[Don Hoey]

While my wife was choosing a new pair of bins for her birthday I twice looked through the SE's among the choice she was offered and each time saw what has been posted in these forums as the blackout effect. She did too and ended up with Nikon 8X30E2's.
Following two trips to Cley marshes and the odd sneak look at home, (hard job prying them out of her hands) I decided that a new pair of bins was in order to replace my 30 year old Swifts.
Thought I might go for HG's as they were also in her line up and I liked them. So while looking at the HG's I was offered SE's to check out. Knowing the blackout experience I had on her viewing, I initially only picked them up to compare with the HG's, after all the reviews here have been very good................... No matter what I did I could not replicate the blackout effect!!! I was so impressed, even compared to roofs costing twice as much NO CONTEST I bought them.
A week later with them glued to my hands I still cannot induce any trace of blackout.
The question is, has anyone else observed this? The shop only had the one pair so I could not check.

[Zolarcon]

Originally Posted by Don Hoey

While my wife was choosing a new pair of bins for her birthday I twice looked through the SE's among the choice she was offered and each time saw what has been posted in these forums as the blackout effect. She did too and ended up with Nikon 8X30E2's.
Following two trips to Cley marshes and the odd sneak look at home, (hard job prying them out of her hands) I decided that a new pair of bins was in order to replace my 30 year old Swifts.
Thought I might go for HG's as they were also in her line up and I liked them. So while looking at the HG's I was offered SE's to check out. Knowing the blackout experience I had on her viewing, I initially only picked them up to compare with the HG's, after all the reviews here have been very good................... No matter what I did I could not replicate the blackout effect!!! I was so impressed, even compared to roofs costing twice as much NO CONTEST I bought them.
A week later with them glued to my hands I still cannot induce any trace of blackout.
The question is, has anyone else observed this? The shop only had the one pair so I could not check.

I can't induce black out with my SE.

Carlos

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Don Hoey

While my wife was choosing a new pair of bins for her birthday I twice looked through the SE's among the choice she was offered and each time saw what has been posted in these forums as the blackout effect. She did too and ended up with Nikon 8X30E2's.
Following two trips to Cley marshes and the odd sneak look at home, (hard job prying them out of her hands) I decided that a new pair of bins was in order to replace my 30 year old Swifts.
Thought I might go for HG's as they were also in her line up and I liked them. So while looking at the HG's I was offered SE's to check out. Knowing the blackout experience I had on her viewing, I initially only picked them up to compare with the HG's, after all the reviews here have been very good................... No matter what I did I could not replicate the blackout effect!!! I was so impressed, even compared to roofs costing twice as much NO CONTEST I bought them.
A week later with them glued to my hands I still cannot induce any trace of blackout.
The question is, has anyone else observed this? The shop only had the one pair so I could not check.

Don,

The first time I picked up an SE 8X32 I saw the blackout and said "not for me". I purchased a pair for my wife and found that, if I sacrificed a tiny bit of the FOV, I could completely eliminate blackouts. I bought a second pair for myself and everytime I use them I'm still amazed by their magic.

John

[Leif]

It might be that you had the wrong intra-ocular distance when you first tried them. I don't think that Nikon have made any chances to the optical formula, though Japanese manufacturers are renowned for making small improvements to products even after release.

I have never experienced black-outs with my 8x32 SE, though the small 4mm exit pupils are not so easy as 5mm ones. However, I don't discount the reports of other users who do experience black outs. I suspect that it is a minority of users (or rather of those who have tested them) though only a survey would find the truth of that statement. It could also be that some peoples faces are such as to induce black outs i.e. the shape of the eye sockets in relation to the eyes.

Leif

[solentbirder]

I had a pair of 8x32 SE's and suffered from the black-out issue constantly so eventually sold them despite the brilliant optics. The problem for me is that I need to keep my glasses on and try as I might I couldn't get the rubber eye-cups to fold down to give exactly the right eye-relief for my eyes/glasses. To replace them I bought the Nikon 8x32 HG and I'm delighted with them - excellent optically and easy to set the right eye-relief due to the adjustable twist-up eye-cups. Surely Nikon should get round to installing twist-up eye-cups on the SE's ?

[Leif]

Originally Posted by solentbirder

Surely Nikon should get round to installing twist-up eye-cups on the SE's ?

I wish they would, but I suspect that Nikon are not willing to pay the tooling up costs for something that probably does not sell in shed loads. Leif

[Stewart J.]

Yo all, recently purchased a pair of 8 x 42 HGL's, wear specs and suffer from blackout with eye cups pushed fully home, this instantley cured by twisting cup just slight off bottom position. Problem was it kept moving back as there is no click stop at this position, so cured it by fitting a rubber O-Ring below cup for it to bottom on.

Suffer blackout problem with my Leica telescope using 20-60 zoom eyepiece at its lowest mag but again slight adjustment of the eye cup cures it.

Stewart

[henry link]

Originally Posted by Leif

I wish they would, but I suspect that Nikon are not willing to pay the tooling up costs for something that probably does not sell in shed loads. Leif

Something as simple and cheap as an alternative rubber eyecup that folds down to a lip about 2 or 3mm farther out from the back of the eyepiece would probably fix the problem for most people who experience it. Even the supplied eyecup can be carefully folded to produce a little deeper lip.

[Don Hoey]

Today I have by accident answered my question on SE blackout.
2 hours of birding at Titchwell on the north Norfolk coast and then it happened a blackout.
On investigation it was all down to how I put the bins to my eye. I set out in hazy conditions likely to turn to bright sunshine so wore a baseball cap, until I faced into bright sunshine I had worn the cap high on my head but in bright sunshine I had pulled the brim down in order to see more comfortably. When I put the bins up to my eye it was straight on and too deeply set to get past the brim. I normally rest the top of the eyecup on my brow as I had been doing so until then.
Back home and a bit of checking out and I think its all about eye relief. Knowledgable bins guys may know better but here goes........

My old bins that I replaced with the SE's are Swift 8x40 Wide Angle model 779 at least 25 years old. Very short eye relief - cannot use glasses with these - eyecup depth is 5mm. Without glasses on you can view at any angle or jamb them into your eye socket with no sign of optical blackout.

My wife has Nikon 8x20 E2's with an eye relief of 13.8mm and eyecup depth of 8mm. I can achieve a partial blackout only if put to the eye straight on and pressed into the eye tightly enough to be uncomfortable.

My Nikon 8x32SE has an eye relief of 17.4mm and an eyecup depth of 11.66mm. Blackout can be achieved without glasses by putting the bins to the eye straight on with the bottom part of the eyecup touching or nearly touching the skin below the eye. I found that if the bins are held as I normally do with the top rim of the eyecup against my brow and the bottom of the eyecup, (my wife just measured it) 12mm away from the skin below the eye I cannot induce blackout.

Users and prospective users of SEs will find that without glasses holding the top rim against the brow naturaly means the bottom will naturally fall at the correct point. There is no need to worry about acheiving 12mm.

Blackout therefore appears to happen if the bins are viewed at less than eye relief. I have just checked this with my scope Nikon 82ED and 30 wide eyepiece with turn and slide eyecups. No glasses and eyecup extended unable to induce blackout, you are naturaly guided for eye placement by the cup. Eyecup screwed down, therefore viewing inside the eye relief, partial blackout can be achieved if the eye is placed off centre.

I agree with others that have posted in respect of Nikon fitting turn and slide eyecups but perhaps only a market as large as the U.S.A. demanding this, could bring this about.

I hope readers of this post will find this helpful if they are users or potential users of SEs.

My thoughts on Nikon 8x32SE .......... absolutly the best bins you can buy if clarity and brightness of image is your top priority. Would not be without them now I have worked this out. As I don't birdwatch underwater I don't need waterproof bins, if it rains I just tuck them inside my jacket. The cash saving over roofs allowed me to buy my 2 wide angles for the scope.

My thoughts on Nikon 8x30E2 ......... second only to the SE's

Comments on any of the above welcome

[Otto McDiesel]

[/quote]
My thoughts on Nikon 8x32SE .......... absolutly the best bins you can buy if clarity and brightness of image is your top priority. Would not be without them now I have worked this out. As I don't birdwatch underwater I don't need waterproof bins, if it rains I just tuck them inside my jacket. The cash saving over roofs allowed me to buy my 2 wide angles for the scope.

My thoughts on Nikon 8x30E2 ......... second only to the SE's

Comments on any of the above welcome[/quote]


Same goes for 10x35 EII and 10x42 SE (i prefer the EII for the wide angle). Boy, i am glad i am not the only one thinking this way. You know, when an entire village tells you that you are crazy...A few months ago I actually went to the store with the credit card in my wallet, checked the top roof binos, and ended up not buying anything and going home happy that i already have my Nikon EII and Celestron ED. I may not be crazy after all...

[Don Hoey]

Hi Otto
You will be pleased to know that my wife disagrees with my ranking and puts the EII in front of the SE for the extra wide angle and less possibility of blackout.
When buying hers she checked out a shed load including top end roof bins and says no contest!!

Don

[Pinewood]

Don et al,

A contributor to this forum Kimmo Kabsetz, of Alula magazine, also thinks highly of the 8x30 E2. As an unhappy owner of an 8x32 SE, I have wanted to look at the E2, but my usual New York vendors do not seem to have one available, when I visit their shops. It was also unavailable from a Chicago vendor. I hope to try one soon.
In the meantime, I use either roof prisms or rather old Porro binoculars.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Otto McDiesel

... Same goes for 10x35 EII and 10x42 SE (i prefer the EII for the wide angle). Boy, i am glad i am not the only one thinking this way. You know, when an entire village tells you that you are crazy...A few months ago I actually went to the store with the credit card in my wallet, checked the top roof binos, and ended up not buying anything and going home happy that i already have my Nikon EII and Celestron ED. I may not be crazy after all...

Could someone please comment about the 10x35 EII vs. the 10x35 E based on personal experience? Please don't refer me to Steve Ingraham's BVD article because it is very confusing and doesn't really address that issue. I'm interested to know if the E has equivalent optical qualities as the EII, with perhaps a difference in construction/cosmetics. If not, what? Nowadays both are hard to find. A related question is how the E compares with the SE — which, based on Steve's statements, simply can't be equalled anywhere in the known universe (or words to that effect). You've probably guessed that I own a 10x35E.

Thanks,
Elkcub

[DavidP]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Could someone please comment about the 10x35 EII vs. the 10x35 E based on personal experience? Please don't refer me to Steve Ingraham's BVD article because it is very confusing and doesn't really address that issue. I'm interested to know if the E has equivalent optical qualities as the EII, with perhaps a difference in construction/cosmetics. If not, what? Nowadays both are hard to find. A related question is how the E compares with the SE — which, based on Steve's statements, simply can't be equalled anywhere in the known universe (or words to that effect). You've probably guessed that I own a 10x35E.

Thanks,
Elkcub

I'm afraid I don't have both in the same magnification but do have a 8x30 EII and a 10x42SE. Based upon general ergonomics and view I can't really see much of a difference between the two both give good views. I think the great advantage of the EII's is the amazingly wide field of view which I find to be much easier to view and gives a more pleasant field. At the 10X the SE has 314ft at 1000yds whilst the EII has 366ft; at 8x its even more pronounced with the EII at 461ft whilst the SE has 393ft.
I think i prefer having the wide field of view.

Dave

[henry link]

elk,

I recently compared an 8X30 E and an 8X30 EII. Like you I suspected that only the bodies had been changed, not the optics. This was in a store and I didn't have time for any real qualitative judgements, but I could see by comparing the pattern of reflections returning from the eyepiece elements and the objectives that the optics of the EII are a bit different from the old E. In addition, if your old 10X35 E doesn't have the green multi-coatings then the 10X35 EII will be much brighter. BTW, the dealer told me that the EII's are soon to be discontinued.

Henry

[Otto McDiesel]

elk,

About 12 years ago i had the chance to look through a 10x35 E. The wow factor was so great, that i still remember those binoculars and what i saw through them (some redshanks and curlew sandpipers in breeding plumage). Tells you a lot...

[Pinewood]

Originally Posted by henry link

elk,

BTW, the dealer told me that the EII's are soon to be discontinued.

Henry

Henry,

This may explain its absence from store shelves in New York and in Chicago.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

[elkcub]

Thanks all,

Your comments really help. My 10x35 E is currently being realigned by Nikon and when is comes back I'll be able to confirm that it does have green coatings — which I recall. I've also asked Nikon to fix the short focus, which should be 10-14 ft. according to my catalogs, but on mine is closer to 21 ft.

Elkcub

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Pinewood

Henry,

This may explain its absence from store shelves in New York and in Chicago.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

Arthur,

The Nikon model number for the E2 is 7410 and the Google search "Nikon 7410" results in several hits. B&H in NY city has them in stock.

Best of luck to you.

John

[Pinewood]

Hello,

My tax refund came and I have ordered an 8x30 E2, from a well known binocular vendor, who had it, in stock. I now have quite a collection of obsolescent binoculars.
I may be able to compare the E2 with the SE and my "reference standard" for this category. I hope to share my findings.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Pinewood

Hello,

My tax refund came and I have ordered an 8x30 E2, from a well known binocular vendor, who had it, in stock. I now have quite a collection of obsolescent binoculars.
I may be able to compare the E2 with the SE and my "reference standard" for this category. I hope to share my findings.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

Hello Arthur,

What is your "reference standard"?

-elk

[Pinewood]

Originally Posted by elkcub

Hello Arthur,

What is your "reference standard"?

-elk

Elk,

As I have neither mustered the glasses, nor my energy nor my time, I will not provide forum members with more information, in anticipation of fulfilling my desire to share my impressions of the E2. Suffice it to write that the comparison will be with a Porro glass of the same general specs as one of the Nikons. Anything else would be unfair. This thread already has one comparison between the E2 and the SE. I hope to provide another perspective. Perhaps I will only reinforce what Don Hoey wrote.
I will allow that I generally find a wide field of view may count for more than a flat field and that I am not as particular about ergonomics as some. Indeed my interest in the E2 was initiated by Kimmo, who analyzed it in one of his Alula articles. ETA of the Nikon is Monday, so it will be a while.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

[elkcub]

Originally Posted by Otto McDiesel

elk,

About 12 years ago i had the chance to look through a 10x35 E. The wow factor was so great, that i still remember those binoculars and what i saw through them (some redshanks and curlew sandpipers in breeding plumage). Tells you a lot...

Otto,

Sorry to respond so late. I'll probably find curlews but will have to get along with yellowlegs. Interesting that you should be able to remember that far back. Encouraging...

-elk

[Pinewood]

Elkcub et al,

The 8x30/32 category of binoculars is considered to be useful for almost
all daylight bird watching. My only reservation to that assertion is
observing birds under the forest canopy or in shrubbery on overcast
wintry days. The great advantage of this size is that a widefield
glass does not require cumbersome prisms. This is why most marques
will have a wider field in this configuration than in 8x42, as the
latter would require oversize prisms, which would be heavy and rather
unfashionable in roof prism binoculars. These three binoculars are of
the Porro design.

The Leitz Binuxit was made from 1927 to 1962. My example of the
model was made in 1951, when coating had been introduced for the air
to glass lens surfaces but probably not for the air to glass prism
surfaces. Mine also use replacement eyecups which have a few mm.
of folding rubber cups to make some accommodation for wearers of spectacles.
The original eyecups were rigid. The other accommodation is a very
broad dioptre accommodation in the focussing arrangements. My sample
suffers from yellowing balsam, a problem peculiar to some German
glasses made at that time. Another sample is free of this problem.

The Nikon E series binoculars were alleged to be copies of a
contemporary Zeiss design of the3 1950's. The SE glasses were supposed to be "Superior E's," while the E2 may have a modified optical design from
the orginal. The current E2 and the SE have multicoating.

My complaint, which is not uncommon, is that the SE suffers from "kidney
bean" or blackout effect, especially for wearers of spectacles.
Remedies include folding the eyecups a few mms. shy of fully down or
holding the binocular tipped up slightly. The former does not completely
cure the problem and the latter makes holding the binocular different from
the other glasses which I use. This fault has been laid to excessinve eye
relief or to spherical aberrations of the eyepiece.

All three may require a little effort to align the objectives, the oculars
and the user's pupils. With an exit pupil fo 3.75 or 4.0 mm., there is less
forgiveness than with larger exit pupils.

Eye Relief
E2 13.8 mm., which I would call adequate
SE 17.4 mm.
Binuxit just gosh awful poor
However both the Binuxit and the E2 have sufficient dioptre compensation to reach -7.5, which I require. The SE does not quite get that far. Therefore I can use the E2 and the Binuxit without my spectacles, mitigating their less than generous eye relief.

Field of View
E2 461 feet at 1000 yds, according to Eagle Optics, 8.8º according to
the engravings on the glass. My arithmetic yield 8.84º with the 461
feet measurement. In any case this is an apparent Field of View of
more than 70 degrees.
SE 393 feet, or 7.53º according to my calculations
The Binuxit has been posted at 8.5º which is 443 feet and sometimes
as 450 feet.

The ideal way of measuring FOV is to use the binocular at night with
star charts against measured displacement of celestial targets, like
the belt of Orion. Please see
http://www.cloudynights.com/howto/bino-measure.htm
Unfortunately, New York's summer skies do not allow me to use this method to check the manufacturers assertions.

I would have to write that the E2's larger field is very attractive and makes
this glass very comfortable and easy to use.

Focussing
All three have stiff focussing, which might be a problem in cold weather and all three would benefit from larger focussing wheels.

Ergonomics
All three are small binoculars, which might present a problem to those
with big hands. They all suited me. The E2 has a faux pebbled leather covering, while the SE has a rubber covering, for a good grip and a little shock absorbing from minor jolts. The E2 also has sloping shoulders which gives it a nice appearance, but is of no consequence in use.

Edge sharpness
The best is the SE, with less than 10%,maybe 8%, of the edge showing fuzziness. The E2 has about 10 or 12% fuzzy. This means between 76 and 80% of the E2 field is sharp. Essentially, the E2 has the same usable field as the SE, but with a little extra field to catch peripheral activity. The Binuxit came in third, but with 15% fuzzy, that leaves 70% sharp. Perhaps a little more is acceptably sharp.

Center Sharpness
All three binoculars have more than acceptable center sharpness, resolving fine details. If anything, the Leitz has the highest center resolution, but multicoating has given the Nikons more contrast which provides the snap that improves the perception of sharpness.
At night, all three binoculars provided point images of stars, a crucial test. All three resolved moons of Jupiter, as well.

Brightness
The Leitz is a distant third. The two Nikons are close, but I'll give the
SE the edge. Maybe the extra 2 mm of the objective or better multicoatings are the reason.

Internal Reflections or Ghost images
All three show internal reflection. When pointed at Antares, two row of dots or lines appeared at the bottom of the field. When pointed at Jupiter, a circle appeared in the lower left part of the field. Experimentation showed that it was ambient light entering at the ocular. Use of the extended eyecups, in the cases of the E2 and the Binuxit fixed that. For the SE I had to cup my hand around the ocular as I cannot focus the SE on infinity without my specs. Alternatively, I could have used my specs and had a reduced field. [This problem was greatly reduced with the Leica BN but I should not really write about that]

Colour
I will pass on this attribute as I can only recognise gross shifts.

Conclusions
I should hang up the Binuxit or put it on the collector's shelf. For an eighty year
old design, updated half a century, ago, it put on a good show. Between the two Nikons,
my personal bias allows the E2 to trump the Se. At half the price, it would also be a
recommendation for anyone looking in the $300 and less category.

For a review of the E2 in comparison to other glasses, by Kimmo Absetz, see
http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm select optical reviews, then
select 4/2003
Holger Merlitz compares the SE with other glasses in
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/nikon8x32.html

In addition to thanking Kimmo Absetz, I would also like to thank Dr. Merlitz and Claudio of Cloudynights for recommendations before I purschased the E2.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Pinewood

Elkcub et al,

The 8x30/32 category of binoculars is considered to be useful for almost
all daylight bird watching. My only reservation to that assertion is
observing birds under the forest canopy or in shrubbery on overcast

wintry days. The great advantage of this size is that a widefield
glass does not require cumbersome prisms. This is why most marques
will have a wider field in this configuration than in 8x42, as the
latter would require oversize prisms, which would be heavy and rather
unfashionable in roof prism binoculars. These three binoculars are of
the Porro design.

The Leitz Binuxit was made from 1927 to 1962. My example of the
model was made in 1951, when coating had been introduced for the air
to glass lens surfaces but probably not for the air to glass prism
surfaces. Mine also use replacement eyecups which have a few mm.
of folding rubber cups to make some accommodation for wearers of spectacles.
The original eyecups were rigid. The other accommodation is a very
broad dioptre accommodation in the focussing arrangements. My sample
suffers from yellowing balsam, a problem peculiar to some German
glasses made at that time. Another sample is free of this problem.

The Nikon E series binoculars were alleged to be copies of a
contemporary Zeiss design of the3 1950's. The SE glasses were supposed to be "Superior E's," while the E2 may have a modified optical design from
the orginal. The current E2 and the SE have multicoating.

My complaint, which is not uncommon, is that the SE suffers from "kidney
bean" or blackout effect, especially for wearers of spectatles.
Remedies include folding the eyecups a few mms. shy of fully down or
holding the binocular tipped up slightly. The former does not completely
cure the problem and the latter makes holding the binocular different from
the other glasses which I use. This fault has been laid to excessinve eye
relief or to spherical aberrations of the eyepiece.

All three may require a little effort to align the objectives, the oculars
and the user's pupils. With an exit pupil fo 3.75 or 4.0 mm., there is less
forgiveness than with larger exit pupils.

Eye Relief
E2 13.8 mm., which I would call adequate
SE 17.4 mm.
Binuxit just gosh awful poor
However both the Binuxit and the E2 have sufficient dioptre compensation to reach -7.5, which I require. The SE does not quite get that far. Therefore I can use the E2 and the Binuxit without my spectacles, mitigating their less than generous eye relief.

Field of View
E2 461 feet at 1000 yds, according to Eagle Optics, 8.8º according to
the engravings on the glass. My arithmetic yield 8.84º with the 461
feet measurement. In any case this is an apparent Field of View of
more than 70 degrees.
SE 393 feet, or 7.53º according to my calculations
The Binuxit has been posted at 8.5º which is 443 feet and sometimes
as 450 feet.

The ideal way of measuring FOV is to use the binocular at night with
star charts against measured displacement of celestial targets, like
the belt of Orion. Please see
http://www.cloudynights.com/howto/bino-measure.htm
Unfortunately, New York's summer skies do not allow me to use this method to check the manufacturers assertions.

I would have to write that the E2's larger field is very attractive and makes
this glass very comfortable and easy to use.

Focussing
All three have stiff focussing, which might be a problem in cold weather and all three would benefit from larger focussing wheels.

Ergonomics
All three are small binoculars, which might present a problem to those
with big hands. They all suited me. The E2 has a faux pebbled leather covering, while the SE has a rubber covering, for a good grip and a little shock absorbing from minor jolts. The E2 also has sloping shoulders which gives it a nice appearance, but is of no consequence in use.

Edge sharpness
The best is the SE, with less than 10%,maybe 8%, of the edge showing fuzziness. The E2 has about 10 or 12% fuzzy. This means between 76 and 80% of the E2 field is sharp. Essentially, the E2 has the same usable field as the SE, but with a little extra field to catch peripheral activity. The Binuxit came in third, but with 15% fuzzy, that leaves 70% sharp. Perhaps a little more is acceptably sharp.

Center Sharpness
All three binoculars have more than acceptable center sharpness, resolving fine details. If anything, the Leitz has the highest center resolution, but multicoating has given the Nikons more contrast which provides the snap that improves the perception of sharpness.
At night, all three binoculars provided point images of stars, a crucial test. All three resolved moons of Jupiter, as well.

Brightness
The Leitz is a distant third. The two Nikons are close, but I'll give the
SE the edge. Maybe the extra 2 mm of the objective or better multicoatings are the reason.

Internal Reflections or Ghost images
All three show internal reflection. When pointed at Antares, two row of dots or lines appeared at the bottom of the field. When pointed at Jupiter, a circle appeared in the lower left part of the field. Experimentation showed that it was amvient light entering at the ocular. Use of the extended eyecups, in the cases of the E2 and the Binuxit fixed that. For the SE I had to cup my hand around the ocular as I cannot focus the SE on infinity without my specs. Alternatively, I could have used my specs and had a reduced field. [This problem was greatly reduced with the Leica BN but I should not really write about that]

Colour
I will pass on this attribute as I can only recognise gross shifts.

Conclusions
I should hang up the Binuxit or put it on the collector's shelf. For an eighty year
old design, updated half a century, ago, it put on a good show. Between the two Nikons,
my personal bias allows the E2 to trump the Se. At half the price, it would also be a
recommendation for anyone looking in the $300 and less category.

For a review of the E2 in comparison to other glasses, by Kimmo Absetz, see
http://www.alula.fi/GB/index.htm select optical reviews, then
select 4/2003
Holger Merlitz compares the SE with other glasses in
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/nikon8x32.html

In addition to thanking Kimmo Agsetz, I would also like to thank Dr. Merlitz and Claudio of Cloudynights for recommendations before I purschased the E2.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

Arthur,

I trust the E2 is all you hoped it to be. There's nothing like the view from a bright, sharp, porro.

John