Some nikon hg /se questions (1 Viewer)

ellisonwales · Jun 29, 2004

Over the last month or two , im getting more into birding and enjoying it.I recently bought a pair of magnaloux 8x42 on ebay and have been happy with them (8.2 fov and bak4 prisms)for the very reasonable price (or so i believe)of £27 pounds.However ive now decided that im not going to get a new XP computer ,but stick with my p3 W98 (which i love by the way)and get a pair of these nikons that everyone talks about.Anyway ive tested the 8.32 HG and the 8.32 SE , and as a newbie wondered about some things.First of all the HGs seem to me to magnify more than the SEs ,something which i think i prefer.Is this because the FOV is slightly bigger in the HGs?Also the HGs seem more comfortable pressed to my eyes than the SEs.The rubber eyepieces are smaller on the HGs so maybe its that.There also seems to be a finer /quicker focus than the SEs.As a novice what sort of tests should i put these bins through?.Visually i cant see much difference except the HGs definitly look more magnified to me.Also what does the "AG" stand for on the focussing knob?(on the HGs).Most posts ive read give the edge optically to the SEs , though as i say i really cant notice.What should i be looking for? when comaring visually these two?
tia
me

Pinewood · Jun 29, 2004

Nikon 8x32 SE

My dear Mr. Wales,

I own a Nikon 8x32 SE. If you wear spectacles, there may be a problem with blackouts. Please search this forum for the thread that contains "Nikon blackouts." There is some advice on how to minimize the problem.

The Nikon SE is a Porro glass, which has the appearance, to some, of providing less magnification. In fact, eight power is eight power.

The 32 mm objectives are fine for full daylight, but I found them lacking for cloudy days, especially when observing birds in trees. On those occasions, an 8x42 was rather useful.

Finally, the SE is not fully watertight, which is important to some. There are threads in this forum which discuss how water resistant this glass may be.

However, it is a first rate binocular, with fine optical qualities. The ideal is to use an example, outdoors, before buying, as using binoculars tend to be very personal.

Faithfully,
Arthur Pinewood

pduxon · Jun 29, 2004

Hi Mr Wales

at the end of the day buy the ones you like best, feel most comfortable with. The SE's are cheaper than the HGs but the HGs are fully waterproof.

SE fans are a bit vocal (Aren't you chaps) but both are fine bins from what I can tell so make your own choice.

ellisonwales · Jun 29, 2004

Thans.. Pinewood..
I dont wear spectacles ,but i can relate to that blackout thread , as i was continually trying to get a comfortable eye position on the SEs , compared to the HGs.Ill try a few things after reading that thread.I agree that an 8 is an 8 magnification, but i still cant help sensing that the HGs view seem much closer/bigger to me.

Thanks...Pduxon..
The HGs seem most comfortable to me initially , though i imagine one can get used to most things over time.I guess that ,after reading many posts here and reviews elsewhere , im looking for that optical superiority of the SE over the HG , though i must be honest (maybe because of the initial eye to glass"akwardness" i experienced),nothing stands out a mile so to speak.Perhaps more testing is in order.

me

P.S anyone know what the AG stands for on the HGs focussing wheel?

henry link · Jun 29, 2004

Check the thread "Apparent Magnification" on page 3 of the binocular threads for a good discussion of the illusion of higher magnification in roof vs. porro (or more accurately between closely spaced objectives vs. widely spaced objectives)

ellisonwales · Jun 29, 2004

Thank you Henry...
That is an interesting link.I totally agree with what Lief is saying there as i see the same "illussion" ,especially as he mentions ...close up.
me

mike60 · Jun 30, 2004

ellisonwales :
I own both of these binoculars and there are strong arguments for each. I prefer the view of the SE, but the HG is a superb binocular in my opinion. From your comments on comfort, blackout, focusing, and magnification, as well as not being able to see a significant optical quality difference, I would recommend the HG. I dont think you should go seeking the optical flaws in the HG to convince yourself that the SE is right for you, given your natural reaction on all these other factors. Choosing the SE might be a mistake because it would be based on issues you had to make an effort to go and seek, and it would be a compromise on all the issues you have already easily identified for yourself on the SE. They are both superb, and you will not regret owning the HG.

zurtfox · Jun 30, 2004

HGs - another plus...

