• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Swift historians (1 Viewer)

planetester

New member
Hi, Ive just joined this forum so I can pass on some information on a pair of Swift binoculars that I recently aquired.
Hope it is useful to someone out there,

Swift
model number.. 801
model name.. Saratoga MK11
Type.. 8x40, Extra Wide field
FOV.. 488ft at 1000yds
optics.. fully coated
serial number,, No 26-706309

I presume they were made in 1970, anymore info would be welcome.

thanks all
 

Attachments

  • SSCN2351.JPG
    SSCN2351.JPG
    61.2 KB · Views: 1,189
  • SSCN2352.JPG
    SSCN2352.JPG
    57.4 KB · Views: 616
  • SSCN2354.JPG
    SSCN2354.JPG
    59.8 KB · Views: 728
  • SSCN2355.JPG
    SSCN2355.JPG
    53.5 KB · Views: 595
  • SSCN2357.JPG
    SSCN2357.JPG
    59 KB · Views: 775
planetester said:
Hi, Ive just joined this forum so I can pass on some information on a pair of Swift binoculars that I recently aquired.
Hope it is useful to someone out there,

Swift
model number.. 801
model name.. Saratoga MK11
Type.. 8x40, Extra Wide field
FOV.. 488ft at 1000yds
optics.. fully coated
serial number,, No 26-706309

I presume they were made in 1970, anymore info would be welcome.

thanks all

The Little brother to the Swift Commodore 7x50.

Bill
 
planetester said:
Hi, Ive just joined this forum so I can pass on some information on a pair of Swift binoculars that I recently aquired.
Hope it is useful to someone out there,

Swift
model number.. 801
model name.. Saratoga MK11
Type.. 8x40, Extra Wide field
FOV.. 488ft at 1000yds
optics.. fully coated
serial number,, No 26-706309

I presume they were made in 1970, anymore info would be welcome.

thanks all

Hi,

Welcome aboard.

This 801 is a large body Type 3 produced by Hiyoshi Kogaku, Japan, and imported by Swift-Pyser, UK. Bill might know if it was marketed in the US, but all my records show European distribution. Since it's labled Mk II, the chances are that it uses BaK-4 prisms and has a 5-element eyepiece. The large body Type 2, 7x35 Holiday—Wide Angle, Mark II, of the same vintage, however, did not use high quality prisms, contrary to the conclusion one would draw from the catalogs of the day. So it would be appreciated if you could comment about the exit pupil of your 801. Is it round with no square frame visible within it, as would be the case with high quality glass?

The Saratoga was promoted for use at horse races and sporting events. The Type 2, 7x50 Commodore—Wide Angle was a sibling, as Bill indicated, and promoted for boating applications. But there was also a standard-field 7x50 Commodore that probably didn't use an Erfle eyepiece. I don't know if either Commodore appeared as Type 3 models in Europe, or had 7x50 counterparts given other names.

I'd also like to hear your assessment of the view using the Saratoga. It may be comparable to the somewhat larger 8.5x44 Audubon, Type 3, its big brother. Incidentally, variants the Saratoga had blue or gold ribbons on the left cover plate, as is typically seen on Type 3 Audubons.

Regards,
Ed
PS. See this thread for related historical info. http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=42944
 
Last edited:
elkcub said:
Hi,

Welcome aboard.

This 801 is a large body Type 3 produced by Hiyoshi Kogaku, Japan, and imported by Swift-Pyser, UK. Bill might know if it was marketed in the US, but all my records show European distribution. Since it's labled Mk II, the chances are that it uses BaK-4 prisms and has a 5-element eyepiece. The large body Type 2, 7x35 Holiday—Wide Angle, Mark II, of the same vintage, however, did not use high quality prisms, contrary to the conclusion one would draw from the catalogs of the day. So it would be appreciated if you could comment about the exit pupil of your 801. Is it round with no square frame visible within it, as would be the case with high quality glass?

The Saratoga was promoted for use at horse races and sporting events. The Type 2, 7x50 Commodore—Wide Angle was a sibling, as Bill indicated, and promoted for boating applications. But there was also a standard-field 7x50 Commodore that probably didn't use an Erfle eyepiece. I don't know if either Commodore appeared as Type 3 models in Europe, or had 7x50 counterparts given other names.

I'd also like to hear your assessment of the view using the Saratoga. It may be comparable to the somewhat larger 8.5x44 Audubon, Type 3, its big brother. Incidentally, variants the Saratoga had blue or gold ribbons on the left cover plate, as is typically seen on Type 3 Audubons.

Regards,
Ed
PS. See this thread for related historical info. http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=42944


Hi, thanks for all the info,
First off, the exit pupils have a very pronounced square shape,
Secondly, Last night was the first chance I have had to view stars through them, Astronomy is my 'thing', I was comparing them to 3 other pairs, Hilkinson 20x60, ZOMZ 7x50 & KOMZ 8x30, When focusing the swifts, it could be seen through both eyepieces that the image of a star focussed in from the side rather than from all around, the others were not perfect but better, I the tried splitting a double star(Alberio), Hand held, the 20x60 was easy,7x50 just about, 8x30, there was a hint & Swifts, not at all.
One other thing I noticed was when I was trying to asses the edge sharpness, when looking at the centre of the field of view, the edge was well defined, but when you tried to look at the edge, the field went dark & the object disappeared, this was very much more noticeable in the swifts than the others.
Finally they didn't have the terrible yellow cast of the 8x30.
Hope this is of use to you,
Good luck
 
planetester said:
Hi, thanks for all the info,
First off, the exit pupils have a very pronounced square shape,
Secondly, Last night was the first chance I have had to view stars through them, Astronomy is my 'thing', I was comparing them to 3 other pairs, Hilkinson 20x60, ZOMZ 7x50 & KOMZ 8x30, When focusing the swifts, it could be seen through both eyepieces that the image of a star focussed in from the side rather than from all around, the others were not perfect but better, I the tried splitting a double star(Alberio), Hand held, the 20x60 was easy,7x50 just about, 8x30, there was a hint & Swifts, not at all.
One other thing I noticed was when I was trying to asses the edge sharpness, when looking at the centre of the field of view, the edge was well defined, but when you tried to look at the edge, the field went dark & the object disappeared, this was very much more noticeable in the swifts than the others.
Finally they didn't have the terrible yellow cast of the 8x30.
Hope this is of use to you,
Good luck


Planetester,

It's valuable information to me, although disappointing to confirm that Swift marketed several "Mark II" binoculars that obviously were not as advertised. I quote from the 1980 Catalog
Swift Mark II Binoculars incorporate lenses and prisms of the finest center-pot Barium Crown glass. ...
I know the 804 Audubon and 823 Commodore—Wide Angle met this criterion, but the 766 Holiday did not (although it has an Erfle eyepiece), and your 801 didn't either. :(

What you described about blacking out when looking at the very edge of the field can probably be explained by the geometry of the particular eyepiece-eye interface design. Essentially, light rays are cut off because the lens of the eye presents an eliptical shape to the exit pupil rather than a circle. The wider the field, the more this "problem" would occur with eye rotation.

It's all a learning experience.

Enjoy the view,
Ed
 
elkcub said:
Planetester,

It's valuable information to me, although disappointing to confirm that Swift marketed several "Mark II" binoculars that obviously were not as advertised. I quote from the 1980 Catalog I know the 804 Audubon and 823 Commodore—Wide Angle met this criterion, but the 766 Holiday did not (although it has an Erfle eyepiece), and your 801 didn't either. :(

What you described about blacking out when looking at the very edge of the field can probably be explained by the geometry of the particular eyepiece-eye interface design. Essentially, light rays are cut off because the lens of the eye presents an eliptical shape to the exit pupil rather than a circle. The wider the field, the more this "problem" would occur with eye rotation.

It's all a learning experience.

Enjoy the view,
Ed

Hi again Ed, I may be wrong on the exit pupils, when you look closely you can see that there is a round exit, but what appears to be square reflections on this side & what i can only describe as a square mask on the far side, have a look at the attached photo & see what you think (very difficult to photo), you have to study it very closely
 

Attachments

  • SSCN2376.JPG
    SSCN2376.JPG
    41.2 KB · Views: 827
planetester said:
Hi again Ed, I may be wrong on the exit pupils, when you look closely you can see that there is a round exit, but what appears to be square reflections on this side & what i can only describe as a square mask on the far side, have a look at the attached photo & see what you think (very difficult to photo), you have to study it very closely

I did a double take on mine too, but they are clearly lower cost crown glass prisms. Here is picture to help you make the distinction. I can't really tell from your photo either, so let me know.

Thanks,
Ed
 

Attachments

  • Exit Pupils 2.jpg
    Exit Pupils 2.jpg
    42.4 KB · Views: 791
elkcub said:
I did a double take on mine too, but they are clearly lower cost crown glass prisms. Here is picture to help you make the distinction. I can't really tell from your photo either, so let me know.

