Nikon E series? (1 Viewer)

[FrankD]

I need a little ID help from you folks with experience with Nikon. I was again at the local Cabelas browsing through their bargain cave section of the store when I happened to notice a lone porro sitting back behind some of the various roof model binos. I asked the salesperson for a look as I could not see the tag from my angle. The binoculars themselves have no ID on them except for 7x35 7.3 degrees "C". However the box they came in has them labeled as 7x35 "E".

I am guessing that these are one of the original E series binoculars? For what it is worth I bought them on the spot. The image they provide is excellent and very comparable in some ways to my HGs...better even in others..at least in my opinion.

More info if it helps with the ID....they have the fold down rubber eyecups and the typical, easily moved, diopter ring on the right eyepiece. Any hints to remedy the "easily moved" part?...or should I just place a rubber band around it?

Can anyone give me a little bit of background info on them. They seem like nice, handy little optics with a superb view. Oh, and I forgot the best part...they were priced at $105 (refurbs).

 

[SteveF]

Sounds like you got an excellent deal.

I have the 8x30E, of the E-series of which you speak. From my old brochure, which I don't have with me at the moment, the 7x35E is just be bit larger, but is otherwise identical in appearance: Zeiss-style porro (objective barrels separate from, not integral with, the prism housings, hard pebble finish (not rubber armored), hard painted objective end rims (not rubber armored), all-black. From the older "Better View Desired" review of the EII's, the optical performance between the E's and EII's were not noticeably distinguishable. Sorry, I don't recall the field-of-view of the 7x35E. I would guess that what you have is exactly the 7x35E, though. In all, I think you got a real good buy.

As far as the "loose" diopter ring, I leave it to you to find your solution. I sympathize, but I don't have a good remedy. Looseness is pretty common in all binoculars.

If there are any comments on the E-series that I can extrapolate from my 8x30E experience for you, don't hesitate to ask.

 

[SteveF]

I don't know if I'm breaking any rules, but a picture of the 7x35E appears on this page, about 1/3 the way down:
http://www.buytelescopes.com/container.asp?dest=/manufacturers/nikon/all.htm

 

[elkcub]

I need a little ID help from you folks with experience with Nikon. I was again at the local Cabelas browsing through their bargain cave section of the store when I happened to notice a lone porro sitting back behind some of the various roof model binos. I asked the salesperson for a look as I could not see the tag from my angle. The binoculars themselves have no ID on them except for 7x35 7.3 degrees "C". However the box they came in has them labeled as 7x35 "E".

I am guessing that these are one of the original E series binoculars? For what it is worth I bought them on the spot. The image they provide is excellent and very comparable in some ways to my HGs...better even in others..at least in my opinion.

More info if it helps with the ID....they have the fold down rubber eyecups and the typical, easily moved, diopter ring on the right eyepiece. Any hints to remedy the "easily moved" part?...or should I just place a rubber band around it?

Can anyone give me a little bit of background info on them. They seem like nice, handy little optics with a superb view. Oh, and I forgot the best part...they were priced at $105 (refurbs).

Yes, it is a very nice deal. I have a pair of 10x35s that Nikon collimated and lubricated for $10 + shipping = $17.50. That's their 25 yr. "no-fault" warranty. Out and back was 3-weeks exactly. I'm reasonably sure they will tighten the diopter ring and make whatever other adjustments you need. As far as porros go, I think those Nikons are about as good as it gets. The SE series has a narrower FOV, so I prefer the Es and E2s. Then, there's all that money you save .

Enjoy the view whatever you do,
Elkcub

 

[FrankD]

Thank you for the help folks I appreciate it.

Steve,

I took a look at that link you provided and do believe that they are one and the same bino. The image is the confirmation of that. It is excellent. Excellent enough to want to make me grab them first to take a peek at any backyard bird I may happen to notice.

If there are any comments on the E-series that I can extrapolate from my 8x30E experience for you, don't hesitate to ask.

Well, I could ask one....or two. How would you describe the image on your compared to other binoculars you have had the privelege to own or handle? Since you referenced BVD's comments about how there really wasn't a discernible difference optically between the E and E2 then could you relate any mechanical or design differences? How about differences between the SE and E series?

Oh, on a related note, I know there are several folks who visit these forums from relatively close to where I live (read as in PA or a neighboring state). There were at least 3 other 7x35 E series binoculars there at the store as well as a whole host of other Nikon binoculars. Apparently, Cabelas received some type of special order (all refurbished maybe?). A majority of them are actually kept separate from the main stock of returned binos in that section of the store.

I thought some of you might want to take advantage of the situation.

Thanks again folks and good birding.

 

[henry link]

I have a pair of 7x35 E's which I bought in the early 90's, or perhaps I should say I have the parts as I have cannibalized my 7x35 to make up a 6x30 E and a 9x35 E which Nikon never actually made. I was surprised to see refurbished pairs appear recently as I thought this binocular had been discontinued years ago. Perhaps Nikon is raiding its remaining parts supply.

The biggest difference between the 7x35 and its 8x30 and 10x35 siblings is the eyepiece. The 7x35 uses a 3 element Kellner which results in a narrow apparent field of about 53 degrees compared to about 67 degrees for the 5 element eyepieces in the others. It has the advantage of longer eye relief and IMO the 7X35 has a slighter brighter image from using two fewer eyepiece elements. The mechanical parts haven't changed at all since the 80's. As a result, by current standards these are an expensive to make all metal binocular with some nice design features like double eccentric objective cells. Samples made after about 1990 have green multi-coatings which look the same as those on the SE and E2. They can be identified by the large leaning Nikon logo silk screened onto the back prism covers. Earlier ones were coated with purple MgFl and have significantly lower light transmission. Those have a more elegant small Nikon logo engraved on the prism cover.

Overall a very nice binocular, especially for the price you paid. As I recall these were about $250 in the early 90's. IMO they are approximately as bright as the Nikon SE and about as sharp in the very center. Field width and off-axis performance are limited by the old eyepiece design which is OK, but not in the same class as the flat field eyepiece in the SE.

 

[RobConnel]

Henry, can you tell us how you made the 6x30 and 9x35? Was it hard or just a matter of parts swapping?

 

[SteveF]

Just got back to my computer and updated myself on this thread:

Frank, I believe, as you do, that you have indeed netted an E-series 7x35. Until proven otherwise, Congratulations!

I dug up an old brochure, and the other information you gave is consistent with the 7x35E’ specifications. Here are the specifications, aside from 7x and 35 mm objectives:

Model number 780
Angle of view: 7.3 degrees real; 51.1 degrees apparent
(Mr. Link’s mention of the Kellner eyepiece explains this.)
Field of view at 1,000 yards: 383 feet
Eye relief: 16.0 mm
Weight: 21.5 ounces
Size: 4.7 inches x 7.1 inches.

As to your other questions:

(1) I have the 8x30E, but I have not ever handled an EII-series binocular. Other 8x30-ish binoculars I have owned or handled are: Swarovski roof prism (SLC), Swarovski porro prism (older, individual-focusing military model), IOR porro prism (Romanian individual focusing), Fujinon FMTR, Minox roof prism (phase-correction coated, but not aspheric), Swift Ultralight porro prism, Hensoldt porro prism (1980’s era military), and Steiner porro prisms (Hunting, Military-Marine, and Safari II models). I had been undecided about buying an EII of this size, because of the BVD review’s comments of no noticeable performance differences (even though the EII has a little wider field of view and, if I recall correctly, uses Nikon’s Eco-glass (but I might be wrong about this)). In this size of binocular, my feelings are that only the Swarovski roof is superior in image quality (just a hair more resolution, and not more), and the Nikon E is equal to the Fujinon and IOR. The rest of the listed binoculars are not as good (resolution, contrast, color, brightness) as these four. The Swarovski roof seems to have slight warm tint. Cost-ratio-wise, the 8x30E is at the top of this group.

The Nikon 8x30E is a little too compact; I need to keep my little fingers from hanging over the objectives. The BVD review indicates that the EII’s body is almost identical, except for rubber armoring and chamfered prism housing shoulders. Being that the 8x30 is already short in body, I can’t see how the chamfered shoulders helps handholding. However, I really do enjoy using the 8x30E, because of its performance, wide and comfortable views, and center focusing.

I agree with Mr. Link’s comments about construction quality. The E-series is very well-built; all metal, with heavy duty parts. It should last a lifetime. Based on the BVD review, the EII is similarly constructed and has rubber armoring. It should be similarly durable, at least in regard to alignment. I don’t really understand this forum’s contributors’ (in other threads) concern about the EII not lasting a lifetime.

(2) I have not handled an 8x32SE, but I do have a 10x42SE. This is not a fair comparison with the 8x30E, but I’ll give comments anyway. The SE shows a little more resolution (due to higher power and probably better optics). I don’t find the SE very bright, however (seems contrary to what people say about the SE series). The SE’s colors seem more vibrant than in other binoculars I’ve looked through. The really negative aspect of the 10x42SE is its tendency for black-outs, which is often mentioned in forum discussions. It is very sensitive to eye-position. If the eyes are not centered in the exit pupils, parts of the image will black-out. I find that I must set my eyes back further than the eyecups to avoid this. The SE’s 17 mm eye relief contributes to this, but I can’t help thinking that some other design aspect also contributes. The 8x30E has about 13 mm eye relief and has no black-out problem. The SE’s rounded prism housing gives me a smaller area for gripping, so it seems not very comfortable to me. To paraphrase a contributor I’ve read in this or the Cloudy Nights forum, the SE’s performance is great, but you must work to get that superior view.

Overall, I believe that a good portion of the above comments about the relative characteristics of the 8x30E apply to your 7x35E. Congratulations again on an excellent buy.

 

[cbushme]

I need a little ID help from you folks with experience with Nikon. I was again at the local Cabelas browsing through their bargain cave section of the store when I happened to notice a lone porro sitting back behind some of the various roof model binos. I asked the salesperson for a look as I could not see the tag from my angle. The binoculars themselves have no ID on them except for 7x35 7.3 degrees "C". However the box they came in has them labeled as 7x35 "E".

I am guessing that these are one of the original E series binoculars? For what it is worth I bought them on the spot. The image they provide is excellent and very comparable in some ways to my HGs...better even in others..at least in my opinion.

More info if it helps with the ID....they have the fold down rubber eyecups and the typical, easily moved, diopter ring on the right eyepiece. Any hints to remedy the "easily moved" part?...or should I just place a rubber band around it?

Can anyone give me a little bit of background info on them. They seem like nice, handy little optics with a superb view. Oh, and I forgot the best part...they were priced at $105 (refurbs).

Hello FrankD,
About your loose diopter ring...I have a pair of old Mirador porros that had a constantly moving diopter ring. Got sick of re-adjusting all the time so I put a small rubber band around it and it worked, but looked so crappy I felt as though I might has well have wrapped duct tape around it. Then I went to the hardware store and found a nice fat black rubber o-ring that fits perfectly in the groove of the ring. Now it only moves when I want it too. The o-ring provides just enough friction that it takes some effort to turn. Looks like it is original equipment, nobody notices the o-ring. Give it a try!

 

[FrankD]

Steve,

Thank you for the further comparisons. They were very helpful.

Henry,

Thank you for chiming in on some of the technical specifics. I found them very interesting.

cbushme,

Thanks for the tip. I will see if I can find something along those lines because, I agree, the rubber band does look poorly on the bino.

Folks, I have to say that these binoculars continue to impress me. I find myself picking them up before the HGs and the Pentaxs. Their wider field of view, compared to the other two, ease of viewing and handling make them very attractive. I would totally agree with Henry's synopsis of their performance. I may have to head back there and examine the rest of that special shipment that they received from Nikon. There is no telling what may be in there.

 

[henry link]

Henry, can you tell us how you made the 6x30 and 9x35? Was it hard or just a matter of parts swapping?

It’s pretty easy to switch the objective barrels between the 7x35 E and the 8x30 E by simply unscrewing them. They’re interchangeable. The hard part is recollimating which requires a spanner wrench that will fit the eccentric objective cells and a lot of patience to acheive what is called “conditional alignment”, collimation for your particular IPD. Alternatively you can switch the eyepieces which might maintain collimation better, but you have to switch everything; eyepiece assemlies, eyepiece bridge and the tubes the eyepieces fit into.

If you owned all three E's, 7x35, 8x30, and 10x35, plus the odd ball 12x40 which wasn’t called an E type but used the same parts you could make up a 6x30, 8.3x40, 8.6x30, 9x35 or 11x40. I don’t really understand Nikon’s design thinking in the E series. The series before it (the A series) had three models; a 7x35, an 8x30 and a 9x35 made by combining the 8x30 eyepiece with the 7x35 objective. Makes perfect sense. In the E series they decided on 10X but rather than going with a 40mm objective with a longer focal length as was usually done they used the 7x35 objective combined with a new shorter focal length eyepiece which decreased both the exit pupil and the eye relief. In the EII series they have gone with a longer focal length objective combined with the 8x30 eyepiece to achieve 10x which maintains the same eye relief as the 8x30, but perhaps they felt uncomfortable going to a 40mm objective because it would have dropped the focal ratio to below f/3.5. I would have been more interested in a 10x38 EII which would resulted from using an objective with the same focal ratio as the 8x30, but I suppose that’s too odd a configuration to market.

 

[ZeNiTh-PbArM]

Hi,

I have an old pair of Nikon 9x35, which i managed to keep in "brand new" condition.
I like to use them, but the chromatic aberration is important and the depth of field is poor.
I wonder if this has drastically evolved in the E series? I never had the opportunity to check, Nikons are hard-to-find around here and quite overpriced (600€ for EII 8x30, 1000€ for SE 8x30).

With best regards,
zp

 

[FrankD]

I like to use them, but the chromatic aberration is important and the depth of field is poor.

To offer some comparison, I see very little chromatic abberation with my Es even against high contrast objects. Depth of field is quite good. When I focus on one of my feeders approximately 20 yards away the treeline outlined behind it (about 300 yards away) is almost in focus. Surely most of the field between the feeders and the treeline is clearly focused to see.

I am sneaking back (the wife) tomorrow to see what else I can find at the store. []