• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

A question about the Nikon Premier 8x32 Roofs (1 Viewer)

John Dracon said:
Little things like this can make a difference in selecting binoculars, but this is all about certain intangibles.
John
Click to expand...

John,
I wholeheartedly, 100% agree with this statement. Again, I'm no purist, optical wizard or full out aficionado but I know what I like. Technically the SE is probably a better bin than the HG (view-wise) but there's that something about the HG's (gestalt-wise) that makes them my favorite.

The HG's do work with glasses but they have to be kind of close fitting. ER can be a pain when it comes to choosing bin's,no doubt. People with 20/20 don't know how good they've got it.
 
Last edited:
Paul, Or one far eye and one close up eye. Diopter control that works great.;) I can see far away with right eye and close up with left. Well not quite as close with left eye. I don't have to wear my glasses.
 
Last edited:
I have both the 8x32SE and 8x32HG(LX), as well as a recently acquired 10x32HG for a bargain price (in the UK) of £320 ($515). All are superb, but the easiest view for me is the 8x32HG, and I rate comfortable viewing as probably the paramount consideration. P.S. For some reason, CA doesn't seem to bother me.
 
Thanks for that, Bob. I do like the HGs. Considering how prices are rising, with EDGs well over £1,000, I reckon Nikon SEs and HGs are excellent value for money, as good (for all practical purposes) as the very best and most expensive binoculars available new today.
 
ceasar said:
James,

Hang on to the 10 x 32 HG L. Nikon doesn't make it anymore. If you want to get another 10 x 32 equivalent to it, it will cost an arm and a leg!

Kimmo Absetz also reported on them in 2004 along with a few other Major League 10x binoculars, like the Nikon 10 x 42 SE, Leica Ultravid, Swarovski 10 x 32 and 10 x 42 and Zeiss 10 x 40.

http://www.lintuvaruste.fi/hinnasto/optiikkaarvostelu/optics_8_Leicaultravid_GB.shtml

Bob
Click to expand...

I would question the validity of a test that is 7 years old. Manufacturers improve coatings over the years.The newer binoculars are way ahead of the older models in brightness and contrast due to improvements in coatings. Even the less expensive newer binoculars are brighter than the older alpha's like the HG.
 
Last edited:
Dennis, you've gone and got my dander up with your sweeping statement that newer binoculars "are way ahead of older models in brightness and contrast due to improvements in coatings". "Even the less expensive newer binoculars are brighter than the older Alphas like the HG". What tosh!
The Nikon HG(LX) series is famous for having 'state of the art' lens coatings, with exemplary contrast and brightness, as well as sharpness, so much so that the new EDG, superb though it is, is only a slight improvement over the older Premier line. Other HG attributes are focus smoothness (seldom equalled and never surpassed, the envy of the entire industry) and build quality (as good as any, better than most). To buy such integrity for around £310 ($500) as I have done, in used but nice condition, is patently far better value than paying the same or more for some new, non-Japanese, relatively unknown upstart still wet behind the ears with only advertising hyperbole to extol its alleged virtues. We KNOW Nikon HGs and SEs are good, with legendary optics and build quality. By way of example, I had a Hawke Frontier 8x43ED for a while, which cost £220 at the time I bought it new. It was good, very good, but not a Nikon, so I knew it would eventually be replaced by a Nikon, after which I'd have peace of mind...
It reminds me of a story I read in 'Car' magazine some years ago, when Aston Martin were trying to enter the 'gentleman's carriage' market (then dominated by Rolls-Royce and Bentley) with the Bill Towns' designed Lagonda, a futuristic wedge-shaped, all-electronic/digital V8 grand tourer, dearer than a standard Bentley T2 of the time (1970s). At the Motor Show a R-R agent strolled over to the Aston Martin stand, paused, kicked the tyres of the Lagonda, and enquired laconically "Are these any good yet?". I rest my case...
 
Dennis,
You should think out your posts first before you put them on line. You are accusing Nikon of not using new lenses with new coatings in older model binoculars when they bring out a new batch of them. We have been told repeatedly here that Swarovski routinely did this as standard procedure. The same with Leica and Zeiss. Why wouldn't Nikon?

Bob
 
Indeed, there has been little room for progress in AR coating technologies since the early 1990's when they achieved almost 99% transmission. The recent addition of a hydrophobic coating has really been the only interesting development. Some claim that it smooths out the "nano pores" on the lens surface so light scatter is also reduced.

Other than that, the major coating improvements for roofs has been phase coatings in the 1980's and the use of dielectic prism coatings since ~2000.

The size/quality of the prisms and their mounting probably has more influence on brightness/resolution/color fidelity than anything else in a binocular.
 
James Bean said:
Dennis, you've gone and got my dander up with your sweeping statement that newer binoculars "are way ahead of older models in brightness and contrast due to improvements in coatings". "Even the less expensive newer binoculars are brighter than the older Alphas like the HG". What tosh!
The Nikon HG(LX) series is famous for having 'state of the art' lens coatings, with exemplary contrast and brightness, as well as sharpness, so much so that the new EDG, superb though it is, is only a slight improvement over the older Premier line. Other HG attributes are focus smoothness (seldom equalled and never surpassed, the envy of the entire industry) and build quality (as good as any, better than most). To buy such integrity for around £310 ($500) as I have done, in used but nice condition, is patently far better value than paying the same or more for some new, non-Japanese, relatively unknown upstart still wet behind the ears with only advertising hyperbole to extol its alleged virtues. We KNOW Nikon HGs and SEs are good, with legendary optics and build quality. By way of example, I had a Hawke Frontier 8x43ED for a while, which cost £220 at the time I bought it new. It was good, very good, but not a Nikon, so I knew it would eventually be replaced by a Nikon, after which I'd have peace of mind...
It reminds me of a story I read in 'Car' magazine some years ago, when Aston Martin were trying to enter the 'gentleman's carriage' market (then dominated by Rolls-Royce and Bentley) with the Bill Towns' designed Lagonda, a futuristic wedge-shaped, all-electronic/digital V8 grand tourer, dearer than a standard Bentley T2 of the time (1970s). At the Motor Show a R-R agent strolled over to the Aston Martin stand, paused, kicked the tyres of the Lagonda, and enquired laconically "Are these any good yet?". I rest my case...
Click to expand...

"new EDG, superb though it is, is only a slight improvement over the older Premier line." Slight improvement! I don't think so. The EDG's are a signifigant improvement over the old LX's. They have better CA control, less astigmitism, better edge sharpness, and less darkening at the field edge. The big improvement to me in the EDG's is the CA control and the edge sharpness. When I had my HG's and I had the 42mm and the 32mm I couldn't stand the CA. Other than that they are a good binocular. If you don't see CA or don't know what it is they are fine but the EDG's to my eyes are a BIG improvement. I think what it is is that people can get the HG for $500.00 or less and they can't afford to spend $2000.00 for an EDG so they rationalize themselves into thinking the HG's are almost as good as the EDG's. Well I am sorry to say they are not as good. To some people who can afford the $1500.00 the EDG is worth the difference. To those who can't afford them they convince themselves that the HG is just as good or almost as good. They is nothing wrong with older alphas. Alot of the time they are a good bargain but they are not as good as the newer alphas. It's like having an old Porsche. Still a good car but not like the new 911's.
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Indeed, there has been little room for progress in AR coating technologies since the early 1990's when they achieved almost 99% transmission. The recent addition of a hydrophobic coating has really been the only interesting development. Some claim that it smooths out the "nano pores" on the lens surface so light scatter is also reduced.

Other than that, the major coating improvements for roofs has been phase coatings in the 1980's and the use of dielectic prism coatings since ~2000.

The size/quality of the prisms and their mounting probably has more influence on brightness/resolution/color fidelity than anything else in a binocular.
Click to expand...

I don't think so. Compare the transmission's of the latest roof's and you will see that they are going up. In my experience with the latest roofs they are getting brighter and it has to be better coatings. A good example is the Swarovski CL. A mid-range binocular for Swarovski but yet it is as bright as there top of the line EL's. Don't tell me coatings are not improving and they haven't improved since the 1990's.
 
ceasar said:
Dennis,
You should think out your posts first before you put them on line. You are accusing Nikon of not using new lenses with new coatings in older model binoculars when they bring out a new batch of them. We have been told repeatedly here that Swarovski routinely did this as standard procedure. The same with Leica and Zeiss. Why wouldn't Nikon?

Bob
Click to expand...

I really don't think Nikon has improved the coatings on the HG's or the SE's in the last 5 years. Why would they bother they are discontinued old model binoculars. They are putting their where the money is. The new EDG's.
 
[email protected] said:
I really don't think Nikon has improved the coatings on the HG's or the SE's in the last 5 years. Why would they bother they are discontinued old model binoculars. They are putting their where the money is. The new EDG's.
Click to expand...

Neither the HGs (now called Premiers) or the SEs have been discontinued. Pay attention!
 
ceasar said:
Is there a difference between what you think and what you know?
Click to expand...

I sent a question to Nikon asking if they had changed the coatings on the SE or HG in the last five years. Here was their reply:

Thank you for using our services,

Nikon Customer Support


If you have more information, update your question by clicking on this link and then hit the update button in the web browser.


Subject
Nikon SE and HG binoculars.

Discussion Thread
Response Via Email (Ed S.) 09/07/2011 02:49 PM
Dear Dennis Mau:

The coatings have not changed.

Sincerely,
Ed

And no I didn't forge this or make it up. What I think is is usually what I know and you should listen to me because I am usually right.
 
[email protected] said:
I sent a question to Nikon asking if they had changed the coatings on the SE or HG in the last five years. Here was their reply:

Thank you for using our services,

Nikon Customer Support


If you have more information, update your question by clicking on this link and then hit the update button in the web browser.


Subject
Nikon SE and HG binoculars.

Discussion Thread
Response Via Email (Ed S.) 09/07/2011 02:49 PM
Dear Dennis Mau:

The coatings have not changed.

Sincerely,
Ed


And no I didn't forge this or make it up. What I think is is usually what I know and you should listen to me because I am usually right.
Click to expand...

I see.

And that is why you did not ask them if they had been discontinued?

Kimmo's review was in 2004. (Make that "Published" in January 2004.)

Who is Ed?

Doesn't the Nikon Rep who posts here live in the Denver area too? I think his name is Mike.
 
Last edited:
This is slightly off topic, but I do not think you will find out with much certainty from Nikon
Customer service, anything about coatings changes along the way with any of the Nikon
binoculars. They are mostly concerned with service, and repair issues.

I do know that there are coatings changes in the SE over the years, I have seen that for myself.

Like many other optics mfrs. Nikon makes changes from time to time, Swaro. is like this also,
as there rep. has mentioned here.
A cust. service rep. would not have privy to this info. I would not expect them to.

Jerry
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

brocknroller
Nikon 8x32 SE Chinese Clone
Replies
7
Views
2K
brocknroller
brocknroller
brocknroller
The Cure for 8x32 SE Tunnel Vision
Replies
7
Views
2K
John M Robinson
J
G
Nikon (Premier?) 8x42 replaced
2
Replies
24
Views
3K
brocknroller
brocknroller
A
Nikon Monarch HG 8x30 - worth or not to buy, considering prose n cons?
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
dries1
dries1
J
What binoculars are as good as Nikon Superior E?
2 3
Replies
46
Views
4K
Jaywalk
J

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top