• 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.

Swift Pix (1 Viewer)

No hallmark on the Neptune--only "Made in Japan for Swift" and, of course, there's no prefix on the serial number.

No MIOJ.
No S&A logo--just the "Swift" crosshairs.
 
Hi Bob,

That's quite a collection, thanks for sharing! Nice to see the Audubon 7x35 roofs there, I remember these well, had a pair around 1990, I think. The dual focuser was what sold me on them, plus the easy-on-the-eyes 7x mag, but I only had them briefly, as I found that the focus wheels operated much too stiff and they didn't loosen up which I had hoped and expected they'd do.
How is the focusing action on your pair?

Best regards,

Ronald
 
Holy Moley, that is some fine collection. Swift should consider opening a binocular museum in Arkansas.

Would you mind telling us, which is your favorite? Or is that like asking which child you like best? :)

Brock
 
Bob,

Do you have any information about the possible meaning of Vega on the 1950's Swifts? My guess is that it could be a trade mark for the coating process but maybe you know more?

Renze
 
I believe Vega is the coating process, too, and Swift in its literature mentions a Super V Coat some time after the Vega logo disappears from the binoculars.

The clones use a different serial-number system and have slot-head screws instead of Phillips. The hallmarks are different when compared to the equivalent Swifts. The cases are the same style. The optics aren't obviously inferior, but I haven't had any of the Vegas cleaned up so I've made no systematic tests.
 
My 825 is almost sloppy in the hinge and is certainly not tight in the focus, so it is a good binocular for a couple of students who are handing off.

My favorite? Well, as I hinted in the notes, my primary birding binoculars are a Zeiss Conquest 8x30 and a Zeiss T*FL 7x42. But after the Commodore Mark II 7x50 came back from Crista last summer I spent many nights on the deck stargazing with them. They're not as gatherful or sharp as the Zeiss--but as Redford said in "The Sting," "It's close."

I can tell you the most disappointing: Sport King and Holiday Mark II. Too heavy and too "fun-house" for panning, so right-out for birding afoot.
 
rdmadison said:
My 825 is almost sloppy in the hinge and is certainly not tight in the focus, so it is a good binocular for a couple of students who are handing off.

My favorite? Well, as I hinted in the notes, my primary birding binoculars are a Zeiss Conquest 8x30 and a Zeiss T*FL 7x42. But after the Commodore Mark II 7x50 came back from Crista last summer I spent many nights on the deck stargazing with them. They're not as gatherful or sharp as the Zeiss--but as Redford said in "The Sting," "It's close."

I can tell you the most disappointing: Sport King and Holiday Mark II. Too heavy and too "fun-house" for panning, so right-out for birding afoot.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply, and for the reference from The Sting, which is one of my all time favorites.

A Swift 804 MC Audubon is conspicuously missing from your Swift collection or did I miss it somehow?

I use it primarily for stargazing, very good edges for a WF bin (75%+), and it shows the tightest stars I've seen in any binoculars - true pinpoints and perfectly round balls are brighter stars. I also bought three 804 FMC samples, hoping they would have as good edges but with better contrast, however, none were as good in edge performance as the older 804 MC. One FMC model had fair edges, one had poor edges but with the sharpest centerfield I've seen (too superlatives in one model bin!) but the pincushion and field curvature were excessive, so that went too.

The FMC ED version had a vertical sweet spot the width of a pinstripe. I could only see the outer stars of Orion's belt if I held the bins sideways. It was also falling apart (this was the legendary black body ED with the recessed objectives that used to be part of Swift folklore until recently).

Here are some photos of my 804 MC Audubon. I should advise you to put a cover over your keyboard, because as a vintage porro aficionado, you might drool on it like I almost did looking at your Osprey. -:)

Brock
 

Attachments

  • Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 003.jpg
    Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 003.jpg
    185.1 KB · Views: 100
  • Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 005.jpg
    Swift 804 MC Audubon and case 005.jpg
    202.5 KB · Views: 104
rdmadison said:
My 825 is almost sloppy in the hinge and is certainly not tight in the focus, so it is a good binocular for a couple of students who are handing off.

QUOTE]

Ok, thanks, maybe I should have kept them longer for the focus to loosen up, they were really nice in the hands.

Best regards,

Ronald
Click to expand...
 
The Osprey had my attention, too. It made me drool back in the 1980's by its looks alone, with classy black rubber, but I never came to buying one, too expensive even then for a student on a tight budget...

Best regards,

Ronald
 
KorHaan said:
The Osprey had my attention, too. It made me drool back in the 1980's by its looks alone, with classy black rubber, but I never came to buying one, too expensive even then for a student on a tight budget...
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the Osprey's good looks are not matched by its optical performance. There's a 7 deg. (122/1000m) RFoV which is not too impressive for a 7.5 power binocular, but I certainly could have lived with that were it not for the worst toilet paper roll-view I've ever come across. I wasn't even aware of a viewing experience like that until I saw the Osprey.

Renze
 
Renze de Vries said:
Unfortunately the Osprey's good looks are not matched by its optical performance. There's a 7 deg. (122/1000m) RFoV which is not too impressive for a 7.5 power binocular, but I certainly could have lived with that were it not for the worst toilet paper roll-view I've ever come across. I wasn't even aware of a viewing experience like that until I saw the Osprey.

Renze
Click to expand...

Renze

They sure are "purdy," but the narrow FOV turned me off too. I also read they had BK-7 prisms so they have square exit pupils, but I hadn't heard about the "toilet paper roll-view". Is that another name for "rolling ball" or the "globe effect" from a lack of pincushion?

Having used both 7x and 8x bins, I think I would like 7.5x, a bit easier to steady w/out losing too much resolution and you gain a bit larger exit pupil.

However, I hardly ever see this magnification made. The only bin I recall in recent times was the 7.5x42 Brunton Epoch, and that has an even smaller 6.4* FOV and a 48.5* AFOV!! And they wanted over $1,000 for them? Like the Osprey, the Epoch is a great looking binocular, but the specs stink!

Brock
 
Previous comments on the Osprey kept the price low enough that I was able to get mine MIB for very little--certainly one of my best buys.

BaK4. Don't get seasick panning (not like the Sport King or Holiday), and the fov is not an issue when I'm not scanning for marsh or songbirds. I have other binocs for that. I like them particularly for waterfowl. I think if they were the only binocular I owned I would not feel at a disadvantage. But they are, after all, in the loaner bag.

I don't own an Audubon in my time range, and I couldn't stand the 804 I got in 1978 (covered elsewhere--I think I called it a prima donna as far as focusing went). I would love to find one at a reasonable price--but Ed and Renze's research has, I'm afraid, inflated the market. Any other Mark II from the 60's is likely to be made just as well and much cheaper to buy.
 
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

M
Unidentified moth? Northern Ireland May 2019 (No photo, only description)
Replies
1
Views
328
qwerty5
qwerty5
R
Swift flying low please advise
Replies
8
Views
423
Kits
Kits
B
Bird in Extremadura, Spain, in November 2022
Replies
3
Views
388
Barb100
B
K
Help me save this goldfinch
Replies
1
Views
380
Bewick
Bewick
R
Something old; something new: 825
Replies
0
Views
1K
rdmadison
R

Users who are viewing this thread

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