Swift 828 or Nikon Monarch 8x42 (1 Viewer)

I'm torn between the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 and the Nikon Monarch 8x42.

I like the Nikon warranty better and the fact that it's probably the best selling roof prism in the $300 price range. On the other hand I like the Swift 828's magnification being 8.5 over 8 and the history behind the model seems to be a well built bino.

Does anyone know what the change in the name from HHS to HCF had to do with and if there was anything changed in the materials or optics? I realize HHS was the initials of late owner of Swift Optics and supposedly the last binocular he designed. I have no idea who HCF is though...and if something changed in the design when the name change happened.

Nikon would be the "safe" bet but I'm leaning more towards the Swifts.

Which would you choose and why?

I have stayed away fron Swift mainly due to warranty and company future issues. And they do need to be repaired, it seems. Nice optics. I have 10x Monarchs, pretty good value for the money and light weight.

As long as Nikon makes cameras, they will be around.

MikeT307 said:

I'm torn between the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 and the Nikon Monarch 8x42.

I like the Nikon warranty better and the fact that it's probably the best selling roof prism in the $300 price range. On the other hand I like the Swift 828's magnification being 8.5 over 8 and the history behind the model seems to be a well built bino.

Does anyone know what the change in the name from HHS to HCF had to do with and if there was anything changed in the materials or optics? I realize HHS was the initials of late owner of Swift Optics and supposedly the last binocular he designed. I have no idea who HCF is though...and if something changed in the design when the name change happened.

Nikon would be the "safe" bet but I'm leaning more towards the Swifts.

Which would you choose and why?

Click to expand...

I bought the Swift 828s as I like things which are a bit unusual and not the obvious choice. I have been extremely pleased with them for the past three years.

Regarding the change of initials, I don't know but the Opticron site gives an explanation of some of the letters commonly used. According to that, 'H' denotes a roof binocular and 'CF' stands for centre focusing. I don't know whether that is correct. Possibly the HHS designation became a bit less relevant and confusing with the passing of time. Incidentally, on the latest Swift site they don't seem to mention any letters now and simply refer to them as 828.

http://www.swift-sportoptics.com/products/binoculars/828

Ron

Thanks Tero and Ron.

Tero brings up good points about the company not being nearly as stable as Nikon.

I've visited the Swift Optics website numerous times researching and I must say that the site is less then impressive in the information and design. That doesn't have anything to do with the build quality of the binoculars but does make me think that the company doesn't want to invest in a more up to date look.

OpticsPlanet recommended the Bushnell Discoverer and the Swift 828 to me, as the two they would choose in the $300 range. The Bushnell has a big FOV at 420 but is heavier too.

I just think that I wouldn't be "unhappy" with the Nikon but the Swift does have it's share of pluses.

If there are any other thoughts or opinions please share them.

Thanks,
Mike

I would go for the Discoverer if the weight is not an issue. Depends on how many hours in the field you use them. I do the most birding with a 20 oz pair of 8x32. In winter I tend to use a heavier pair as I am more in the car and less walking or going far.

I compared the Nikons and the Swifts about 3 years ago. My impression was I would rather buy the Swifts based on image quality, ergonomics and apparent build-quality. I remember thinking the Swifts were very clearly superior. I am sorry I cannot recall more details. One difference I do remember is the Nikons have a "higher gear" focus wheel and the Swifts, a slower but finer focus.

I would not be concerned about Swift's ambigious future in the bin biz. Go for the best binocular for you. Rely on the seller's 30 day return policy. Once you determine there are no defects and you are satisfied with the pair you get, the chance of needing to contact Swift and demand some help are remote.

I have had the Discoverer 7x42 (pc) for 7 years now. They are good, but heavy. The Swift 828 were the first roofs in the same price range I felt equalled the Discoverers optically, and the light weight was a big plus. However I would have had to trade FOV. In the end, I purchased the Swift 820s (Porro) because the image quality was clearly superior to both roofs and the FOV was there. No real regrets. One slight drawback is the stiffer, slower focus time to be expected when switching to a higher mag and a Porro. The Porros come with a terrible case. Also, the eye relief on the Porro isn't quite as long as advertised. But the 828s you are interested in have excellent ER. I put up with these inconveniences from the Porro because the truth is I cannot go back to the good, but inferior, image quality of the $300 roofs.

MikeT307 said:

I'm torn between the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 and the Nikon Monarch 8x42.

I like the Nikon warranty better and the fact that it's probably the best selling roof prism in the $300 price range. On the other hand I like the Swift 828's magnification being 8.5 over 8 and the history behind the model seems to be a well built bino.

Does anyone know what the change in the name from HHS to HCF had to do with and if there was anything changed in the materials or optics? I realize HHS was the initials of late owner of Swift Optics and supposedly the last binocular he designed. I have no idea who HCF is though...and if something changed in the design when the name change happened.

Nikon would be the "safe" bet but I'm leaning more towards the Swifts.

Which would you choose and why?

Click to expand...

Mike,

Just a few comments:

# Swift has used the HCF and HWCF designations for many years, "W" meaning wide. Similarly, they use BWCF to refer to the Porro Audubons, "B" standing for Bausch & Lomb construction. ZCF and ZWCF refer to Porros with Zeiss construction, as in the Ultra Lite and Aerolite series.

# Dropping the HHS designation may only be for the catalog, as it may still be on the side of the binocular itself.

# There are now other H models being pushed, such as the Eaglet (Model 825). This redesignation probably levels the playing field for marketing.

# The HHS was Swift's flagship roof, and still is their flagship Audubon roof. It's been upgraded at least once, and probably will be again unless all the Japanese models are dropped from the Swift lineup. (No, I'm not predicting that, but...)

# IMO the HHS is equal or better than any other bin in it's price class, but all are inferior to similar priced Porros, such as the Model 820. Can't get around that.

# Swift Sport Optics (binoculars and rifle scopes) is now owned by SafeTGuard, a well known company in the sporting goods field. The same repair stations are involved and the warranty is as it was before they took over.

# IMO the HHS is a solid workhorse, but not a racing pony. The next step up would cost twice as much.

# I like it better than the Monarch, but certainly not the LXL.

Enjoy the view whatever you do,
Ed

Thank you all for your input and thoughts on these binoculars.

elkcub said:

# IMO the HHS is equal or better than any other bin in it's price class, but all are inferior to similar priced Porros, such as the Model 820. Can't get around that.

Enjoy the view whatever you do,
Ed

Click to expand...

IMO the roof vs. the porro argument can be made in any price class other than maybe the elite models. The porro will always give a better image. I just like the feel of most of the roof models over the porros, usually they are not as heavy, and IMO are more rugged for weather, slips and falls...etc. I'm just looking for a good bang for the buck binocular.

Thank you for your explanations on the model abbreviations.

I think the Monarchs are out of the running. They didn't weigh much and are certainly a "good buy" or they wouldn't be as popular as they are. I just think you can get a little more for the money with the 828.

Seems that the Swift 828 or the Bushnell Discoverer are both good contenders for the "bang for the buck award" but I don't like the weight of the discoverer and do like the little extra magnification on the 828. I could live with the weight of the discoverer if the optics were noticeably better but I doubt I could tell the difference in the two.

I think I've decided on the Swifts. Hopefully the company can keep a following and stay in business.

Thank you again,
Mike