Anybody at Slimbridge on 7th want a pair of joke binoculars?

[mcdowella]

Last summer I tried to clean a pair of Swift Audubon 8.5x44 820 porro binoculars, and made the mistake of believing that the "waterproof" marking meant that they would actually survive being left to soak in water. They went back to Warehouse Express for repair under warranty on the 28th August. After periodic emails to Warehouse Express and reports that they were in a waiting list or undergoing repair at Pyser I ended up with a replacement pair. I took today off from work at short notice just to be able to receive them and eagerly unwrapped them to compare them with the ED version I had got to replace them (and carefully kept well away from water!). Funny, I don't seem to be able to focus them... A few moments later I noticed that the left hand side was giving me a view not only blurred, but slanted 10-20 degrees to the left of vertical. Furthermore, it rattles when shaken gently. There is no sign of exterior damage, so I'm guessing that this isn't a pair that has been dropped in transit.

Somebody's quality control is not all that it should be and I am sick to death of this affair. If anybody is going to Slimbridge tomorrow and can use a pair of joke binoculars, PM me and I'll hand them over. Would suit birdwatcher completely blind in left eye or amateur optical engineer.

[Leif]

Binoculars are usually rated as being waterproof to a certain depth for a certain duration. Leaving them under for a prolonged time is bad news. Did you put detergent in the water? That probably makes matters worse as it lowers the surface tension, and dissolves grease/lubricant.

Out of interest, what are the two versions like? Is there any point to paying extra for the ED version?

[mcdowella]

Yes, I did put a small amount of detergent in the water, and yes I still feel very stupid about it! I was quite keen to compare the ED and non-ED versions but I still have never had both working non-ED and working ED on hand at the same time. I might compare what I have got them with a lens cap over the left hand side so I don't get a headache trying it, but I suspect my answer wouldn't be very useful to other people as I am unusually short sighted (last prescription was 18.5 and 19.25 dioptres) so the combined optical path to the back of my eye must be very odd (I can get chromatic aberation from my glasses alone!)

[Leif]

Yes, I did put a small amount of detergent in the water, and yes I still feel very stupid about it! I was quite keen to compare the ED and non-ED versions but I still have never had both working non-ED and working ED on hand at the same time. I might compare what I have got them with a lens cap over the left hand side so I don't get a headache trying it, but I suspect my answer wouldn't be very useful to other people as I am unusually short sighted (last prescription was 18.5 and 19.25 dioptres) so the combined optical path to the back of my eye must be very odd (I can get chromatic aberation from my glasses alone!)

Sounds like you need APO/ED/HD/Flourite eyeglasses!

[rogerk]

You should have used a shorter spin cycle and a non-colour fading powder!!
The results would have been the same, have you tried claiming on the house insurance?
Yours cynically and latterly more serious, Roger.

[mcdowella]

The idea of going through yet more hassle with a third party does not appeal, which is why I just had a moan instead of taking this further with anybody.

I did go out into the garage, lean my elbows on the car, and try reading the small print on various containers on the shelf. By far the most interesting result is that there is a huge difference between using both sides of a pair of binoculars and just one - so big that it looks like an increase in magnification when you take the left hand lens cap off a working pair. Interesting when you think about observation binoculars vs scopes!

As far as marginal differences go, I think the right side of tbe brand new 820s is marginally BETTER than the right side of the EDs in their usual condition, with a little bit of grease visible on the lenses. After cleaning (with a gadget designed for the purpose!) the EDs may possibly be marginally better than the ordinary 820s, but I wouldn't bet on it. For sheer resolution, a cheap pair of 10x50s (http://7dayshop.com) is very slightly better than the 8.5x44 820s, but of course provides a much narrower field of view.

PS - you CAN get different sorts of spectacle lenses. Mine are high refractive index plastic, which do give me fringes when I look through the edges, but are much lighter than others (which used to rub my ears raw) and are less likely to injure me if I come off my bicycle.

[mcdowella]

Well, I finally calmed down enough to take the non-EDs to ActionOptics, who fixed them both promptly and cheaply. It seems that a prism had become completely detached from its mounting, probably due to shock in transit. I guess that clears quality control at Warehouse Express and Swift, although I happened to have the delivery packing material along and ActionOptics said it wasn't as protective as they would use - looking at the size of their outgoing parcels I believe them.

Since then I have been comparing the centre field resolution in ED and non-ED Swift 820 porros - by hand, when resting my elbows, and tripod mounted, using the titles of books and videos in a bookcase, a £5 note, and (briefly) the moon and venus as targets. I have not been able to find convincing evidence of a difference between them, so I guess my eyesight is the limiting factor. At one point I thought I had found a situation that would force the non-EDs into visible coloured fringes at the very edge of the field, but that turned out to be coming from my glasses!

(FWIW I can detect lower centre field resolution in some compact 8x25 roofs and - even allowing for the difference in magnification - in some 7x42 roofs I bought as bad-weather binoculars - I am not taking the Swifts out in the rain!).

[Pileatus]

Well, I finally calmed down enough to take the non-EDs to ActionOptics, who fixed them both promptly and cheaply. It seems that a prism had become completely detached from its mounting, probably due to shock in transit. I guess that clears quality control at Warehouse Express and Swift, although I happened to have the delivery packing material along and ActionOptics said it wasn't as protective as they would use - looking at the size of their outgoing parcels I believe them.

Since then I have been comparing the centre field resolution in ED and non-ED Swift 820 porros - by hand, when resting my elbows, and tripod mounted, using the titles of books and videos in a bookcase, a £5 note, and (briefly) the moon and venus as targets. I have not been able to find convincing evidence of a difference between them, so I guess my eyesight is the limiting factor. At one point I thought I had found a situation that would force the non-EDs into visible coloured fringes at the very edge of the field, but that turned out to be coming from my glasses!

(FWIW I can detect lower centre field resolution in some compact 8x25 roofs and - even allowing for the difference in magnification - in some 7x42 roofs I bought as bad-weather binoculars - I am not taking the Swifts out in the rain!).

Last year I picked up a brand new pair of Swift 820 porros and saw exactly the same thing. One of the prisms was dislodged and the view was exceptional. It was wonderful to be able to look straight ahead and at the sky at the same time!

The Swift 820 porro optics are very appealing, but I would never buy one based on the poor QA I've seen and read about. The excellent reputation this binocular once enjoyed suggests something has either changed in the production cycle or people are just abusing them.

John