-
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.
Se 10x42 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter dries1
- Start date
A2GG
Beth
The SE porros are wonderful. I owned the 8x32 for a few months or so some years back.
It was truly razor sharp (high serial#). I sold it to Bruce who still has it I believe.
Couple years ago I bought a 10x42 SE from the sports store down the street that was closing for good.
I resold it and made a little money, but sometimes think I should have kept it. It was really the only 10x
I got along with and was impressed with. It worked with my glasses and the view was great with huge sweet spot
from the field flatteners. I'm not a big fan of 10x in general, but the 10x42 SE is impressive and one I could use.
Probably should've kept it.
It was truly razor sharp (high serial#). I sold it to Bruce who still has it I believe.
Couple years ago I bought a 10x42 SE from the sports store down the street that was closing for good.
I resold it and made a little money, but sometimes think I should have kept it. It was really the only 10x
I got along with and was impressed with. It worked with my glasses and the view was great with huge sweet spot
from the field flatteners. I'm not a big fan of 10x in general, but the 10x42 SE is impressive and one I could use.
Probably should've kept it.
dries1
Member
The great thing about them is that being a porro, they can be serviced easier than a roof. And yes the 10x has great eye relief and by far the lightest 10X I have with very easy handling. It would have been great to walk into that store at that time and see what they were selling off at discount. On the + side you pocketed a few $$. Should you seek one down the road, they come up for sale time and again.
Andy W.
Andy W.
Samolot
Well-known member
Agreed. There is one on EBay right now, a tad expensive. I managed to pick one up a few weeks ago from a different seller. Really enjoyed them, but have shipped them off to get them "overhauled" (internal cleaning, collimation, and refurbish the focuser). I miss them already and can't wait for their return.
In regards to the serial number, this is apparently a topic of frequent discussion in regards to the SE's. I found this on Birdforum a while back:
It would be nice to do a side-side by side comparison between the 050... binocular in Australia you found and mine (008...). Quite frankly however, its all a moot point. This is great glass and because its a porro, easily serviceable as you mentioned, so it will last a very long time and views are always a pleasure.
dries1
Member
Mike,
Brock spent many a thread on the SEs, do we really know when Nikon switched to unleaded glass? and if there is a definite difference in the optics over the years.
Peter it is a high serial No. alright. So this serial No. likely represents lead free glass? the serial numbers from Nikon are clouded in mystery.
Andy W.
Brock spent many a thread on the SEs, do we really know when Nikon switched to unleaded glass? and if there is a definite difference in the optics over the years.
Peter it is a high serial No. alright. So this serial No. likely represents lead free glass? the serial numbers from Nikon are clouded in mystery.
Andy W.
There are a couple of long threads on the subject of the SE's SNs and whether or not one could determine when they were manufactured by the 1st 3 digits of their SNs..
I never thought anything precise could be determined from them. The consensus seemed to be that when Nikon would improve the coatings on their LX and LXL series binoculars they also put the new glass in newly made SEs and E2s at the same time.
FWIW my 8x32 is 505xxx; my 10x42 is 005xxx and my 12x50 is 300xxx which as far as I can tell means that my 8x32 is an early issue; my 10x42 might be among the earliest made (Its SN has much smaller printing than on the other 2.) and as for my 12x50; I have no idea!
The 8x and 10x are in very good condition and the 12x50 is in excellent condition.
Bob
I never thought anything precise could be determined from them. The consensus seemed to be that when Nikon would improve the coatings on their LX and LXL series binoculars they also put the new glass in newly made SEs and E2s at the same time.
FWIW my 8x32 is 505xxx; my 10x42 is 005xxx and my 12x50 is 300xxx which as far as I can tell means that my 8x32 is an early issue; my 10x42 might be among the earliest made (Its SN has much smaller printing than on the other 2.) and as for my 12x50; I have no idea!
The 8x and 10x are in very good condition and the 12x50 is in excellent condition.
Bob
Last edited:
PeterPS
Well-Known Member
Andy,
Here is what I know:
-SE 8x32, SN 551xxx and 550xxx---eco glass
-SE 10x42, SN 050xxx--eco glass
-SE 12x50, SN 350xxx--eco glass
Any smaller SNs---lead glass.
Bob,
Your SE 8x32 with SN 505xxx is not really an early one (the SNs jumped from 505xxx to 550xxx when Nikon switched to eco glass), but it's one with lead glass.
Peter
Here is what I know:
-SE 8x32, SN 551xxx and 550xxx---eco glass
-SE 10x42, SN 050xxx--eco glass
-SE 12x50, SN 350xxx--eco glass
Any smaller SNs---lead glass.
Bob,
Your SE 8x32 with SN 505xxx is not really an early one (the SNs jumped from 505xxx to 550xxx when Nikon switched to eco glass), but it's one with lead glass.
Peter
14Goudvink
Well-known member
Is lead glass actually better, optically speaking? With better CA control?
henry link
Well-known member
AFAIK nobody has ever produced any evidence that lead containing glass in binoculars is any better at CA control than eco glass. It seems to be mainly a selling point for old binoculars offered on eBay.
I tried to test this by switching 30mm objective lenses between a lead containing 8x30 E and an eco glass 8x30 E II. In those binoculars the only lead containing element that matters for longitudinal CA is the "flint" in the objective doublet. Both binoculars use the same objective lens and lens cell, so they are easily exchanged. I used my usual high contrast CA target and examined the color fringes after boosting the magnification to 64x. No difference.
I've seen or owned 503, 504, 505, and 550 8X32 SE's. I sold a 550 and personally use a 504. My wife's 550 hangs on a hook. A relative has one of the 504's. Every darn one of them is a joy to use. Starting with the 550's there was a subtle increase in brightness (heard on the net and verified while testing samples in a darkened room). Outside the "extra" brightness is a non-starter.
I've looked at several well-used SE's over the years and only one had a problem. One tube was not pin-sharp and I think it was due to being fogged multiple times (owner verified). Still, it was still a pretty nice view!
I think the SE design is so simple and the construction so good that there's not much room for error. Perhaps Henry/Bill can comment. More than 10 years ago I dropped my 504 from about 3 feet onto pavement. I thought for sure it was damaged but I'm still happily using it.
I've looked at several well-used SE's over the years and only one had a problem. One tube was not pin-sharp and I think it was due to being fogged multiple times (owner verified). Still, it was still a pretty nice view!
I think the SE design is so simple and the construction so good that there's not much room for error. Perhaps Henry/Bill can comment. More than 10 years ago I dropped my 504 from about 3 feet onto pavement. I thought for sure it was damaged but I'm still happily using it.
Last edited:
14Goudvink
Well-known member
Thanks for the comments on leaded vs eco-glass.
I use to have a 0008XXX 10x42 SE that in direct comparison had a sparkle that a Leica Ultravid 7x42 BR just didn't have.
George
I use to have a 0008XXX 10x42 SE that in direct comparison had a sparkle that a Leica Ultravid 7x42 BR just didn't have.
George
