Chronology of focus wheel styles & eye cup styles? (1 Viewer)

[Charlie Yardbird]

So Swift focus wheels had long striped on the axle, fat striped on the axle, wheel in front of the cover...
Anybody have a table describing these changes chronologically?
Did changes happen at about the same time all across the brand as a style decision?

 

[Bino Steve]

I can only imagine a Swift collector could give you some insight. Curious your interest in wanting to know this. Swift , like most all the others were distributors of Japanese made binoculars. If you bought enough, you could put your name on it. I'm not sure if Swift stuck with the same JB mfg all the years or not. I have had several, still a few around here. My guess is they used many different JB mfgs over the years. Often that long focus wheel id's it as Swift. But there were other brands who had that and were possibly the same JB number as the Swift.

 

[Charlie Yardbird]

Well, I'm primarily interested in figuring out the approx date of manufacture for Swifts.
At some point they abandoned eccentric objective mounts & went with prism screws.
That's the main difference I want to discern when I see one for sale.
I want to find a junker with eccentric mounts so I can take it apart & see how it works.
Or another brand, but trying to figure date of manufacture is tough, and there is a body of knowledge re Swifts.

 

[Bino Steve]

If you go over to miniaturebinoculars.com, I think catalog #7 mfgs starting with letters O to T, there are several Swift catalogs in pdf on there. Maybe you can recognize the models you have and it will give you clue to the years.
Good luck.

 

[elkcub]

Well, I'm primarily interested in figuring out the approx date of manufacture for Swifts.
At some point they abandoned eccentric objective mounts & went with prism screws.
That's the main difference I want to discern when I see one for sale.
I want to find a junker with eccentric mounts so I can take it apart & see how it works.
Or another brand, but trying to figure date of manufacture is tough, and there is a body of knowledge re Swifts.

A great deal of info. about Swift binoculars can be found on this thread where we discovered that after 1960, which is when Swift Instruments was first incorporated, the first two digits of the s/n show the year of manufacture. This holds up for Tamron and Hiyoshi Kogaku products and probably the others as well. The attached PDF file shows the historical progression of the Swift Audubon 8.5x44 binoculars but it wasn't updated to refine the approximate dates of manufacture. I believe the use of prism screws started about 1985 with the introduction of Type 4a, or the 804R. That's the one shown on the first page.

Ed

 

[Bino Steve]

Great reminder of that thread Ed. I've run across it before. Not to diverge from Charlie's question, buy I recently sold my 804R. Didn't get the WOW out of it I was expecting for such a revered instrument. I've found all the Swifts I've owned tend to render color bluish gray, so have sold.

 

[elkcub]

Great reminder of that thread Ed. I've run across it before. Not to diverge from Charlie's question, buy I recently sold my 804R. Didn't get the WOW out of it I was expecting for such a revered instrument. I've found all the Swifts I've owned tend to render color bluish gray, so have sold.

Steve,

During the fifteen year evolution of the standard Type 4, several coating changes were made from Multi-Coated (MC) to Fully Multi-Coated (FMC). There were at least three MC versions (including the 804R), and one or two FMC versions. The 804ED also had at least two FMC versions. They each had slightly different visual properties. But, of course, we will never know objectively how these coatings really differ to a standard human observer since no one has elected to calculate any binoculars' luminosity, dominant wavelength, and excitation purity according to the CIE Color Specification System.*

Ed

* This could be done automatically whenever a transmission spectrum is measured. (See attached.)

 

[Bino Steve]

Thanks for the additional information. I did a side by side of my 804R, Triton, Saratoga and Nighthawk, all rendered unfavorable compared to naked eye and compared to other binoculars of similar vintage. It may be just my preference, but I at least would like it to match my naked eye coloring. So like I said, all sold , except my mint Sportcaster. Too cool of a shape.

 

[elkcub]

Personally, the 804R is one of my favorites.

 

[Bino Steve]

Glad it worked for you. I expected to get a good price. Sold for a measly $38. Guess not that desirable anymore.

 

[Charlie Yardbird]

Lots of clues, keep it coming
"I believe the use of prism screws started about 1985 with the introduction of Type 4a, or the 804R."
I thought it was about 20 years earlier.
So basically, the look of 1960's vs the look of 1980's styles.
And the names of new styles starting in the '80's

Does Swift have 2 eccentrics? Do they all use the same sort of fastening framework?
So having figured out one model, you are good for all models?

"They each had slightly different visual properties. But, of course, we will never know objectively how these coatings really differ to a standard human observer since no one has elected to calculate any binoculars' luminosity, dominant wavelength, and excitation purity according to the CIE Color Specification System.*"

That would be interesting. Who has that equipment? We could send examples for testing.
I wonder if the coatings degrade over the years.
How does fogging effect coated glass?
Any such age related changes could be estimated by using several samples of each model, or even each year of manufacture - graph a curve over time for similarly coated glass.

 

[Charlie Yardbird]

Datapoint:
www.birdforum.net/threads/swift-holiday-mark-ii.220939
rdmadison, 2012 POST# 19
Serial number dating is consistent on all my Swifts with makers marks through 1967, regardless of indicated manufacturer. The only possible exception is Swift 765 10x50 Rainier #7-49439 (MOC/B32/E10), which suggest the serial number dating begins just after the makers' marks do--in 1960. The design of the instrument and case is consistent with other 1960 instruments: black wheel, thin polished facets on oculars, bayonet eyepieces; case is thin closure-strap, dark brown pebbled leather.

 

[elkcub]

Glad it worked for you. I expected to get a good price. Sold for a measly $38. Guess not that desirable anymore.

Indeed. One might even wonder why you bought it in the first place?

 

[elkcub]

Does Swift have 2 eccentrics? Do they all use the same sort of fastening framework?
So having figured out one model, you are good for all models?

"They each had slightly different visual properties. But, of course, we will never know objectively how these coatings really differ to a standard human observer since no one has elected to calculate any binoculars' luminosity, dominant wavelength, and excitation purity according to the CIE Color Specification System.*"

That would be interesting. Who has that equipment? We could send examples for testing.
I wonder if the coatings degrade over the years.
How does fogging effect coated glass?
Any such age related changes could be estimated by using several samples of each model, or even each year of manufacture - graph a curve over time for similarly coated glass.

Hi Charlie,

I don't know much about the mechanical aspects. If you're really interested I'd suggest sending a PM to Bill Cook, aka WJC.

Congratulations! After several years, you are the first and only one to pick up on the wide range of possibilities for systematically computing binocular luminosity, dominant wavelength, and excitation purity. It would be highly informative and also take a great deal of subjectivity out of product comparisons by providing reference standards! Manufacturer's surely have the equipment necessary to measure transmission, i.e., spectrophotometers, as well as the trivial computing capacity to process the output vectors. Unfortunately, doing so would also limit their ability to hype new products, so it's understandable why they don't. A little science is a good thing, ... but ambiguity and hype can be so much better.

Ed

 

[Bino Steve]

Indeed. One might even wonder why you bought it in the first place?

I bought because of the stellar reviews on these types of forums. And I like a good vintage bino. Mechanically it was nice, optically nice, just not fond of the color rendering.

 

[elkcub]

I'm just funnin wid ya.

Ed

 

[Charlie Yardbird]

If you're really interested I'd suggest sending a PM to Bill Cook, aka WJC.

LOL. Already bugging him about where the heck to buy the key components of a Mark 5 collimator - the 10-12" crappy lens, the tall rhomboid prism, and a design for a clamp that holds like a rock but allows you to get to the screws.

He commented that the Mark 5 uses two of those big lenses, but you can get by with just one. So what's the difference - one lens having a lot longer focal length, so need a bigger bench?

Most of the answers are probably online somewhere, its just searching for them is hit & miss. I want to buy the parts & get to building stuff, then get to cleaning & collimating stuff.

 

[elkcub]

I sent you a PM (private message).

 

[Charlie Yardbird]

When did Swift change from slotted screws on the prism cover to Phillips Head?
Did all the Japanese JB's change at the same time?
One person said generally 1970, IIRC.

 

[elkcub]

When did Swift change from slotted screws on the prism cover to Phillips Head?
Did all the Japanese JB's change at the same time?
One person said generally 1970, IIRC.

Never! They were always Phillips head screws from the first Audubon in 1958 (see pic) to the last in 1999-2000. *
See attachment to post #5 to determine manufacturer for each model.
The manufacturer did change from Tamron Optical Co. to Hiyoshi Kogaku around 1970.

Ed
* Prior to 1960 the company was called Swift & Anderson. The s/n first included the date starting from 1960 when Swift Instruments, Inc. was established. Hence, s/n 70851 does not date the binocular to 1970.