Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 19:22   #1
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 100
Better views than Nikon EII/SE?

Hi,

Back in 2010 I settled on the Nikon SE 8x32. I compared it to the EII and couldn't tell much of a difference so I kept the SE. Back then the feeling was that you would have to move up to a high end alpha to beat the Nikon view.

The SEs have been great but...I started reading this forum again :)

How much do I have to spend these days on a roof bin to get a better view than those porros? Are the improvements in the view over the SE/EII obvious? Or, is it one of those things where you need to look at charts or electric wires to start seeing improvements?

Thanks,
Dave
Super Dave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 19:59   #2
Steve C
Registered User
 
Steve C's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Klamath Falls, Oregon
Posts: 3,380
You can spend all you want to, that is your choice. However I seriously doubt that whatever "improvement" there would be is going to be really a notable change. I don't think there is nearly the amount of improvement jumping up the perceived quality ladder as many perceive there is. Not that it is perhaps not there, but if you are still rocking with the SE my advice is...if it ain't broke don't fix it .Try fixing it only after you have determined just how the SE needs to be upgraded. Your mileage may differ
__________________
Steve

"Do what you can, where you are, with what you have" Teddy Roosevelt.
Steve C is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 20:30   #3
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 100
Thanks Steve, that's good to hear. The SE's are a classic and will hold their value.

It was sounding like the mid range 8x32s had really improved and the Zeiss Conquest HD is pretty reasonable for German glass. Cabelas was selling the Euro HD / Meostar for $400 (sold out).

Thanks,
Dave
Super Dave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 21:01   #4
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve C View Post
Try fixing it only after you have determined just how the SE needs to be upgraded. Your mileage may differ
Sound advice.

The only issue that needs fixing in my opinion is the waterproofing, at least in my neck of the woods.

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 21:08   #5
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 584
It is difficult to beat the views of the Nikon 8x32 SE or 8x30 EII with a roof prism especially if you like the 3D realism of the porro. I have a Nikon 8x30 EII and I preferred it over the "Latest and Greatest" Nikon 8x42 MHG. I keep trying to find a roof as good as the EII without any luck. I tried the Zeiss Conquest 8x32 and 8x42 HD's and they didn't measure up to the porro's to my eyes. I ordered the Euro HD 8x32 and I will let you know how it compares. I know the Euro won't have the wide FOV or 3D view of the EII but we will see how it compares. They sure sold out fast but it is to be expected at $450.00 off of retail. I compared the Euro HD 8x32 at Cabela's to the Swarovski 8x32 SV and outside of the SV having sharper edges they were very close in optics. The Euro had a much smoother focuser than the Swarovski though with the Swarovski focuser being sticky and having unequal tension in one direction and appeared to match it in build quality.

Last edited by denco@comcast.n : Sunday 5th November 2017 at 21:24.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 21:29   #6
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,281
Hi,

actually going up from an SE 8x32 is kind of difficult imo. The only ever so slight optical deficiency is that the field of view could be a bit wider and of course the lack of waterproofing.

So if you really want to get sth new (to you) in the 8x32 class, I would try a Zeiss FL 8x32. It has a bit wider fov (although not quite E2 wide), is obviously waterproof and very small and light. Optical quality is also very nice with even a bit more transmission than the SE but you will not get the super flat field courtesy of Nikon field flatteners (the best atm imo).

PS: forget about some midrange pair beating the SE - you will have to shell out a 4 digit amount to have a chance to get better.

Joachim
jring is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 21:45   #7
Pinewood
New York correspondent
 
Pinewood's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 3,364
Hello Dave,

If nothing is broken, there is nothing to fix.

A modern roof 8x32 won't provide anything noticeably brighter, unless your unit is rather older than seven years with older coatings. A modern roof, like the 8x32 Zeiss FL, might provide better suppression of chromatic aberrations, a slightly wider field of view and closer focussing. Do you have problems with those shortcomings of the SE? I think that too much is made of close focussing down to 2m and then there would be the pain in the purse of buying a modern alpha.

Incidentally, the 8x32 SE never worked for me.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood
__________________
Bread is not enough. Give us circuses!

Last edited by Pinewood : Sunday 5th November 2017 at 22:05.
Pinewood is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 22:23   #8
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
Hi,

Back in 2010 I settled on the Nikon SE 8x32. I compared it to the EII and couldn't tell much of a difference so I kept the SE. Back then the feeling was that you would have to move up to a high end alpha to beat the Nikon view.

The SEs have been great but...I started reading this forum again :)

How much do I have to spend these days on a roof bin to get a better view than those porros? Are the improvements in the view over the SE/EII obvious? Or, is it one of those things where you need to look at charts or electric wires to start seeing improvements?

Thanks,
Dave
The 8X32 SV ($2,200) will pretty much match the SE and give you a more comfortable, wider angled, waterproofed view. My wife used an 8X32 SE for more than ten years but, in the past three years, has refused to give up her 8X32 SV. Her SE is now a loaner bin.

In the 42/50mm range you're looking at $2500 to whatever you're willing to pay. The 8X32 SE view always amazes me, while at the same time challenging me for several minutes as I adapt to its well-known finicky eyepiece. Once adapted I'm good for the day AND I sometimes use mine (504nnn) all day to give my SV's and Leica a day off! I will not sell it under any circumstances.

PS
I use a 504nnn 8X32 SE but I do have a 550nnn (my wife's second SE) in the house as a loaner. Contrary to all the nitpicking analyses I love the 504nnn.

Last edited by Pileatus : Sunday 5th November 2017 at 22:26.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 5th November 2017, 23:43   #9
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 100
Great, the experts have spoken. I'm glad to hear I'm not missing anything. I'll put this desire to rest and check back with you folks in another 7 years.

Super Dave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 00:14   #10
Pinewood
New York correspondent
 
Pinewood's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 3,364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
Great, the experts have spoken. I'm glad to hear I'm not missing anything. I'll put this desire to rest and check back with you folks in another 7 years.

Hello Dave,

I may be wrong but I only expect marginal improvements in the next 7 years.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur
__________________
Bread is not enough. Give us circuses!
Pinewood is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 03:17   #11
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 584
"The 8X32 SV ($2,200) will pretty much match the SE and give you a more comfortable, wider angled, waterproofed view."

The Swarovski 8x32 SV won't match the glare and flare control or the smooth focus in the Nikon 8x32 SE in my experience. Also, if you notice RB you will get it with the SV and not with the SE even though the SE's edges are almost as sharp and the SE has no Absam Ring like the SV does or area which is out of focus as you approach the edge. I got a lot of glare with my 8x32 SV and almost none with the SE. I just tried a new model Field Pro Swarovski 8x32 SV at Cabela's the other day and the focuser was sticky and had uneven tension in one direction so Swarovski still haven't improved their focusers. I will take a Nikon focuser anyday. The SV will not touch the SE's realistic 3D view either. You just have to decide what is important to you.

Super Dave. Keep your SE.

Last edited by denco@comcast.n : Monday 6th November 2017 at 03:23.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 03:52   #12
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 100
Perfect, thanks. Yea, the 3D view really pops on the Nikon SE.

Thanks for talking me out of spending money. I'm definitely not looking to drop a bunch of cash if the difference would not make me think "wow".

By the way, where do you see "SV" on the Swaros? What does that refer to? I only see "EL" mentioned.

Aloha,
Dave
Super Dave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 04:38   #13
sbb
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Singapore
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
Perfect, thanks. Yea, the 3D view really pops on the Nikon SE.

Thanks for talking me out of spending money. I'm definitely not looking to drop a bunch of cash if the difference would not make me think "wow".

By the way, where do you see "SV" on the Swaros? What does that refer to? I only see "EL" mentioned.

Aloha,
Dave
Dave,
the SV depicts EL's that came with the Swarovision coatings. The first EL's came out with out Swarovision and was added in subsequent updates.
sbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 04:48   #14
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 100
Thanks for clarifying that.
Dave
Super Dave is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 10:11   #15
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,281
Hi,

regarding the 32mm Swaro EL examples I have looked through, none came close to my SE 10x42 (which works perfectly for me - unlike for some others). The amount of CA visible, the glare problems and the not too smooth focuser on some made it not desireable for me.

Joachim

Last edited by jring : Monday 6th November 2017 at 20:39. Reason: speling
jring is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 16:26   #16
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
Hi,

Back in 2010 I settled on the Nikon SE 8x32. I compared it to the EII and couldn't tell much of a difference so I kept the SE. Back then the feeling was that you would have to move up to a high end alpha to beat the Nikon view.

The SEs have been great but...I started reading this forum again :)

How much do I have to spend these days on a roof bin to get a better view than those porros? Are the improvements in the view over the SE/EII obvious? Or, is it one of those things where you need to look at charts or electric wires to start seeing improvements?

Thanks,
Dave
Nikon’s SE

MECHANICAL

* The ergonomics on the SE is great*—although copied ... sort of ... from the Wallensack of decades ago.
* The focus mechanism seems to have been machined and lapped by aerospace machinists ... as does the ultra-firm but smooth hinge actuation.
* It is NOT “waterproof,” but mine has never fogged.
* Some grandchild will love mine.

OPTICS

* Glare suppression is great*, which improves contrast—but how much?
* Off-axis performance is great*—but how much better than the EII?
* I’ve never had occasion to go inside (onacounta they’re made well), but I am told the 5-element EP is akin to those in the famous Prostar.

BUT

I have not witnessed a difference in quality sufficient to warrant the myriad quibbles that have arisen. But then, the pragmatic doesn't get much airplay.

FROM the Intro to BINOCULARS: Fallacy & Fact

— Threshold of Recognition (loosely related to the clinical term: sensory threshold) is a term I frequently use because I believe it’s more understandable than similar terms used in the neurosciences. In addition, it should probably be used a lot more in amateur discussions concerning visual acuity because so many of the things observers claim they have seen are without a doubt below a human’s proven ability to see.

Or, as my contemporary ... William Shakespeare ... once said:

"Much ado about nothing."

Just a thought.

Bill

* Just my opinion ... get over it.
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking

Last edited by WJC : Monday 6th November 2017 at 19:07.
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th November 2017, 22:07   #17
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
.......
By the way, where do you see "SV" on the Swaros? What does that refer to? I only see "EL" mentioned.

Aloha,
Dave
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbb View Post
Dave,
the SV depicts EL's that came with the Swarovision coatings. The first EL's came out with out Swarovision and was added in subsequent updates.
Swarovision is primarily thought of as Swarovski binoculars with lens flatteners (edge to edge sharpness) but the term is really a vision system or package consisting of several items:
- lens flatteners
- HD glass (fluoride glass)
- wide angle eye pieces
- close focus
- optimized coatings

Only the second generation and above of the EL series uses the SV or Swarovision designation. The SLC line has some of the above attributes but they do not have lens flatteners and the current SLC is also lacking close focus so they are not SV models.

Swarovski includes optimized coatings in their description of Swarovision but they have separate marketing terms for the various coatings used.

- Swarobight
- Swarodur
- Swarotop
- Swaroclean
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)

Last edited by BruceH : Monday 6th November 2017 at 22:50. Reason: Added a word
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 07:27   #18
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 714
Just a couple of my recent experiences - I’ve often compared the E2 in 8x and 10x to the Habicht in 8x and 10x.

Either Habicht has better resolution and is significantly brighter.

Just a few observations on low light viewing - I’ve tested brightness recently using a 4Watt lamp inside a curtained window situated ten metres away from a ten metre tall Chinese Elm tree. Sitting outside with arms supported and viewing the bark at night in these very dim conditions twenty metres away from the tree reveals a huge difference between these Binoculars. I’d say this is an area E2 is really quite a poor performer. This may not be the most scientific test but simply by counting streaks of bark and notches in wood, the differences between Binoculars are made obvious within a second or two.

I use the Fujinon 7x50 fmt-sx as a reference for this test and the little Habicht is far far closer to the big Fujinon’s performance and low light resolution that it is to the dim E2.

(I compared the benchmark SV 8.5 with the 8x42 Noctivid in the same test and the Noctivid was better. The Noctivid image did not appear to be ‘brighter’, but the extra detail was there to be seen. The incredible Noctivid contrast was there to be seen even in extremely low light viewing. The Noctivid was also clearly better than a mint Zeiss 7x42 bgatp, and was on par or better than a mint Zeiss 8x56 bgatp...more testing required with those two. The Noctivid has been a bit of a surprise in very low light viewing)

Rathaus
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 07:38   #19
sbb
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Singapore
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathaus View Post
Just a couple of my recent experiences - I’ve often compared the E2 in 8x and 10x to the Habicht in 8x and 10x.

Either Habicht has better resolution and is significantly brighter.

Just a few observations on low light viewing - I’ve tested brightness recently using a 4Watt lamp inside a curtained window situated ten metres away from a ten metre tall Chinese Elm tree. Sitting outside with arms supported and viewing the bark at night in these very dim conditions twenty metres away from the tree reveals a huge difference between these Binoculars. I’d say this is an area E2 is really quite a poor performer. This may not be the most scientific test but simply by counting streaks of bark and notches in wood, the differences between Binoculars are made obvious within a second or two.

I use the Fujinon 7x50 fmt-sx as a reference for this test and the little Habicht is far far closer to the big Fujinon’s performance and low light resolution that it is to the dim E2.

(I compared the benchmark SV 8.5 with the 8x42 Noctivid in the same test and the Noctivid was better. The Noctivid image did not appear to be ‘brighter’, but the extra detail was there to be seen. The incredible Noctivid contrast was there to be seen even in extremely low light viewing. The Noctivid was also clearly better than a mint Zeiss 7x42 bgatp, and was on par or better than a mint Zeiss 8x56 bgatp...more testing required with those two. The Noctivid has been a bit of a surprise in very low light viewing)

Rathaus
Hi Rathaus,
how the Habicht compare to the Noctivids?
Cheers,
Alex
sbb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 09:14   #20
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 714
Quote:
Originally Posted by sbb View Post
Hi Rathaus,
how the Habicht compare to the Noctivids?
Cheers,
Alex
Re very low light viewing?...I didn’t put much time into those two specifically back and forth but the 8x Noctivid is better in low light. However, The little Habicht is just extraordinary considering it’s specification. It’s not something I’ve seen discussed much regarding the little Habicht.

The 10x40 Habicht against the 10x42 Noctivid would be an interesting low light test.

Getting away from the superb low light performance, the Noctivid is the only roof I’ve encountered with such a wonderful and strong Porro feel to its image. It’s certainly much easier to use than the Habichts given the Noctivid’s excellent eye relief, large quality eye cups and huge eye pieces and the Noctivid’s massive and beautifully natural sweet spot.

To answer the OP, if a viewer’s acuity is up to it, The Noctivid is in another league to the E2 optically in just about every way possible. Resolution, jaw dropping contrast, truly incredible immunity to glare and flare.... I even roughly compared their FOV and I can say there isn’t much in it...possibly nothing. That was the only area I thought the E2 might have an advantage, even if the E2 image is relatively useless much more than 50% out.

Comparing the E2 with an SV or SF, some viewers may at least feel rewarded by its relatively sweet ‘porro type’ rendering of the immersive depth of field and fov, but this advantage just doesn’t stand out against the Noctivid.

Rathaus

Last edited by Rathaus : Tuesday 7th November 2017 at 09:17.
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 09:53   #21
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rathaus View Post
Just a couple of my recent experiences - I’ve often compared the E2 in 8x and 10x to the Habicht in 8x and 10x.

Either Habicht has better resolution and is significantly brighter.

Just a few observations on low light viewing - I’ve tested brightness recently using a 4Watt lamp inside a curtained window situated ten metres away from a ten metre tall Chinese Elm tree. Sitting outside with arms supported and viewing the bark at night in these very dim conditions twenty metres away from the tree reveals a huge difference between these Binoculars. I’d say this is an area E2 is really quite a poor performer. This may not be the most scientific test but simply by counting streaks of bark and notches in wood, the differences between Binoculars are made obvious within a second or two.

I use the Fujinon 7x50 fmt-sx as a reference for this test and the little Habicht is far far closer to the big Fujinon’s performance and low light resolution that it is to the dim E2.

(I compared the benchmark SV 8.5 with the 8x42 Noctivid in the same test and the Noctivid was better. The Noctivid image did not appear to be ‘brighter’, but the extra detail was there to be seen. The incredible Noctivid contrast was there to be seen even in extremely low light viewing. The Noctivid was also clearly better than a mint Zeiss 7x42 bgatp, and was on par or better than a mint Zeiss 8x56 bgatp...more testing required with those two. The Noctivid has been a bit of a surprise in very low light viewing)

Rathaus
I liked the Habicht for awhile until I started observing the glare and flare it exhibits. The Habicht is totally useless when trying to observe at sharp angles like in a canyon or a high tree. I found the flare totally covers the FOV and you can't see anything. Once I saw this flare I sold mine the next day and I will never have another. It is also has the hardest focuser of any binocular I have ever used and I have tried a lot of different binoculars. The focuser is totally useless for fast focusing on different objects. Your correct in that your low light test is unscientific. I can't see how it proves anything. Try using a resolution chart and you will find the EII is just as sharp if not sharper than the Habicht. Henry Link did a very detailed test of the Habicht and found it exhibited veiling glare and here is the link where he describes the reason's behind it. The EII is a much better birding binocular than the Habicht. Here was the highly respected Henry Link's comments on the Habicht compared to the Nikon EII and SE.

"The only things I really like about the current 8x30 Habicht are the state of the art light transmission and color accuracy.

No 8x30/32 is my cup of tea. The axial image quality and ease of view of every one I've seen is obviously inferior to the 8x56 I normally use, but if the comparison is limited to just the ones you listed I would say the Swarovski is superior to my copies of the three Nikons only for light transmission and color accuracy. I haven't seen a current production 8x30 EII with the latest Nikon coatings, so I don't know how that would compare to the Habicht.

