Steve C
Well-known member
I recently came across an absolutely mint Swift Audubon 804R 8.5x44 Mark II HR/5, Type 4b (2) binocular. This one was made in 1999. I’d been intrigued by this binocular for a long time, but always wondered how something that had an advertised weight of 38.5 oz could have possibly have been tagged with a featherweight label. This HR/5 eliminates 10 oz of that weight. It is still big, but very manageable. This big binocular has always been regarded for its outstanding optics, large size, and the relative ease with which it will fog up. I’ve been on the lookout for the ED version of this binocular for a while, but have not seen one for sale for several years. At any rate this is a classic, high quality binocular with a considerable fan base and some collector interest.
A comparison with the much discussed new kid on the block, in the form of the ZEN ED seemed worthwhile. For one thing the ZEN is certainly on everyone’s mind right now and the Swift is a well known, solid, high quality, classic optic.
So, how do they compare? Well there is the obvious porro vs. roof differences. Aside from that, the obvious thing is the ED glass in the ZEN and lack thereof in the Swift. The weight is similar, 28.5 oz for the Swift and 27.5 for the ZEN. They specify a similar fov, 430’ for the Swift and 426’ for the ZEN. The Swift is completely retro in appearance being a big blocky leatherette covered porro. It is wider than the ZEN is long.
Focus characteristics:
The ZEN has a 1 3/8” (35mm) diameter focus wheel which operates in 2 ½ revolutions. Two revolutions are used going from the close focus distance of 6’ to 30’. ¼ Revolution goes from 30’ to infinity, and there is ¼ revolution past infinity. This is likely the big handicap of the ZEN. It likely won't be real handy as a Butterfly binocular. Both focus clockwise to infinity.
The Swift uses a 1 3/16 (30mm) diameter focus wheel that operated through 1 ½ turns, ½ turn goes from the close focus distance of 12’ to 30’, ½ turn from there to infinity and ½ turn past infinity. The design of the Swift is such that the thumb can be used from underneath the wheel to manipulate focus. This gives the user some latitude on how to hold this big binocular. I personally much prefer the focus of the big Swift.
Color Fringing:
Using a white speed limit sign with black lettering with the afternoon sun shining on the sign was the fringing target. The ED glass does give the ZEN a slight advantage. I can get fringing in the ZEN only when the lettering is just out of focus on the close side. The Swift shows a little more, and on both the close and far focus in relation to the target. Apparent fringing when the lettering is in sharp focus is not noticeable. Both are much better than the only other ED glass I have, the Vortex Viper 10x42.
Color rendition:
Both binoculars are superb but the ZEN seems slightly better in color reproduction. The colors are a bit sharper in the ZEN, but both are good. The Swift seems to have a tad bit warmer color bias than the ZEN. The differences will not be evident without the binoculars being side by side.
Image Quality:
Using the old NEED test from BVD, the sharpness of the images are too close to call. The detail seen with my eye can be read just 8 x further away with the ZEN and 8.5 x further with the Swift. This shouldn’t be too surprising since the resolution specs are 3.2 arc seconds for the ZEN and 3.5 for the Swift. So this feature is a tossup.
There is a nice sharp image that in both looks a lot like you have just walked up closer to your subject for a better look. The ZEN is perhaps a bit brighter and has a bit of a yellow bias, while the Swift looks a bit reddish in its bias. Both of these binoculars give an easy view that seems to produce very little strain. The Swift has an obvious advantage in depth of field. When focused on an object about 200 meters away, the Swift is basically in focus from 30meters on out, while the ZEN is focused from 40 meters on out. There is more focus movement in the Swift in the deep field than there is in the ZEN.
The Swift seems to have a larger field of view. For instance both the ZEN and my Promaster look to be dead equal, while the Swift is a bit larger. I don’t know what is what, but if the Swift is correct at 430’ then the ZEN is around 410’. If the ZEN is right at 426’, the Swift is closer to 440’. That is nothing to notice unless you go looking for it.
The Swift has more softness at the edge of the field, but you have to be looking directly at the edge to notice it. The ZEN has a clear edge here.
So the old classic and the new contender are pretty close. I’m glad I got that old Swift, and it was a bargain at the price I gave. There is one just like it now on auction that is currently at $50.00 more than I paid for this one. It will definitely see some use.
A comparison with the much discussed new kid on the block, in the form of the ZEN ED seemed worthwhile. For one thing the ZEN is certainly on everyone’s mind right now and the Swift is a well known, solid, high quality, classic optic.
So, how do they compare? Well there is the obvious porro vs. roof differences. Aside from that, the obvious thing is the ED glass in the ZEN and lack thereof in the Swift. The weight is similar, 28.5 oz for the Swift and 27.5 for the ZEN. They specify a similar fov, 430’ for the Swift and 426’ for the ZEN. The Swift is completely retro in appearance being a big blocky leatherette covered porro. It is wider than the ZEN is long.
Focus characteristics:
The ZEN has a 1 3/8” (35mm) diameter focus wheel which operates in 2 ½ revolutions. Two revolutions are used going from the close focus distance of 6’ to 30’. ¼ Revolution goes from 30’ to infinity, and there is ¼ revolution past infinity. This is likely the big handicap of the ZEN. It likely won't be real handy as a Butterfly binocular. Both focus clockwise to infinity.
The Swift uses a 1 3/16 (30mm) diameter focus wheel that operated through 1 ½ turns, ½ turn goes from the close focus distance of 12’ to 30’, ½ turn from there to infinity and ½ turn past infinity. The design of the Swift is such that the thumb can be used from underneath the wheel to manipulate focus. This gives the user some latitude on how to hold this big binocular. I personally much prefer the focus of the big Swift.
Color Fringing:
Using a white speed limit sign with black lettering with the afternoon sun shining on the sign was the fringing target. The ED glass does give the ZEN a slight advantage. I can get fringing in the ZEN only when the lettering is just out of focus on the close side. The Swift shows a little more, and on both the close and far focus in relation to the target. Apparent fringing when the lettering is in sharp focus is not noticeable. Both are much better than the only other ED glass I have, the Vortex Viper 10x42.
Color rendition:
Both binoculars are superb but the ZEN seems slightly better in color reproduction. The colors are a bit sharper in the ZEN, but both are good. The Swift seems to have a tad bit warmer color bias than the ZEN. The differences will not be evident without the binoculars being side by side.
Image Quality:
Using the old NEED test from BVD, the sharpness of the images are too close to call. The detail seen with my eye can be read just 8 x further away with the ZEN and 8.5 x further with the Swift. This shouldn’t be too surprising since the resolution specs are 3.2 arc seconds for the ZEN and 3.5 for the Swift. So this feature is a tossup.
There is a nice sharp image that in both looks a lot like you have just walked up closer to your subject for a better look. The ZEN is perhaps a bit brighter and has a bit of a yellow bias, while the Swift looks a bit reddish in its bias. Both of these binoculars give an easy view that seems to produce very little strain. The Swift has an obvious advantage in depth of field. When focused on an object about 200 meters away, the Swift is basically in focus from 30meters on out, while the ZEN is focused from 40 meters on out. There is more focus movement in the Swift in the deep field than there is in the ZEN.
The Swift seems to have a larger field of view. For instance both the ZEN and my Promaster look to be dead equal, while the Swift is a bit larger. I don’t know what is what, but if the Swift is correct at 430’ then the ZEN is around 410’. If the ZEN is right at 426’, the Swift is closer to 440’. That is nothing to notice unless you go looking for it.
The Swift has more softness at the edge of the field, but you have to be looking directly at the edge to notice it. The ZEN has a clear edge here.
So the old classic and the new contender are pretty close. I’m glad I got that old Swift, and it was a bargain at the price I gave. There is one just like it now on auction that is currently at $50.00 more than I paid for this one. It will definitely see some use.
Attachments
Last edited: