• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE has been discontinued by the manufacturer??? (1 Viewer)

etudiant said:
I'm a little surprised that Nikon marketing has not recognized that this glass has almost a cult following.
Click to expand...

Outside photographic equipment, Nikon doesnt seem to give a damn about its products and their customers.

I am very happy with my EII and thats the only reason why I didnt try to buy a SE yet, outside the affordability.
 
brocknroller said:
Regarding that the SE is "long in the tooth" because it doesn't have modern ED glass is a straw man argument ....


....

Brock
Click to expand...

What a rant - and a right one; thanks, Brock!

The connection between CA problems and the mode of focusing seems convincing, because the focusing lens alters the rays that exit from the objective. And this alteration would depend on the particular position of that lens, so that objective-CA could only be possibly optimized for a single distance setting. If we reduce the dispersion altogether (using ED objectives), then we immediately reduce the consequences of varying positions of that lens. Strangely, no textbook I know of seems to mention that connection.

Cheers,
Holger
 
Brock,

The SE is no longer on the Nikon USA web site as a current product, but it is still listed on the Nikon international web site.

The status of the SE may now be the same as the EII, where Nikon USA "discontinued" marketing them to US vendors (i.e. Optics Planet), but they are still in production for the other Nikon worldwide distributors.

Hopefully Mike F. will reply and give us the straight story.
 
The 8x32 SE is, for me, "long in the tooth" for the following reasons:

1) Rubber fold down eyecups. Heaven forbid you try to share an SE with someone who doesn't wear glasses (I do, my wife doesn't). The SE's got left behind many times for that reason alone. In addition I had to fold the cups down halfway to get the eye relief right, and twiddle with them a few times in the course of an afternoon. This leads to:

2) That finicky blackout-prone eyepiece. It seems half the users or more have an issue with it. I did, especially if I was in a hurry to get on a bird.

3) Not waterproof. The SE's got left behind at times for this reason too, although I was somewhat overprotective.

4) No hydrophobic, easy-to-clean coatings. Those coatings work.

5) Field of view. The 8x32 SV, for instance, has an extra 33 feet of it.

6) Price. $700-800 is too high for the SE. I paid $500 in, I believe, 2009 for a 550. Brand-new. What happened?

7) The 3D view was of little consequence to me and not a selling point.

8) Poor close focus because of widely spaced objectives.

I had the 8x32 SE for two years but I ended up selling it and I wouldn't really want another. The 8x32 SV solves every issue mentioned above--except price of course. ;)

Just my experience,
Mark
 
Kammerdiner said:
The 8x32 SE is, for me, "long in the tooth" for the following reasons:

1) Rubber fold down eyecups. Heaven forbid you try to share an SE with someone who doesn't wear glasses (I do, my wife doesn't). The SE's got left behind many times for that reason alone. In addition I had to fold the cups down halfway to get the eye relief right, and twiddle with them a few times in the course of an afternoon. This leads to:

2) That finicky blackout-prone eyepiece. It seems half the users or more have an issue with it. I did, especially if I was in a hurry to get on a bird.

3) Not waterproof. The SE's got left behind at times for this reason too, although I was somewhat overprotective.

4) No hydrophobic, easy-to-clean coatings. Those coatings work.

5) Field of view. The 8x32 SV, for instance, has an extra 33 feet of it.

6) Price. $700-800 is too high for the SE. I paid $500 in, I believe, 2009 for a 550. Brand-new. What happened?

7) The 3D view was of little consequence to me and not a selling point.

8) Poor close focus because of widely spaced objectives.

I had the 8x32 SE for two years but I ended up selling it and I wouldn't really want another. The 8x32 SV solves every issue mentioned above--except price of course. ;)

Just my experience,
Mark
Click to expand...

I can add another. C A and lots of it. Kept mine for 11 1/2 months. good bins,but,better binoculars out there,much better.
suppressor
 
I have`nt tried the SE` with the newest coatings but I have tried mine alongside all the current Alpha 8x32 roofs, the SE view is unique compared to all of them, and, IMO better in the area`s which matter most to me, and the fact it can compete with them head on at a fraction of their price makes me love them even more.

Simply the finest vfm binocular ever made IMO.
 
In 2010 I spent 4 hours between 1100 AM and 300PM comparing my 10 x 42 SE (which I had purchased 2nd hand years earlier) and my new 10 x 32 EDG I at Hawk Mountain Sanctuary.

It was a brilliant, cloudless, sunny autumn day. There was virtually no difference between them except while looking though very light haze at farms and houses up the valley several miles away. The EDG showed more detail than the SE there and I attributed it to newer coatings on the EDG. There were no other differences even in the edges of their views.

I let a Hawk Mountain Intern working there, who was from Nepal, try both of them. He had been studying Himalayan Vultures at home. He preferred the SE. He liked the handling better because he said it was like the binoculars he used in Nepal. He was using a Nikon Monarch while counting raptors at the South Lookout.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Kammerdiner said:
The 8x32 SE is, for me, "long in the tooth" for the following reasons:

1) Rubber fold down eyecups. Heaven forbid you try to share an SE with someone who doesn't wear glasses (I do, my wife doesn't). The SE's got left behind many times for that reason alone. In addition I had to fold the cups down halfway to get the eye relief right, and twiddle with them a few times in the course of an afternoon. This leads to:

2) That finicky blackout-prone eyepiece. It seems half the users or more have an issue with it. I did, especially if I was in a hurry to get on a bird.

3) Not waterproof. The SE's got left behind at times for this reason too, although I was somewhat overprotective.

4) No hydrophobic, easy-to-clean coatings. Those coatings work.

5) Field of view. The 8x32 SV, for instance, has an extra 33 feet of it.

6) Price. $700-800 is too high for the SE. I paid $500 in, I believe, 2009 for a 550. Brand-new. What happened?

7) The 3D view was of little consequence to me and not a selling point.

8) Poor close focus because of widely spaced objectives.
Click to expand...

Just to provide a different perspective.

1): I don't usually share my bins with anyone. No problem there, and fold-down eyecups have one real advantage: there's nothing that can break, and they don't get stuck.

2): I never ever had any problem with blackouts with the SE. I couldn't even see them, no matter what I tried.

3), 4) and 5): Agreed, even though I don't find the field of view too restrictive. Waterproofing is the really important point here, I think. Hydrophobic coatings are nice but not essential, as far as I'm concerned.

6): For the optical quality of the SE they're cheap. Almost as good as one of the top roofs at a third of the price. Talk about bargains.

7): I prefer the 3D-effect over the flat view of a roof any time.

8): I don't need very close focus. Birds don't usually land on my boots. And the short focus of many roofs may lead to all sorts of problems in the design of binoculars, like problems when viewing against the light or mechanical problems with the focuser. Close focus isn't for free. There ain't such a thing as a free lunch.

Hermann
 
Hermann said:
Just to provide a different perspective.

1): fold-down eyecups have one real advantage: there's nothing that can break, and they don't get stuck.

Hermann
Click to expand...

But the rubber cracks where it is folded Hermann.
Or at least the rubber eyecups my wife and I have experience of (Leica and Zeiss) all cracked in this way.
Mostly the cracks ran across the line of the fold so it looked like ozone attack to me.

Lee
 
Hermann said:
Just to provide a different perspective.

1): I don't usually share my bins with anyone. No problem there, and fold-down eyecups have one real advantage: there's nothing that can break, and they don't get stuck.

...
Hermann
Click to expand...

I generally don't share either, but my wife often doesn't like to carry binos, so back and forth they go. Maybe I can get her to carry the 8x25 CL this year. ;)

Even though I wouldn't be interested in buying another SE, it's sad to hear they are truly gone.
 
Kammerdiner said:
...
I had the 8x32 SE for two years but I ended up selling it and I wouldn't really want another.
...
Just my experience,
Mark
Click to expand...

Mark,

I understand, perfectly.

Two things are probably going on. First, the profit margins on the EDG are higher, so the company is sticking to one premier line. Simultaneously, they are selling poorer Porro binoculars to a mass market. Secondly, anyone who wanted an SE, probably has one. Nikon cannot demand a sufficiently high price for the SE to be produced in smaller and smaller lots.

It may have had a singular following among some bird watchers, but the European firms have put out some very good glass, in the last decade, or so, while Canon's IS binoculars have taken a sizable share of the 10x binoculars. The technology has moved on.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :hi:
 
mikefreiberg said:
The SEs are definitely discontinued. That is a fact at this point.

Best,
Mike
Click to expand...

Mike,

Are they discontinued for just Nikon USA or are they discontinued worldwide?

The SE series is still shown as an active model line on the Nikon Worldwide website.
 
Kammerdiner said:
The 8x32 SE is, for me, "long in the tooth" for the following reasons:

1) Rubber fold down eyecups. Heaven forbid you try to share an SE with someone who doesn't wear glasses (I do, my wife doesn't). The SE's got left behind many times for that reason alone. In addition I had to fold the cups down halfway to get the eye relief right, and twiddle with them a few times in the course of an afternoon. This leads to:

2) That finicky blackout-prone eyepiece. It seems half the users or more have an issue with it. I did, especially if I was in a hurry to get on a bird.

3) Not waterproof. The SE's got left behind at times for this reason too, although I was somewhat overprotective.

4) No hydrophobic, easy-to-clean coatings. Those coatings work.

5) Field of view. The 8x32 SV, for instance, has an extra 33 feet of it.

6) Price. $700-800 is too high for the SE. I paid $500 in, I believe, 2009 for a 550. Brand-new. What happened?

7) The 3D view was of little consequence to me and not a selling point.

8) Poor close focus because of widely spaced objectives.

I had the 8x32 SE for two years but I ended up selling it and I wouldn't really want another. The 8x32 SV solves every issue mentioned above--except price of course. ;)

Just my experience,
Mark
Click to expand...
I agree. The SV 8x32 is the waterproof, updated and improved SE.
 
The cost question is interesting. Some care about it, some don't.

It's a bit like saying, "My Ford Mustang GT is as fast as your Porsche Cayman 0-60 and pulls the same g's on a skidpad so why should I spend the money on a Porsche?!?"

OK, don't. Enjoy your ride. What's to get miffed about?

Besides, I think Dennis rarely has more than 3-4 binoculars at a time. He sells the rest, doesn't he? In fact, he's probably got less invested in optics than many of us. I find his perpetual revolving optics quest a little odd, but heck it's none of my business.

Mark--who has neither Mustang nor Porsche (well, there's a 27 year-old Porsche sitting in the garage with a dead battery if that counts. Some day I hope to dig it out of the snow). ;)
 
The cost is not what stops me buying an SV, I simply don`t care for it much and frankly none of the alpha 32mm glass represents value in my book as the only advantage I can find over the SE is waterproofing.

I`m far more likely to buy one of the latest SE` or a top 7x42 before I`d consider £1400+ on a 32mm roof.
 
Torview said:
The cost is not what stops me buying an SV, I simply don`t care for it much and frankly none of the alpha 32mm glass represents value in my book as the only advantage I can find over the SE is waterproofing.

I`m far more likely to buy one of the latest SE` or a top 7x42 before I`d consider £1400+ on a 32mm roof.
Click to expand...

But isn't "value" the same as caring about cost? And why does that "sour grapes" tone always seem to creep into the discussion?

I parked in front of a guy downtown yesterday, a local developer who drives the latest supercharged Jaguar XJ. Gets a new one every two years or so. For some reason I felt absolutely no desire to point out that my Subaru AWD is just as good in the snow. ;)

Mark
 
Sour grapes was not my intention nor my position, and caring about value does not equal caring about cost in my book.

To take the on idea of sour grapes from a non Swaro owner, I must say I`v never read a response on here from a Leica or Zeiss owner suggesting that affordability is the reason for putting down their chosen optic, the more time I spend around this forum the more it seems Swaro brings out the superiority complex.

Me ? I just don`t see what all the fuss is about, never been enticed to buy one yet.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

brocknroller
Nikon 8x32 SE Chinese Clone
Replies
7
Views
2K
brocknroller
brocknroller
brocknroller
The Cure for 8x32 SE Tunnel Vision
Replies
7
Views
2K
John M Robinson
J
John A Roberts
SE Numbering & Production
Replies
13
Views
3K
b-lilja
B
F
A Note About Nikon w/Regard to the 10x42 SE
2
Replies
21
Views
3K
brocknroller
brocknroller
P
Nikon EDG and MHG 8x42 comparison.
Replies
8
Views
2K
Paultricounty
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top