How good was the N Gold Ring Sentinel 8x35? (1 Viewer)

Henry,

Thank you for the info. I will pull out the scale and check when time allows.

I am looking forward to reading your post about the history of the Action series. I have several of the models now but see several more than have me curious. Any and all info would be appreciated.

Using old Nikon brochures I've tried to construct a partial history of the Action binoculars and their off-shoots. Here's what I have come up with so far.

Original Action: Introduced around 1985 as Nikon's budget line. No markings on the binoculars identifies them as Action series. The far left photo shows their specs from a 1986 catalogue. The 7x35 model is mysteriously omitted from the catalogue, but was almost certainly available in 1986.

Action II: Introduced in the late 1980's. Smaller, lighter, narrower fields and shorter eye relief than the originals, in general a step down in quality. At about the same time the original Actions were upgraded to the Gold Sentinel Series, which had the same optics, but with the addition of minimal multi-coating, a different leatherette covering and a better case. Physically, the only obvious difference is a thin gold band around the objective trim ring and green multi-coating on the exterior glass surfaces of the Gold Sentinels. The second photo from the left shows specs for the Gold Sentinels (same as original Actions) and what I call the Action II series to distinguish it from the originals. With this series Nikon begins to use Roman numerals for the individual models like the Naturalist II (7x35) and the Lookout II (10x50). The Action II is also available (including a 7x50 model) with a lockable center focus, called "Stayfocus Plus" Series

Action III: Introduced sometime in the early 1990's. Optical specs appear to be similar to the Action II, but the bodies are completely changed to a new "ergonomic" shape, with rounded prism housings and closely spaced objective tubes. There is also a lockable focus version based on the same design called "Stayfocus Plus II". The Roman numerals for individual models are bit confusing. The 7x35 is called "Naturalist III" and the 10x50 is called "Lookout III", but the zoom model is called "Scoutmaster II" because it's only the second zoom to appear in an Action series and the 8x40 is simply called "Egret" because it's the first 8x40 in an Action series.

Action IV: no information

Action V: Introduced in the late 1990's and very similar to the current Action Series. This series returns to the wide fields of the originals, but from what I've seen, except for light transmission, the optical quality of the original Actions and Gold Sentinels has never been equaled, much less surpassed, by any of the later versions.

Henry,

I may be able to help a bit as I just picked up an Action IV 7x35. I will post pics, etc... tomorrow. Thank you for all you have posted.

Y'all got me excited and I just picked up a mint 7x35 GS on ebay...

Those were mine that you bought for a steal. ;-)

FrankD said:

Those were mine that you bought for a steal. ;-)

Click to expand...

Wow, that is very hilarious. Evidence that the interwebs are actually a very small world.

I like them, a lot. Just arrived. Amazing sharpness. I need to get them next to my EII's, but honestly not far off at first view. To my eyes the collimation may be off a smidge but I'm sensitive. I like the rubber-ish objective rings, they are nice and quiet when returning to the table. Wow!

Thanks Frank! And you are right...they were a steal! I figured with this post someone would have sprung more for them...

Yeah, me too.

Glad you enjoy them. I look forward to hearing more of your comments about them...especially in comparison to your other bins. They, and the WFs, have become one of my "go to" binoculars for general use.

What I'm looking forward to is a side by side with the EIIs.

Me too.

FrankD said:

I wanted to revive this thread simply because I received a Nikon Gold Sentinel 7x35 yesterday evening. I have not yet compared it to the Nikon Action WF 7x35 but plan to do so right after work.

They do appear to be the same bin on casual inspection. The images certainly are similar but until I do a side by side I don't want to comment further. What I do want to comment on is the feel. The Gold Sentinels feel heavier. I would question whether the Sentinels had the plastic barrels or if that was something that only the original Action version had.

..and, for what it is worth, I also picked up the Naturalist II "Action" 7x35. I am assuming this was the next Action version in the lineup? The field of view is narrower at only 8.6 degrees but is seems to share a similar overall design/style.

Click to expand...

Just reviving an older thread, and these older Nikon Action porros are very good,
and it seems clear they are superior to the newer versions.

I recently purchased a very nice, used 7x35 WF 9.3, and am very impressed.
The wide sweet spot is a treat, and Frank, your post was the one that put
me on the trail.

Henry, thanks for your resolution scores, I agree, these seem first rate to me.
At this point, coatings do not mean as much as optic design.

