terra. No compaints."

It's not necessarily *exceptional* at anything (although it's very good in several areas), but IMO what separates it from the rest of the budget bin riff raff is that is has no glaring weakness. A well executed effort to bring this level of quality to the price point by Zeiss.

Well, after waiting since the end of June I finally received my Zeiss Terra ED 8x42s. I will agree with most of the comments presented about this binocular so far by other users. It does seem well put together for a $350 binocular. As was done above let me reference my positives and negatives with this model.

Positives

- good build quality
- solid functioning eyecups
- plenty of eye relief
- pleasing tactile rubber armor
- overall size and weight are good for a 42 mm binocular
- field of view is not bothersome to me at all at 375 feet in an 8x
- good apparent sharpness and CA control inside the sweet spot

Negatives (some of these are personal preference and some are not)

- focusing speed/depth of focus is way too fast for my tastes. You are either in focus or completely out of focus. Thankfully the focusing tension is good otherwise I would have real difficulty with this issue.

- sweet spot size is much smaller than I anticipated. Performance outside of the sweet spot isn't bad which is why I don't find as much of an issue with the size of the sweet spot.

- the location of the sweet spot with this particular pair is something I find troubling. When I center an object in the field of view and focus I get an acceptable level of image sharpness. However, if I reposition the binocular so that the object is about 1/3rd of the way down from perfect center then I get a much sharper image. I am guessing an optical alignment issue which also could be the reason for the discrepancy in sweet spot size between my experience and that of other users.

I took several hours comparing the Terra ED to my Sightron Blue Sky 8x32 this past weekend. I was up at the local hawkwatch looking for the big Broadwinged Hawk push that was due. I was able to many Broadies, Bald Eagles, Kestrels, etc... and I used both binoculars to not only observe these birds against the blue sky/white clouds but also migrating warblers under the fairly dense canopy.

Without meaning to offend any current, happy Zeiss Terra ED owners I preferred the Sightron without reservation. Here was my reasoning:

- the sweet spot in the Sightron was much larger so it was very easy to follow birds against both backgrounds. The transition from the sweet spot to off axis was also more gradual in the Sightron thus making peripheral imagery less distracting.

- The focusing speed/depth of focus of the Sightron allowed me to much more easily focus on the birds and then refocus as needed. I often over shot with the Zeiss.

I noticed no difference in apparent sharpness, brightness or contrast nor did I detect a notable difference in CA control. The Zeiss's image representation appeared more yellowish than the Sightron's "redder" color tone. I did not find either preferrable in this area to the other.

Just to serve as an overall reference I had several other binoculars along on the trip as well including the Vixen Foresta 7x50, the Celestron Nature DX and Trailseeker, the Zen Ray 7x43 ED3 and the Nikon Action WF 7x35. I did not spend as much time comparing the Zeiss to any of the others as I thought the Sightron was the most similar overall from an optical perspective.

Frank, I would be interested in your opinion of the two Celestron models that you mentioned. Thank You!

Have some friends who want to purchase a Zeiss Terra ED 8x42 There isn't a store in Montana which currently has them in stock, and going on line results in back orders. This process has been going on for some time now, Evidently, Zeiss ordered just so many (that makes perfect sense) to see what the demand will be.

In my previous post #212, I stated it was too early for the mechanical reliability to meet Zeiss standards I have had several reports from salesmen who claim they are not trouble free. For example, the focusing knob fell off of one pair. But no accompayning information. I have been repairing binoculars for many years now, and almost without exception, the tinkerer with the wrong tools botches things up, Of course using the wrong screwdriver, etc. will cause unecessary marring. Lens separations do occur, and prisms get chipped in ill fitting seats. But most binoculars are amazingly tough.

I note that even the alphas have their share of returning to the factory for adjustment. IMO much of this is a function of over-engineering. Swarovski led the trend with its split bridge. Nice to grab a hold of with one hand, but it all comes at a price.

Rifle scopes used to have a knob for elevation and one for windage. Now the scope resembles a wart hog..

John

Had a good try with an acquaintances 10x42 Terra ED today.

I was underwhelmed to be honest, nice ergo`s and balance, pretty good focusser and reasonable build.

Sweetspot quite small as was the fov.

Optically I feel there are better UK options from Opticron or RSPB for similar money.

Torview said:

Had a good try with an acquaintances 10x42 Terra ED today.

I was underwhelmed to be honest, nice ergo`s and balance, pretty good focusser and reasonable build.

Sweetspot quite small as was the fov.

Optically I feel there are better UK options from Opticron or RSPB for similar money.

Click to expand...

Yo Tor-spotter

Don't forget the Terra isn't aimed at dedicated birders but at outdoor enthusiasts and beginners.

Lee

John Dracon said:

Rifle scopes used to have a knob for elevation and one for windage. Now the scope resembles a wart hog..

John

Click to expand...

John

You must tell us how you get on the next time you try to adjust a wart-hog's reticles..........................

Lee