rmcconachy
Active member
I'm another who is still using his HR/5 binoculars (a MC 826 and an 804ED) in rotation with other glasses. Even when you have too many, letting go of binoculars you really like is hard.
-
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.
Still using your HR/5? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jaymoynihan
- Start date
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Very true. Any chance you could post a picture of your 804ED and its s/n? That one is getting quite rare.
Ed
Last edited:
rmcconachy
Active member
After all the help you've given me, sure thing Ed. The s/n on the 804ED is 963221. Nicolas Crista found them for me about a year ago. I actually have two Audubon 10x50 (model 826) glasses, one marked "Kestrel" with s/n 934807 and one not with s/n 930113. I don't know if their prism covers are original since I bought all three binoculars secondhand (and all three have been serviced by Nicolas). The remaining picture shows the 804ED and one of the 826s to illustrate the (pretty minimal) difference in size between the two.
Attachments
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Ah, great! This has already answered a number of questions. Now might I trouble you for one or more pictures that show the objective glass (no cap on) at such an angle that one can get an idea how much it's recessed behind the rubber objective ring. A comparison picture with one of the Kestrels would also help.
Many thanks,
Ed
Many thanks,
Ed
rmcconachy
Active member
I'm not sure how well these pictures show what you want to know but I cannot think of a better setup (feel free to make suggestions!). Here are some pictures of the objectives. In both cases the amount of recess is very small (too small IMHO). At the front edge of the objective both binoculars are recessed by the same amount to my eye but the Kestrel, having a fractionally larger diameter objective, may have a tiny amount less safety space in the center of the objective.
Attachments
Last edited:
Simon S
Well-known member
I did a direct comparison between the 8.5x44 MC and my new 10x50 MC today and found that the smaller binocular produces a very slightly brighter image with a tough more colour.
The Image is quite obliviously wider in the 8.5x binocular, the extra 1.5x magnification of very little help in resolving distant detail. Both binoculars are, as you would expect sharp and fairly well corrected, but I still prefer the original 8.5 model.
The Image is quite obliviously wider in the 8.5x binocular, the extra 1.5x magnification of very little help in resolving distant detail. Both binoculars are, as you would expect sharp and fairly well corrected, but I still prefer the original 8.5 model.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Your pictures are great. I've been waiting for such an occasion.
1. Later 804EDs had a black body, which was introduced in the mid-90s. I've never seen one in an advertisement, which led me to question Brock's assertion.
2. There were at least three cover plate markings for the model 826: Audubon, Audubon /Kestrel, and Kestrel, probably introduced in that order. Mine were made in 1998.
3. The size and spacing the the air-spaced objectives of the 804ED remained constant throughout its production. They, like the Kestrel's, bulge out almost to the limit of the cover ring. I put a soft pad on the inside of the tethered cover I got from EO.
4. The FMC coatings on my Kestrel and 804ED differ from one another, altho they are both FMC.
Do you feel that the 804ED has a small "sweet spot"? I don't, but Brock does. But then he also reported that the objective was deeply recessed in his black-body specimen, which leads me to think they had improper maintenance.
Ed
Attachments
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
I suspect that not all MC was the same, just like not all FMC was the same. Do photos of the objectives/eyepieces show color differences?
Ed
jaymoynihan
Corvus brachyrhynchos watcher
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 804 ED!
Ed,
It isn't an ED. I wish it was! It is a garden variety 804 (HR/5 Fully Multi Coated) but it does have nice, rather darkish green coatings with magenta undertone on the objectives and the oculars appear to be same greenish color as those on the 10 x 50 Kestrel. The cone shaped washer assembly showing the IPD scale at the end of the hinge also appears to be identical to the one on the Kestrel.
Don't know if that helps.
Bob
Last edited:
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Well, it just means you still have something to look forward to. 
Also, if you use eyeglasses the standard has slightly longer eye relief.
My Kestrel is dated 1998, just one year before your standard 804. I'm willing to go out on a limb and conclude that they both used the same coatings.
Ed
Also, if you use eyeglasses the standard has slightly longer eye relief. My Kestrel is dated 1998, just one year before your standard 804. I'm willing to go out on a limb and conclude that they both used the same coatings.
Ed
Last edited:
Hi Ed,
Yes, I bought these used, they appear to have been well taken care of, or used very little. Next to my William Optics 22x70 ED, the Swifts are my best bino.
Phil
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
All,
Renze has questioned the underlined statement in my post #12 about small body models appearing before 1985. He is absolutely correct! It should have read:
Ed
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Hi, Ricky-
Fancy meeting you here, Mate!! Hey, I never did hear any feedback as to how you liked your ED's! Be happy to take any of those 3 Swift's off yer' hands when ye' tire of 'em!
I have a pair of HR-5's that the Rev. Mr. Brock graciously bestowed on me for a paltry pittance... they are amongst my favorite bino's. Always will be!
Wes
Fancy meeting you here, Mate!! Hey, I never did hear any feedback as to how you liked your ED's! Be happy to take any of those 3 Swift's off yer' hands when ye' tire of 'em!
I have a pair of HR-5's that the Rev. Mr. Brock graciously bestowed on me for a paltry pittance... they are amongst my favorite bino's. Always will be!
Wes
