从评测看,这宽镜子的综合指标不错.
但外观造型不下功夫,尺寸不小,缺乏观赏性.这一点还不如西光追求超段镜身有进取心.
这款镜子的锐度肯定要超过你手上的820.是否暧昧,是一个相对的概念.朋友你需要一款42口径 ...
赏月观星 发表于 2010-11-23 10:51 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
哈哈，原来是这样啊！？只是相对的！！:lol 看来我真的需要一款42口径的顶级镜了！！::070821_21.jpg::
哈哈，原来是这样啊！？只是相对的！！ 看来我真的需要一款42口径的顶级镜了！！ ...
aitian 发表于 2010-11-23 21:13 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
:lol 有没有看中哪个品牌啊？
42口径的顶级镜考虑施华洛世奇的10X42 EL或者10X42 SLC HD啊！:lol
第2支是什么问题？
赏月观星 发表于 2010-11-22 15:31 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
饰皮看着还是不放心。。。不过眼罩是太舒服了。。。别的厂家应该学习。。。
EDG外观有太多累赘，看着不那么利索和悦目。
EDG外观有太多累赘，看着不那么利索和悦目。
我用美能达 发表于 2010-11-26 13:05 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
:handshake 我主要是对那两块发亮的牌子很苦恼。:L
对了，看来赏月兄对于施华的二线产品，即SLC NEW和新版的SLC HD系列没有了解过哦。。。
从评测看,这宽镜子的综合指标不错.
但外观造型不下功夫,尺寸不小,缺乏观赏性.这一点还不如西光追求超段镜身 ...
zhwwww 发表于 2010-11-23 15:31 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
是啊，超短镜身看着很棒。
我主要是对那两块发亮的牌子很苦恼。
赏月观星 发表于 2010-11-26 13:18 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
就像是扎了一条俗气的领结，呵呵。
就像是扎了一条俗气的领结，呵呵。
zhwwww 发表于 2010-11-26 22:55 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
::27:: 太形象了!
拜读，N家和3大的差距还是有的。
LZ最后的总结，我个人感觉还是为了保整体牺牲了中心锐度，做到中心很锐周边差相对整面锐要容易吧。
我想知道这副EDG的视场里， 星像能否挺住到80%的视场半径处才开始松散、劣化？
再仔细看了一次这篇测评！非常好！！::070821_09.jpg::
尼康的EDG果然是一款极好的工具镜！只要再稍为努力一下，就可以完全比肩欧洲三大了！！:lol
呵呵 将来有机会了俺也一定整个大品牌的好镜子用用！::070821_01.jpg::
终于明白了为什么那么多EDG到手后 那么快就出:dizzy: 看来顶级镜不是那么好进啊
我想知道这副EDG的视场里， 星像能否挺住到80%的视场半径处才开始松散、劣化？ ...
棱丝 发表于 2010-12-27 11:15 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
:handshake 手持观星的话，可以的。但是，如果上架仔细辨认的话，可能会看到小小不同。但是大体上来说，80%内的范围，肉眼观看时很难看到明显的松散。
再仔细看了一次这篇测评！非常好！！
尼康的EDG果然是一款极好的工具镜！只要再稍为努力 ...
aitian 发表于 2011-1-8 11:52 http://www.astronomy.com.cn/bbs/images/common/back.gif
等着尼康的下一个系列吧，我看已经很逼近了！:handshake
转一篇尼康7X42 EDG的外国测评：
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=116087
I had the opportunity to briefly test a prototype of the new Nikon 7x42 EDG binocular today. I didn't have time to be as careful as I would have liked and used abbreviated versions of my usual tests which included resolution and artificial star testing at boosted magnification of 56x and examination of a CA target for longitudinal CA at 56x and lateral CA at 7x. I was able to very briefly compare the EDG to a Zeiss 7x42 FL, a Leica 8x42 Ultravid (non HD) and a Nikon 8x42 LX L, looking mainly for differences in brightness, contrast and color transmission.
After just a few minutes it was clear that the EDG has MUCH higher light transmission than the LX L, and, I believe, slightly better contrast and a little more neutral color (there's just a slight hint of the usual Nikon red). Light transmission in the LX L series really needed improvement and the difference is quite obvious. The EDG appeared to be just slightly dimmer than the Zeiss FL and just a bit brighter than the Ultravid. The EDG is probably about as bright as current technology allows a complex binocular with a Schmidt-Pechan prism to be.
An artificial star test at 56x (Christmas tree ornament in sunlight) revealed a little misalignment in the left barrel (probably a side effect of collimation and pretty harmless). The right barrel was completely free of assembly defects, with just the expected aberrations. It was not the very best looking star test I've seen from a binocular, but, by binocular standards there was nothing seriously wrong either. Resolution was perfectly fine, around 3.5 arcsec in the right barrel, about what I would expect from a typical premium 42mm binocular and much better than is needed for a sharp image at 7x.
Longitudinal CA, viewed at 56x, was clearly better than the LX L. The purple fringe on the the CA target was reduced to about 1/4 the width of the fringe seen in the LX L, very similar to the Zeiss FL. The low CA makes the 56x image look quite clean and contrasty compared to most binoculars, again similar to the Zeiss FL. IMO, lateral color (the type of CA you actually see as a color fringe in binoculars at low power) is pretty bad in the LX L series and it appears to be improved in the EDG to about the level of the Zeiss FL, but all the high end roof prism binoculars have more lateral color than just about any garden variety Porro with a simple doublet objective.
There appears to me to be very little rectilinear distortion in the EDG, a design approach similar to the SE series. That's in contrast to the Zeiss FL and Leica Ultravid which employ considerable pincushion with the goal of the eliminating the "rolling ball" effect when panning. Unfortunately I didn't have time for a careful evaluation of off axis sharpness, but my brief impression was positive. I think the EDG probably uses a low astigmatism eyepiece design like the SE.
Overall, I'm quite impressed with the optics of this binocular. If production samples live up to the prototype the EDG binoculars should be perfectly capable of jostling with Leica, Swarovski and Zeiss for a seat at the head of the $2000 binocular table.