All three of my Nikons have a bit sharper axial images than the Habicht because their axial aberrations, both spherical and chromatic, are lower. Off-axis the E is similar to the Habicht, the EII is better and the SE is much better. All three Nikons also have better glare resistance.

In spite of all that I wouldn't want to part with the Habicht because I like having a reference standard for light transmission and color accuracy around and it's a kind of sentimental favorite. A Habicht 8x30 W GA was one of the first binoculars I bought way back in 1986."

Henry

http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.ph...7&postcount=23

Last edited by denco@comcast.n : Tuesday 7th November 2017 at 09:58.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 10:01   #22
horukuru
Here I Come !
 
horukuru's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Near with Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah at Borneo Island
Posts: 6,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pileatus View Post
The 8X32 SV ($2,200) will pretty much match the SE and give you a more comfortable, wider angled, waterproofed view. My wife used an 8X32 SE for more than ten years but, in the past three years, has refused to give up her 8X32 SV. Her SE is now a loaner bin.

In the 42/50mm range you're looking at $2500 to whatever you're willing to pay. The 8X32 SE view always amazes me, while at the same time challenging me for several minutes as I adapt to its well-known finicky eyepiece. Once adapted I'm good for the day AND I sometimes use mine (504nnn) all day to give my SV's and Leica a day off! I will not sell it under any circumstances.

PS
I use a 504nnn 8X32 SE but I do have a 550nnn (my wife's second SE) in the house as a loaner. Contrary to all the nitpicking analyses I love the 504nnn.
Yes same with me. After using the 8x32 SV, I seldom grab the 8x32 SE. Now I passed it to my friend and she love the view!
horukuru is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th November 2017, 10:20   #23
denco@comcast.n
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Denver,CO
Posts: 584
"To answer the OP, if a viewer’s acuity is up to it, The Noctivid is in another league to the E2 optically in just about every way possible. Resolution, jaw dropping contrast, truly incredible immunity to glare and flare.... I even roughly compared their FOV and I can say there isn’t much in it...possibly nothing. That was the only area I thought the E2 might have an advantage, even if the E2 image is relatively useless much more than 50% out."

I don't believe your statement when you say the EII has no advantage in FOV when the EII has an 8.8 degree FOV(462 foot) and the Noctivid 8x42 only has 7.7 degree(404 foot). That is a huge difference. I don't believe that the Noctivid out resolves the EII either when numerous tests have shown the EII is resolving to the eyes limits.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=38202

Last edited by denco@comcast.n : Tuesday 7th November 2017 at 10:35.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 10th November 2017, 17:31   #24
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Lawrence, Kansas, USA
Posts: 2,664
The view through the SE is superb, but it doesn't suit me as a birding binocular. Focus is too slow to get on birds quickly. Also deficient against the latest bins are hang, close focus, lack of "easy clean" coatings, and waterproofing. Any of the best roofs that have field flatteners would provide a similar or better view than the SE and would be better in all of those respects. Do a side by side comparison to the Swarovski 8x32 or the 8.5x42 EL Swarovision if you want to see if you are missing anything that matters to you.

--AP
Alexis Powell is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 10th November 2017, 17:46   #25
WJC
Registered User
 
WJC's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Twin Falls
Posts: 1,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
The view through the SE is superb, but it doesn't suit me as a birding binocular. Focus is too slow to get on birds quickly. Also deficient against the latest bins are hang, close focus, lack of "easy clean" coatings, and waterproofing. Any of the best roofs that have field flatteners would provide a similar or better view than the SE and would be better in all of those respects. Do a side by side comparison to the Swarovski 8x32 or the 8.5x42 EL Swarovision if you want to see if you are missing anything that matters to you.

--AP
Hi, Alexis:

Please consider that in warmer climates that firmer focus can come in handy, as focusers coming from the factory with TOO smooth an action can get sensitive to the point of annoyance in hot weather.

What is an “easy clean” coating?

Cheers,

Bill
__________________
"The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."—Dr. Stephen Hawking
WJC is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon SE 10x42 SE - First Views EnjoyTheView Nikon 18 Tuesday 22nd March 2016 22:26
Multimedia views lmans66 Computers, Birding Software And The Internet 4 Thursday 19th February 2009 03:01
Kingfisher Views gary jb Information Wanted 1 Monday 12th July 2004 22:15
Views... ralph Birds & Birding 0 Sunday 29th September 2002 19:57

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.26034999 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 16:48.