A little perspective on water resistance... (1 Viewer)

MandoBear · Mar 15, 2020

This weekend I was going through some boxes I've had in storage and found a BBC Wildlife Magazine from March 1989 -in which there was a test of binoculars of various makes and types from the era - including Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Opticron, Alderblick, Optolyth, Swift, Carl Zeiss Jena, and Bresser. The test included a water resistance test whch comprised of "placing the binoculars under a lawn sprinkler for five minutes; after vigorous focusing, they were then placed in the fridge for two hours to test for internal condensation. Numbers one and two in their overall rankings were Zeiss Dialyt 10x40B, followed by Nikon 8x30. Both proved completely water resistant."

I thought this was very interesting and quite surprising (not so much for the Zeiss Dialyt because this is a roof-prism, though not of modern, sealed construction), but for the Nikon 8x30 - which in that era would have been the Nikon E-series, and, one would have thought, rather less water resistant with its traditional Zeiss-type porro-prism body. Makes one wonder if the modern Nikon EII would be similarly resistant to the sprinkler and fridge test?

Binastro · Mar 15, 2020

Soviet era Porros apparently have a sealing goo, which is quite good.

Some have survived dropping into rivers.

B.

NDhunter · Mar 16, 2020

Tell us what Nikon 8x30 was mentioned in the article? The Nikon Trailblazer 8x30 was a rubber armored
roof prism model and was waterproof.
This was probably the one mentioned.

Jerry

MandoBear · Mar 16, 2020

Jerry, the photos and specifications were definitely of the Nikon E porros, with centre focus, pebble leatherette and metal end plates. The model you mention wasn't widely available in the UK at that time, and, being IF, would not have been recommended for bird and wildlife observation, which was the purpose of the reviews.

jring · Mar 16, 2020

Binastro said:
Soviet era Porros apparently have a sealing goo, which is quite good.

Some have survived dropping into rivers.

B.

Hi,

my E2 and SE have been out in light rain several times - usually no problem with fogging but I tend to not put them in the freezer afterwards ;-)

A sure fire way to get fogging is having the optics in an air-conditioned car in the tropics though... switching off or turning down the aircon might fix this of course, but unfortunately the locals often tend to insist on 16 degrees centigrade... shudder...

Joachim

Troubador · Mar 16, 2020

Me and Troubadoris had poor experiences with a 1971 MkII Swift Audubon 8.5x44 and a 1971 Swift Saratoga 8x40 which, when exposed to rain during 2-3 days on holiday, always fogged up and needed sending back to the UK importer (Pyser) for cleaning. This happened regularly over the 3-4 years we had them.

Lee

MandoBear · Mar 16, 2020

Lee, the review did mention that the Swift Audubon they tested did also not fare well in the water test. Interesting, given that the Bausch-style body should, in theory, have less potential points of water entry than the Zeiss-style body of the Nikons.

Robert Wallace · Mar 16, 2020

Troubador said:
Me and Troubdoris had poor experiences with a 1971 MkII Swift Audubon 8.5x44 and a 1971 Swift Saratoga 8x40 which, when exposed to rain during 2-3 days on holiday, always fogged up and needed sending back to the UK importer (Pyser) for cleaning. This happened regularly over the 3-4 years we had them.

Lee

I hope you mean "Troubdoris and me", Seriously I had problems with my CZJ 10x50 Dekarems but like most binoculars at that time early 1974 in my case, rain guards were not supplied. I had to return my Dekarems to the importers but water staining (slight) on the internal objective lens surface was still visible.

Robert Wallace · Mar 16, 2020

Ref #1 Mandobear

It does not altogether surprise me that the Zeiss Dialyt 10x40B came out well because although they were not sealed, it was the objective lenses that moved not the eyepieces when focusing. Therefore in the rain simulator test the internals of the binocular would be reasonably protected. Some years ago I remember one of the Zeiss demonstrators either at a well known bird reserve or at the Birdfair stating that their service department had received little or no complaints or servicing requirements relating to water ingress for their 7x42 Dialyts. These binoculars were more conventional in their focusing.

wllmspd · Mar 16, 2020

Never worried about fogging till spent a while hiking about in the cold (great views), then came indoors and could t see through my 8x30E2!. Normally never an issue, don’t use them underwater so not sure about water resistance.

Peter

Troubador · Mar 17, 2020

Robert Wallace said:
I hope you mean "Troubdoris and me", Seriously I had problems with my CZJ 10x50 Dekarems but like most binoculars at that time early 1974 in my case, rain guards were not supplied. I had to return my Dekarems to the importers but water staining (slight) on the internal objective lens surface was still visible.

LOL. Troubadoris and I have often discussed these rules of grammar and methinks these rules are more akin to guidelines. :-O

Lee

Pileatus · Mar 17, 2020

Memory lane...
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2822874&postcount=14

Best post on the subject...
https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2823192&postcount=20

yarrellii · Mar 18, 2020

MandoBear, thank you for posting this information. This is really interesting and enlightening! I've always felt that if things like the SE or E2, let alone Dialyt, where good enough (in terms or water resistance; not water tightness) for serious birders in the past, they must be more than enough for amateurs like myself. The information you provide is very helpful, thanks for that.
I don't know if I'm right, but I would assume that if the tested binocular was the E, probably the E2 would be at least as robust, or should I? In the end, Both the SE and the E2 share some components, and both seem very rugged.

My main concern with the E2 (probably in line with Pileatus post #12) is actually internal fogging on the device (and the temporal impossibility to actually use it to watch birds). Secondly, there is the remaining question of whether this internal fogging could be an indication of future internal damage (mould, fungus, haze) thus shortening the lifespan of the binoculars. Where I live is very humid (if you set the table on your patio to have a lovely al fresco dinner on a Summer evening, by the time you to bring the food to the table, the dishes are literally soaking wet, as if it had rain on them, not just dew). I've already had the E2 fogged internally (see picture) in a "regular day" (not extreme conditions, just taking a walk at 2 PM). So that leaves a feeling of uncertainty... (however, the mechanical precision of the device usually helps dissipating it!).

MandoBear · Mar 20, 2020

Indeed - one might think that the EII should have similar water resistance as the older E, but I'm not about to take my EII into the shower to test this hypothesis. What I have also noted is that many older binoculars have their "end plates" - for want of a better term - kind of sealed onto the cast body with a kind of very heavy grease or soft wax which is forced into the joint, and this must surely contribute to their sealing against dust and moisture. I don't have an older E model to compare, but the EII appears to lack this, although the plates are a very accurate fit on the body of the binocular. Maybe the E was/is better sealed in this regard?

Yarellii, I can only sympathise on the very high humidity - if a binocular, like the EII, is not hermetically sealed, then it is inevitable that the humidity inside the instrument will equilibriate with the outside world, and if the temperature then drops below the dew point, condensation will form. You can't argue with physics (no matter what some politicians might think...). Provided the condensation dissipates quickly, I would think no lasting harm is done, but a humid environment does favour the growth of mould over the longer term.

wllmspd · Mar 21, 2020

Sounds like a greenhouse, nitrogen purged units with hydrophobic coating on the lenses to help stop external fogging might be the only full solution. For “normal” conditions the E2 works very nicely, but of course not for everyone.

Peter

mooreorless · Mar 30, 2020

NDhunter said:
Tell us what Nikon 8x30 was mentioned in the article? The Nikon Trailblazer 8x30 was a rubber armored
roof prism model and was waterproof.
This was probably the one mentioned.

Jerry

Here is one as well but camo Nikon Trailblazer 8x30 I still have it! Individual focus WP for sure!

NDhunter · Mar 30, 2020

Steve:
Thanks, how are the optics on that one. The rugged armor was designed for military use, and
some say is similar to the Zeiss safari.

I suppose the camouflage lets you go undetected wherever you go........

Jerry

mooreorless · Mar 31, 2020

Jerry the Nikon 8x30 Trailblazer is pretty decent for non phase coated binocular.It is not a Nikon SE or E2 of course. I have not had it out for a while I will have to try it tomorrow. Yes the camo is great for that. I never tried dunking this under water to test WP but have had it out in really wet conditions. https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=219014

SeldomPerched · Apr 1, 2020

At least none of you suggested 'Troubadoris and myself' -- that is a usage that makes me wince and has gained currency in recent times.

Tom (founding member of Desiccated Pedant Forum)

NDhunter · Apr 1, 2020

SeldomPerched said:
At least none of you suggested 'Troubadoris and myself' -- that is a usage that makes me wince and has gained currency in recent times.

Tom (founding member of Desiccated Pedant Forum)

Tom:

I don't understand your thinking, please explain. Especially your part at your
signature.

Jerry

A little perspective on water resistance... (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

"Experientia Docet”

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread