brocknroller
porromaniac
Bushwackers will also help protect the objective housings, which on the EII are not armored but exposed metal just looking for a ding.
<B>
-
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.
Regarding Nikon Se (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Odradek
- Start date
Bushwackers will also help protect the objective housings, which on the EII are not armored but exposed metal just looking for a ding.
<B>
![Nikon EII and SE 030 [Desktop Resolution] [].JPG](/data/attachments/421/421864-99fa6d372b4067a90f8d44ffc7ac7db9.jpg)
Yes. They probably are pretty good birders.
steve@37n84w
Well-known member
I'm sure Simon will mention some of his favorites but from your comments it's obvious you haven't looked through a Prostar or any of the other fantastic Nikon IF porros. I have many porros and roofs with field flattener lenses to increase edge performance but the Prostar still offers the best edge performance of any binocular period and it is also stunning on axis as well.
As far as center focus Nikons I have all of the SE and EII models and they are superb but the center focus Nikon that impresses me the most is the venerable 7x35 9.3º Wide Field.
Steve
Simon S
Well-known member
How about the 10x42se or even the 10x50se? They look great but no idea if they are readily available?
I think this SN sequence 00xxxx is from early models of the the Nikon 10 x 42 SE.
I have a 10 x 42 SE. The SN on mine (#0053xx) has smaller sized numbers and has a more narrow plastic cover guard over it than my 8x32 and 12x50 SEs have.
I purchased it used from KEH Camera in May 2006. It was rated LN- and it was in pristine condition. I assumed that KEH might have gotten it through the purchase of the inventory of a camera store. The instruction sheet (manual), product guide with specifications and the Nikon product registration card were included but there are no publication dates on them.
The product guide shows a photo of an 8 x 32 SE which has a SN of 500003 on it. If I'm not mistaken the #50xxxx sequence is for the earliest 8 x 32 SE.
This may indicate that the last 4 numbers of the SN disclose the numerical sequence of it's manufacture in a series which is identified by the 1st 2 numbers. If this is so then the last number shown on the 8 x 32 would mean it was the 3rd one made. (?) So I guess the count would start with the last number. I don't know if 6000 or more were sold world wide from the 1st run of the 10 x 42. Seems like a lot! This is speculation of course. Maybe the 3rd or 4th numbers are another code? The 10 x 42's sold for about $800 to $900 new in the early 2000s as I recall. If 1000 of them were sold it would seem to have been successful.
Hope this helps some.
Bob
PS: I believe that the 10 x 42 was the first version of the SEs. It came out in 1995 I think. Shortly after that Bill Cook wrote a very complimentary article about it in an issue of "Sky and Telescope" magazine.
Last edited:
steve@37n84w
Well-known member
Simon
The 10x42SE and 12x50SE are great but availability is spotty at best, B&H shows the 10x42 in stock and the 8x32 and 12x50 back ordered and Adorama at least for now shows all three SE models in stock. When I purchased my 10x42 and 12x50 they were "special order" (from Optics Planet) but they didn't charge my credit card until the binos were shipped about two weeks later.
All of the SEs are great but I think the 8x is the pick of the litter, I have both the older version (leaded glass) and the new eco glass version....both are superb. I also think the lower magnification models in the EII series and IF series are a little better then their higher magnification siblings but that's understandable knowing the problems inherent in higher magnification binocular optics
I also like to say thanks for making your great collection of binoculars readily accessible to all of us binocular enthusiasts, I often look at your collection and use it is a reference tool.
Steve
Thanks Bob. I got them from Camera World 13yrs. ago
Yours might have the old Lead Glass in the optics. I'm not sure. Someone else might know. There are SE aficionados who think this is a good thing.:t:
Bob
angelo225544
Well-known member
Hi, Steve. Fair comment, and I have had the good fortune of owning both the Prostar and Tropical at various times. I didn't think IF binoculars ought to be part of this conversation, since they aren't exactly meant for birding, but I should have been more specific. Please tell me more about the 7x35 9.3° Wide Field. Is it multicoated? Does it have a similar 5-element eyepiece as the EII? Does it share the same wobble-free bridge design as the SE and EII? Thank you in advance for your help.
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Angelo:
There is a recent discussion of the older Actions, they are very good,
and you will find this interesting. After trying some nice newer models
I find it fun to try some of the "oldies but goodies".
Look back 5 threads, to "How good was the N Gold Ring Sentinel."
I am not sure about the eyepiece design, but the bridge is strong and
well made.
I am also wondering how this Action compares to the early E models?
I am hoping someone will chime in on that question.
They must be close.
Jerry
angelo225544
Well-known member
Thank you, Jerry. I can tell you the early E's are fine binoculars, especially the later multi-coated ones. Any of the older single coated Nikons will pale (literally) in comparison - but are at least as good as any of their contemporaries from Germany. Was the 7x35 9.3° originally part of the "A" or "E" Series, or did it evolve separately? It seems a shame Nikon stopped developing a 7x35 as an extension of the SE or EII lines, but the larger exit pupil probably prohibited using the same prisms.
henry link
Well-known member
It wasn't part of either. It was a low priced binocular of an entirely different design, part of the original "Action" series. I tested a pair awhile back on this thread: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=220714
Alright!!!
John Dracon
John Dracon
As Henry Link mentioned in his earlier analysis. the barrels were made of plastic, and the several I had cracked, particularly during cold weather and routine banging.
The optics were outstanding then, and pretty darn good today, but that 7x35 wide field 9.3 model was not robust. My comment is from actual experience with them.
The optics were outstanding then, and pretty darn good today, but that 7x35 wide field 9.3 model was not robust. My comment is from actual experience with them.
Tantien
Well-known member
Wow...
Finally got the 8x32SE-CFs today. Unfortunately they got here near to dark, so I mostly have tried to use them indoors.
These were new (FYI: Serial # 504xxx) but older: Seller: "these are new old stock the warranty has never been activated.... I purchased this pair from a local Camera store that was closing about 1-1.5yrs ago so I am not sure if the warranty can be activated."
First impressions: these are so comfortable in the hand! It is quite remarkable how they fit my hands so perfectly.
Quick A/B test: I compared these to my Viper 8x32 HDs in lamp-lit room light and I checked out a blooming amaryllis across the room. First, I thought the two were close, and then I saw it: the Nikons were clearly brighter and showed much more detail at the edges of the petals--there was even more definition in the veining of the petals.
I did briefly see the 3D effect earlier in the evening before total darkness set in; remarkable!
Given the fact that these two had the same objectives and magnification and that the Nikon had older multicoatings (it does state--on the box only--that they are "Fully Multicoated") of the Viper and it certainly does not have the HD glass speaks to the quality of the Nikon optics.
Yes these are now my "surrogate" Alpha's and I understand now (more than I ever did before I got these) what the difference is when you spend more. Whether this difference is worth an extra $1,000+ is now clearer to me what I'd be paying significantly more for.
Certainly the Vipers are a bit more versatile being water and fog-proof and with a super-close 3 foot close focus, they are still a really nice all around pair.
But yes: Very glad I made the investment! These are keepers! :t:
Finally got the 8x32SE-CFs today. Unfortunately they got here near to dark, so I mostly have tried to use them indoors.
These were new (FYI: Serial # 504xxx) but older: Seller: "these are new old stock the warranty has never been activated.... I purchased this pair from a local Camera store that was closing about 1-1.5yrs ago so I am not sure if the warranty can be activated."
First impressions: these are so comfortable in the hand! It is quite remarkable how they fit my hands so perfectly.
Quick A/B test: I compared these to my Viper 8x32 HDs in lamp-lit room light and I checked out a blooming amaryllis across the room. First, I thought the two were close, and then I saw it: the Nikons were clearly brighter and showed much more detail at the edges of the petals--there was even more definition in the veining of the petals.
I did briefly see the 3D effect earlier in the evening before total darkness set in; remarkable!
Given the fact that these two had the same objectives and magnification and that the Nikon had older multicoatings (it does state--on the box only--that they are "Fully Multicoated") of the Viper and it certainly does not have the HD glass speaks to the quality of the Nikon optics.
Yes these are now my "surrogate" Alpha's and I understand now (more than I ever did before I got these) what the difference is when you spend more. Whether this difference is worth an extra $1,000+ is now clearer to me what I'd be paying significantly more for.
Certainly the Vipers are a bit more versatile being water and fog-proof and with a super-close 3 foot close focus, they are still a really nice all around pair.
But yes: Very glad I made the investment! These are keepers! :t:
The serial number beginning with 50 indicates that they are indeed of "old stock."
If you got documents with the binocular it should have a "Product Guide" and also include an Instruction Sheet (Manual) and a Nikon Product Registration Card. The Product Guide has the specifications for the 3 versions of the SE in it. There is a photo of an 8 x 32SE in it and it should show the SN on it to be 500003. You can read it on the photograph.
It is possible that these have the old Lead Glass in their optics.
I don't remember if you have to register them with Nikon. Just keep the receipts and the papers and the warranty should cover them. It is transferable.
Bob
Last edited:
mulligatawny owl
Well-known member
I'm not gonna rank them but suffice to say the EII's are absolute jewels, clearly not quite as bright as the SE's even in full sunlight but certainly as sharp,possibly sharper, something about the view seems ( possibly) very slightly cleaner somehow than my 505 SE's, a perfect crystalline image, mesmerizing in its transparency.Truly like looking through pure air, only eight times closer. No way did the SLC HD's I just sold have this sort of wow factor in regards to sheer pellucid transparency and perceived sharpness of image. Again I won't say one is better than the other, the SLC's have other wows of their own.
Unfortunately eye relief on the EII's is just a little less than perfect for my glasses, I have to cram them into my face to get the full immersive view. Glare control is way better with the SE's too, probably because the eye relief is perfect for me. The SE's I just throw to my face and they work, perfect circle, no blackouts. The EII's are a bit fussier for me,I think if I keep them (oops am a bit overdrawn) I'll have to invest in some contact lenses to get the most out of them.
Should get my 550 SE's tomorrow to compare
As i asked at nikon, they told me that it is not neccessary to fill out the papers. Not by me nor the shop who sold the bino. I should keep them with me and the invoice of the order too. In case of service is needed i should only send a copy of papers and invoice. They said never send the originals.
