[James Bean]

Have you got it yet? The two focus wheels on the Swift seem at first sight to have the same functions as those on the Zeiss, but the front one on the Zeiss is a dioptre adjuster, while the Swift has a separate dioptre ring on the right ocular, so the Swift's two focus rings are... twin focus controls, revolving together, so you use whichever is the handier. The Swift also has the legend "Immersion Tested", presumably meaning it's fully waterproof, and it appears to be made mostly of metal. If any further clue is needed, go to the Swift Historical document, near the end, where it refers to roof prism models (pp.21-22).

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by James Bean

Ed, guess what I've just bought? It's compact and bijou, perfectly formed, is a clone of a rubber armoured Zeiss 8x30BGA (even to identical body ribbing) except it's a 7x35, an fov of 428ft at 1000yds, it's a J-B 35, has the unusual (for a Swift) serial no. Z201362, has a gold spot, is a roof prism model, yet has the name of a famous ornithologist, with a genuine Swift velvet-lined black soft leather case, all in mint condition, made in Japan. It looks like a smaller version of my Zeiss 10x40 BGAT*; even the zip cases are similar. I wonder where Swift got the idea from! So, it's an ..........?

Hi James,

I have not the slightest idea where Swift got its inspiration for these 7x35 Model 825 Audubons. It must have been a coincidence. J-B 35 corresponds with the manufacturer Raito Koki Seisakujo Co. Ltd. - Lite Koki Seisakujo Co. Ltd, incidentally, so at that time (c. 1989) they didn't use Hiyoshi Kogaku, JB-56. I've handled a pair, but I think Renze owns one. How do you like it?

Swift went off in a couple of strange roof prism directions in search of a worthy Audubon before settling on the Model 828 8.5x44 HHS in 2000—which was made by Hiyoshi Kogaku.

A few years earlier the short lived 8.5x44 Model 827 showed up (c. 1999), which was unquestionably a colossal design mistake by Hiyoshi. What most people don't know is that there was also a sister 8x35 mistake made in the same time period by Hiyoshi, and also called an Audubon. (Unfortunately, I missed out on the auction and could only capture the pictures.)

I don't know the model number for the 8x35 and never saw an ad or flier that mentioned it, but, nonetheless, here it is for all to see. As Renze commented back in 2007, "It must be the rarest Audubon in the world."

Ed

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Swift went off in a couple of strange roof prism directions in search of a worthy Audubon before settling on the Model 828 8.5x44 HHS in 2000

Well phrased Ed, that's about it.
Indeed I bought a 7x35 Audubon model 825 some time ago, but don't own it anymore. It's well made, looks good but optically it's rather typical of most of the midprized roofs of the past century: it sucks imagewise. An interesting feature though - which is also applied to model 827 and probably to the mysterious 8x35 too - is the way it is made waterproof: the ocular lenses move behind a mirror.
To add all information I've got about model 825, I can say that indeed the serial number doesn't give a clue about the year of production. Also, the number is sometimes preceded by a Z like in James' specimen, but I've seen other letters as well, notably B and C. And lastly, there are small differences in appearance of the 7x35 Audubon: some are without the gold badge, and some have Audubon735 on the left prism housing.

Renze

[James Bean]

Ed, How do I like my Swift Audubon 825 ? I love it ! Classic design and elegance (unlike the model 827 which appears styled by a Klingon on a bad day) plus a rarity value which affords the quiet satisfaction (smugness?) of knowing I probably won't ever see another one in my lifetime. I couldn't believe my luck when I came across it on UK eBay; I had a bidding contest to contend with, but emerged victorious for the sum of £119 (c. $190). A very similar looking Zeiss 8x30BGA went for over £500, so I'm happy with my bargain. I've always admired the Zeiss ClassiC look (orig. Dialyt) and now I have a nice little Swift to complement my 10x40BGAT*. Do your records indicate when this 825 was made? It's probably around 1989 to the mid 1990s (unlike most other Swifts, the serial number does not give a clue of its production year). As to optical performance, it's not phase coated but then neither is my Zeiss 10x40, and I'm more than happy with that, so the 825 will be good enough. Ergonomically it's very nice and 'feels expensive'. The two focus wheels were a surprise, but a good idea, and I find myself using right or left fingers as the mood takes me. The right ocular dioptre adjustment is nicely firm, so it won't slip. The general cosmetic finish is exemplary, up there with the Alphas, where it was no doubt intended. To quote an old adage, 'it oozes quality and inspires confidence'. I can hardly claim the 825 has a better view than the 'real' Audubon 804, but for its size the 825's a little gem. No doubt about it, I'll be keeping this one...