Thanks,
Ed

Yes, Mine look like the one on the right, Luckily they were given to me by my Neighbour, don't laugh, but I'll stick with my £15 7x50 ZOMZ for my astronomy, they do produce pin point star images.

What you may be able to explain to me is how the type of glass affects shape of the exit pupil, I would expect the size of the prism to be the major factor, maybe you know a good website that reveals all,

thanks again
 
swift historians

I recently bought, on e bay, a pair of 8X40 Swift binoculars manufactured, I guess in the '70's for a shop called Greens. They are similar in appearance to Aerolites. They were OK but no better than other cheap binoculars which I own which was disappointing considering the reputation that Swift has. It wasn't until I found this site this week that I realised that the Aerolites are of poorer quality.

This week, I was in a charity shop where they were selling a pair of Swift Saratoga 8X40's model 801. Field of view is 393ft at 1000yds and serial (not phone)No is 44 - 702125. When I looked through them, I couldn't believe the superb brightness and clarity or the fine detail of the image. I bought them for £25 (approx 50$ US). They are obviously earlier than the mark II saratoga's described above. They have the older chrome striped focus knob and eypiece adjusters and no visible tripod bush (although there is one at the front of the focus adjuster). It does not say MkII on them. There is no coloured stripe and the lenses are fully coated. I assume that they are MkI although it does not say so. The exit pupil is round so I think that it has the better prisms and there is screw up eye relief adjustment. The bridge is markedJ-B21.

I still can't believe how superior these glasses are to the cheaper ones which I own.

What would be the difference in the optics of the Mk II and would they be any better?
 
Last edited:
bosun said:
I recently bought, on e bay, a pair of 8X40 Swift binoculars manufactured, I guess in the '70's for a shop called Greens. They are similar in appearance to Aerolites. They were OK but no better than other cheap binoculars which I own which was disappointing considering the reputation that Swift has. It wasn't until I found this site this week that I realised that the Aerolites are of poorer quality.

This week, I was in a charity shop where they were selling a pair of Swift Saratoga 8X40's model 801. Field of view is 393ft at 1000yds and serial (not phone)No is 44 - 702125. When I looked through them, I couldn't believe the superb brightness and clarity or the fine detail of the image. I bought them for £25 (approx 50$ US). They are obviously earlier than the mark II saratoga's described above. They have the older chrome striped focus knob and eypiece adjusters and no visible tripod bush (although there is one at the front of the focus adjuster). It does not say MkII on them. There is no coloured stripe and the lenses are fully coated. I assume that they are MkI although it does not say so. The exit pupil is round so I think that it has the better prisms and there is screw up eye relief adjustment. The bridge is markedJ-B21.

I still can't believe how superior these glasses are to the cheaper ones which I own.

What would be the difference in the optics of the Mk II and would they be any better?

Hi,

The only Swift binoculars I thought I had a reasonable handle on were the Audubons — and even there surprises occur all the time. In 1980, the Swift catalog referred to the Aerolite series as a "low end budget line," so it's not too surprising that yours performed poorly.

Unfortunately, I don't have a catalog reference for the early 8x40 Saratoga you described, but they were probably made in 1970 with a large body manufactured by Tamron Optical, J- E-45. Take a close look for that mark as it can be quite faint. The J-B21 mark is for Kokisha Co. Ltd. Tokyo, who apparently was the finished product manufacturer. (Which is a new historical factoid for me, incidentally.) The thing here is that even the Tamron large body Audubons made in 1970 were not stenciled "Mark II", so it would take a catalog reference to confirm how your Saratoga was actually advertised. It turns out, however, that the Mark II designation didn't alway guarantee BaK-4 prisms or Erfle oculars, as I sadly discovered recently with an old pair of 7x35 "Holiday" Mark IIs. (Being a historian can have its disappointments. ;))

So, enjoy your find and use it in good health. It's probably as good as it gets for the original Swift series.

Ed
 
elkcub said:
Hi,

The only Swift binoculars I thought I had a reasonable handle on were the Audubons — and even there surprises occur all the time. In 1980, the Swift catalog referred to the Aerolite series as a "low end budget line," so it's not too surprising that yours performed poorly.

Unfortunately, I don't have a catalog reference for the early 8x40 Saratoga you described, but they were probably made in 1970 with a large body manufactured by Tamron Optical, J- E-45. Take a close look for that mark as it can be quite faint. The J-B21 mark is for Kokisha Co. Ltd. Tokyo, who apparently was the finished product manufacturer. (Which is a new historical factoid for me, incidentally.) The thing here is that even the Tamron large body Audubons made in 1970 were not stenciled "Mark II", so it would take a catalog reference to confirm how your Saratoga was actually advertised. It turns out, however, that the Mark II designation didn't alway guarantee BaK-4 prisms or Erfle oculars, as I sadly discovered recently with an old pair of 7x35 "Holiday" Mark IIs. (Being a historian can have its disappointments. ;))

So, enjoy your find and use it in good health. It's probably as good as it gets for the original Swift series.

Ed
Thanks for all the info. I have read with interest your historical notes on the Audobons and it looks as though my Saratogas are an early parallel product. I have looked at them more closely and the square masking does appear, very faintly, in the exit pupil but the image quality does seem much better than my other (admittedly low quality) binoculars. I cannot find a J-E Number anywhere though.

Thanks for your good wishes. I will enjoy using them and the info which you have supplied will enhance my enjoyment. Having read your history, I will now be looking for other examples on e bay and other places and will buy any that seem to be cheap enough.

Regards
Mike
p.s. Would it be of any interest to see some photographs if I can manage to post them? The eye pieces on the Saratogas look completely different from any of the examples in your history.
 
Last edited:
bosun said:
Thanks for all the info. I have read with interest your historical notes on the Audobons and it looks as though my Saratogas are an early parallel product. I have looked at them more closely and the square masking does appear, very faintly, in the exit pupil but the image quality does seem much better than my other (admittedly low quality) binoculars. I cannot find a J-E Number anywhere though.

Thanks for your good wishes. I will enjoy using them and the info which you have supplied will enhance my enjoyment. Having read your history, I will now be looking for other examples on e bay and other places and will buy any that seem to be cheap enough.

Regards
Mike
p.s. Would it be of any interest to see some photographs if I can manage to post them? The eye pieces on the Saratogas look completely different from any of the examples in your history.

Mike,

Yes, I'd love to see pictures of your treasure. If the exit pupils aren't obviously squared off (diamond shaped), then the prisms are doing what they should regardless of the glass that was used. Uniform illumination is what we're after.

Now I'm curious what the oculars might look like. :scribe:

Ed
 
elkcub said:
Mike,

Yes, I'd love to see pictures of your treasure. If the exit pupils aren't obviously squared off (diamond shaped), then the prisms are doing what they should regardless of the glass that was used. Uniform illumination is what we're after.

Now I'm curious what the oculars might look like. :scribe:

Ed
I hope these pictures work.
 

Attachments

  • PICT0076.JPG
    PICT0076.JPG
    113.5 KB · Views: 754
  • PICT0077.JPG
    PICT0077.JPG
    110.5 KB · Views: 944
  • PICT0078.JPG
    PICT0078.JPG
    144.9 KB · Views: 597
  • PICT0082.JPG
    PICT0082.JPG
    120.4 KB · Views: 623
Mike,

Well, they do look to be in very fine condition, and clearly the original large body type — I still think made by Tamron. The metal ribbing of the eyepieces is somewhat different than the Type 1 Audubons shown in our article, but all in all the similarity is quite evident. Also there are those interesting metal eyecups that twist out only 3mm or so. It's quite a nice piece. From the pictures it would appear that the exit pupils are somewhat squared off, so this model probably didn't use BaK-4 glass — but that really doesn't matter if the whole instrument works well, which you said it did. So, I think you got a great bargain for $50. Now try to wear it out looking at birds. ;)

I recently missed out on an early Swift catalog on eBay that could have told us the story about this instrument — assuming it was also marketed in the US. There is still a lot to learn about these things.

Thanks for the pictures,
Ed
 
elkcub said:
Mike,

Well, they do look to be in very fine condition, and clearly the original large body type — I still think made by Tamron. The metal ribbing of the eyepieces is somewhat different than the Type 1 Audubons shown in our article, but all in all the similarity is quite evident. Also there are those interesting metal eyecups that twist out only 3mm or so. It's quite a nice piece. From the pictures it would appear that the exit pupils are somewhat squared off, so this model probably didn't use BaK-4 glass — but that really doesn't matter if the whole instrument works well, which you said it did. So, I think you got a great bargain for $50. Now try to wear it out looking at birds. ;)

I recently missed out on an early Swift catalog on eBay that could have told us the story about this instrument — assuming it was also marketed in the US. There is still a lot to learn about these things.

Thanks for the pictures,
Ed
Thanks for all the info. I will enjoy using these binoculars and as I said before, the information which you have supplied will enhance my enjoyment.

Regards

Mike
 
bosun said:
Thanks for all the info. I will enjoy using these binoculars and as I said before, the information which you have supplied will enhance my enjoyment.

Regards

Mike
I have just bought another pair of Swift Saratogas on e bay! How many do I need to qualify as a collector?

These are Mark IIs and are very different from my older pair. The body is much bigger and heavier. In fact, reading your history, my older pair is more like the small bodied 804R in that the focus wheel is much easier to reach because of the somewhat slimmer design. The eypiece diameter is much greater on the newer model (at least 1.5 times bigger). The serial number is 761454. The casting No. on the body is JL B56. There is a tripod bush on the Right hand body. FOV is 488ft@1000yds. The eye cups are rubber and the focus wheel is of metal construction.

I cannot discern any difference in the optical performance but the newer pair will not focus down below about 20yds (I wondered whether the focusing screw needs adjusting?). The older pair focuses down to about 15ft without spectacles. The focusing distance shortens with spectacles, but I never wear specs when using binoculars. The exit pupils on the newer model have a much more definite square mask.
 

Attachments

  • PICT0087.JPG
    PICT0087.JPG
    164.9 KB · Views: 603
  • PICT0088.JPG
    PICT0088.JPG
    154.4 KB · Views: 1,119
  • PICT0089.JPG
    PICT0089.JPG
    109.6 KB · Views: 461
  • PICT0090.JPG
    PICT0090.JPG
    122.5 KB · Views: 386
  • PICT0091.JPG
    PICT0091.JPG
    156.4 KB · Views: 419
Last edited:
Why, Bosun, I do believe you have all the makings of a Swift Saratoga collector. In fact, you now are a collector! Congratulations!

By way of contrast, your two finds seem to be quite different. The first is tall and slim, the second short and squat. Obviously, they are quite different optical designs, since the first has an apparent FOV of 60 deg. while the latter has a huge 75 deg. field.

Based on my limited knowledge, I can't really say that the older one was made by Tamron, so you might wish to pursue that historical avenue a bit further. Your new one was made by Hiyhoshi Kogaku, and corresponds with the Type 3 European body shown in our article, blue ribbon and all. I'd be very surprised if this wide a FOV was not supported by a five-element Erfle eyepiece and BaK-4 prisms. At least in the photos I don't see any indication of vignetting.

A near focus of 20 yds. is not all that useful for birding tasks, but it might be for horse racing. I would advise caution in attempting adjustments yourself. Now that you're a collector, though, it might be time for you to contact Pyser and see if they have a good rapair tech. to work with. I have a 7x50 Type 2 Commodore Mk II that can focus to 12 ft., so I tend to agree that yours is out of adjustment.

Many of the older instruments, unfortunately, were not given expert repair. Quite often collimation was not balanced over the full range of IPD settings, so everything might be fine for one person and very bad for another. Nicolas Crista will need to work on those 7x50 Commodores of mine. After looking through then, my eyeballs feel like they were sucked on by a giant squid. |:S|

Looking forward to a treatise from you on Swift Saratoga's in the next year or two.

Blue skies,
Ed
PS. Note Planetester's 1970 Saratoga in post #1, made about the same time as your older model. His is marked more like an American model would be, but I don't think this body style was distributed in the US. Yours retains the same FOV. Very interesting ...
 
Last edited:
I think that your history of the Audubon is an impossible act to follow but I would be happy to send you any pics, which I might have, that would help you to expand your history at a later date.

The close focus adjustment on my new pair was achieved by removing the cover at the bottom of the focus adjuster and giving the internal axial screw a couple of turns. The close focus distance is now fine.
 
I do love compliments, particularly from a bino collector with handy repair skills. So how close will it focus now?
Ed
 
bosun said:
The close focus adjustment on my new pair was achieved by removing the cover at the bottom of the focus adjuster and giving the internal axial screw a couple of turns. The close focus distance is now fine.

Boy, thanks for this trick. I adjusted my Saratogas (serial 4-6310301) until the barrel almost pulls clear of the central shaft, and they now focus down to about 20 feet. Still not too good for birding, but at least now I can spend a little less time hanging out at the horse-races. |:d|
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top