Nikon SE binoculars and ED lens (1 Viewer)

brocknroller · Feb 19, 2010

spyglass said:
I see no CA or roll-the-ball effect in any of my binos (well, a little in my vintage, cherry 8x30 Canon B body), but none of that in the new ones. Now I had a Pentax 8x32 SP (nonED) for a while, and that had noticable yellow fringing....also had a Swift 828 that really rolled tha ball when ya panned. But the 7 I have now are flaw-free (at least as far as I'm concerned). So there.....

I guess the moral to this story is, if you buy and sell enough bins, you are bound to stumble upon 7 that you like.

If you try the new SV EL or a Nikon full sized Premier, you might get the "ball" rolling again.

If you want to see more CA than you've ever seen before, try putting away your present stock of non-ED bins and use a low dispersion glass, low power (7x or 8x) bin exclusively for a few weeks while observing birds against a snowy landscape.

Then pick up your old bins and compare the views side by side with the ED bin, and you might be surprised to see CA that you never saw before in those non-ED bins.

I found that using an ED bin under extreme conditions and then transitioning myself back to my non-ED bins was a very "colorful" experience.

spyglass · Feb 19, 2010

Well, I tried to remember all the binos I've had (starting with my first 8x30 Sans & Strieffe Jena knockoff) since 1959....75, give or take. Admittedly, the last 10 yrs or so, since I discovered ebay, have been the most....fruitful. BUT.....I ain't buyin' no more. I've been on the wagon for almost 9mo and don't believe that I can improve to any meaningful degree on what I've got now. I've quit critiquing every bino every time I use it and my standard now is, is the view pleasing. I apparently don't see CA to any great degree, edge sharpness on all my stable is a non-issue.....so I've become content. (It's still interesting to read the posts here and on CN, tho'.....sometimes entertaining, usually educational).

Dean L · Feb 19, 2010

Nikon 12X50 SE availability

If there are any of you who have been pining for a pair of Nikon 12X50 SEs, but haven't acted because you know they have been discontinued, here's an update.

As some may know, I've had a pair of these on order for over a month, and just today received another update from the seller as to when they might actually come in. This is the second time I've been notified of a delay, and I'm now told it will be the middle of March. So, I called Nikon to get the real skinny.

The official party line is that these are available as a "Special Order" item only, which means that you can expect it to take 90 to 120 days after your order is placed before you will see the bins. The nice gentleman at Nikon didn't know why it would take that long, but he speculated that "Special Orders" for these are binos coming out of Europe--not production. He went on to say that the seller would likely give me several more updated delays before I might actually see them.

So, if a dealer like Adorama or Amazon were to order 10 pairs on a special order, it might take Nikon a couple of months to round up that many pairs in Europe (or elsewhere) before they would be able to ship the entire order. Undoubtedly, this will not go on forever. My guess is this applies to the entire SE lineup. At this point, there is no certainty they will be delivered. :C

Dean

jaymoynihan · Feb 20, 2010

"...would the Nikon SE be a better binocular if it had ED lens..."
yes
"..., or does it?'
No

But the color error / Fringing in the 8's is pretty minor. Have never looked through the 10's.
I also have the 12x50's. They NEED ED glass, would be significantly improved with it.

ceasar · Feb 21, 2010

I understand that all 3 of the SE's are f4 and use the same eyepieces. If so, why would the 12x need ED glass to eliminate color fringing while the 8x doesn't? Is it because their extra power makes the color error more visible?

Bob

John M Robinson · Feb 21, 2010

ceasar said:
I understand that all 3 of the SE's are f4 and use the same eyepieces. If so, why would the 12x need ED glass to eliminate color fringing while the 8x doesn't? Is it because their extra power makes the color error more visible?

Bob

I don't understand the optical theory, but I do see more CA in my 10x42SEs than my 8x32 SEs. Worse yet are my 8x42 Ultravids.

John

Kevin Purcell · Feb 21, 2010

ceasar said:
I understand that all 3 of the SE's are f4 and use the same eyepieces. If so, why would the 12x need ED glass to eliminate color fringing while the 8x doesn't? Is it because their extra power makes the color error more visible?

The magnification makes the longitudinal CA fringes "bigger" so you can see them more easily. CA goes up with magnification for this reason.

The lateral CA will be the same in each model as the EPs are identical.

There is also an aspect of the lateral CA from the edges of the light cone (well all of the light cone except that on axis) hitting the hitting the prisms surfaces at a slight angle. BaK4 has quite a large dispersion so adds a bit of color. Not to sure how much this varies from one bin to the other: the field narrows so the light cone is smaller but the magnification goes up (in direct proportion). I suspect as these are in step then may be no excess contribution.

ceasar · Feb 21, 2010

Thanks Kevin,
I'm going to check this out with my 8x and 10x. There is a horizontal mountain ridge top about 2 miles due east from me, visible from my deck, with a TV tower on top to try this out on.
Bob

spyglass · Feb 22, 2010

Ok, Fri morning I authoritatively avered that none of my current binos had flaws. That was just before a few of us left on a birding trip to Black Mesa. While down in a wash, scanning the rock shelves and spruce, a Canyon Towhee let off, so we're all busily scanning trying to find it. I'd grabbed my 7x26 Elite (one my faves for crawling around rocks, etc) and was takin' in all the areas above and lo & behold, I saw the ball rolling....not bad, but the first time I'd noticed it....and I've had several of these (each body style), all have the same optical compement. Now I've been to this same locale before with this bino and panned and never saw the aberration before. It's not objectionable, tho, & I'm keepin' the little Bushnell....but all my binos aren't perfect as I was boasting.

mooreorless · Feb 22, 2010

Spyglass this is Brock's fault you saw the ball rolling on the 7x26 Elite.

After everybody reads the very many posts by him about this, they start looking for it and low and behold there it is. Take a deep breath and relax your eyes. Try to look for CA instead.

Regards, Steve

jaymoynihan · Feb 23, 2010

Kevin Purcell said:
The magnification makes the longitudinal CA fringes "bigger" so you can see them more easily. CA goes up with magnification for this reason.QUOTE]

Yep, kind of. Clearest way to see that in action is to view a bright star, or a planet at high magnification with two refractors of same aperture, focal length, and same brand/model of eyepieces. Except, one is an achromat, and the other an apochromat. The achro will exhibit a ring of color around the target. The shorter the focal length of the scope, the more extreme the CA.
The same done at a low magnification, the achro's error may be absent or will be reduced.

Kevin Purcell · Feb 23, 2010

It depends on the f/number rather than just the focal length.

Remember in daylight they eye entrance pupil is smaller than the exit pupil and acts as a stop on the binocular optics so the effective focal number goes up (you only use a small portion of the objective) stopped down. That will reduce apparent CA too.

A set of f/4 8x40 bins with a 2.5mm entrance pupil (a bright day) will effectivley be working as a set of f/8 8x20 bins.

Another difference between day and night use. The astro folks (or birders in twilight) will see more CA.

brocknroller · Feb 23, 2010

mooreorless said:
Spyglass this is Brock's fault you saw the ball rolling on the 7x26 Elite. After everybody reads the very many posts by him about this, they start looking for it and low and behold there it is. Take a deep breath and relax your eyes. Try to look for CA instead.
Regards, Steve

Grasshopper,

Without realizing it, you have stumbled upon a fundamental existential truth.

All interactive experiences of life create sub-conscious learning (values/beliefs) that can either create blinders or open up the perception to higher planes of awareness.

Majestic landscapes can sometimes elicit epiphanies, but one must be open to the experience.

By planting that sub-conscious learning about "rolling ball," I was able to plant a seed of awareness about the possibility of seeing that optical phenomenon in binoculars.

However, it was only when the synchronicity of that sub-conscious belief met the epiphany created by the majestic landscape that he was able to attain a higher plan of awareness and "open his eyes" to seeing the "rolling ball" in his binoculars that was there all along.

The more rigid and mechanistic one's belief structure, the harder it is to remove the blinders. For some people, it takes an epiphany, for others a bunker buster bomb.

Baba O'Broccoli

mooreorless · Feb 24, 2010

There you go proves my point.

I need a bunker buster bomb.

Steve

NDhunter · Feb 24, 2010

brocknroller said:
Grasshopper,

Without realizing it, you have stumbled upon a fundamental existential truth.

All interactive experiences of life create sub-conscious learning (values/beliefs) that can either create blinders or open up the perception to higher planes of awareness.

Majestic landscapes can sometimes elicit epiphanies, but one must be open to the experience.

By planting that sub-conscious learning about "rolling ball," I was able to plant a seed of awareness about the possibility of seeing that optical phenomenon in binoculars.

However, it was only when the synchronicity of that sub-conscious belief meet the epiphany created by the majestic landscape that he was able to attain a higher plan of awareness and "open his eyes" to seeing the "rolling ball" in his binoculars that was there all along.

The more rigid and mechanistic one's belief structure, the harder it is to remove the blinders. For some people, it takes an epiphany, for others a bunker buster bomb.

Baba O'Broccoli

Brocknroller or should I say Brocknrollingballer:

My sympathies go out to you with your unfortunate awareness of the
rolling or swirling syndrome.

I am fortunate to not have seen the malady.

You would be a good candidate as a screener for the optics companies
for a thorough examination for the effect. Maybe you could contact some
of them and offer to be a tester for new products! Now that would be fun!:t:

Jerry

stereotruckdriver · Feb 24, 2010

:'D:'D:-O

brocknroller said:
Grasshopper,

Without realizing it, you have stumbled upon a fundamental existential truth.

All interactive experiences of life create sub-conscious learning (values/beliefs) that can either create blinders or open up the perception to higher planes of awareness.

Majestic landscapes can sometimes elicit epiphanies, but one must be open to the experience.

By planting that sub-conscious learning about "rolling ball," I was able to plant a seed of awareness about the possibility of seeing that optical phenomenon in binoculars.

However, it was only when the synchronicity of that sub-conscious belief meet the epiphany created by the majestic landscape that he was able to attain a higher plan of awareness and "open his eyes" to seeing the "rolling ball" in his binoculars that was there all along.

The more rigid and mechanistic one's belief structure, the harder it is to remove the blinders. For some people, it takes an epiphany, for others a bunker buster bomb.

Baba O'Broccoli

spyglass · Feb 24, 2010

But, but......Brock wudden even there!!! Ergo, he cuddena been rolling the ball!

Now, moving on to Brock's pontification on the subject, I wonder if he meant subconscious yearning. Ya see, I'd seen the ball roll b4 in an 828 Swift (and knew I was not alone....one day at a local lake looking at rafts of waterfowl & scads of shorebirds, an old fella standing beside me with an old 7x35 Tasco or Simmons or the like was also scanning and got so dizzy and/or disoriented his legs buckled. Luckily I saw him start to go and hooked him under the armpit b4 he hit the ground. Asked if he wuz alrite, and he said that when he moved the bino side to side, he got dizzy. I tried them, and HOO WAH! I could see why they caused him consternation).

In my case, tho', I discovered that I had to scan an extended field with lines parallel to the scan to see it. It doesn't show on varied planes like trees, brush, buildings, etc. As I sed, tho', it wasn't objectionable, just there....I guess I yearned for it not to be so I could brag that I had a stable of "perfect instuments". Bummer....

Chhayanat · May 15, 2010

"Nikons warranty is also very good, as they will continue to service these on the 25 year No-fault."
I couldn't find a mention of the No-fault Warranty on Nikon USA's main website.
The only Nikon site where I could find a reference to the No-fault Warranty was at /www.nikondownload.com/images/no-fault_warranty.pdf. The No-fault Warranty Certificate is dated 1/06. Has anyone actually got No-fault repairs done from Nikon in the past year or so?
Chhayanat

Kevin Purcell · May 16, 2010

The page that points to that PDF shows that this is still current:

http://www.nikondownload.com/nofault.asp

Nikon is dedicated to quality, performance and total customer satisfaction. If your Nikon Binocular, Spotting Scope or Fieldscope requires service or repair not covered by our 25 Year Limited Warranty, Nikon will repair or replace it (even if it was your fault) for just $10, plus return shipping and handling.

e.g. one of their distributors also point this out

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikonbinoculars.html

Chhayanat · May 17, 2010

Kevin Purcell said:
The page that points to that PDF shows that this is still current:

http://www.nikondownload.com/nofault.asp

e.g. one of their distributors also point this out

http://www.opticsplanet.net/nikonbinoculars.html

I meant a Nikon company site. The Nikon site in question is not very clear on the currency of the warranty to an outside observer. It is not evident when the site was updated: it says 2001-2006 Nikon USA, Inc in the lower border on the page that points to the PDF.
That was why I was hoping that some member who had actually availed of the No-fault warranty over the past year would confirm its continued existence.

Nikon SE binoculars and ED lens (1 Viewer)

porromaniac

Djoo c it? Wut wuzit?

Active member

Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Djoo c it? Wut wuzit?

Well-known member

Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher

Well-known member

porromaniac

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Djoo c it? Wut wuzit?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread