Comparison Nikon Prostaff 7S 10x42 vs Nikon Prostaff P7 8x42
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 12. 2022
- 00:00:30 Optical coatings : High-reflective (dielectric?) coating* and phase coating
00:01:05 Lenses caps
00:02:31 Color rendition
00:04:51 Other coatings
00:05:30 Sharpness and contrast
00:06:05: Maybe one of the reasons
00:06:13 More recessed objective lenses
00:06:58 Chromatic aberrations
00:08:46 Barrel distorsions
00:10:20 Field of view
00:10:52 Apparent field of view
00:11:40 Dioptre adjustment ring
00:13:41 First quarter Moon
00:14:44 Eye relief
00:15:45 Atmospheric turbulences
00:16:40 Focus wheel
00:17:40 Grip
00:18:11 Handling
00:18:48 Balance
*2022/12/19 :
According to two different Nikon websites I looked at (USA, France), the Nikon Prostaff 7S has a high-reflective coating (so I don't know the nature of this coating actually).
And the Nikon Prostaff P7 has a "dielectric high-reflective multilayer prism coating " (quoted from the Nikon USA website www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-pro... )
Thank you very much for this video! There is almost no other example of the 2022 P7 optics on the internet, so this was very helpful.
Thank you so mutch for this video !!
8×42 лучше картинка, по моему. Спасибо за обзор!
Amigo muito obrigado pelo comparativo! Na sua opinião qual seria mais indicado para observação de aves?
I from Brazil
To my taste 8x42 P7 is better for birdwatching . Because I have all the time the binculars around my neck. So a low weight is important for me, to me it's more important than the correction of chromatic aberrations for example, because even with chromatic aberrations around a bird in challenging conditions, I can still identify a bird. In addition the P7 has a water repellent coating (water condensation on the eyepiece lenses after a big effort or the consequences of a big difference of temperature will be reduce) and a dielectric coating (more brightness in theory) So, water repellent coating is also very important for me during cold days because the difference of temperature of the body and the outdoor is very high. Moreover, I find that the image of an 8x42 is easier to focus, more depth of field, more room for the eye placement : it's important for me for birdwatching because If I spend to much time to focus or to find the right placement for my eyes, the bird I target has time to go away.
Nevertheless, I also like 10 power. Actually, when I look through my 8x42 P7, I tell myself "I would like to have a little bit more magnification and little bit more field of view and apparent field of view" and when I have my 7S 10x42 : "I would like to have a steadier image, more field of view (when I use the P7 10x42 I don't say this because the apparent fied of view is great). The ease of use of an 8x42 miss me a bit" etc...
@@colvertfurtifmuito obrigado pela resposta, sua experiência com equipamento me ajudou muito na escolha do meu primeiro binóculos, vou de P7 8x42 mesmo!
Obrigado!
You're comparing apples and oranges, but I'm sure you know that. The P7 8x42 has really impressive apparent brightness compared to the 10x42, and even the porro prism Action EX 8x40!
I agree that comparing two binoculars with different magnifications is not ideal.
I tried to emphasize it when I talked about chromatic aberrations and sharpness. This is the reason why I also talked about physical features such as grip, tension of the focus wheel, balance, etc... This is something I did not do in my others videos.
I think that those physical features on the P7 10x42 are likely to be the same as the P7 8x42 but, yes, I cannot be sure. For example, is the tension of the focus knob different between the 10x42 or 8x42 on the P7? I don't see any reason why Nikon would have changed the tension of the focus knob between the 10x42 and the 8x42 on the P7. Another example, the P7 10x42 is 10 grammes heavier than the P7 8x42 (600 g vs 590 g). Is the P7 10x42 slightly better balanced than the P7 8x42 thanks to the additional weight? Or slightly worse balanced ? I don't know.
I will have the p7 10x42 sooner or later because I am interested in the low weight and the wide field of view. I will come back here if their physical features are not as I expected.
@@colvertfurtif I bought the 8x42 P7 on the basis of the specs on apparent brightness, which is quite extraordinary compared to the 10x42, and there are a lot of dark days in Oregon. The other bino I may get eventually is the 7x50 Active EX, which is really great for low light or night time conditions with some moonlight.
@@Demosophist Thanks for your share. It seems that your eye pupil can dilate very well, you can enjoy binoculars with a large exit pupil.
Now, I have the p7 10x42. I'm surprised because the focus wheel is tight on my device, maybe more tighter than the one on my 7s 10x42. About the balance, I didn't feel any difference when I compared it to the p7 8x42.
