-
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.
Historical Review of Swift 804 Audubon Binoculars (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter elkcub
- Start date
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Dennis,
Here is the page showing your 766 Holiday from the 1969 Swift Instruments catalog, along with the Audubon (Type-1c), and 802 Neptune of the day.
Ed
Hey, waddaya know? At that time they were also making a 9x35 Trilight MkII roof with an air-spaced objective and 5-element Erfle type eyepiece. By josh, also more expensive than the Audubons.
Here is the page showing your 766 Holiday from the 1969 Swift Instruments catalog, along with the Audubon (Type-1c), and 802 Neptune of the day.
Ed
Hey, waddaya know? At that time they were also making a 9x35 Trilight MkII roof with an air-spaced objective and 5-element Erfle type eyepiece. By josh, also more expensive than the Audubons.
Attachments
Last edited:
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
I have been thinking about the attribute, "Feather Weight," proclaimed on the first (Type 0) and several subsequent 804s. If the binocular really was developed according to suggestions of ornithologists, then this statement might be more than hype. But "Feather Weight" compared to what?
A lot of information exists about military binoculars, so we know their intended applications. And clearly many commercial bins made before and after WWII were not intended for "birding," but for opera and sports observation, and for travel.
So what binoculars were preferred by ornithologists and some of the earliest non-professional "birders" after WWII? Between the war and the time that the earliest 804 was introduced, did those folks--in an effort to have bins that were brighter and perhaps with higher magnification than the common, commercial products--use military surplus binoculars?
I haven't looked at any books on binoculars or the history of binoculars, but I have done a lot of searching on the Internet, and I haven't found anything on the history of binoculars as used for birding. If ornithologists and birders were using surplus bins--some of which were very heavy--in the first ten or fifteen years following the war, could that explain "Feather Weight"?
Obviously many of those heavy military bins had independent focus and would have been impractical in the field. But I'm curious. Has anybody studied this topic? Surely some of those folks are still around and might have some information.
A lot of information exists about military binoculars, so we know their intended applications. And clearly many commercial bins made before and after WWII were not intended for "birding," but for opera and sports observation, and for travel.
So what binoculars were preferred by ornithologists and some of the earliest non-professional "birders" after WWII? Between the war and the time that the earliest 804 was introduced, did those folks--in an effort to have bins that were brighter and perhaps with higher magnification than the common, commercial products--use military surplus binoculars?
I haven't looked at any books on binoculars or the history of binoculars, but I have done a lot of searching on the Internet, and I haven't found anything on the history of binoculars as used for birding. If ornithologists and birders were using surplus bins--some of which were very heavy--in the first ten or fifteen years following the war, could that explain "Feather Weight"?
Obviously many of those heavy military bins had independent focus and would have been impractical in the field. But I'm curious. Has anybody studied this topic? Surely some of those folks are still around and might have some information.
Last edited:
The current edition of the "Hawk Mountain News" (Autumn 2009) has a picture on page 16 of Board Member and noted bird expert Chandler Robbins holding what I think are old and huge 10 x 50's held by what appears to be a shoestring strap around his neck. These binoculars make the Swift 804 look petite. I don't know what brand they are but they have to weigh at least 3 pounds if they are an ounce! And from the scars and dents on them, they look like they were used as a blunt instrument on a few occasions. He still uses them, and I would think that he is the person to contact for your information.
Bob
Bob
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
Thanks for that. I can't get the newsletter online, but I found a photo of him with those bins on the Patuxent WRC site. He has probably had such a productive career in birding because he never wasted time on BF arguing about mostly imagined differences between his Louisville Slugger 10x70 and somebody else's glass. I'll locate him and see what he might know.
henry link
Well-known member
There is a thread about Chandler Robbins' bins here:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=144506
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=144506
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
Thanks Henry. I'm off to work, but I'll read and follow all those other links later.
Somewhere in the past week I saw the weight of the SARD Mark 43, which was four pounds, and that is what got me thinking about this. Granted, nobody would have used the SARD for birding, except for scanning a body of water or giant mudflat. But maybe people were accustomed to great optics coming at the price of weight.
Incidentally, from just reading the PWRC page on him, Robbins is clearly not a "birder" as I said before, but one of the most accomplished ornithologists in North America.
Last edited:
jaymoynihan
Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher
Thank you folks for this fascinating .
I saw mention of "Japanese manufacturer, Hiyoski Kogaku, Ltd."
If i am not mistaken, they also manufacture the well known to amatuer astronmers "University Optics" Orthoscopic eyepieces, which are inexpensive, yet highly regarded for lunar and planetary viewing.
I saw mention of "Japanese manufacturer, Hiyoski Kogaku, Ltd."
If i am not mistaken, they also manufacture the well known to amatuer astronmers "University Optics" Orthoscopic eyepieces, which are inexpensive, yet highly regarded for lunar and planetary viewing.
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
In prior posts to this thread, the Swift 9x42 was mentioned. One just sold on eBay in the UK and photos are still online. It's a great looking binocular, and as the seller says, it's hard to imagine why Swift-Pyser would have marketed something so close to the 804R. Here is the link. If it doesn't work, be sure to highlight the entire thing before pasting in to your browser:
http://cgi.ebay.com/SWIFT-AUDUBON-S...inoculars_ET?hash=item1e58c7964a#ht_762wt_946
http://cgi.ebay.com/SWIFT-AUDUBON-S...inoculars_ET?hash=item1e58c7964a#ht_762wt_946
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Yes, it is interesting. Unfortunately, a confusion that defies easy classification is that the Audubon version marketed in the 1984-5 Pyser catalog was labeled "HR/5" and not 804R, as in North America. It is, therefore, a Type 4a variant. In addition, the first Type 4b sold in America some years later was also labeled HR/5 with MC optics, but many were actually FMC. So, the British were the first to use HR/5 on the prism cover, terminology that was only later adopted by Swift USA. The Brits didn't have a model 804, incidentally, since their catalog was organized differently. The 804R is the "112-224 Swift Audubon HR/5 BWCF 8.5x44" (for what it's worth). :eek!:
These differences resulted from the terms of the licensing agreement between Swift and Pyser, which allowed Pyser broad latitude to market the Hiyoshi-built SWPA series. Hyoshi-Kogaku, however, also sold similar configurations under different brand names in Europe and North America. To my knowledge, only Swift or their partners could market the 8.5x44 configuration — the venerable Audubon.
Ed
These differences resulted from the terms of the licensing agreement between Swift and Pyser, which allowed Pyser broad latitude to market the Hiyoshi-built SWPA series. Hyoshi-Kogaku, however, also sold similar configurations under different brand names in Europe and North America. To my knowledge, only Swift or their partners could market the 8.5x44 configuration — the venerable Audubon.
Ed
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Collector’s Alert!!!
I'm selling my VG-excellent condition Swift 804 Audubon HR/5 MC binoculars with brandy new leather covered hard case at original cost - $259.99
Take a look:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=156183
Thanks!
I'm selling my VG-excellent condition Swift 804 Audubon HR/5 MC binoculars with brandy new leather covered hard case at original cost - $259.99
Take a look:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=156183
Thanks!
Last edited:
Geez it's hard keeping track of the variations in these 804's! Mine say "fully multi coated" on the left prism housing with HR/5 just above it. On the right prism housing it says "Swift Audubon." And I got a soft case with it! Darn!
How bout we trade cases? Maybe I could throw in a proto roof prism by Fujinon. 7 x 42 copy of a Leitz 7 x 42 with serial number 00201. circa 1984. A real collectors item which will illustrate just how far Roof Prism binoculars have progressed in 25 years!
Cordially,
Bob
How bout we trade cases? Maybe I could throw in a proto roof prism by Fujinon. 7 x 42 copy of a Leitz 7 x 42 with serial number 00201. circa 1984. A real collectors item which will illustrate just how far Roof Prism binoculars have progressed in 25 years!
Cordially,
Bob
brocknroller
porromaniac
Bob,
Thanks for the offer, but I'm no longer a collector. This recession has pushed me out of the "business".
I'm selling off what's left of my classic porro collection (8x and 12x SE (*SOLD*), 8x50 Octarem (*SOLD*), 804 Audubons (one sold, one for sale), 6x30 FMTR-SX (*SOLD*), Nikon 8x35 WF (sharp and contrasty as the SE but short ER, way better than the Action IV or EX, there were new "old stock" I picked up, and are still in mint condition).
Because of the recession, the porros were sold at cost or close to cost even though they were all in very good to excellent condition and could probably garner more $$$ on an auction site if Happy Days [WERE] Here Again.
If you are into collecting roof prism bins, I have a Jap. made rubber armored 9x63 MC roof with Abbe-Koenig prisms (circa 1986). Caps, original strap, and hard case included. The front end cap that had the name of the manufacturer is missing. So I don't know what company made these.
They look very similar to a 9x63 Optolyth, in terms of the armoring and frame, but Jap. made.
Unfortunately, they are out of collimation, so you would need to get them repaired or fix them yourself, which is why I haven't put them up for sale.
I can take some photos, if you're interested.
Last edited:
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
Brock, I just sent you a PM.
Brock,
I'm not really into collecting old roofers. I happen to have 3 of them. Two 7 x 42's: The Fujinon and the Leitz Trinovid, and a Minolta Mariner 8 x 32. It is enlightening to compare them with recent Roof Prism's. I can see the improvement instantly. I can go from the poor 7 x 42 Fujunons to the good (but lacking Phase coating) Leitz and then to the modern and excellent Leica 7 x 42 Trinovid and I can compare the poor Minolta Mariner to my excellent 8 x 32 LX L. It's a small, visual historical record of the improvement in the optics of roof prism binoculars!
Bob
I'm not really into collecting old roofers. I happen to have 3 of them. Two 7 x 42's: The Fujinon and the Leitz Trinovid, and a Minolta Mariner 8 x 32. It is enlightening to compare them with recent Roof Prism's. I can see the improvement instantly. I can go from the poor 7 x 42 Fujunons to the good (but lacking Phase coating) Leitz and then to the modern and excellent Leica 7 x 42 Trinovid and I can compare the poor Minolta Mariner to my excellent 8 x 32 LX L. It's a small, visual historical record of the improvement in the optics of roof prism binoculars!
Bob
brocknroller
porromaniac
Bob,
It's too bad that the price difference isn't as incremental as the coatings improvements!
According to Henry, roof prism evolution is more complex than merely better coatings. See my thread on "Incremental Improvements" for his comments.
Btw, I just sold my 804 FMC Audubon. Another Porro dinosaur made extinct by the K-T Roof Prism Event (aka "P-coatings).
Jon, Replied to your PM.
Timedrifter
Well-known member
I have been reading this thread with interest, and have on the spur of the moment bought a pair of I think 1c's. Rense and Edward appear to say that the 1c started in 1968, but the serial number on the pair I have just purchased, but not yet received, starts 67. Is this already known?
I can give more details if required, but they appear to be identical to treemans on post 157.
Max
I can give more details if required, but they appear to be identical to treemans on post 157.
Max
Similar threads