Renze, I've just seen your post, so thanks for the extra information, but I'm not so sure I'd agree with your comment that 'the image sucks'. It's not 21st century dielectric ED standard but, so far, so good, it seems sharp enough for my modest purposes...

[rdmadison]

I don't own a pre-1970 Audubon (yet, he says). Here's what I have:
Swift 825 7x35 Audubon #Z201052 (B35).

It is a remarkably comfortable binocular to use, and is currently on loan to one of my Natural History graduate students who has just taken up birding. I chose it over my other loaners--an Eaglet 7x36, Osprey 7.5 x 44, and B&L Zephyr 7x35.

They are my first choice for backpacking and canoeing, and just seem to be a little less finicky than the Eaglet, although obviously without the butterfly-on-your-boot close focus of the latter.

I thought the design was a rather obvious attempt to go head to head with the Germans.

[Kevin Purcell]

I thought the design was a rather obvious attempt to go head to head with the Germans.

The marketing phrase is "parallel placement" to make your product look like (and hint that's its very similar to) another product without actually infringing trademarks or design patents (e.g. the style of the relief below the prism housing).

It's an odd one for me as I thought of Swift as it's own company with "Swiftian" products not a obvious imitators of their rivals.

Then again Zeiss didn't make a 7x35 which I imagine was still a popular magnification and exit pupil size at the time (though 10x was taking over with "serious" birders at that time).

Still a very interesting piece. Thanks for bringing it up and the photos too, James.

[James Bean]

Thanks 'rdmadison' for your input; sounds like your 825 #Z201052 is just a little bit older than mine (#Z201362) so will have the Swift gold spot and gold 'Audubon' on the body. I agree its style is very 'germanic', particularly reminiscent of Zeiss contemporary models. I also agree it's comfortable to use: some binoculars you take to immediately, as if made for your hands. One slight negative is the focus goes the 'wrong' way (anticlockwise to infinity) but I can tolerate that, even though it goes against the Swift 804 series 'norm'. Close focus is a measured 8 feet, so not bad, but nowhere near Pentax Papilio standard. It does seem pretty rare and I'd never seen one 'in the metal' until I found this example.

Kevin: You're right about the 825 imitating rather than emulating the Zeiss; it resembles it, instead of being a blatant copy, but it works well, though the Zeiss still has the edge for elegance IMO. The 825 does seem somewhat out of place in the Swift product line, which may explain its relative rarity. Minolta tried something similar with a svelte model not unlike a Leica, which was very good but just didn't have the cachet (or price) of the Wetzlar product. Come to think of it, the 825 is no doubt scarce because of its original price, which was considerably more than (say) an 804 whose optics were quite superior, although not waterproof. In short, the 825 'seemed' overpriced, even if quality was high enough to merit its placement, because it lacked a prestige Alpha name, so the best Swift could do to remedy that situation was to call it an 'Audubon'...

[kk99ll]

Hi Guys

Wonder if anybody could give me any info on these Swift Neptune binoculars

and tell me if they are any good.

Many thanks.

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...l/P1000195.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...l/P1000196.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...l/P1000197.jpg

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/f...l/P1000199.jpg

[elkcub]

Made in 1975 by Hiyoshi Kogaku, Japan, and marketed by Swift-Pyser, UK. These Neptunes are 7x50, which is somewhat unusual. Most were 7x35. They are probably "fully coated," but otherwise the optics are fine. In its day, Mk 1 was marketed as an economy binocular with fairly narrow field..

Ed

[kk99ll]

thanks for getting back to me,I bought these when I was a teenager, and forgot about them, I found then in the attic only recently.
does the s/n indicate when they were made?.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by kk99ll

thanks for getting back to me,I bought these when I was a teenager, and forgot about them, I found then in the attic only recently.
does the s/n indicate when they were made?.

Yes. Actually, the first two digits are the year of manufacture. Yours were made in 1975 not 1971 as I stated originally. Sorry about that.

There's no reason not to use them, so have fun.