Hi,

May I just add that I recently measured the fov and close focusing of my 8x32 HGs and was pleasantly surprised to find that they are 141m@1000m and 1.8m which is better than the 136m/2.5m given in their specs. Perhaps this helps to explain why I still maintain that in daylight they are the equal of almost any 8x42mm bino.

Chris

ellisonwales · Jun 30, 2004

Thanks mike60 and zurtfox.
I think you hit the nail on the head there .My gut feeling is to go for the HGs as they are instantly comfortable to use (though a little heavier)and I do like the "larger" image that i percieve compared to the SEs.Although i have no doubt about the SEs optical quality , i just cant seem to get a comfortable eye position , which results in me looking at " purply fringes" or "black shadow" on the edges of the view if the binocular is tilted a little or my eyes are not quite in line or even pressed too hard against the eyepieces.I had began to wonder whether its my physical makeup maybe (though i do consider myself pretty normal ) lol.Anyway im getting the bins friday and at the moment everythings telling me to get the HGs.
thanks again.
me

scampo · Jun 30, 2004

My brother has the HGs. They are a magnificent optic for sure but the design has been around for a few years now and, around the corner, might be a lighter pair from Nikon, so patience might pay off. Also a new Zeiss binocular range will be available before long - the Zeiss FL - again, well worth the wait, I'd say.

pluvanut · Jun 30, 2004

Thought Scampo was going to repeat his reply to the effect that he has used lately a couple of times i.e. that differences between optics of this quality are likely to be hard to spot (or worry about) unless observation skills are well developed.

Rather than wait, if money isn't the limiting factor, buy whatever feels best/is easiest to use and go birding. I guess it will be a while before choice of bin is the limiting factor. Certainly true in my case (I use 8x32 SE BTW, which I wouldn't swap.)
Fun looking/playing though eh?
Good Luck

scampo · Jun 30, 2004

My earlier comments concerned scopes, not binoculars. Not sure why I deserved the rather cutting tone of your response - but... maybe just the way I read it? Ah well.

)-:

If I were about to spend several hundred pounds at this particular moment, I would hope I could hold my purchase for just a couple more months as it is now well known that at least one new pair of bins is around the corner - the Zeiss FLs. These are, I believe, going to be objectively lighter, brighter, wider and exhibit less colour fringing than any other pair of bins on the market. Also, Nikon HGs are ready for replacement - and the reduction in price hints that is around the corner, too. With these being such a fine pair, their replacement is surely going to be something rather special.

Pinewood · Jun 30, 2004

What kind of chap am I?

pduxon said:
Hi Mr Wales

SE fans are a bit vocal (Aren't you chaps)

As an owner of the SE, I am not one of the vocal supporters. I regret my purchase. I think that I could do with a more comfortable, rather than idiosyncratic glass.

Happy birding,
Arthur Pinewood

pduxon · Jun 30, 2004

Pinewood said:
pduxon said:

Hi Mr Wales

SE fans are a bit vocal (Aren't you chaps)

As an owner of the SE, I am not one of the vocal supporters. I regret my purchase. I think that I could do with a more comfortable, rather than idiosyncratic glass.

Happy birding,
Arthur Pinewood

Click to expand...

Arthur

you must admit there are some very vocal fans of the SE - Leif, John Cantelo and many more and whenever the SE is mentioned it gets praised to the hilt.

Wasn't a dig guv, I was being light hearted.

From what I've read the SE is a bin you will either love or fail to get on with.

pluvanut · Jun 30, 2004

scampo said:
My earlier comments concerned scopes, not binoculars. Not sure why I deserved the seemingly harsh tone of your response - but... maybe just the way I read it? Ah well.

)-:

If I were about to spend several hundred pounds at this particular moment, I would hope I could hold my purchase for just a couple more months as it is now well known that at least one new pair of bins is around the corner - the Zeiss FLs. These are, I believe, going to be objectively lighter, brighter, wider and exhibit less colour fringing than any other pair of bins on the market. Also, Nikon HGs are ready for replacement - and the reduction in price hints that is around the corner, too. With these being such a fine pair, their replacement is surely going to be something rather special.

No intention to be harsh I assure you, I couldn't agree more and I think your point about skills is true of most (all?) technically aided pastimes/crafts. Experience gets the best from the best gear.
Point taken also about not spending hastily.

scampo · Jun 30, 2004

Ah well - I thought it must be the way these emails can easily be interpreted wrongly. It would be nice to see a new pair of Nikon and Zeiss as, for me, the Ultravids added very little to what we have already.

Leif · Jun 30, 2004

pduxon said:
Arthur

you must admit there are some very vocal fans of the SE - Leif, John Cantelo and many more and whenever the SE is mentioned it gets praised to the hilt.

Wasn't a dig guv, I was being light hearted.

From what I've read the SE is a bin you will either love or fail to get on with.

Pete: I do praise the optics, but the mechanics have a few quirks as I have often mentioned: naff rubber eye tubes IMO, focus wheel stiff in cold weather. Ah well. They do say love is blind.

An awful lot of people on BF sing the praises of the Nikon 8x32 HG.

Nikon might be reducing the UK Nikon 8x42 HG price to put them more in line with American prices, as there they are a bit of a bargain. However Nikon do have a habit of reducing the price of existing stock a few months before a new product appears. They regularly do that with film scanners.

mike60 · Jul 1, 2004

I find the 8x32 HG weight to be very comfortable, and in my hands, they are the most stable binoculars I have ever used. I somehow dont find the weight offensive in these bins at all compared with the 8x42HG, where it really is a problem. Reducing weight is usually an excellent idea, but I wonder if they would become less steady for me? If Nikon are improving them, I would rather see them work on the CA than the weight. I agree with Steve that waiting for the next version from nikon could be the way to go -but my guess is its more than a year away.The zeiss FL release is more definite. The way products are released nowdays, you could spend your life waiting for the new release which somehow always seems 'just around the corner'.

pduxon · Jul 1, 2004

Leif - as you say love is blind! Any optic is a compromise between optical quality, build, handling, price. We all just balance the equation is different places.

Andy Bright said that whatever of the best optics you buy you won't be disappointed and it will be the personal things that really influence. To be honest the more I use bins the more I agree with that. I love the x32's fast focus and couldn't take a really slow focus but each to his own

Out of interest guys.

Are the next generation of a bin likely to be that much better? For example are the ELs worth upgrading to from the SLCs, are the Ultravids really THAT much better than the trinovids? Probably not. I wonder if trading in for people who own the next big thing is more of a status symbol than a optical quality thing. I doubt if its value for money.

Are the Swarovski 8x32 ELs really £350 better than the 8x30 SLCs?? Probably not but then where is the logic in desire !

Leif · Jul 1, 2004

pduxon said:
Leif - as you say love is blind! Any optic is a compromise between optical quality, build, handling, price. We all just balance the equation is different places.

Andy Bright said that whatever of the best optics you buy you won't be disappointed and it will be the personal things that really influence. To be honest the more I use bins the more I agree with that. I love the x32's fast focus and couldn't take a really slow focus but each to his own

Out of interest guys.

Are the next generation of a bin likely to be that much better? For example are the ELs worth upgrading to from the SLCs, are the Ultravids really THAT much better than the trinovids? Probably not. I wonder if trading in for people who own the next big thing is more of a status symbol than a optical quality thing. I doubt if its value for money.

Are the Swarovski 8x32 ELs really £350 better than the 8x30 SLCs?? Probably not but then where is the logic in desire !

Pete: I largely agree with your comments. However, I have always found the Leica 8x42 BN too large and heavy, but then I have smaller than average hands. The Swaro EL range focus closer than the SLC range (~4m) and so are better suited to insect watching. For some people the newer binoculars do have some advantages.

Some nikon hg /se questions (1 Viewer)

Active member

New York correspondent

Quacked up Member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Steve Campsall

DOCG

Steve Campsall

New York correspondent

Quacked up Member

DOCG

Steve Campsall

Well-known member

Well-known member

Quacked up Member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread