I think so, Arthur. I've never seen them advertised anywhere else. I had two pairs, a 10x50 and 8x42, about a decade ago. They were excellent mid-price optics in those days, but had rather narrow FOV, and I imagine they've been outclassed nowadays by Hawke, Zen-Ray etc.
-
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.
Nikon EII serial number (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sandy Leng
- Start date
I think so, Arthur. I've never seen them advertised anywhere else. I had two pairs, a 10x50 and 8x42, about a decade ago. They were excellent mid-price optics in those days, but had rather narrow FOV, and I imagine they've been outclassed nowadays by Hawke, Zen-Ray etc.
Brigadier
Well-known member
Arthur, Sancho - Yes, the Avian brand is exclusive to Ace Cameras.
Athough Ace seems to have abandoned Nikon binos, you can still buy the EII (black body, of course!) at several UK outlets including:
Wex Photographic, http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-8x30-eii-binoculars/p1002398
Bristol Cameras, http://www.bristolcameras.co.uk/p-nikon-binoculars-8x30-eii.htm
Kay Optical, http://www.kayoptical.co.uk/kay/sit...n=Nikon&id=1098&prod=Nikon 8x30 EII Binocular
Camera In The Post, http://www.camerainthepost.com/Binoculars/Nikon/Nikon+8x30+EII+Binoculars.html
Last edited:
The grey is a very dark grey and I thought of it as black. It wasn't until I saw pictures of the "black" bodied ones that I could see what Brock was talking about.
Bob
James Bean
Well-known member
My 10x35 EII (BB) was bought new in April 2010 from Chinaarts Hong Kong, £280 mail free, serial no. 003*** AM (same as Brock's). Assuming it wouldn't have been in stock very long, since it's "much sought after", I'm guessing it was made in 2009 or early 2010? Elsewhere, I see Nikon have apparently asked this outlet to stop selling EIIs other than in Asian Markets. Is this the meaning of 'AM', and why would Nikon seek to prevent sales? Is this a version of 'retail price maintenance'? I'm glad I bought mine when I did...
On the black body/gray body thing, what would these be?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...39ErgYEUkatcSsto2nvY4%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
They have a "500..." serial # (see 4rd pic), but the "leather" sure looks black to me... Maybe it's just the pics?
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...39ErgYEUkatcSsto2nvY4%3D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc
They have a "500..." serial # (see 4rd pic), but the "leather" sure looks black to me... Maybe it's just the pics?
Last edited:
Kevin Purcell speculated about the Nikon Serial Number policy in this particular post in this thread:
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=1914289&postcount=11
Bob
David Swain
Well-known member
Yes, the rubber covering is black, but those are quite early "gray" (anodized) versions. Mine were 500168.
David
The picture here, particularly the bottom view, looks like mine. It is about the same shade of black as mine and the leatherette (which is really a thin layer of rubber) looks fitted like on mine. And the covering doesn't look like a hard rubber pebbly covering.
These binoculars also have a SN about 600 numbers lower than mine.
Bob
brocknroller
porromaniac
David's correct, the white background caused the meter to underexpose the gray body EII (see my "fix" below).
The other photo shows the GB and BB look side by side. The Bushwackers hide the gray metal objectives housings on the 8x30 EII GB vs. the black housings on the 10x EII BB.
<B>
Attachments
![ebay EII [].JPG](/data/attachments/369/369001-ad44559c4018eb93ccda11d7d8e7272d.jpg)
![Nikon EII and SE 031 [Desktop Resolution].JPG](/data/attachments/369/369007-f9ba35a49038bbbfeabbed7a2701d1be.jpg)
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
This just keeps getting curiouser and curiouser. Now a black body SE too? What's the first three digits of the serial #?
Also, did you purchase these from a U.S. store? I'm curious to see if there's a black Eurasian "shadow copy" out there like the BB EIIs.
Could you please post a photo of it?
I think I have the latest 8x32 SE model made, and the serial # starts with 550xxx. These were the SEs advertized with "Eco-Glass".
<B>
Last edited:
David Swain
Well-known member
Brock,
Mine are US SEs from Nikon USA, serial 550802. They are identical to the photo on the left. My friends early SEs (don't know the serial #, but she's had them a long time) are like the one's pictures on the right. Note the black eyepiece/diopter rings on the right one stand out; everything matches on the left ones. I don't know if there is anything in this, but it's useful to look at it from all angles. Personally, I think there are too many variables to come up with any one unified theory of serial numbering.
David
Mine are US SEs from Nikon USA, serial 550802. They are identical to the photo on the left. My friends early SEs (don't know the serial #, but she's had them a long time) are like the one's pictures on the right. Note the black eyepiece/diopter rings on the right one stand out; everything matches on the left ones. I don't know if there is anything in this, but it's useful to look at it from all angles. Personally, I think there are too many variables to come up with any one unified theory of serial numbering.
David
Attachments
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Maybe it's the black sheep of the family.
My 8x32 SE's serial # is 550300, which assuming the numbering is sequential, that would indicate yours were made after mine.
Somewhere between 550300 and 550800, they apparently switched to the black body model, meaning there could be at least 299 black body SEs or as many as 699 made by the time they finish this run, if they haven't already done so.
It's the first BB SE I've seen on either of side of the pond.
As far as if or how the serial #s indicate the YOM, we know that other companies such as Swaro and Swift do indicate the YOM in their serial numbers, and Zeiss used to do this with their porros, so it's not unprecedented. But Nikon is the only one who could tell us for sure, and for some unfathomable reason, they won't say.
I am fairly certain that the latest SEs are numbered 550xxx (8x32), 050xxx (10x42), and 350xxx (12x50), and for sure that they have Eco-Glass. No higher SE numbers have surfaced since 2007.
My 550 8x SE is a noticeable step up in brightness and contrast from my previous 505 8x SE.
P.S. Forgot to ask. Do the BB SE's have an anodized black finish, or are they painted black, black as night, black as coal....
<B>
Last edited:
David Swain
Well-known member
Maybe it's the black sheep of the family.
My 8x32 SE's serial # is 550300, which assuming the numbering is sequential, that would indicated yours were made after mine.
Somewhere between 550300 and 550800, they apparently switched to the black body model, meaning there could be at least 299 black body SEs or as many as 699 made by the time they finish this run, if they haven't already done so.
So you are saying your 550300 has the grayer finish an rubber and contrasting black eyepiece/diopter ring? Fascinating. I'd seen so many pictures of gray SEs that I assumed they were just Nikon stock photos and that there must have been many black ones produced.
You know what: I bet there is just a bin of serial #s stickers (or in the case of EIIs, endcaps) and they grab one at random as each one crosses the line. :-O What would we do if someone told us the "truth?":-C
Fortunately, none of this alters the view.
David
brocknroller
porromaniac
True, same great view, whether
red and yellow, black and white
They are precious in our sight
Porro fans love the little SEs of the world
(sing it children)
Everything's more beautiful
SE owners say
Like a starry summer night
Or a snow covered winter's day
There is none so blind
As he who will not a porro see
We must not close our minds
We must let our roofs run free
Geez, I think I just out dennised, dennis.
<B>
The eyepiece/diopter rings on all three of my SEs are a darker, glossier black than the rest of the binoculars are and that includes the eye cups. My 10x is the oldest of the three (purchased used about 6 years ago) and it seems to have a little lighter black body armor than the other 2 which were recent purchases. The 8x was a new binocular and the 12x was a Demo.
Maybe the sun bleaches out the body armor somewhat?
Bob
:-O! Isn't there a Nikon Dude comes on here sometimes called Mike Freiberg? Perhaps he could explain it all, or get an in-depth interview with the Numbers-Bucket Operative.
brocknroller
porromaniac
This from wikipedia...
"A serial number is a unique code assigned for identification of a single unit. Although usually called a number, it may include letters, though ending with digits. Typically serial numbers of a production run are incremented by one, or another fixed difference, from one unit to the next."
and...
"Serial numbers identify otherwise identical individual units with many, obvious uses. [They] are a deterrent against theft and counterfeit products, as they can be recorded, and stolen or otherwise irregular goods can be identified. ['gray market' and fakes in the case of bins, and the numbers are also used to register your bin for the purpose of warranty coverage]
"They are valuable in quality control, as once a defect is found in the production of a particular batch of product, the serial number will identify which units are affected."
For Nikon, I think this last purpose is probably the most valuable reason to have sequential numbers. If a problem surfaces, they can trace it back to a particular batch made at a particular factory and find out what went wrong and fix the problem (unless it's a loose focus knob or drifting diopter on an EDG, in which case they will send you a new unit
. I don't know where Kevin got his information from about the Nikon's serial numbers not being sequential. He didn't say, but it certainly doesn't jive with industry standards, and if they are given out "willy nilly," it obviates the usefulness of having a serial # as per all the reasons given above. You have a VIN on your car for the same reasons.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number
<B>
David Swain
Well-known member
I was being only slightly facetious about random serial numbering. We tend to assume that serial numbers are necessarily serial, that is, assigned in strict, ascending numerical order. Back in the days of Henry Ford they were.
VIN numbers are an excellent example of how modern enumeration of objects is done. The fundamental principle is that there is an arbitrary connection between the number/code/alpha-numeric sequence and the object to which it is assigned. Exactly like language, where there is no necessary connection between "binocular" and this fetish object we use for seeing far things near. Thus the fallacy that a given SE is "newer" than mine because its serial number is 42 numbers higher. It is more likely that within a given batch (say, 600 units) a sequence of numbers is assigned out of manufacturing sequence (particularly if two assembly lines run in parallel). In the case of, say, iPhones, where an entire assembly floor is dedicated to one product, how do you assign serial numbers? You don't; you assign the equivalent of a bar code to each unit; that unit has no identity, per se, until it is assigned a code, just as a car is utterly untrackable without a VIN. If you have done a warranty return with Nikon knows that the entire transaction is handled using two arbitrarily associated numbers: the work order #, and the serial number of the item being repaired.
There is no necessary reason, other than habit, why an assembly line worker should even apply the serial numbers in ascending order. As long as a given batch of numbers was assigned to a given batch of Nikons, that batch has an identity (say, 550301-550900). That these particular Nikons might have black frames would not be arbitrary if the last batch had gray frames.
I know a mathematician who works on enumeration of computer viruses, and he has continual battles with engineers, who want to make somewhat rigid associations between enumeration schemes and particular features of a given virus; he knows that way lies madness. They in fact use a (classified) enumeration system analogous to VINs.
FWIW,
David
VIN numbers are an excellent example of how modern enumeration of objects is done. The fundamental principle is that there is an arbitrary connection between the number/code/alpha-numeric sequence and the object to which it is assigned. Exactly like language, where there is no necessary connection between "binocular" and this fetish object we use for seeing far things near. Thus the fallacy that a given SE is "newer" than mine because its serial number is 42 numbers higher. It is more likely that within a given batch (say, 600 units) a sequence of numbers is assigned out of manufacturing sequence (particularly if two assembly lines run in parallel). In the case of, say, iPhones, where an entire assembly floor is dedicated to one product, how do you assign serial numbers? You don't; you assign the equivalent of a bar code to each unit; that unit has no identity, per se, until it is assigned a code, just as a car is utterly untrackable without a VIN. If you have done a warranty return with Nikon knows that the entire transaction is handled using two arbitrarily associated numbers: the work order #, and the serial number of the item being repaired.
There is no necessary reason, other than habit, why an assembly line worker should even apply the serial numbers in ascending order. As long as a given batch of numbers was assigned to a given batch of Nikons, that batch has an identity (say, 550301-550900). That these particular Nikons might have black frames would not be arbitrary if the last batch had gray frames.
I know a mathematician who works on enumeration of computer viruses, and he has continual battles with engineers, who want to make somewhat rigid associations between enumeration schemes and particular features of a given virus; he knows that way lies madness. They in fact use a (classified) enumeration system analogous to VINs.
FWIW,
David
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Interesting "enumeration" information, but it probably "does not compute" for the SE, which is not manufactured in millions of units like automobiles nor can they be scanned with a bar code like iPhones.
At most, 999 SEs are manufactured and assembled in a production run. Given the drop off in demand since 1998 when they were first introduced at a time when most roofs were still w/out phase coatings and roof pickins were slim compared to today's offerings, they might even make less than that per run and then continue from where they left off when demand picks up again as orders stack up in the U.S. and abroad since stores, at least in the U.S., no longer stock them, but order them as per demand. But maybe not, it takes a lot of energy to run a factory, so it's probably more efficient to go through an entire run and then store the surplus in a warehouse.
But here's what really messes with my mind. The 550xxx 8x32 first surfaced in 2006, according to one member who bought one at that time. I first saw them in 2007. If there are only 999 units in each run before the third digit changes, that means that since late 2006, early 2007, less than 999 8x32 SEs have been sold worldwide? Is that possible? Is demand that low? If so, how could Nikon justify making them and charging only $600. Be different if they cost $2,400, but for $600 is it worth producing 999 units that take more than 5 years to sell? I guess so.
In any case, I seriously doubt if there are two parallel assembly lines running at once in at an SE factory! I also doubt if anybody would go mad counting up to 999, but stopping production in the middle of a run and then resuming might.
Mei: What number did we stop with, Chen?
Chen: I don't know, this new arbitrary enumeration scheme is driving me mad, I tell ya, mad, mad, mad!
Mei: I hear ya, I still can't get used to the new ISO standards for apparent field of view. Drives me nuts.
If you look closely at the serial #s on SEs, they are stenciled on the back of plastic strips. I think those would be difficult to apply by hand since if the worker didn't apply it perfectly straight, the number would rub off when he or she peeled it off to reapply it.
I've owned a numberless 12x50 SE. All that was left underneath the plastic was some white residue. The SE had eight owners before I bought it, then I sold it to a guy I know from Cloudy Nights, who in turn sold it to Edz, who sold it to mooreorless, and God only knows where it is now.
If somebody has a 12x50 SE without a serial #, that's probably the one I had at some point. I don't know what happened to the serial number, but 12x50 SEs are often mounted, so perhaps the number wiped off from rubbing against the tripod head platform. The clamp-type adapter that came with the 12x SE was not an official SE adapter, but a shorter clamp adapter that just barely cleared the tripod head at my IPD. At narrow IPDs, the barrels probably touched the head.
I later included that adapter when I sold my Nikon XL Zoom binoculars, because the guy who wanted to buy them didn't want to spend $40 on an SE adapter. The smaller 40mm XL Zooms cleared the tripod head with more room, at least at my IPD.
Given the delicate nature of the serial numbers, they might be applied by machine. The machine would probably cut the rectangular pieces of plastic in the order they were printed rather than pulling them out of a box at random like the bored Japanese workers would in your facetious example.
If they were applied by hand, it's not likely that there would be as much difference as a 42 count between samples as you suggested.
It seems ludicrous that serial #s would be selected by hand out of a big box randomly like lottery numbers. More likely they come stuck on plastic sheets with adhesive backs. But how does one get them off w/out sticking to your hands or gloves? Seems more likely a task for an automated process.
<Unit 550300>
There is a difference in the size of the serial numbers printed on these plastic inserts. The inserts on all 3 of my SEs are 2cm in length and 5mm high. They fit into a groove machined into the bottom of the left prism housing to those measurements. The heights of the numbers in the inserts on the 8x and 12x are 3mm high and 16mm long, but on my older 10x they are 2mm high and 15mm long. But the inserts are all the same size.
As we all know these prism housings are all the same size and interchangeable from binocular to binocular. (If one has the wherewithall to make these changes.) The eyepieces are also the same and one would postulate that the prisms are likely the same.
Query: What would prevent Nikon from making a large batch of prism housings, including the focusing mechanisms, years ago and warehousing them until they were needed for new binoculars. All they would have to do is make new objective housings (Nikon might even have those stored in bins waiting to be used.) and put in new optics with up to date coatings on the new binoculars. The major part of these production runs would have been done years ago.
Think of all the millions of 6 x 30 porro prisms that were built for the armys of the 20th century which were manufactured in this modular fashion! It really can't be too difficult to do it on a small scale like Nikon has done it with their E series and SEs. The SE parts probably take up a small corner in a small warehouse.
Bob
As we all know these prism housings are all the same size and interchangeable from binocular to binocular. (If one has the wherewithall to make these changes.) The eyepieces are also the same and one would postulate that the prisms are likely the same.
Query: What would prevent Nikon from making a large batch of prism housings, including the focusing mechanisms, years ago and warehousing them until they were needed for new binoculars. All they would have to do is make new objective housings (Nikon might even have those stored in bins waiting to be used.) and put in new optics with up to date coatings on the new binoculars. The major part of these production runs would have been done years ago.
Think of all the millions of 6 x 30 porro prisms that were built for the armys of the 20th century which were manufactured in this modular fashion! It really can't be too difficult to do it on a small scale like Nikon has done it with their E series and SEs. The SE parts probably take up a small corner in a small warehouse.
Bob