My direct comparison is with the Nikon Action Naturalist II, 7x35, 8.6,
and the WF 7x35, is much better.
I have also owned the newer Action 7x35, another step down, that one
I gave to my daughter.

Is there an older Nikon porro in the 10x50 size that has the quality
optics of these mentioned?

Jerry

I recently bought a Nikon 7x35 9.3° Wide Field - first generation. There seems to be something unique about Nikon's single coatings. They are a deeper blue than most others I've seen, and appear to reflect less light than other single coatings. The contrast this binocular produces seems impossible for a single coated binocular! I have completely disassembled them, so here are a couple of observations about build quality: aluminum alloy housings and occular guides, plastic (yet remarkably rigid) bridge, occular housings and objective tubes. The focus wheel is also plastic, geared much too fast and with too much resistance. The prism shelf is part of the housing casting, this has the advantage of not allowing any light leaks around the prism shelf. The prisms are factory aligned and cemented in place, then a strap is added to hold them securely. There are no adjustment screws for the prisms, so alignment is adjusted by eccentric rings on the objectives. Around this same time, Nikon introduced a line of low-cost camera lenses, the E-Series, and photographers quickly discovered most performed as well as or better than Nikon's F-Series lenses. This appears to be the case here as well. Corners have been cut in construction, but the optics are beyond criticism.

angelo225544 said:

I recently bought a Nikon 7x35 9.3° Wide Field - first generation. There seems to be something unique about Nikon's single coatings. They are a deeper blue than most others I've seen, and appear to reflect less light than other single coatings. The contrast this binocular produces seems impossible for a single coated binocular! I have completely disassembled them, so here are a couple of observations about build quality: aluminum alloy housings and occular guides, plastic (yet remarkably rigid) bridge, occular housings and objective tubes. The focus wheel is also plastic, geared much too fast and with too much resistance. The prism shelf is part of the housing casting, this has the advantage of not allowing any light leaks around the prism shelf. The prisms are factory aligned and cemented in place, then a strap is added to hold them securely. There are no adjustment screws for the prisms, so alignment is adjusted by eccentric rings on the objectives. Around this same time, Nikon introduced a line of low-cost camera lenses, the E-Series, and photographers quickly discovered most performed as well as or better than Nikon's F-Series lenses. This appears to be the case here as well. Corners have been cut in construction, but the optics are beyond criticism.

Click to expand...

As you noted the mechanical build isn't what you would expect on a Japanese manufactured Nikon; however, the optics are superb. I have 3 of the 7x35 9.3º Wide Fields (two regular versions and one Gold Sentinel) and use one of them on a regular basis.

Most people aren't aware of just how good many of these older Nikon porros are, all of my 7x35 Wide Fields are sharp across most of their generous fov and especially so on axis and I have a 9x35 7.3º J Pat that is probably my sharpest binocular.

Steve

steve@37n84w said:

As you noted the mechanical build isn't what you would expect on a Japanese manufactured Nikon; however, the optics are superb. I have 3 of the 7x35 9.3º Wide Fields (two regular versions and one Gold Sentinel) and use one of them on a regular basis.

Most people aren't aware of just how good many of these older Nikon porros are, all of my 7x35 Wide Fields are sharp across most of their generous fov and especially so on axis and I have a 9x35 7.3º J Pat that is probably my sharpest binocular.

Steve

Click to expand...

Hi, Steve. I agree, these perform well above their price point. I wonder if you might know whether the 7x35 WF uses a 3-element or 5-element eyepiece? Also, does the 9x35 produce a noticeably dimmer view than the 7x35?

Sorry to revive this old thread, but it seemed like the appropriate location to post pictures of my Nikon binoculars. I have no recollection of how/when I obtained these, but my best guess is that these are from the 1980's. None of the info provided above matches these binocs "exactly" so I was hoping to find any further info. TIA

The last 2 photos are of the area where the tripod mount normally is. It says "Nikon/405122/Japan". If I pop this cap off there is a brass plate with decorative designs all over it and two holes. Obviously not a tripod mount (I think) and a pretty design!

The really good early Nikon Action binoculars were the Action I and the Gold Sentinel upgrade of the Action I. Your 10x50 is what I call an Action II, which I'm afraid was a considerable step down in quality from the Action I.

I think the pattern you see on the brass plate was made by a viscous glue being pressed flat when the cap was attached.