BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="elkcub" data-source="post: 1465297" data-attributes="member: 14473">Most of this discussion seems oriented to older binoculars that are still bird worthy today.  In this respect, I would strongly agree with Chartwell99 (post #20) that modern coatings make a huge difference in worthiness.  I have a fairly large collection of Swift Audubons (and related models) that have all been reconditioned by Nicolas Crista to perform optimally.  Combining the 804 and 820 series, they essentially retained the same basic optical design for 50+ years, but with evolutionary changes being made in materials, mechanics, adjustments, ergonomics, baffling, and lens coatings.  Rate these changes in reverse order in terms of importance.One of the most beautiful to look at and hold is the original (Type-0) made by Tamron for Swift-Anderson between 1957-1959.  A real collector's item.  They are quite rare at this point, much more rare, for example, than the 8x30 Nippon Kogaku, of the same vintage, that I also own.  I believe they compare well with the large Zeiss porros of that era, but to be honest the N-Ks retain more usefulness.   So, assuming you could find an early Audubon in excellent condition, I wouldn't recommend buying it for day-to-day birding.  Decidedly not!  They are too large, heavy, and cumbersome; too much lacking in contrast; too much flare; minimal eye relief, etc.  By modern standards, the small body types with multi-coatings (e.g., the 804R, HR/5, 804ED, and 820) would be much more satisfactory in the field.  These didn't show up until the mid-1980s.  However, they are still comparable to the best modern porros, and even expensive roofs.     (I hasten to mention that if one already owns an older model, or inherited one from a relative, it certainly would be worth a modest investment to bring it back to its original performance level.  Otherwise, my advise is to leave the really old guys for the collectors.)Now the beautiful Nippon Kogaku 8x30 "Mikron," the predecessor of the Nikon A, E, E2, and SE, is an interesting case.  IMO it is definitely bird worthy even today (if reconditioned), — and that is probably also true for the 6x30, 7x35 and 9x35 Mikrons.  Comparing the 1958 (?) specimen I own to the 1958 Swift Type-0b, although both are fully coated, the Nikon walks away with the prize for glare suppression, baffling, and general handiness.  In fact, armed with nothing other than a 8x30 Mikron one could probably become a world class birder.  Oh, yes, it's not as bright, colorful, or flat a view as an 8x32SE, but it's no slouch either.  Hopefully, I haven't offended anyone's sensibilities.  In conclusion, though, some of the older models are worth buying and reconditioning.  Many others might be quite disappointing.    Ed</blockquote>

Verification