Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE has been discontinued by the manufacturer???

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 11 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 16:18   #1
brocknroller
Registered User
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE has been discontinued by the manufacturer???

MIKE!

I was planning on selling my 8x32 SE because of personal reasons, love the bin, would never sell it if I really didn't have to, but then I saw a notice on Optics Planet's website that Nikon has discontinued the SE. Now I'm wondering if I should sell everything but the kitchen sink instead.

OP had been selling the 8x32 SE for the ridiculous price of $829, and even B&H, which had been selling the SE for $699 (on backorder) raised its price to $799! That's what the 12x50 SE used to cost, then they raised the 10x42 SE to that price, and the 10x had been $100 less.

What's going on with the CRAZY SE prices and is Optics Planet's notice about the SE being discontinued REALLY TRUE??? We've heard rumors many times before, but this is the first time I've seen a major store post a notice about it.

PLEASE ADVISE!

Here's the notice and the link to the webpage:

Product Discontinued by Manufacturer

Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE Binoculars 7381 has been discontinued by Nikon and is no longer available. Our product experts have helped us select these available replacements below. You can also explore other items in the Binoculars category yourself to try and find the perfect replacement for you!

Nikon 8x32 SE RIP

Brock
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 16:49   #2
mooreorless
Registered User
 
mooreorless's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Huntingdon,Pa.
Posts: 3,466
Brock just buy the Bushnell 10x42 mm H2O to replace it.

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthrea.../o/all/fpart/1

Last edited by mooreorless : Saturday 1st March 2014 at 16:51.
mooreorless is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 17:16   #3
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 8,361
SE also reported as discontinued at AuthorisedOptics: http://www.authorizedoptics.com/disc...inoculars.html
And on Nikon website here: http://www.nikonsportoptics.com/en/N...r-SE-8x32.html

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 17:39   #4
cycleguy
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: mile high, colorado
Posts: 908
Here's to hoping it gets reincarnated as something better.... waterproof, larger focus wheel, and twist up eyecups.

CG
cycleguy is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 17:54   #5
Troubador
Moderator
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 8,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by cycleguy View Post
Here's to hoping it gets reincarnated as something better.... waterproof, larger focus wheel, and twist up eyecups.

CG
And with roof prisms


Just kidding folks

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 18:53   #6
brocknroller
Registered User
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troubador View Post
And with roof prisms


Just kidding folks

Lee
They already did that, it's called the Nikon EDG. I compared the 10x42 SE and the 10x42 EDG side by side, and the view was very similar. The perceived depth of field was better in the SE, the CA control about the same despite the EDG's ED glass, although the ED glass and perhaps more advanced coatings did give the EDG a slight edge in contrast and color saturation. Ergonomically, I preferred the SE, but the EDG was a little easier to hold steady due to its heavier weight.

The Nikon SE's demise has been falsely reported so many times that when you hear the latest rumor, it's like the Boy Who Cried Wolf, you just ignore it. But now it looks like the Wolf might be knocking at the door: "Oh, Grandma, it's me, Little Red Riding Hood, I brought you some biscuits" (and some salt and pepper for me).

Anxiously awaiting Mike's reply.

Brock
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 19:17   #7
David Swain
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Boston area
Posts: 537
8x32SEs are no longer available on Amazon Japan, and the big dealer from whom I got my EIIs, Yodobashi Camera, lists them as discontinued.

Brock, don't sell them. Not now, not ever.
__________________
"For the love of the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster, they're only binoculars, and if they didn't exist, we'd just have to stand closer to stuff!" --Sancho

Nikon 8x32SE, 8x30E II
David Swain is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 20:42   #8
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocknroller View Post
They already did that, it's called the Nikon EDG. I compared the 10x42 SE and the 10x42 EDG side by side, and the view was very similar. The perceived depth of field was better in the SE, the CA control about the same despite the EDG's ED glass, although the ED glass and perhaps more advanced coatings did give the EDG a slight edge in contrast and color saturation. Ergonomically, I preferred the SE, but the EDG was a little easier to hold steady due to its heavier weight.

The Nikon SE's demise has been falsely reported so many times that when you hear the latest rumor, it's like the Boy Who Cried Wolf, you just ignore it. But now it looks like the Wolf might be knocking at the door: "Oh, Grandma, it's me, Little Red Riding Hood, I brought you some biscuits" (and some salt and pepper for me).

Anxiously awaiting Mike's reply.

Brock
Brock:

I would keep the 8x32 SE, as many are recommending.

I preferred the SE over the EDG in the 8x32 size optically, but I prefer the
10x42 EDG over the 10x42 SE.

This time of year, with few birds to watch, I use my 12x50 SE daily
as my long range observing bin from my house out to 2 miles.
It has an addicting, tack sharp and pleasant view. And it is lightweight
for a 50 mm binocular, well balanced and under 32 oz.

They are all good, and we all have personal preferences.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 22:04   #9
brocknroller
Registered User
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
I sent Mike a PM and an email message. I want to hear it from the horse's mouth, but I won't sell it in the meantime.

If it's true, I wonder if the EII will be next on the chopping block? When I sold the 8x30 BB EII and 10x35 BB EII in January, I thought, oh, well, I can always buy replacements when I'm flush again. I thought the same thing when I sold my 10x42 and 12x50 SEs.

I wish I could have afforded to hold on to all them. "Yes I would, if I could, I surely would. Mmm.... mmm.. mmm... mmmm."

<B>

Last edited by brocknroller : Saturday 1st March 2014 at 22:38.
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 23:26   #10
stereotruckdriver
Registered User
 
stereotruckdriver's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oregon Coast
Posts: 1,775
Brock, better hold on to them. If its monetary reasons I will donate a pair to you just shoot me a pm.
Bryce...
stereotruckdriver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 1st March 2014, 23:57   #11
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocknroller View Post
MIKE!

I was planning on selling my 8x32 SE because of personal reasons, love the bin, would never sell it if I really didn't have to, but then I saw a notice on Optics Planet's website that Nikon has discontinued the SE. Now I'm wondering if I should sell everything but the kitchen sink instead.

OP had been selling the 8x32 SE for the ridiculous price of $829, and even B&H, which had been selling the SE for $699 (on backorder) raised its price to $799! That's what the 12x50 SE used to cost, then they raised the 10x42 SE to that price, and the 10x had been $100 less.

What's going on with the CRAZY SE prices and is Optics Planet's notice about the SE being discontinued REALLY TRUE??? We've heard rumors many times before, but this is the first time I've seen a major store post a notice about it.

PLEASE ADVISE!

Here's the notice and the link to the webpage:

Product Discontinued by Manufacturer

Nikon 8x32mm Premier SE Binoculars 7381 has been discontinued by Nikon and is no longer available. Our product experts have helped us select these available replacements below. You can also explore other items in the Binoculars category yourself to try and find the perfect replacement for you!

Nikon 8x32 SE RIP

Brock
Those prices are about the same as they were selling for about 6 or 7 years ago. I remember when the 12x50SE was selling for $999.00 and at times it was listed at $1099.00. The 10x42 SE was selling for $899.00 up to $999.00 at times and the 8x32 was selling for $699.00 which was the highest price I ever saw it offered at. If it is priced higher than that now one could argue that the sellers are profiteering on a scarce commodity.

Factor inflation into the current prices and they are a bargain unless they are a mixture of old stock with older coatings and newer ones with newer coatings. That's a chance you will have to take. In any case, optically they all will be excellent binoculars.

Bob

Last edited by ceasar : Sunday 2nd March 2014 at 00:02.
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 00:19   #12
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,106
Have to say these news make one worry a bit about how Nikon is doing.
We know the camera market has suffered as cell phones have become the casual camera of choice and we know the semiconductor electronics production optics business is spotty. So where is the growth?
It is not, sad to say, in sport optics, hunters are a dying breed and birders are too few and too cheap to really impact Nikon.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 00:57   #13
stereotruckdriver
Registered User
 
stereotruckdriver's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oregon Coast
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
Have to say these news make one worry a bit about how Nikon is doing.
We know the camera market has suffered as cell phones have become the casual camera of choice and we know the semiconductor electronics production optics business is spotty. So where is the growth?
It is not, sad to say, in sport optics, hunters are a dying breed and birders are too few and too cheap to really impact Nikon.
Etudiant, not that I disagree but, Nikon is global don't think the SE's really impacted them one way or the other.
Parts, warranty these things could impact them in the long run.

Binoculars as a whole are changing, not that we agree.

The SE was in the forefront for several years.
The technology Nikon used was for the most part untouched until recently.

Binocular technology has progressed recently leaving the SE long in the tooth.

By design I think for an upgrade to the SE would prove to costly for Nikon.

So, no choice but to discontinue them.
Bryce...
stereotruckdriver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 01:27   #14
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
Have to say these news make one worry a bit about how Nikon is doing.
We know the camera market has suffered as cell phones have become the casual camera of choice and we know the semiconductor electronics production optics business is spotty. So where is the growth?
It is not, sad to say, in sport optics, hunters are a dying breed and birders are too few and too cheap to really impact Nikon.
This is a good question, and I just spent some time viewing some
financial info. including sales numbers and some other things from
Nikons annual report, and other financial reports.
The Imaging Division which includes cameras and sports optics is by far Nikons biggest business. Last year sales were down but profits were up.
I cannot find numbers about sales of sports optics, but I believe it is a
small part of the number.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 06:21   #15
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,495
Quote:
Originally Posted by stereotruckdriver View Post
Etudiant, not that I disagree but, Nikon is global don't think the SE's really impacted them one way or the other.
Parts, warranty these things could impact them in the long run.

Binoculars as a whole are changing, not that we agree.

The SE was in the forefront for several years.
The technology Nikon used was for the most part untouched until recently.

Binocular technology has progressed recently leaving the SE long in the tooth.

By design I think for an upgrade to the SE would prove to costly for Nikon.

So, no choice but to discontinue them.
Bryce...
Just about any kind of upgrade, except new coatings, will be very expensive. These binoculars define the adage "If it ain't broke don't fix it."

If Nikon can't sell them at a profit now at current prices after their technology has long been paid for (the SE's are basically modular construction and have many interchangeable parts among the 3 of them-only the optical tubes and the objectives are different) then it does not seem likely they will be profitable after they are redesigned around new technology that will have to be paid for from their sales.

The only real reason to discontinue them is because they don't sell very well any more. Nikon should mothball the current technology so they can bring them back later as collectibles every now and then!

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 18:43   #16
looksharp65
Registered User
 
looksharp65's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Varberg, Sweden
Posts: 1,859
Stick with'em Brock. Cannot imagine you without the SE.
Are the SE's really long in the tooth? I doubt that, as their optics, the E II's optics and the EDG's optics are very, very similar.
If the SE series are getting old hat, that would also be true for the EDG, and who would say that?
"Long in the tooth" is more true for the Premier.

//L
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby_lenses - The Viking optics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuBYpRkbzrs - The Viking War Cry
looksharp65 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 23:14   #17
stereotruckdriver
Registered User
 
stereotruckdriver's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oregon Coast
Posts: 1,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by looksharp65 View Post
Stick with'em Brock. Cannot imagine you without the SE.
Are the SE's really long in the tooth? I doubt that, as their optics, the E II's optics and the EDG's optics are very, very similar.
If the SE series are getting old hat, that would also be true for the EDG, and who would say that?
"Long in the tooth" is more true for the Premier.

//L
Lars, when you look at the se or eii although the optics don't appear old its design has run its
course. Though similar the edg is a modern ed glass binocular with all the bells and whistles.
I own an se so its not a knock but, compared to my SV it is long in the tooth! Bryce...
stereotruckdriver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 2nd March 2014, 23:21   #18
looksharp65
Registered User
 
looksharp65's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Varberg, Sweden
Posts: 1,859
Quote:
Originally Posted by stereotruckdriver View Post
Lars, when you look at the se or eii although the optics don't appear old its design has run its
course. Though similar the edg is a modern ed glass binocular with all the bells and whistles.
I own an se so its not a knock but, compared to my SV it is long in the tooth! Bryce...
My 7x42 with its modest magnification has a CA level very similar to the E II.
Possibly, the E II has an extremely tiny amount in the center under the most adverse conditions where the EDG doesn't, but laterally they are almost identical.
I'm thinking the SV may have ED glass in the eyepieces?
However, I love the natural and sparkling colours of the finer Nikons.
If I could make use of one, I'd buy an 8x32 SE or maybe the whole series, but it's just impossible to justify that.

//L
__________________
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visby_lenses - The Viking optics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuBYpRkbzrs - The Viking War Cry
looksharp65 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 00:54   #19
etudiant
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 4,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by stereotruckdriver View Post
Lars, when you look at the se or eii although the optics don't appear old its design has run its
course. Though similar the edg is a modern ed glass binocular with all the bells and whistles.
I own an se so its not a knock but, compared to my SV it is long in the tooth! Bryce...
The SE is a classic, just like the 1911 Colt or the '03 Springfield. It does its job very well, as well as any of the successors. It just lacks their 'bells and whistles', only one of which, the waterproofing, is missed.
I'm a little surprised that Nikon marketing has not recognized that this glass has almost a cult following. Offering it as a special 'Classic' series, maybe with a fancy logo on the case and a 100% price hike would allow the SE to stay in the Nikon catalog. The improved margin should offset the carrying cost of the parts inventory even if sales are slow.
etudiant is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 06:14   #20
brocknroller
Registered User
 
brocknroller's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 5,581
Regarding that the SE is "long in the tooth" because it doesn't have modern ED glass is a straw man argument. It doesn't have ED glass, because it doesn't need it. The reason the EDG, FL/HT, UV HD, SV EL and SLC-HD all use low dispersion glass is due to the fact that the internal focus elements add CA to the image. Experts have weighed in on this, and we started reading reports of increased CA around the time when roofs began being made with internal focusers.

As I mentioned earlier, I compared the 10x42 SE and 10x42 EDG side by side, and in terms of CA control, the EDG didn't perform any better, the ED glass just kept it from performing worse. Where it did perform better was in contrast due to the ED glass and slightly better color saturation, probably due to its flatter light transmission. The 10x SE I was using at the time weren't the latest 050/051 models, if it had been, the results would have been even closer.

It's also curious that Nikon would make a new production run of SEs (8x 551xxxx) and then discontinue them.

While in theory it might sound correct to say a modern roof beats and "old porro" when compared side by side that theory doesn't hold up, particularly if you are comparing an SE with Eco-Glass and Nikon's latest coatings. ED glass would slightly improve the SE, but not enough to make a significant difference except on the 12x50 model. It's not the "modern glass" that makes $2K roofs better, it's their WP and robust build quality.

The SE is no slouch when it comes to build, it's certainly built better than the EII, but I wouldn't want to test it against an EDG in a javelin toss. The EDG is (or was before the recent SE price hikes) nearly 4x the cost of the SE, but optically, it isn't 4x better, not 3x better, not even 2x better.

I do like the wider FOV of the 10x42 EDG over the 10x42 SE, but image-wise, I can't see the justification for the much higher price. Even adding the better build quality and WPing, the EDG is still overpriced, IMO. Nikon is charging $2K+ because the competition is. If people are willing to keep paying higher prices, the Big Four will raise the price to $3k, then $4k, and $5k.

This is why, if true, it is such a shame that the SE is being discontinued. Not only does it represent the best bang for your buck in premium optics, but it gives a 3-D representation to the image that a roof could never achieve. I don't live in Flatland so I don't want to see Flatland through my binoculars.

I have tried a lot of bins, although most of them have been porros, I've also tried some roofs including Swaros, and I keep coming back to the same two binoculars - the SE and EII - because they are the best of the lot, IMO. They also fit my hands better than most roofs (though I had to add Bushwackers to the stubby barreled EII).

I realize that many people prefer roofs these days, but it shouldn't be because the SE's are "long in the tooth," I agree with Lars about that. The Premier (HGL) is "long in the tooth," because it doesn't have the least prism coatings or ED glass, and it really could use the ED glass to control the CA better.

All the SE needed was to keep getting its AR coating upgraded.

Roofs have had to overcome so many obstacles. First they needed phase coatings, because the prism design causes the light to become "out of phase." Early roofs I tried had "softer" images than comparably sized porros, and they were also dimmer, which brings us to obstacle #2 - reflective coatings. Roofs, or at least SP-roofs, which are used in 99% of roofs, need 90-layers (or whatever they are using these days) of dielectric coatings to match the brightness of premium porros.

The other argument about the SE being discontinued because they don't sell well is also not valid, IMO. Most automakers have high end sport cars that don't sell well, but they make them anyway because they set the bar for performance. So does the SE, which has long been a reference standard used by many reviewers. Only Swarovski makes premium porros, and those really are old designs compared to the SE.

To have something unique, a reference standard, a bin that has been referred to in comparisons more time than I can count has helped the brand, IMO. Taking the SE away will hurt the brand some, though as a new generation comes up to replace us, only the true optics nuts among them will remember the bin that was once considered the reference standard by which all other bins were compared.

Brock
brocknroller is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 07:55   #21
horukuru
Here I Come !
 
horukuru's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Near with Mt. Kinabalu, Sabah at Borneo Island
Posts: 6,229
Brock,

Nikon Vision Japan didn't say anything about it being discontinued http://www.nikon.com/products/sporto...ture/index.htm
horukuru is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 08:03   #22
oetzi
Registered User
 
oetzi's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Deutschland
Posts: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by etudiant View Post
I'm a little surprised that Nikon marketing has not recognized that this glass has almost a cult following.
Outside photographic equipment, Nikon doesnt seem to give a damn about its products and their customers.

I am very happy with my EII and thats the only reason why I didnt try to buy a SE yet, outside the affordability.
__________________
No free lunch:
" It is always a compromise in optical systems that you improve one situation but you risk making something else worse."
(Gerold Dobler)
oetzi is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 08:42   #23
Holger Merlitz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Xiamen
Posts: 404
Quote:
Originally Posted by brocknroller View Post
Regarding that the SE is "long in the tooth" because it doesn't have modern ED glass is a straw man argument ....


....

Brock
What a rant - and a right one; thanks, Brock!

The connection between CA problems and the mode of focusing seems convincing, because the focusing lens alters the rays that exit from the objective. And this alteration would depend on the particular position of that lens, so that objective-CA could only be possibly optimized for a single distance setting. If we reduce the dispersion altogether (using ED objectives), then we immediately reduce the consequences of varying positions of that lens. Strangely, no textbook I know of seems to mention that connection.

Cheers,
Holger
Holger Merlitz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 09:25   #24
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
BF Supporter 2018
 
BruceH's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 2,393
Brock,

The SE is no longer on the Nikon USA web site as a current product, but it is still listed on the Nikon international web site.

The status of the SE may now be the same as the EII, where Nikon USA "discontinued" marketing them to US vendors (i.e. Optics Planet), but they are still in production for the other Nikon worldwide distributors.

Hopefully Mike F. will reply and give us the straight story.
__________________
It's all about the view!
vs.
A fool and his money are soon parted!
(The Yin Yang of the Binocular Forum)
BruceH is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 3rd March 2014, 12:34   #25
Kammerdiner
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: PA
Posts: 1,767
The 8x32 SE is, for me, "long in the tooth" for the following reasons:

1) Rubber fold down eyecups. Heaven forbid you try to share an SE with someone who doesn't wear glasses (I do, my wife doesn't). The SE's got left behind many times for that reason alone. In addition I had to fold the cups down halfway to get the eye relief right, and twiddle with them a few times in the course of an afternoon. This leads to:

2) That finicky blackout-prone eyepiece. It seems half the users or more have an issue with it. I did, especially if I was in a hurry to get on a bird.

3) Not waterproof. The SE's got left behind at times for this reason too, although I was somewhat overprotective.

4) No hydrophobic, easy-to-clean coatings. Those coatings work.

5) Field of view. The 8x32 SV, for instance, has an extra 33 feet of it.

6) Price. $700-800 is too high for the SE. I paid $500 in, I believe, 2009 for a 550. Brand-new. What happened?

7) The 3D view was of little consequence to me and not a selling point.

8) Poor close focus because of widely spaced objectives.

I had the 8x32 SE for two years but I ended up selling it and I wouldn't really want another. The 8x32 SV solves every issue mentioned above--except price of course.

Just my experience,
Mark
Kammerdiner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon SEs Discontinued ronjax Nikon 19 Friday 26th August 2011 04:23
Discontinued Nikon EDG bino. Why? SzimiStyle Nikon 32 Saturday 9th October 2010 15:43
Nikon Fieldscope 82A Discontinued? bm571q Nikon 19 Friday 24th August 2007 23:47
Nikon CP4500 discontinued? Dave Smith Nikon 24 Monday 4th August 2003 23:19

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.25986791 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:20.