Your pick from the following list

[Robert Ellis]

I get asked this all of the time by my group, so now I pass it on to you.

For $300 US would you rather have the Nikon 8x30 EII of the Swift Audubon 820 ?

I hardly ever recommend anything else in that price range because the image these porros give is untouched by $300 dollar roofs. For those who must have a roof I try to lean them towards the Discoverer 7x42 as I feel it's overall image and "ease of viewing" comes closest to matching the wide open views of the porros.

Any thought from the forum regarding the Nikon EII and Swift Audubon?

[Otto McDiesel]

I use the 10x35 EII in the field for hard work every day, but i am familiar with the 8x30 and the Swift 820 (8.5x roof). The Nikon will last if cared for, i testify to that.The 8.5x offers a bit more magnification, is waterproof, and is really good overall.
The big difference is in the Field of View - excellent for Nikon, and only 330 ft for Swift.
The image quality is better in the Nikon .
So if i had to choose, it would be like this:
If you bird forests and parks, and don't need waterproof, go for Nikon.
If you need waterproof, and FOV is not an issue, go for Swift.
By the way, i compared the 10x35 EII for a whole day against a Zeiss classic C T* P* 10x40. Guess what, i liked the Nikon better in all respects. But it's not waterproof, and probably it is less durable.

[Robert Ellis]

FYI, the 820 is the current porro version.

[Tim42]

I don't know about those brands, but I like my Brunton Eterna 10X32's. They have a close focus of 4 ft., are fog and water proof, and are just $379. Plus they have hinged covers for the lenses and I cups. I have never had a problem with them in the year I've had them.

[Robert Ellis]

I don't know about those brands, but I like my Brunton Eterna 10X32's. They have a close focus of 4 ft., are fog and water proof, and are just $379. Plus they have hinged covers for the lenses and I cups. I have never had a problem with them in the year I've had them.

If you have never looked through a quality porro (not a department store Tasco or Bushnell) you owe it to yourself. The image is only bested/equaled by the most expensive of roofs. Top porros have resolution that makes them better for astronomy than many beginner scopes and trust me it is hard to impress astronomers with a view.

All midsized roofs that I have owned or examined (bruntons included) have a very narrow depth of field which leads to more focussing than is necessary. One of the reasons the 7xDiscoverer is the roof I recommend is because it has a better depth than the 8x and 10x models from everyone else. Other than waterproofness I would not recommend ANY roof dollar for dollar against a Nikon EII.

All that aside, bin choice is very subjective and personal. If you like what you have, my hat is off to you. It took me years to find bins I was happy with. Then again, being in the industry I know what should be possible with optics and am very particular about mine.

Happy birding.

[richt]

If you have never looked through a quality porro (not a department store Tasco or Bushnell) you owe it to yourself. The image is only bested/equaled by the most expensive of roofs. Top porros have resolution that makes them better for astronomy than many beginner scopes and trust me it is hard to impress astronomers with a view.

All midsized roofs that I have owned or examined (bruntons included) have a very narrow depth of field which leads to more focussing than is necessary. One of the reasons the 7xDiscoverer is the roof I recommend is because it has a better depth than the 8x and 10x models from everyone else. Other than waterproofness I would not recommend ANY roof dollar for dollar against a Nikon EII.

All that aside, bin choice is very subjective and personal. If you like what you have, my hat is off to you. It took me years to find bins I was happy with. Then again, being in the industry I know what should be possible with optics and am very particular about mine.

Happy birding.

Hi Robert

I too have looked through Swift Porro's several times both 820 and earlier 804 models and can confirm these are visually as good as anything i have looked thru to date (i own Nikon SE and Zeiss Jenoptem 10 x porro's)
The Nikon's are sharp to almost edge and Zeiss are wonderfully wide for a 10 x with a "bright easy" view in my opinion however it is my intention to buy a Swift pair when in USA later this year as they impressed me so much and the 8.5 x will be a little steadier to hold
I have doubts ref the 820 waterproofing methodology and saw an excellent recent post on Cloudy Nights Forum regarding the different Swift Audubon models which seemed to recommend the 804 version despite its heavier weight and lack of water proofing
The dollar rate is great for uk folk holidaying in USA at present so who knows i may bag a bargain in a few months !
I have also tried a Nikon E11 8 x 30 and SE 8 x32 both of which are superb views and lighter/less bulky than the Swift's (although personally the Swift FOV for me seemed more expansive)
What's your personal take on the Swift Audubon ?

Regards
Rich T

[Otto McDiesel]

FYI, the 820 is the current porro version.
oops,
yep, i sandpipered (watched sandpipers) with a ED version. they are AWESOME. nevermind the waterproofing. it should be read "splashproof" at best. You can't beat those, optically. the image is better in my opinion that the Swaro EL 8.5.

The image is better IMHO in the Swift 8.5x, and the .5x extra is good. The Nikon EII has better handling. Small hands - Nikon.
Large hands - Swift.

[Blackstart]

I use the 8X30 EII daily, and I am astonished at the view it gives for the money.

Now all Nikon needs to do is figure out how to keep the rubber covering from falling off.

-Adam

[Robert Ellis]

I have the Mark 2 Audubon like what is recommended on CloudyNights. It works wonderfully. I learned to bird with an 10x50 porro (I had no idea what I was buying at the time) so the size and weight are not objectionably to me. I think the ultimate would be to get a repairman to put ED lenses from the 820 into my old tank of a body or for Swift to reissue the older model with ED as a Classic. That would appeal to no-nonsense birders and astronomers alike.