Swift Audobon Hr5

[imac]

Is there anyone out there that has compared FULLY MULTICOATED and MULTICOATED versions of this binocular side by side ? If so could you please tell me if one differed and how as I am not in the position to make such a comparison and am quite intrigued..

[elkcub]

Good question. I haven't been able to make that comparison either. Do you own one of these models?

[imac]

Yes Ed I have used this since the early 80's it surprises me how many people write these bins off , never even having looked thru them. Finding tethered covers is not easy in the UK tho, I am still looking for them. I had one pair of HR5's nicked out of my car! I must say I was sure you would know the difference, if there is any.

[elkcub]

imac,

Too bad about that. 804 Audubons really are fine binoculars, and it's still possible to replace them via eBay at reasonable cost. I see them consistently.

There are two non-ED versions of the HR/5 Audubon. Type 4b(1) appears to have the same coatings as the earlier 804R (Type 4a) and is marked Multi-Coated Optics. Type 4b(2) has the newer green coatings and is marked Fully Multi-Coated. Although I haven't made a side-by-side comparison of the two, I have compared the earlier 804R with the Type 4b(1) and found no differences. They seem to be the same binocular with different cover plates. I've also compared 804R with the 10x50 HR/5 Audubon/Kestrel that does have FMC. In general, the newer coatings seem to provide slightly more color saturation and contrast, although this is rather elusive. Only the relatively rare 804ED (Type 4c) is clearly a step up in terms of center clarity and color contrast. But this is probably due to the combined effect of coatings and ED glass, or just the ED glass alone. So, frankly, I wouldn't be overly concerned with the issue of MC vs. FMC on the standard models. Keep in mind that Steve Ingraham's 1990's BVD review of the 804 Audubon involved the MC model, which he used as his primary birding binocular for several years.

Hope this helps.

Enjoy the view,
Ed

[imac]

Thanyou very much for the info

[elkcub]

Thanyou very much for the info

I forgot to mention that Eagle Optics sells rubber tethered objective covers for the Audubon that are really excellent. You might check to see if they will mail you a pair. Cost is moderate.

Ed

[imac]

I already tried that route but they dont mail over here! and I cannot locate a source in europe never mind the UK but I have managed this far, its just that I have always had a great talent for losing 1 never the lot which shows how well organised I am. I wont try and justifv this behaviour and wonder at the hilarity of it all..

[elkcub]

I'm going on vacation in a few days, but will be happy to remail you a set from EO when I return in mid-Sept. Please send me a private message if you'd like to take me up on the offer, and we'll make the arrangement. At this point, do you have an 804 Audubon to use them on?
Ed

[imac]

Unfortunately I have a message saying your PM box is full , enjoy your holiday. I own a pair of multicoated at the moment

[elkcub]

Unfortunately I have a message saying your PM box is full , enjoy your holiday. I own a pair of multicoated at the moment
Oops, I didn't know it was full. Please give it another try.

[zurtfox]

There are two non-ED versions of the HR/5 Audubon. Type 4b(1) appears to have the same coatings as the earlier 804R (Type 4a) and is marked Multi-Coated Optics. Type 4b(2) has the newer green coatings and is marked Fully Multi-Coated.
Ed

Hi Ed,


I have recently acquired a very fine pair of HR/5 (don't ask what I paid!), which are 91.... with MC optics. However, I am a bit perplexed by your description above because these have a distinct green coating to the outer faces of both the eyepiece and objectives, which is more like the FMC version (I think). I have attached an image of the objective and would appreciate your opinion.

Chris

[elkcub]

Hi Ed,


I have recently acquired a very fine pair of HR/5 (don't ask what I paid!), which are 91.... with MC optics. However, I am a bit perplexed by your description above because these have a distinct green coating to the outer faces of both the eyepiece and objectives, which is more like the FMC version (I think). I have attached an image of the objective and would appreciate your opinion.

Chris

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the comment. I think the dilemma is resolved by the recent revelation that HR/5 Audubons with Gold Dots first appeared in Europe during the early- or mid-1980s, marketed by Swift-Pyser. Actually, there was a whole series of gold and blue dot models that Renze knows more about than I do.