2-3 éléments (je possède les Nikon prostaff P7, remplaçant les S7, des Zeiss Conquest à 1350€, et une vieille paire de Marine de la 2nde guerre mondiale…)
- les Nikon prostaff P7 résolvent bien des désavantages de leur prédécesseur: petites comme les Vortex, + légères encore (600g), blocage de la correction dioptrique, champ à 1000m + important, une des meilleures molettes du marché (celle des Monarch, mieux qu’en leica ou zeiss…)… mais en 2023 la quasi totalité des fabricants se rapproche du standard Nikon Monarch pour leur molettes
- leur équipement est de la m… ! Sacoche à 50 centimes inutilisables et non protectrice (obligé de la tenir à la main…) capuchon d’objectifs … comme s’ils n’existaient pas, capuchons d’œilletons se collant tjs aux œilletons, obligé de les enlever lors des sorties, sangle ultra fine à changer. Ces équipements au complet ne revenant pas à plus de 2€ au fabricant…. Puisque vous devrez vous rééquiper de ce côté là…prévoyez 30 à 50€ de plus…
- les prostaff sont de très bonne qualité optique, mais: les prix des jumelles ont explosé (presque doublé en 6 ans) , mais la qualité des gammes éco s’est très améliorée). Nikon est + cher à qualité égale (mes P7 = 200€ au Canada, 260€ en France, et sont équivalentes en optique à des jumelles d’environ 120€ au Canada et 150€ en France: à savoir que l’on trouve sans forcer aujourd’hui des jumelles avec verres ED à 180€!!!
- j’ai choisi les Nikon Prostaff P7 , contre Buschnell H2O et Vortex Diamonblack et 2 autres moins bien: parceque plus légères et agréables en mains, super molette (ça compte, vous l’utilisez sans cesse). Le prix n’a pas compter (c’était un cado) et je n’avais pas pensé à vérifier l’équipement (sacoche, sangle, capuchons)
Conclusion: à refaire , je regarderai l’équipement des deux autres, car pour le reste, c’était ultra proche…
Les Vortex Diamondback HD ont indéniablement un meilleur équipement : bouchons reliés au objectifs, belle sacoche, etc. Ils pourraient correspondre à mes critères de choix compte tenu de leur légèreté, autour de 600 grammes.
Ce que je cherche dans les jumelles d'entrée de gamme, ED ou pas ED, c'est leur légèreté ou une particularité intéressante que je ne trouve pas sur les Monarch HG 10x42 par exemple. Ce n'est pas rare que je prenne les Nikon Prostaff 7 s 10x42 ou les P7 8x42 au lieu des Monarch HG juste parce les Prostaff 7s /P7 sont plus légères, ou parce qu'il y a un revêtement en caoutchouc sur le pont qui fait que je peux utiliser ces jumelles en hiver sans avoir besoin de gants ou parce que je préfère la molette de mise au point des Prostaff 7s/P7 qui est moins dur/plus souple.
Par rapport à la sangle fine sur les P7, je me suis demandé pourquoi Nikon n'avait pas gardé la même sangle que sur le 7 S qui est plus confortable. Je pense que c'est pour éviter de trop transpirer en été vu qu'il y a moins de contact avec le cou avec une sangle fine.
Pour la courroie des Nikon P7: il est à peu près sûr que Nikon a choisi cette mini sangle désagréable par économie. En général, plus on monte en gamme et plus la sangle est de qualité.. et large. Celle-ci est à changer d’office. Je reste content des P7, mais elles reviennent à presque 50% plus chères…
Pour les Diamonblack, l’équipement est bien. J’avais trouvé moins agréable à regarder dedans: un léger halo sur le pourtour du champ. Les P7 me semblaient plus uniformes sur tous le champ ce qui est bien plus confortable et agréable.
Merci pour ton commentaire, c’est exactement l’avis que j’attendais pour me décider entre les nikon et les vortex !
Saya tidak mengerti bahasa anda.
Jadi mana yang lebih baik, 7S atau P7 ?
It depends on what you need. If a low weight is your priority, then p7 is better in 10x42 or 8x42. If you think that balance is more important than a low weight, then 7s is better. If the field of view is important for you, p7 is better. If the correction of chromatic aberration is important for you, I think 7s is better. If the grip is important, 7s is better. If brightness is essential for you, p7 is better. If you would enjoy a locking diopter ring, p7 is better. If compactness is an advantage for you, then p7 is better.
Price??
For the P7, the price in the USA is less expensive than in Europe. The Prostaff 7 S is the previous model, maybe you can find it in second hand
Los nuevos Nikon P7 basicamente son los mismos que la serie antigua Prostsf S7 ,la optica es exactamente la misma ,Nikon se ha limitado a cambiarle la apariencia
The P7 series has water repellent coating and much wider field of view on the 10x42 and 8x30.
စျေးနုန်းသိချင်လို့
The price depends on the country you live. I would recommand to look at the official Nikon website of your area.
small binoculars have an unstable image, it shakes, what is the image of the Nikon 6x15micron, is it stable?
I don't have this model. With 6x magnification, you should have a stable image.