Se 8x32 (1 Viewer)

I was out this morning with these, I am and will always be impressed with the sharpness and contrast they provide, on anything from tree trunk structure to the feathers on birds. Too bad Nikon is not pushing the premium porro line any more, these are light with a small foot print.

A.W.

Hi Dries,

Aren't they a bit bulky? I find my Nikon 7x35 porro ergonomically rather inconvenient when compared to an 8x32 roof...

Synaps,

No actually they are quite portable, and light at ~ 630 grams and can easily fit into a coat pocket. I like a variety of view through a glass, both flat and with a 3D view with depth of field, such as the 8X30 EII which also has the 8.8 degrees FOV. The SE (albeit with a smaller FOV than the eII) allows me to see small details that with SOME roofs would go unnoticed.

A.W.

A.W.

Synaps said:

Hi Dries,

Aren't they a bit bulky? I find my Nikon 7x35 porro ergonomically rather inconvenient when compared to an 8x32 roof...

Click to expand...

For me the width of the SE and E2 helps to give me a good hand fit. Other porros (Swaro Habicht for example) less so. I don't know about the Nikon 7x35. Just as different types of roofs feel different in the hand, so do different types of porros.

dries1 said:

I was out this morning with these, I am and will always be impressed with the sharpness and contrast they provide, on anything from tree trunk structure to the feathers on birds. Too bad Nikon is not pushing the premium porro line any more, these are light with a small foot print.

A.W.

Click to expand...

Nice to learn there are more tree trunk observers here on Bird Forum. I also like to inspect the differences among tree trunk structure. Many tree field guides report on tree trunks as well leaf structure, height, wood, etc.

Crusty

Well, I confess now that I am also a tree trunk addict, and love to look at the differing bark configurations, let alone the rest of the trees. The other thing is that I tire of trying to find and keep birds in my view-they don't have high heartbeats for nothing! ; ) They seem at times as unpredictable as humans!

Figety is not my forte, but I love when I can study something at will, without knowing in a second or three, or less than a minute it will not be there again! Birds are very beautiful, and their feather patterns and colors have no equal. And that may be why some have gone over to the other side, and like to capture them with a camera, now digitally easy to do so. But really, I get a kick out of just observing grasses, flowers, shrubs and blossoms, whether on trees or flowers, or anything that offers great diversity due to lighting conditions that change over time, and when they are highlighted it is just beautiful to catch them at the right moment-such as a backlit Maple leaf, or the like! Even clouds, buildings, or lighting conditions that offer pleasing or even better, dramatic results for the here and now experience, besides the birds that fleetingly remain in view well lit or not!

I was first a photographer, so my want of a perfect view is hard to dismiss, for just seeing something that appears so briefly as birds often do, to dramatic lighting changes of the countryside that please constanly while they are happening and can be even be captured and recorded to show the changes if photographing, even if they also disappear too quickly as well, over time. Many times I just stare through my binoculars and am glad I was there to see the lighting so beautifully displayed. So for others to capture birds in a desirable photograph is even more difficult it seems to me. I just am not as patient anymore in my old age to wait out the quick captures that I might have once done. That's OK, as I still get a kick out of seeing other natural textures and patterns that just amaze me when I see them, especially in the right light that makes you just say wow!

I had both the 8x SE and EII, AND the 8x32 Swarovski EL WB and SV. Now I don't!!!

What this proves, I haven't a clue....:flyaway:

CG

I guess you got rid of your BBs. What glass are you sporting these days.

Andy W.

It has changed over the years, so at the moment:
EDG 7x, UVHD+ 7x, BGA Classic 7x, Conquest HD 8x32, Maven B3 8x, Swaro CL 8x, Bushnell 8x25.
Don't think this proves much of anything either!|:d|

CG

Cycleguy,

I think you have it covered with that glass. Nice to see others with an EDG and a Zeiss BGA. Not to mention the Leica, the one I am looking for in a 7X42. Only premium one in 7X made anymore.

Andy W.

Tree Trunks

Crusty,

I am sure there are some fine forests in kentucky, a great place to view nature.

Andy W.

Crusty said:

Nice to learn there are more tree trunk observers here on Bird Forum. I also like to inspect the differences among tree trunk structure. Many tree field guides report on tree trunks as well leaf structure, height, wood, etc.

Crusty

Click to expand...

Barry

When seeking subjects that don't fly away, don't neglect mosses, lichens and fungi. They all occur in a bewildering but bewitching array of forms.

Lee

Troubador said:

Barry

When seeking subjects that don't fly away, don't neglect mosses, lichens and fungi. They all occur in a bewildering but bewitching array of forms.

Lee

Click to expand...

That's where my wife's Pentax Papilio 6.5 x 21 comes into its own, with its very close 0.5m focus. She's the flora expert and it's like having an mobile encyclopedia with me when were are out together.

Stan

Tree bark, especially when it contains lots of block or linear features, is great for testing for astigmatism in bins. !

--AP

Tree bark

Alexis Powell said:

Tree bark, especially when it contains lots of block or linear features, is great for testing for astigmatism in bins. !

--AP

Click to expand...

Bingo.:t:

Andy W.

I don't have much to say about tree bark but after using lesser bins for the past couple of weeks ( Sightron blue sky and ...Zeiss HT) going back to the SE's is an almost hallucinatory experience. Their sharpness, eye popping contrast and three dimensional clarity appearing quite surreal.
Sometimes I wonder whether the SE's were not in fact phased out by Nikon but actually secretly banned by sinister government forces along with such substances as LSD and psilocybin.

Alexis Powell said:

Tree bark, especially when it contains lots of block or linear features, is great for testing for astigmatism in bins. !

--AP

Click to expand...

I usually set my diopters to well furrowed tree bark.

mulligatawny owl said:

I don't have much to say about tree bark....

Click to expand...

Well, it's quiet, and it doesn't move a whole lot! And there are so many patterns, and all that is what I like about tree bark! ; )

cycleguy said:

It has changed over the years, so at the moment:
EDG 7x, UVHD+ 7x, BGA Classic 7x, Conquest HD 8x32, Maven B3 8x, Swaro CL 8x, Bushnell 8x25.
Don't think this proves much of anything either!|:d|

CG

Click to expand...

I think it may prove you enjoy the hunt and the chance to look at new glass like many of us here do. :t: The differences between all that glass as far as quality is likely not that great. It's just fun to try out new binoculars. Right now I have the EII in both 8x and 10x, the 8x32 EL, 10x32 UVHD, Kowa Genesis 8x33. What I will have in two years is a mystery but I doubt it will be much better or worse than what I have now.

Troubador said:

Barry

When seeking subjects that don't fly away, don't neglect mosses, lichens and fungi. They all occur in a bewildering but bewitching array of forms.

Lee

Click to expand...

Thanks Lee, I'll have to look next time I'm out and see how they look through the binos! I remember taking a walk around the neighborhood here on a warm Winter day, and finding a small patch of rich green moss growing at the edge of a sidewalk across from where I was sitting while taking a rest. I was happy to see it too, a little nature among all the concrete and macadam road!

There's also an old Red Cedar tree at the entrance of the back alley that I vew from my bedroom that you can clearly see when it's wet, a pattern of green fungi or moss that dots the trunk here and there. I use it to focus on and compare binoculars's sharpness how well they can pick it out then too.

I do have a pair of 8x32 SE's, though I haven't had them out lately, but they are very sharp-even more so than my EII's to my eyes-maybe the field flatteners that help make it seem sharper? But when I'm looking through my EII's that I have out, I don't notice any problem with sharpness either. That's probably natural unless you are comparing one after the other at the same time. But because of the extended distance I can see down the alley, often I will use my 10x bins instead. It's not a wide field I need, but a bigger bird when I'm trying to find them or ID them. I also get a kick being able to see objects that I can't even see with my eyes, until I put up the bins to my face, and become Superman again! ; )

The Nikon SE 8 x 32 are amazing binoculars and are not at all bulky. The only flaws associated with them are 1) they are not waterproof; and 2) once the rubber eyecups become worn out and crack, these are no longer replaceable. I personally don't put too much stock in waterproofing of binoculars, as I do not let mine get rain-soaked and I don't anticipate dropping them in a puddle. But I know that this feature is important to some people. As for the eyecups, I suppose people can improvise some way to keep old, cracked ones going, but really, it's too bad Nikon is unable to keep these minor spare parts for these binoculars. They go through all the trouble of making beautiful optics that will last a lifetime (or more), and then cripple them by including parts that have a relatively short life and yet cannot be replaced.