Our latest historical conjecture, therefore, is that this early Type 4b(1) was physically the same as the Type 4a (804R) sold in the US, and shared the same "Multi-Coated Optics." I'm calling it the Type 4b(1)E — 'E' for Europe. See the historical thread starting with post #109. As with most/all European Swift's, they are also distinguished by not having "model 804" stenciled on the cover plate.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=745506#post745506

The first Type 4b(1) with Gold Dot emblem appeared in the US about 1989 and retained the MC marking even though it obviously had improved coatings. I also recently acquired a dealer's 1995 store sample (don't ask the price :) that was still marked MC, not FMC. Yet, I can't distinguish its ocular coatings from the 1993 and 1994 Type 4c (804ED) specimens that Renze and I own, which are marked "Fully Multi-Coated." The objectives, like yours, also look to be FMC.

The only conclusion I can draw is that Swift (USA) was not all that accurate in their coating designations.

Enjoy the view,
ED

PS. Is yours marked "Model 804" on the cover plate?
PPS. Very sorry about date error.

[zurtfox]

Hi Ed,

Thanks for the reply. However, more anomalies are appearing...

[QUOTE=elkcub]I'm calling it the Type 4b(1)E — 'E' for Europe. See the historical thread starting with post #109. As with most/all European Swift's, they are also distinguished by not having "model 804" stenciled on the cover plate[UNQUOTE]

Mine have "Model No 804" stencilled on the bottom line of the cover plate. It also has "US Patent No..." on the right cover plate (is that of any significance, or do they all have that?). I'm beginning to wonder if mine (cost $200 at today's £/$ exchange rate) originated in the US and found their way to the UK at some point.

I recently trialled a new 820ED and they appeared to have similar coatings to this pair of HR/5s. I have to admit that optically I was disappointed with the 820ED - with spectacles (super-thin) I could still never get more than 138m/1000m in the fov, even when peering into the corners! However, the colour rendition in the 820 was more neutral than my HR/5, which have a slightly green/yellow cast (very similar to Swarovskis of that time), and ergonomically they are a definite improvement.

As for resolution, well, in a lines/mm @ 10m test, these HR/5s outperformed my Zeiss 8x32 FLs (even after allowing for the extra 0.5x magnification). I am simply amazed a bino which is 15 years old and 1/8th of the cost of the top optics of today performs so brilliantly (and meets its spec @ 144m/1000m = a lovely picture-window 70°).

By the way, I also had a pair of Blue Band and Gold Band 8.5s (76.... & 77.... respectively). I deconstructed the Blue ones (they were in poor physical condition) down to the last screw/lens element/prism, polished the mould off the prism surfaces, rebuilt them, recollimated them and put them in p/x them for the HR/5s. The only discernable difference between them was that the Gold were 50g lighter (although I couldn't find where they had shaved that off - unless I left something out when I rebuilt them ;-)).

One final comment: in your superb 3-part history you have the strap lugs as 'plastic' on the HR/5s - mine are definitely alloy.

All the best,

Chris

PS I use a pair of Nikon LX rainguards instead of the caps - just the right size to keep the entire eyepieces dry.

[elkcub]

Hi Ed,

Thanks for the reply. However, more anomalies are appearing...

[QUOTE=elkcub]I'm calling it the Type 4b(1)E — 'E' for Europe. See the historical thread starting with post #109. As with most/all European Swift's, they are also distinguished by not having "model 804" stenciled on the cover plate[UNQUOTE]

Mine have "Model No 804" stencilled on the bottom line of the cover plate. It also has "US Patent No..." on the right cover plate (is that of any significance, or do they all have that?). I'm beginning to wonder if mine (cost $200 at today's £/$ exchange rate) originated in the US and found their way to the UK at some point.

I recently trialled a new 820ED and they appeared to have similar coatings to this pair of HR/5s. I have to admit that optically I was disappointed with the 820ED - with spectacles (super-thin) I could still never get more than 138m/1000m in the fov, even when peering into the corners! However, the colour rendition in the 820 was more neutral than my HR/5, which have a slightly green/yellow cast (very similar to Swarovskis of that time), and ergonomically they are a definite improvement.

As for resolution, well, in a lines/mm @ 10m test, these HR/5s outperformed my Zeiss 8x32 FLs (even after allowing for the extra 0.5x magnification). I am simply amazed a bino which is 15 years old and 1/8th of the cost of the top optics of today performs so brilliantly (and meets its spec @ 144m/1000m = a lovely picture-window 70°).

By the way, I also had a pair of Blue Band and Gold Band 8.5s (76.... & 77.... respectively). I deconstructed the Blue ones (they were in poor physical condition) down to the last screw/lens element/prism, polished the mould off the prism surfaces, rebuilt them, recollimated them and put them in p/x them for the HR/5s. The only discernable difference between them was that the Gold were 50g lighter (although I couldn't find where they had shaved that off - unless I left something out when I rebuilt them ;-)).

One final comment: in your superb 3-part history you have the strap lugs as 'plastic' on the HR/5s - mine are definitely alloy.

All the best,

Chris

PS I use a pair of Nikon LX rainguards instead of the caps - just the right size to keep the entire eyepieces dry.

Chris,

Said like a true 804 Audubon aficionado.

I don't know if the post-1989 European issue HR/5s can be distinguished from those sold in the US with Gold Dots. I wouldn't be surprised, but I'm not sure how much I care either — ;). It's too confusing to track these minor things. Your 1991 model, however, sounds just like my recent 1995 acquisition, and the US patent reference probably indicates they were made for the US market.

Wow, you're a handy guy. I'd say your earlier blue and gold ribbon models were Type 3, sold in Europe. If you still have them could you pass on the dates? Some of those go back almost to the Type 1s made by Tamron, and preceeded the entire line of Type 2 Audubons sold in the US.

The new owners of Swift Sport Optics have been made aware that the 820ED does not have air spaced objectives as stated in their recent (and earlier) brochures. So, it's inevitable that the aberration characteristics would be different from the 804ED. Most people I've talked with can't see much difference from the standard 820, except (maybe) for color saturation. My own sense of overall color cast is lacking, or I adapt to it very quickly, so I don't really have any preferences one way or the other.

My 804EDs are superior to any binocular I own for center clarity, and I'd rather use them for long-distance shore birding than 10x42 SLCs or even 10x50 Kestrel Audubons. Remarkable! Buy it if you find one in serviceable condition. Nicolas Crista in the US can do wonders with resoration at a most reasonable price.

I'm sure you're right about the strap lugs being metal on the HR/5s. That will be corrected. Thanks.

Best regards,
Ed

[zurtfox]

Hi Ed,

[QUOTE=elkcub]Chris,
If you still have them could you pass on the dates?[UNQUOTE]

Blue Band - 1976
Gold Band - 1977

The best illustration I can give of my HR/5s is to be found on eBay (USA), where currently there is a pair for sale (item number 280057409087). The are identical to my pair in every way (except the year: mine 1991).

All the best,

Chris

[elkcub]

Hi Ed,

[QUOTE=elkcub]Chris,
If you still have them could you pass on the dates?[UNQUOTE]

Blue Band - 1976
Gold Band - 1977

The best illustration I can give of my HR/5s is to be found on eBay (USA), where currently there is a pair for sale (item number 280057409087). The are identical to my pair in every way (except the year: mine 1991).

All the best,

Chris

Many thanks for the dates, which gibe with the Type 3a and 3b we mention in the article.

The auction HR/5 binoculars are also the same as my recent $200 acquisition.

Use them in good health,

Ed

[Simon S]

I can tell you that the FMC's give a deeper saturation in the colours and slightly improved contrast. The coatings are different colours which may go some way in determining the improvement.

[Renze de Vries]

Now, this coating-identification is quicksand, believe me. I can show you my records, put together by asking Audubon HR/5 owners what colours they saw on the objective and ocular lenses, and they're a mess. There's no consistency in them at all. When I thought I (or my honorable sources...)must be colour blind, or crazy, or an alien I stopped collecting this information. Even Ed and I don't agree (which I haven't told him yet, he's too dear te me).
However, my rule of thumb is that if there's red or orange in the coating, it's a good sign. IMHO this represents the latest version (my 804ED shows orange in the ocular lenses, my 10x50 Audubon (Kestrel) shows red.

Renze

[elkcub]

Dear Renze,

My standard 804 and 804ED HR/5s each show orange — the same orange. My 10x50 Kestrel oculars show not a hint or red or orange — just green. My conclusion is that our Kestrels have different coatings. My s/n is 984836. Could you ask your friend what yours are again? ;)

Ed

[elkcub]

I can tell you that the FMC's give a deeper saturation in the colours and slightly improved contrast. The coatings are different colours which may go some way in determining the improvement.

Sorry, I lost track. Are you referring to 804 Audubons with MC vs. FMC? Could you provide the year of manufacture (first two digits of s/n) and whether or not you can see red/orange in any of the ocular reflections? My MC 804R has white reflections except for one green — no red or orange.

(Renze, I think you're on to something.)

Simon, when you say "slightly improved contrast," what do you mean by "improved." To me it would suggest that one could perceive more color gradations, but that also tends to lower color saturation in a given area. This is by no means a criticism. I'm just curious about what you mean.

Thanks,
Ed

[James Bean]

Ed, To confirm the colour of reflections on your 10x50 Kestrel, my 2000 model has only green reflections on both ocular and objective lenses. However, if held to reflect light at an angle from a bright source (sunlit window) the light reflects as purple on the green lens surface. In comparison, my Audubon big-body 3b has very pale yellow/gold coatings which, at an angle from the window, produce pale yellow reflections with perhaps just a hint of purple. Compared with the Kestrel, the Audubon view is slightly "washed out" but a larger field (as you'd expect). Don't know if this is any help... Jim.

[James Bean]

Ed, Some further snippets on coatings. My Asahi Pentax 7x35 (1970s, & marked j-B21 on the left and j-E25 on the right) with 11 degree wide field and "coated optics", resembles the shape of Swift binoculars. Objective coatings are purple and oculars are vivid gold. The result is a view which is quite sharp, but 'cold' compared with the Audubon. Perhaps this 'Pentax' was made by Hiyoshi Kogaku? But I don't want to start a hare running...
Jim.

[Renze de Vries]

New information coming up, well I'm color-screwed up anyway so here we go again.
My rule of thumb appears to be of no value at all, because my 10x50 Audubon (no Kestrel on it yet) from 1992 shows red (next to green and blue) in the oculars, while Ed's later Kestrels don't.
I think the story should be rewritten like this, more or less:

On older, pre-1985 Audubons amber-coloured coating (call it white, or yellow) is used.

This amber (plus green and blue) is still used on early post-1985 HR/5, gold dot or 804R Audubon oculars.

On later Audubons and early Kestrels (where are we, 1992? Or earlier?) red or orange shows up, replacing the amber.

In the last phase of Audubon and Kestrel production red or orange is gone again, it's just blue/green.


Notes:
It's very well possible that the red/orange found on Audubon 804ED oculars is not a quality sign at all, but only indicates a coating production phase. Ed's 804ED as well as mine are from 1993/94 and I've never seen an ED with a serial number considerably higher.

Renze

[Simon S]

Here is a picture of the two different coatings on my HR5's On the left is the FMC labeled binocular and on the right MC. You might note that the lens on the right has what looks like a green tint to the lens when looking at it from a certain angle. The lens on the left however looks green from every angle.

[elkcub]

Renze, no argument with your thoughts. I have a Swift brochure dated 1/01 which actually states which binoculars were discontinued as of that date. Quite remarkable. On the list is the 804 and 804ED. The Kestrel isn't listed, but isn't mentioned in the brochure either. We know that they were manufactured as late as 2000. It's hard to say when Swift quit making the 804ED, since they could have just been selling off stock for several years until 2000, — but I wouldn't be too surprised if one shows up with a "00xxxxx" s/n.

Simon, my own standard 804 HR/5 has green objectives like your FMC. However, mine is marked MC. This may confirm an earlier conclusion that FMC was used for a time even though the cover plates were not yet upgraded. If so, Simon's 804 FMC should be newer than 1995. Is this correct? BTW, my guess is that you will see an orange reflection in the ocular of the FMC, and basically white ones in the MC. Please confirm/refute. More pictures would be outstanding.

James, your Asahi with J-B21 corresponds to Kokisha Co. Ltd., Tokyo, being the final product integrator, and J-E25 to Zuiho Kogaku Seiki Co. Ltd., Tokyo, the metalwork manufacturer.

I've been led to believe that Hiyoshi Kogaku makes the 820, but I have not seen any makers marks.

Ed

[Renze de Vries]

With respect to the MC and FMC pictures, what I see in the left picture (FMC) is green+blue, what I see in the right one (MC) is green+blue+red.

Renze

[Simon S]

Simon's 804 FMC should be newer than 1995.
Ed
Your spot on elkcub.
The FMC's are 1997 and the FC's are 1990.
Here are the pictures of the oculars.

[elkcub]

Your spot on elkcub.
The FMC'a are 1997 and the fC are 1990.
Here are the pictures of the oculars.

Ah, yes, and green and orange reflections in the FMC. :t:

Elk

[Renze de Vries]

Ah, yes, and green and orange reflections in the FMC. :t:

Elk

Quicksand! Quicksand!

S.O.S. (Save Our Souls)


Renze

[Simon S]

Quicksand! Quicksand!

S.O.S. (Save Our Souls)


Renze

LOL yes but very interesting!

[elkcub]

With respect to the MC and FMC pictures, what I see in the left picture (FMC) is green+blue, what I see in the right one (MC) is green+blue+red.

Renze

i c it 2, green + blu. :t: