[namaste]

Hi,
I have been thinking of getting a pair of Swift Audubon 8.5x44 BWCF's is the ED versions worth the £90 premium. I understand that views are subjective but does anyone have experience of both models.
Thanks Richard.

[BobinKy]

Richard...

The ED version of the Swift Audubon 820 8.5x44 is definitely worth the premium. I have tried both versions in this model. The colors are more vibrant yet still true and the contrast is more striking. Similar to eating a cold potato or a hot potato with butter and sour cream.

...Bob
Kentucky, USA

[ronh]

Bob,
This is a fine example of the notorious "subjectivity of view". But, you are selling them, man!
Ron

[BobinKy]

RonH...

You are right.

...

Richard...

The only way you are going to know for sure if the ED version is worth 90 more pounds is to have both models in your hand and ask yourself if the ED version is worth the extra 90 pounds. No one can answer this question but you--and whoever might help you spend those extra 90 pounds!!!

Best of luck.

...Bob
Kentucky, USA

[chartwell99]

Originally Posted by BobinKy

Richard...

The ED version of the Swift Audubon 820 8.5x44 is definitely worth the premium. I have tried both versions in this model. The colors are more vibrant yet still true and the contrast is more striking. Similar to eating a cold potato or a hot potato with butter and sour cream.

...Bob
Kentucky, USA

The ED version is also better sealed against dust and moisture (although neither version is "waterproof").

[Vámibimbero]

Dear Richard,

I have seen both normal and ED Swift Audubon. And without any doubt I have purchased the ED model. It has an excellent and very sharp picture with extremely natural color rendition. It is a rather subjective point of view, but I have to confess that for my eyes this bino produces almost as good image than a Zeiss Victory. And there is a big gap between the two prices.

Regards,

Vámi

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by BobinKy

Similar to eating a cold potato or a hot potato with butter and sour cream.
...Bob
Kentucky, USA

Well, it looks like I get to try Bob's two potato theory. I ordered an 820 ED last week and when it got here today, it proved to be the non ED 820. So back it goes on Monday. I'm on the verge of getting really testy with the outfit I ordered this from, but stuff happens and I'll see how efficiently they correct it.

The non ED 820 is optically very close from my non ED 804, except for a closer focus and the 804 seems to have better control of color fringing.

So, when I finally get the 820 ED, I'll have a better idea about which potato I like best.

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by BobinKy

Similar to eating a cold potato or a hot potato with butter and sour cream.

So that would make a non-ED roof something like eating a a cold Yam and an ED roof like hot sweet potatoes with marshmallow on the top.

Or is it more like broccoli and cauliflower ...

I await Steve C's 820ED comparison with some interest ... who are the miscreants who don't know the difference between ED and non-ED? Name names!

[Steve C]

Well, there is apparently yet another addled page in the history of the Swift Audubon porro 8.5x44. After several calls between myself and the dealer, myself and Swift and Swift and the dealer, it appears there is another mystery which will hinder ready identification of the Swift Audubon. This one affects the 820 and 820 ED.

With the introduction of the 820, the ED model had black armor and a red Swift Logo on the upper left barrel. There has been a foul up in a production and now there are 820 ED's out there that have the Gray rubber armor and the Yellow Swift logo of the non ED model. When I saw the gray armored binocular sporting the Yellow logo appear from the box clearly marked 820 ED, the conclusion I reached was that I had a box that had somehow been mispacked with a standard 820. The only way to identify these is that the 820 ED weighs 30 oz and the standard 820 weighs 24 oz. That's it. There is no size difference, not even slight color variation, just the weight. Even the markings on the end of the hinge indicate standard 820. Mine weighed 30 oz smack on the button. Tim at Swift weighed several and the 24/30 oz comparison seems valid. That is without the lens and objective caps.

If you ordered an 820 ED and were unaware of this, and if the binocular is Gray, I would weigh the binocular as a double check. If is gets confused with a standard 820 on a trip, there is no way short of a scale to tell the two apart. I have no idea what happens if the weight comes up 26-28 oz. Swift can probably tell from the serial number. I gave them the serial number of mine and asked for a letter from them verifying it is an ED binocular. That way I will know what it is and can offer some proof that it is an ED should I ever decide to sell it. They seemed particularly willing to do this.

My 804 Audubon is on its way back from Nicholas Crista. I have for now decided to keep the 820 ED. Since I assumed it was a standard model, I just re-boxed it and used it hardly at all. So when I get the 804 back, a more thorough comparison will be done with it and the 820 ED, as well as with the ZEN and Promaster ED binoculars.

I guess I have still to decide how hot the potato is. I got a little hot in the apparent run around it looked like I was getting. Hot enough I felt I needed to issue a couple of apologies.

[Charltonfan]

I bought a pair of the Swift HHS roofs for my wife recently. I compared them to the ED audubons and didn't think there was much in it other than the roofs were much nicer to hold and with better eye relief. The FOV was a fair bit narrower than the Porroprism bins though but still good enough. Also tried the Hawke Frontier 8x43 ED. Although they were a similar price, optically they were much better than the Swifts. It was only the slow and rough focus and slightly worse build quality that put me off. Might be worth a comparison though

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by namaste

Hi,
I have been thinking of getting a pair of Swift Audubon 8.5x44 BWCF's is the ED versions worth the £90 premium. I understand that views are subjective but does anyone have experience of both models.
Thanks Richard.

Richard,

I have the impression that the Non-ED version is slightly brighter than the ED one. The ED version seems to be very slighty more contrasty. Colour fringes at the Non-ED don´t bother me.

Steve

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by Charltonfan

I Although they were a similar price, optically they were much better than the Swifts. It was only the slow and rough focus and slightly worse build quality that put me off. Might be worth a comparison though

Yes, from your observation a comparison is in order. The fast look I gave the 820 ED and the ZEN and Promaster ED roofs showed mighty slim differences. Initial impressions were depth of field went to the Swift, FOV looked a lot wider in the Swift, even though there is only 4' difference @1,000 yds. Colors seemed pretty close and sharpness might have to go to the two roofs. But a more through observation is needed.

[Kevin Purcell]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Well, there is apparently yet another addled page in the history of the Swift Audubon porro 8.5x44. After several calls between myself and the dealer, myself and Swift and Swift and the dealer, it appears there is another mystery which will hinder ready identification of the Swift Audubon. This one affects the 820 and 820 ED.

With the introduction of the 820, the ED model had black armor and a red Swift Logo on the upper left barrel. There has been a foul up in a production and now there are 820 ED's out there that have the Gray rubber armor and the Yellow Swift logo of the non ED model. When I saw the gray armored binocular sporting the Yellow logo appear from the box clearly marked 820 ED, the conclusion I reached was that I had a box that had somehow been mispacked with a standard 820. The only way to identify these is that the 820 ED weighs 30 oz and the standard 820 weighs 24 oz. That's it. There is no size difference, not even slight color variation, just the weight. Even the markings on the end of the hinge indicate standard 820. Mine weighed 30 oz smack on the button. Tim at Swift weighed several and the 24/30 oz comparison seems valid. That is without the lens and objective caps.

It probably won't happen but Swift should put a list of serials for their "bad batch" on the web site. Might I ask what the first few digits of your one is (it would give people a clue).

I wonder how many they produced this way?

I'm also a little surprised that there aren't any other markings on the bin ... I guess the rest of it is rubber armor but they could put an indication on the bridge pivot cap (or perhaps they did and got that wrong too ... consistent at least).

[Steve C]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

I wonder how many they produced this way?

I'm also a little surprised that there aren't any other markings on the bin ... I guess the rest of it is rubber armor but they could put an indication on the bridge pivot cap (or perhaps they did and got that wrong too ... consistent at least).

They can tell by serial number and I was told they will try to post the serial number ranges. At any rate, they will check your serial number if you ask.

I think this was a factory production foul up. The assembly line was producing ED's and the parts (rubber armour, logo, and the cap on the end of the hinge) on hand at the end of the line was for the non ED, so there was a run of ED binoculars that got the whole non ED costume, hence no ED distinguishing markings. This was the last run right when the company was changing ownership recently, so a communication foul up seems most likely.

At any rate weight them and see.

[dbuss]

Originally Posted by Steve C

Yes, from your observation a comparison is in order. The fast look I gave the 820 ED and the ZEN and Promaster ED roofs showed mighty slim differences. Initial impressions were depth of field went to the Swift, FOV looked a lot wider in the Swift, even though there is only 4' difference @1,000 yds. Colors seemed pretty close and sharpness might have to go to the two roofs. But a more through observation is needed.

The Swift 820 ED and the Zen Ray ED 10x43 make an excellent set of binoculars that would satisfy most birding needs for well less than $1,000 combined. As an owner of both, I am quite satisfied with their superior optical performance and ease of handling. The Zen Rays do quite nicely for distant birds at shorelines while the Swifts are great for wooded areas with their wide field of view. If you must choose between the two, start with the Swift 820 EDs and then add the Zen Rays as your needs dictate.
Dennis

[Steve C]

Well Bob in KY's hot potato/cold potato question is one I cannot answer. After having the 820 ED (allegedly ED) binocular for awhile now, it cannot convince me that it does in fact possess ED glass. It shows absolutely no optical improvement over the Audubon 804 I have. It may be a tiny bit brighter, but that is to be expected since my 804 is from 1999 and coatings should be a little better now. Other comments on the 820 ED made reference to the fact the 820 ED was not as bright as the non ED, but the color and contrast was much improved. The 820 also focuses somewhat closer. But color rendition, contrast, CA control, edge distortion and other image parameters are such that I can really tell no practical difference between the two.

Edit: Both the 820 and 804 are very good binoculars, very close (at the least) to alpha quality. So I guess I'd have to say they are both hot potatoes with butter and sour cream, but without bacon bits and chives. I just can't be sure the 820 is ED.

The 820 is really the only binocular where I have ever had any real objection to the eye cups. The oculars on the 820 are the same size as the objective of the Leupold Yosemite. The covers interchange perfectly. That is too large for hard use in a long day with the 820 as the primary optical instrument. The old fold down rubber eye cups and the smaller diameter of the ocular assembly (the ocular lenses are the same size in both 804 and 820) of the 804 are clearly superior for me. I also do not use glasses, even at 61, with binoculars, so that is a non issue for me. The ergonomics of the 820 are clearly superior to the 804, especially if you have small hands. But the 804 is not uncomfortable for a large porro prism binocular, unless you have small hands. It seems to me that if you have small hands, you typically will be a smaller person and thus also have a smaller face, and that will magnify the objection to the large ocular diameter of the 820. The eye piece bridge is also too flimsy for my liking with an eye towards long term viability.

Also I talked with Eagle Optics in a research mode. They tell me that all of the 820 ED they have, and have ever had, are black armored and have a red logo. Further, they tell me that both the 820 and 820 ED weigh 30 oz on their scale, so that seems not to work as a determining factor.

I have until April 20 to return the 820, and it is going back. I have a line from Nicholas Crista on one of his refurbished 804 ED for a too good to turn down price, so that made the return of the 820 a no brain-er.

As a point of response to the last post from dbuss, my favored 1-2 combination with my 804 will be my 7x36 Eaglet

[elkcub]

Very interesting, Steve. I may get an 820ED from EO just to compare it with the standard 820, 804, and 804ED. That comparison has been eluding me for years, and I do have the other three — all fine-tuned by Nicolas.

Let us know how you like the 804ED when you get it. I'll bet it doesn't have black armor.

Ed

[Steve C]

I just got my 804 back from Nicholas, which may have been why it performed well. Just be sure if you bite the bullet for an 820 ED to check with the dealer and be sure it's black armored. The switched gray rubber armor story is one I'm not quite sure how to put any credence to.

I'm looking forward to that 804 ED. BTW I think you are the guy who beat me to the final bid on the last 804 ED I saw on ebay. You made your first posts on the 804 ED very shortly thereafter. I had something else to finish and forgot about the close time for that particular binocular.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Steve C

I just got my 804 back from Nicholas, which may have been why it performed well. Just be sure if you bite the bullet for an 820 ED to check with the dealer and be sure it's black armored. The switched gray rubber armor story is one I'm not quite sure how to put any credence to.

I'm looking forward to that 804 ED. BTW I think you are the guy who beat me to the final bid on the last 804 ED I saw on ebay. You made your first posts on the 804 ED very shortly thereafter. I had something else to finish and forgot about the close time for that particular binocular.

Steve,

I bought my own 804ED on eBay in 2005. The second one for Renze was bought about 2007/8. Both were conditioned by Nick at the same time. I suspect Renze's is the one you are referring to, since my purchase was kind of a fluke (or flounder). It had been mis-advertised.

Thanks. I'll keep an eye out for black armoring. BTW, do the current 820s use a twist-up eyecup, or pull up? As you may know, Nicolas invented the eyecup as an engineering fix for Hiyoshi's failed effort. His patent covers twist-up and pull-up, but Humphrey H. Swift wanted the pull-up version used on the 820. That was a mistake, but he was the boss.

Ed

PS. The best way to appreciate the 804ED is to look at BIRDS! The subtle variation in color gradation can not be appreciated looking at painted objects. Blue tones are particularly interesting, although others can also take your breath away.

[Kevin Purcell]

As you may know, Nicolas invented the eyecup as an engineering fix for Hiyoshi's failed effort. His patent covers twist-up and pull-up, but Humphrey H. Swift wanted the pull-up version used on the 820. That was a mistake, but he was the boss.

Ed, do you know what HHS's rationale was?

Like pretty much everyone else I dislike pull ups (especially if one uses rubber rainguards ... the tight fit of my after-market rainguard on my EO Raptor/Vixen Foresta porros mean the pull ups get pulled up whenever I use it. And as I wear glasses it's usually found out when a bunch of FOV has disappeared. I need some black tape

PS. The best way to appreciate the 804ED is to look at BIRDS! The subtle variation in color gradation can not be appreciated looking at painted objects. Blue tones are particularly interesting, although others can also take your breath away.

I found this too.

Even common birds (or especially common birds because they're always there for a comparison) if you get close. I find Black-capped chickadees are pretty good for this given the shading of one low saturation color into another on their bodies (grey, buff, whitish).

That said I wouldn't want to ue this to critique a bin in fall and compare it to a bin tested this was in spring. Much, much duller ... obviously worse

[Steve C]

The 820 eye cup is a twist up affair. Either all the way up or down, nothing in between. These seem to be quite prone to stay where they are put when extended. Some have remarked on the sloppy diopter, but on this one, it seems quite sung. How it will wear I can't say.

It has been a crappy weather spring. I hope to get in some birding this weekend. I have no doubt that the various shades of color from the bird world is the best way. I do want to go birding at least once with the 820 before it goes back. However the 820 image is behind the ZEN ED class roof a bit.

Kevin, you might check out Better View Desired. Ingraham's HHS review goes to philosophy a bit.

I've a wierd half notion to exchange the 820 for the 828.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

Ed, do you know what HHS's rationale was?

Like pretty much everyone else I dislike pull ups (especially if one uses rubber rainguards ... the tight fit of my after-market rainguard on my EO Raptor/Vixen Foresta porros mean the pull ups get pulled up whenever I use it. And as I wear glasses it's usually found out when a bunch of FOV has disappeared. I need some black tape

I found this too.

Even common birds (or especially common birds because they're always there for a comparison) if you get close. I find Black-capped chickadees are pretty good for this given the shading of one low saturation color into another on their bodies (grey, buff, whitish).

That said I wouldn't want to ue this to critique a bin in fall and compare it to a bin tested this was in spring. Much, much duller ... obviously worse

Kevin,

I asked Nick the same question. His answer was, that's how HHS wanted it, period. No rationale. I have the same problem with the pull-ups on my 820, which didn't arrive with a rain guard so I don't know what the originals looked like.

Yes, common birds. Initially, I was so struck by the 804ED that I got a new field guide and started to revisit all the species from scratch, based on the feeling that if I hadn't seen them with the ED, I hadn't seen them at all. That all proved to be true. Even European Starlings and House Sparrows became intensely interesting.

There is no way to get around good lighting, though, and the subtle delights of the ED disappear in poor lighting, like stale coffee.

Ed

[Kevin Purcell]

Do you mean the HHS review ...

http://www.betterviewdesired.com/Swift-HHS-Audubon.php

Doesn't mention anything about the pull up versus twist up eyecups (and HHS apparently put them on the 828!).

I see Hot Digital are on vacation for the next couple of weeks .... but that might be an interesting exchange (lighter bin with narrower FOV).

And Elkcub just crossed with me. Thanks for those notes. Apparently he'd changed his mind by the 828!

"Even European Starlings and House Sparrows became intensely interesting."

Ask most birders to correctly to describe the coloration of a House Sparrow and they can't even though the male House Sparrow is not a dull LBJ: white wing bar, anyone? And a five colored head!

Gone on ... look closely at the next one you see

[Steve C]

Kevin,

Yeah that is the review I was thinking about. I admit I goofed a bit. When you said HHS I jumped to the 828 HHS. It seems you meant the founders initials.

It is a more or less interesting trade. But I need the HHS like...well I don't know. With both the Promaster and ZEN and an 8x42 Monarch, lord knows I really do not need the 828. Curiosity can be a powerful thing. That is what I am with regard to the 838, curious.

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Kevin Purcell

Do you mean the HHS review ...

http://www.betterviewdesired.com/Swift-HHS-Audubon.php

Doesn't mention anything about the pull up versus twist up eyecups (and HHS apparently put them on the 828!).

I see Hot Digital are on vacation for the next couple of weeks .... but that might be an interesting exchange (lighter bin with narrower FOV).

And Elkcub just crossed with me. Thanks for those notes. Apparently he'd changed his mind by the 828!

"Even European Starlings and House Sparrows became intensely interesting."

Ask most birders to correctly to describe the coloration of a House Sparrow and they can't even though the male House Sparrow is not a dull LBJ: white wing bar, anyone? And a five colored head!

Gone on ... look closely at the next one you see

It really took me a while to zone in on the subtle color effects of the 804ED, but once seen they couldn't be missed or forgotten. My perceptual system reorganized.

Most people, I suspect, wind up looking for something else in their evaluation, e.g., "resolution," sharpness, brightness, flat-field, stereo, ... whatever, and go right past this property. I also have no idea whether other ED implementations, such as in the Zeiss FL, Leica, Nikon EDG, and new Chinese products, produce this effect or something entirely different. From what I've heard, it's not even clear that the 820ED "got it."

Ed