Ed

[kk99ll]

thanks Ed

[martindf3]

Originally Posted by planetester

Hi, Ive just joined this forum so I can pass on some information on a pair of Swift binoculars that I recently aquired.
Hope it is useful to someone out there,

Swift
model number.. 801
model name.. Saratoga MK11
Type.. 8x40, Extra Wide field
FOV.. 488ft at 1000yds
optics.. fully coated
serial number,, No 26-706309

I presume they were made in 1970, anymore info would be welcome.

thanks all

Just being searching for information on Swift Saratoga . I now own these binoculars . i have just adjusted them to focus closer thanks to forum ,all information has been very much appreciated
Regards Martin

[Ysterkvisten]

Hi guys

Just bought a pair of Saratoga MkII (serial 741213) on Ebay in near mint condition.
One thing puzzles me though, the focus-knob is a bit strange and does not reach all the way down to the bottom of the lower bridge, well it does when I focus up close but moves upwards when I focus afar.
The focus knob also moves either to easy or a bit to hard.
Anyone know the remedy for that?

Hope someone reads this old thread :-)

/Janne

[Simon S]

Originally Posted by Ysterkvisten

Hi guys

Just bought a pair of Saratoga MkII (serial 741213) on Ebay in near mint condition.
One thing puzzles me though, the focus-knob is a bit strange and does not reach all the way down to the bottom of the lower bridge, well it does when I focus up close but moves upwards when I focus afar.
The focus knob also moves either to easy or a bit to hard.
Anyone know the remedy for that?

Hope someone reads this old thread :-)

/Janne

There should be an adjustment on the end of the focus barrel to take up the clearance.

[Renze de Vries]

Janne,

Do you mean there's empty movement in the focus wheel between the two bridges? If that's so you should have play in the focusing proper too. Correct?

Renze

[Ysterkvisten]

Hi

There is play when the gap occurs. The focus knob just moves downwards but it does not move the eye-pieces until it touches the bottom and gets a grip so to speak.

Should I adjust by removing the serial number button and insert a screwdriver?

Sorry for the angled photo. Up is left side, as you might have guessed.

Thanks for trying to help!

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by Ysterkvisten

Hi

There is play when the gap occurs. The focus knob just moves downwards but it does not move the eye-pieces until it touches the bottom and gets a grip so to speak.

Should I adjust by removing the serial number button and insert a screwdriver?

Sorry for the angled photo. Up is left side, as you might have guessed.

Thanks for trying to help!

Strange, there's no axle through the focus wheel? Am I right?

Renze

[Ysterkvisten]

No axle all the way. When I unscrew the screw inside the focus knob, it get all loose and is removable, but that is what its supposed to be I guess.

[Ysterkvisten]

There is an axle, attached to the top of the knob of course.

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by Ysterkvisten

There is an axle, attached to the top of the knob of course.

If I'm not mistaken the bottom of the knob screws in and out the knob, and is fixed by set screws, like the ones in the picture (of a Swift Saratoga MK II).

Renze

[Ysterkvisten]

I'll unscrew the axle today and see what happens. Mine looks exactly like the photo above, but there is play in the knob downwards.

[Renze de Vries]

Originally Posted by Ysterkvisten

I'll unscrew the axle today and see what happens. Mine looks exactly like the photo above, but there is play in the knob downwards.

Yeah, take it apart and put it together again. You should be able to adjust the focus wheel between the upper and lower bridge.

Renze

[ronh]

The odd stuff you learn hanging out on this forum. So, it seems the focus knob must fill that gap, or there will be play in both directions as it climbs the screw without pushing or pulling on the focusing mechanism.

You can't make the knob any longer, but if I've got this right, you must eliminate the gap somehow. It appears that might be what the "button" on the objective end of the hinges is for. If that thing could be screwed in a little bit, and close the gap down to where the knob fits tight, the problem would be solved.

But what do I know, it's probably not that easy. Mostly I just want to say, what a fine looking binocular it is it is! That is one beefy CF mechanism, hope you get it working right.
Ron

[Steve C]

Typically to remove the eye pieces, the cap at the objective end of the hinge is removed. There is usually a screw inside that that needs to be removed, then the eye pieces can, using the focus knob, be unscrewed until they are free of the binocular ocular tubes. You will be holding the oculars, the eye piece bridge, and the threaded focus rod in your hand as a unit. This allows the removal of ocular tubes and prism plates to gain interior access. As I see it, you should just be able to unscrew the whole unit out without doing anything, and that is not the way it should be.

What I see in your photos and as others have noted, is that there seems something very strange about the missing section of hinge. I'd guess that you need a new focus rod assembly and you need to get these serviced. If you were in the US, I'd recommend you send them to Nicholas Crista.

I do not see how the focus assembly of that binocular has a chance of being able to work at all. However that is one Swift I have not seen closely enough.