It's not as good.
Last edited:
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Does Nikon use ED glass in the SE and EII? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sandy Leng
- Start date
A2GG
Beth
As I've said in the past, I don't have the stomach for all of that buying and selling. I'd like to stay where I'm at and have these binos for a very long time or until they fall apart. The Yosemites will be the first to fall apart for sure. Speaking of the stiff focus wheel, the yosemite's are like that too, so I am used to it. Yeah, the wheel is thin on the SE and strange compared to the 'modern' designs, but I think the classic design of the SE is part of the charm and what I found alluring from the start.
Thanks for the mini-review !
so, now I have the Viper 8x32, two Yosemite's (6x30 and 8x30), the Cascades
7x42 and will soon have the SE. I think that covers it for me. Oh yeah, and I have an Olympus PCIII 7x21 porro compact that goes in my handbag. These are super light and cheap, but VERY good. I recommend this one for 'on the go' everyday; ladies can put it in their purse/handbag and guys if you have a messenger bag you carry to work or backpack. It's great if you happen to see something interesting just out on lunch break.
oetzi
Well-known member
I did a google search for the 8x32 and 10x42SE about prices and availability in Germany:
8x32SE: 10 offers, € 699,- up to € 999,-. Up to 6 weeks for delivery or not available at all.
10x42SE: 8 offers, € 689,- up to € 1079,-. Up to 4 weeks or not available at all.
Then I found a shop in the netherlands, claiming to be able to deliver the 8x32SE in up to 5 days for € 789,-
http://www.verrekijkershop.nl/verrekijkers/748-nikon-8x32-se-cf-0018208073818.html
Ditto the 8x30 EII as special offer for € 529,- instead of 739,-
http://www.verrekijkershop.nl/verrekijkers/750-nikon-8x30-se-ii-0018208059263.html
Postage in central EU is € 14,50 and worldwide is € 26,50. Now thats not too bad.
Last edited:
opticoholic
Well-known member
Actually I only just this year got to point where I REALLY have too many binoculars. It took me quite a few years. So I will be selling one for the first time. I have another one I would sell but it's loaned indefinitely to friends. I don't like the idea of "flipping" bins... I really want to read optics forums less and spend more time USING my stuff. You should all tell me to get out of here... But right now I'm stuck in a carpool crawling in heavy traffic.
--Dave
Last edited:
opticoholic
Well-known member
Wow, maybe you should post this in the "Binocular Bargains" thread.
stereotruckdriver
Well-known member
It looks like you have all your bases covered! I think you will enjoy the se's they are a very fine glass and will compliment what you already have! Bryce...
brocknroller
porromaniac
I couldn't have said it any better myself, Ollie.
I will bookmark this post for people looking for review/comments on the SEs.
Stanley
You also need to get the Nikon 8x30 EII. It is a complement to the SE different but one of the best binoculars made. The big relaxing view with it's astonishing DOF and 3D realism is unmatched. It is almost like there is no end to the FOV ,whereas in most binoculars it is sharply defined. Great in the hands also. I have a feeling you would prefer it over the SE but either are great birding binoculars.
Last edited:
• As an alternative is this also up there: Leupold Yosemite 6x30 or "clone" - or does the optical quality not quite make it?
• The Nikons are not waterproof, while at least one of those "clones" is. In some parts of the planet such as here that's essential to keep out mould/fungus from glass surfaces which can ruin a bin, unless you go to some trouble, like Horukuru.
Nikon has made both "external-" and "internal-focussing" wp. porros, so they prob. can make their premium porros wp. by redesigning and retooling on a scale short of what they regularly need for new mdels.
Nearly 20 yrs ago I got worked up reading reviews of the Nikon 8x30, and asked my brother if he could bring one for me from a trip abroad - far less costly than importing here, more so then than now. The trip was short - had to be cut short I think - and he could only grab (from a non-speciaist shop) an 8x30 - or was it 32 - named Kiron. It had plastic lenses, but I was happy with its v. light weight, to the dismay of at least one savvy "bird friend".
I'm glad I didn't get the Nikon, and the trouble! With any bin wp. is a sine qua non for me (ask Brock or Google) and if a model doesn't have wp. I "instinctively" skip it.
Not an autobio. (seemed to come close) but a criterion for some parts of the world.
As this thread strayed into a discussion about CA here's Henry Link's thread on CA in the Nikon SE, Zeiss FL and Zeiss porro. http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=134310
There is too much importance attached to WP. For some people it is very important and for many people it is not very important. It costs money to do it right and adds to the price of the binocular. Many great ornithologists went their entire careers without using waterproof binoculars and worked around salt water estuaries and in the Caribbean using them.
Here is a noted professional who used one and who got a nice writeup here:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=1599746
There is no reason to deny yourself the pleasures of using an SE or an EII if your birding style does not involve a great deal of work in very wet conditions. You can always use an inexpensive Yosemite when you decide to go out in crummy weather when no binocular is at it's best.
Bob
Here is a noted professional who used one and who got a nice writeup here:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=1599746
There is no reason to deny yourself the pleasures of using an SE or an EII if your birding style does not involve a great deal of work in very wet conditions. You can always use an inexpensive Yosemite when you decide to go out in crummy weather when no binocular is at it's best.
Bob
A2GG
Beth
Somebody stop this guy! He's an enabler! Heehee
Actually the eii is what I'd prefer but none available anyway that I can see.
And I don't have great patience for hawking eBay etc every day.
If I ever get to try it someday and like it more I could swap or something.
Earlier today I briefly compared my 8x32 SE with an 8x32 Swarovision, and I agree the latter has very little CA, very well controlled, superb optics. I wouldn't want to say any more on the basis of such a short test, but the little Swaro is a big advance on the old model.
brocknroller
porromaniac
I wonder if Pileatus' subjective observation would hold up under the scrutiny of Henry's "microscope"? I also wonder if he has an SE with Nikon's latest glass (Eco-Glass)?
For example, Diane Porter rated the 8x32 EL WB high in Birdwatching Dot Com's midsized roundup, and said it showed no CA on axis, while others report seeing CA with that model. I didn't see any on axis either when I used a sample, but it was a sunny day, with no high contrast backgrounds.
The FL probably has a shorter focal length than the 8x32 EL (both versions), but I'm not sure if that's significant enough to be a factor; however, low dispersion glass isn't the only determining factor in controlling CA in an optical system.
What the EL and FL both have in common is that they are roofs, and I have always seem more CA in roofs before the use of ED glass than in my 8x32 SE. Various reasons have been proposed why this is so - roofs have more optical elements than equal quality porros and focusing elements, the latter of which Henry speculated could be a factor.
Considering that Henry found "the FL actually has a bit more transverse CA than the Octarem or the SE," and the FL is widely regarded as having the best CA control of all roofs, then the 8x32 SV EL would have to control CA better than the FL to beat the SE even though it does not have as high a grade low dispersion glass as the FL glass. Quite a feat!
This question was originally posed here.
I hope Henry does a four-way test with the Octarem, 8x32 SE, 8x32 FL, and 8x32 SV EL. Of course, that wouldn't negate Pileatus' subjective observations, but it would tell us if the SV EL controls CA as well as the FL under the 56x "microscope" (which may or may not be seen in the real world at normal magnification).
<B>
For example, Diane Porter rated the 8x32 EL WB high in Birdwatching Dot Com's midsized roundup, and said it showed no CA on axis, while others report seeing CA with that model. I didn't see any on axis either when I used a sample, but it was a sunny day, with no high contrast backgrounds.
The FL probably has a shorter focal length than the 8x32 EL (both versions), but I'm not sure if that's significant enough to be a factor; however, low dispersion glass isn't the only determining factor in controlling CA in an optical system.
What the EL and FL both have in common is that they are roofs, and I have always seem more CA in roofs before the use of ED glass than in my 8x32 SE. Various reasons have been proposed why this is so - roofs have more optical elements than equal quality porros and focusing elements, the latter of which Henry speculated could be a factor.
Considering that Henry found "the FL actually has a bit more transverse CA than the Octarem or the SE," and the FL is widely regarded as having the best CA control of all roofs, then the 8x32 SV EL would have to control CA better than the FL to beat the SE even though it does not have as high a grade low dispersion glass as the FL glass. Quite a feat!
This question was originally posed here.
I hope Henry does a four-way test with the Octarem, 8x32 SE, 8x32 FL, and 8x32 SV EL. Of course, that wouldn't negate Pileatus' subjective observations, but it would tell us if the SV EL controls CA as well as the FL under the 56x "microscope" (which may or may not be seen in the real world at normal magnification).
<B>
Last edited:
henry link
Well-known member
Hi Leif, nice to see you posting here again.
Brock, prism design is not the only thing modern roof prism binoculars have in common. As Leif mentioned, an internal focusing lens necessitates a complex objective design with wide air spaces. I think that's the more likely cause of the excessive lateral color in some modern binoculars that also coincidently use roof prisms. ED glass appears to reduce the lateral color of those binoculars in the center of the field, but in my experience in a controlled test even ED binoculars with negative internal focusers tend to show more lateral color toward the edge of the field than virtually any old binocular with a simple cemented doublet objective. That includes the Zeiss FL's and the Swarovision models I've seen.
In my test set-up the lateral color of the EII and SE is about average for binoculars with simple objectives, not especially good or bad, but somewhat better in the outer part of the field than ED binoculars with internal focusers.
Brock, prism design is not the only thing modern roof prism binoculars have in common. As Leif mentioned, an internal focusing lens necessitates a complex objective design with wide air spaces. I think that's the more likely cause of the excessive lateral color in some modern binoculars that also coincidently use roof prisms. ED glass appears to reduce the lateral color of those binoculars in the center of the field, but in my experience in a controlled test even ED binoculars with negative internal focusers tend to show more lateral color toward the edge of the field than virtually any old binocular with a simple cemented doublet objective. That includes the Zeiss FL's and the Swarovision models I've seen.
In my test set-up the lateral color of the EII and SE is about average for binoculars with simple objectives, not especially good or bad, but somewhat better in the outer part of the field than ED binoculars with internal focusers.
I'm not sure what relevance a microscope has. Incidentally my SE is 500996 so one of the earliest production models. Cameras have a country code in the serial number, but it looks not to be the case with the binoculars.
The problem here is that some people have an inability to see CA, and as you indicate, you have to know how to provoke it e.g. dark bird against bright sky. The Porter's tests are too uncritical and of little value in my biased and not very polite view. The recent Italian test which collects together a group of obsessives is perhaps the best way to draw conclusions, as there are so many psychological and physiological factors.
As regard roof prism binoculars, I suggested many years ago, long before Henry I believe, that the cause of the excessive CA originated in the focussing mechanism:
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=426627&postcount=48
At that time I was rather unpleasantly attacked by many amateur astronomers who claimed that such small objectives could not show CA. The attacks from one person were quite vicious.
Anyway, the fact that roof prism binoculars, such as the Zeiss 8x30 BGA, which achieve focus by moving the objectives show very little CA does support this idea. Unfortunately some of these seem to suffer from flare, which might be a side effect of objective focussing, speculation of course. Also, it is well known in camera optics that internal focussing has a number of side effects which include a tendency for increased CA as well as reduction in focal length at near distances.
And as you surely know, CA can originate in both the objectives and the eyepieces, as well as the focussing lens when present. Dispersion in the prisms seems not to be an issue.
Another issue is alignment of the pupil, since you can position your eye away from the centre of the eyepeice, and that may modify the image quality. And then there is the issue of pupil size, since a larger pupil uses more of the light cone from the objective, and potentially showing more aberrations.
Perhaps the next advance in binoculars is the introduction of aspherical lens elements, although I seem to recall the old Nikon Action 8x40 used aspherics to achieve a huge field, albeit distorted.
As far as binoculars are concerned, the latest bunch are superb, but I think the dealer benefits most. |=)|
Thank you Henry.
Do you have any insight into the disadvantages or focussing by moving the objectives? The Zeiss 8x30 BGA used to, and I assume still does, suffer some flare, and apparently the 10x40 does too. As you know both focus via the objectives, and I have wondered if this is something to do with inadequate shading of the objectives at one end of the focus range, or the presence of the front 'windows'.
I have seen many waterproof porros appearing, and I assume these focus likewise, although I have not been able to check.
Do you have any insight into the disadvantages or focussing by moving the objectives? The Zeiss 8x30 BGA used to, and I assume still does, suffer some flare, and apparently the 10x40 does too. As you know both focus via the objectives, and I have wondered if this is something to do with inadequate shading of the objectives at one end of the focus range, or the presence of the front 'windows'.
I have seen many waterproof porros appearing, and I assume these focus likewise, although I have not been able to check.
A2GG
Beth
Are the Nikon se cf 10x42 hard to find? If so, there's one at efinger,s sporting goods down the road from me. I was just there looking for boots for myself and thought I'd check out the bins. I handled it to get a taste of what I'm getting with my 8x32 on order. It's wonderful...way lighter than I imagined. I like the longer barrells of the 42mm, so we'll see how the 8x32 feels to me ergonomic wise. But the 10x42 felt nice...I like it a lot. It's just a smidge awkward in ergonomics to me compared to a roof and even my Yosemites. But I know I will grow into it. Love the design. I looked through them but did not set up the diopter but didn't want to test the optics out too much since I'm getting 8 power anyway. Didn't want to put too much stock into that aspect and just wanted to handle it.
So go to efinger's if you are in nj or pa area and are wanting this.
So go to efinger's if you are in nj or pa area and are wanting this.
Last edited:
