• 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.

Regarding Nikon Se (1 Viewer)

So if i got you right than the SE lives more from its reputation or myth than from real Performance (relative spoken)?

I don't think so.

If it couldn't walk the walk all the talk in the universe of the internet would not help it!

Binoculars do not remain around for 18 years without changes other than modernization of the coatings on their optics unless they are the real thing. It is likely to still be around when the Swarovison goes through it's first upgrade, which should not be too long from now, if Swarovski wants to continue to be "King of the Hill."

Bob
 
Mine lost it's odor after a week or so but then it hasn't been tested by experts in that respect. My nose, although long and aquiline, is not Durante-esque.

Bob

Long Schnoz Bob,

It's not the size of your proboscis but the functionality and sensitivity of your olfactory system (which includes specialized brain cells) that determines how well you can smell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olfaction#Human_olfactory_system

Thirty years ago, I opened a carton of milk at my parent's house and almost puked. The milk was spoiled putrid. My dad didn't believe me, so I handed him the carton, he took a sniff, and said, "There's nothing wrong with this milk." Then he poured some in his coffee, and the milk curdled. The nose knows.

Anyhow, the smell is a "moo point" (as my "Friend" Joey would say), because the "very fast focuser" and "shallow depth" described by James are both turn-offs. I disagree with him that only the very picky amongst us would have a problem with very fast focusers. You don't and he doesn't, but I bet we'll see a number of others who do, just as we have with the Nikon 8x and 10x32 HGs and other bins with fast focusers. Getting on the bird fast but then having to toggle back and forth to achieve fine focus is counterproductive, regardless if the bin costs $359 or $2,359.

But unlike some people we know, I didn't take a quick look and then sell it on the 'bay a few days later. I stuck with the 8x32 LX for three years and even bought two samples to get one with a more precise focuser. The second sample's focuser had no play like the first and had much better dampening (the first was so loose I could spin it a quarter turn), but I never could get used to the shallow hal depth and ultra fast focuser.

When it comes to focusers, I want a bin with a SLOW HAND.

Roman Nose Brock
 
Last edited:
I think you've hit the nail on the head - perception trumps reality in the marketplace - which occasionally creates REAL bargains. I found the original Victory and Victory II to be a great bargain, since they sold for such a small fraction of their original intended price. Similarly, I believe the Swift 804 HR/5 is the most currently undervalued relative to performance, and is becoming more difficult to judge the SE's to be the relative bargain they once were.

You hit the magic number of mentions of the 804 HR/5 where the photos must come out.

<B>
 

Attachments

  • Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 003.jpg
    Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 003.jpg
    217.8 KB · Views: 83
  • Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 005.jpg
    Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 005.jpg
    208 KB · Views: 88
You hit the magic number of mentions of the 804 HR/5 where the photos must come out.

<B>

Brock:

Good of you to post these nice pictures.

As a Swift newbie, "what large ocular lenses you have", said the Wolf.

I would like to know more about the design of the Swift.

I enjoy the SE's, and like to learn more about some other fine
porro binoculars.

Jerry
 
So if i got you right than the SE lives more from its reputation or myth than from real Performance (relative spoken)?

Spend a few hours behind a Swift Audubon 804 HR/5, then ask yourself whether a Nikon SE is worth 3x to 4x more money. Look through the new Zeiss Conquest HD (any size you like), then ask yourself whether a non-waterproof, less portable, non-HD(or ED in Nikon's nomenclature) binocular is worth every bit as much. While the SE has been standing still (at an admittedly very high level), the roof prism has enjoyed immense research, devopment, and economies of scale. The SE is still a great binocular, but it now has so much more competition in it's price range both in the secondary market, and from the latest generation of roofs. I'm obviously playing devils advocate here, attempting to provoke thought and discussion. It is not my intention to suggest the SE is anything less than a wonderful optical instrument. In fairness, I would hope to hear someone concede that in relative terms, it is no longer as great a bargain as it once was.
 
Brock:

Good of you to post these nice pictures.

As a Swift newbie, "what large ocular lenses you have", said the Wolf.

I would like to know more about the design of the Swift.

I enjoy the SE's, and like to learn more about some other fine
porro binoculars.

Jerry

Hello, Jerry. You're in luck, since THE definitive history of the Swift 804 was co-written by frequent Birdforum contributor Ed Huff (AKA Elkcub). Do a Birdforum search and you will find a 3 part Pdf that is a comprehensive history of the many different versions of the 804. You might think of the final, multi-coated 804 HR/5 as a larger, brighter version of the SE that matches its center resolution, but the 804 has more field curvature, so it is technically less well corrected. I find the 5+mm exit pupil and brighter image of the 804 HR/5 more than a fair trade for the SE's flatter field and smaller size.
 
Long Schnoz Bob,

It's not the size of your proboscis but the functionality and sensitivity of your olfactory system (which includes specialized brain cells) that determines how well you can smell.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olfaction#Human_olfactory_system

Thirty years ago, I opened a carton of milk at my parent's house and almost puked. The milk was spoiled putrid. My dad didn't believe me, so I handed him the carton, he took a sniff, and said, "There's nothing wrong with this milk." Then he poured some in his coffee, and the milk curdled. The nose knows.

Anyhow, the smell is a "moo point" (as my "Friend" Joey would say), because the "very fast focuser" and "shallow depth" described by James are both turn-offs. I disagree with him that only the very picky amongst us would have a problem with very fast focusers. You don't and he doesn't, but I bet we'll see a number of others who do, just as we have with the Nikon 8x and 10x32 HGs and other bins with fast focusers. Getting on the bird fast but then having to toggle back and forth to achieve fine focus is counterproductive, regardless if the bin costs $359 or $2,359.

But unlike some people we know, I didn't take a quick look and then sell it on the 'bay a few days later. I stuck with the 8x32 LX for three years and even bought two samples to get one with a more precise focuser. The second sample's focuser had no play like the first and had much better dampening (the first was so loose I could spin it a quarter turn), but I never could get used to the shallow hal depth and ultra fast focuser.

When it comes to focusers, I want a bin with a SLOW HAND.

Roman Nose Brock

Brock

I think I have olfactory nerves in my nose but not brain cells.

The Swift 8.5 x 44 Audubon 828 should focus slow enough for you and it costs the same as the Terra ED. Besides it is made in Japan and won't stink. And it looks upscale with that gold button on the front. They are dim but you can't have everything. Anyway you won't notice that on bright days. I saw a lady using one at Cape May. She was happy and it looked like an alpha to the unsophisticated eye.

Also I would advise you to stay away from any bargain you might find in a discontinued Zeiss FL because it will have the same fast 360º focus radius that the Terra ED has. I have a 7 x 42 FL and it's focus wheel is pretty well damped like the Terra ED and I find that any toggling necessary with them is easy and minimal at 7x and 8x. I think I will keep them both.

Hope this helps,

Bob
 
Hello, Jerry. You're in luck, since THE definitive history of the Swift 804 was co-written by frequent Birdforum contributor Ed Huff (AKA Elkcub). Do a Birdforum search and you will find a 3 part Pdf that is a comprehensive history of the many different versions of the 804. You might think of the final, multi-coated 804 HR/5 as a larger, brighter version of the SE that matches its center resolution, but the 804 has more field curvature, so it is technically less well corrected. I find the 5+mm exit pupil and brighter image of the 804 HR/5 more than a fair trade for the SE's flatter field and smaller size.

Angelo:

I will have to do some searching, I have followed some of
those posts, and so it seems the many variations, make things
interesting.
Thanks for the advice.

Jerry
 
So if i got you right than the SE lives more from its reputation or myth than from real Performance (relative spoken)?

Hello Odradek,

It is a good binocular for most people but personal preferences are more important among first rate binoculars.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
 
Brock

I think I have olfactory nerves in my nose but not brain cells.

The Swift 8.5 x 44 Audubon 828 should focus slow enough for you and it costs the same as the Terra ED. Besides it is made in Japan and won't stink. And it looks upscale with that gold button on the front. They are dim but you can't have everything. Anyway you won't notice that on bright days. I saw a lady using one at Cape May. She was happy and it looked like an alpha to the unsophisticated eye.

Also I would advise you to stay away from any bargain you might find in a discontinued Zeiss FL because it will have the same fast 360º focus radius that the Terra ED has. I have a 7 x 42 FL and it's focus wheel is pretty well damped like the Terra ED and I find that any toggling necessary with them is easy and minimal at 7x and 8x. I think I will keep them both.

Hope this helps,

Bob

Bob,

The two things I liked about both the 820 Audubon, and the 804 FMC Audubon was how bright they were and the wide 8.2* FOV.

Although the ER is more generous, the 828 Audubon roof has a paltry 6.4* FOV and by your own admission, the view is "dim" (75% light transmission, according to Arek). Most ChinBins beat this Japanese-made roof in light transmission.

To pick my wallet, the 828 Audubon needs a redesign - a wider FOV and significantly higher transmission.

If not for us, Alison, do it for the good name of Humphrey H. Swift.

<B>
 
Interesting thread for me.
I have and use all three of the SE models. I also have that model of the Swift, and a Leica 10x42 BA, and the venerable Zeiss 7x42 BGAT*P.
That Swift 804 has to my eye, very similar central resolution to the SE. But two things are very different , other than the eye relief restrictions of the 804. The massive resolution sweet spot of the SE's, and I find the contrast to be noticably better in both the center and the rest of the field in the SE.
Also, as previously pointed out in this thread, the superb field flatness in the SE provides a lot more information in the view, than the 804.
But for the overall, gestalt of viewing, that Ziess 7x of mine is...well........
 
Last edited:
Shipping delayed

Nikon SE 8x32 ordered from Optic Planet in late June has now been delayed from July 5th until August 5th according to their customer rep this morning.

The suspense is killing me and now it looks like they won't be going to Alaska with me either. :C

Apparently, these must be in extremely high demand AND/OR they are produced in very limited runs.
 
Nikon SE 8X32 504xxx is on bid at your favorite auction site. Currently $480 with 4 days remaining.

No, it's not mine.

Thanks!

What is the difference between the ones on sale 8x32 SE CF: and the ones I have on order: Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE?

Anyone know? Their specs appear to be the same.
 
Last edited:
Thanks!

What is the difference between the ones on sale 8x32 SE CF: and the ones I have on order: Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE?

Anyone know? Their specs appear to be the same.
Basically identical. I use my aging 504xxx and my wife a relatively new 550xxx (newer coatings that are very marginally brighter). I could use one of our 550's but I sentimentally prefer my 504xxx!
 
Tantien

Focus Optics in the UK have a nice used one for sale, thought it may be of interest to you.

John.

http://www.focusoptics.eu/focus/second-hand/used/?product_page=4

P.S. They have a 10x42 as well.

Thanks John! But with the shipping and the Pound to Dollar exchange rates the cost comes out close to the cost of what I ordered. I'm paying £403.41 and these used ones from the UK are £400.00 according to the shopping cart. I did the conversion for you. ;)

But thank you for the look-out!
 
Thanks!

What is the difference between the ones on sale 8x32 SE CF: and the ones I have on order: Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE?

Anyone know? Their specs appear to be the same.

Mostly a change in marketing, and a confusing one, I think since the roof known as HGL in Europe is called the Premier in the U.S. But unlike the Premier, which does have a badge change on the binoculars, at least in the U.S., the Nikon "Premier" SE still says Nikon 8x32 7.5*. On the box it's designated as 8x32 SE CF.

There is, however, a difference in the coatings and glass in the latest model (serial # 550), which has "Eco-Glass" and more advanced coatings that produce better contrast.

Ditto for the coatings on the newer black body EII vs. the older gray body EII. Comparing the EII BB to the 550 SE, the coatings appear to be very similar in terms of contrast, though the colors in the EII are slightly warmer than the SE.

Both give stunning images for a fraction of the cost of an alpha, though, of course, they are not waterproof or as robustly built as an alpha roof.

I still get impressed by the SE and EII, particularly in subdued/filtered light (such as light coming through a tree canopy) where the softening of the light really brings out the contrast and aids in revealing details.

As long as you don't experience the dreaded SE image blackouts, you will be well pleased with the optics. If you do experience blackouts, search for the term MOLCET and you'll find out how to avoid them.

Brock
 
Mostly a change in marketing, and a confusing one, I think since the roof known as HGL in Europe is called the Premier in the U.S. But unlike the Premier, which does have a badge change on the binoculars, at least in the U.S., the Nikon "Premier" SE still says Nikon 8x32 7.5*. On the box it's designated as 8x32 SE CF.

There is, however, a difference in the coatings and glass in the latest model (serial # 550), which has "Eco-Glass" and more advanced coatings that produce better contrast.

Ditto for the coatings on the newer black body EII vs. the older gray body EII. Comparing the EII BB to the 550 SE, the coatings appear to be very similar in terms of contrast, though the colors in the EII are slightly warmer than the SE.

Both give stunning images for a fraction of the cost of an alpha, though, of course, they are not waterproof or as robustly built as an alpha roof.

I still get impressed by the SE and EII, particularly in subdued/filtered light (such as light coming through a tree canopy) where the softening of the light really brings out the contrast and aids in revealing details.

As long as you don't experience the dreaded SE image blackouts, you will be well pleased with the optics. If you do experience blackouts, search for the term MOLCET and you'll find out how to avoid them.

Brock

Thanks Brock and Pileatus! So the listing has this "MPN: BAA555AA" for the binoculars. So is this the 550 SE that you are referring to? Because the MPN number for the one's I've ordered have an MPN: 7381 which would either imply a later model or a newer coating?

This marketing change is driving me nuts!|:S|
 
Last edited:
Thanks Brock and Pileatus! So the listing has this "MPN: BAA555AA" for the binoculars. So is this the 550 SE that you are referring to? Because the MPN number for the one's I've ordered have an MPN: 7381 which would either imply a later model or a newer coating?

This marketing change is driving me nuts!|:S|
Nikon 7381 = 8X32 SE (Superior E, Premier SE)
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=146143&Q=&is=USA&A=details
FWIW, "Nikon 7381" is the best search term.

Compared side-by-side in all conditions the 501, 504, 505 and 550 serial numbers are virtually identical. The later 550 models are a bit "brighter" due to improved coatings but, in actual use, it's not apparent unless it's rather dark! I actually prefer the color saturation of the earlier versions...but that too is easy to ignore.

Note: Ordering a Nikon 7381 does not guarantee you'll get a 550nnn serial number. It all depends on what they have in stock. I don't think the MPN number is useful to end-users.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top