Newly designed Audubons? (3 Viewers)

[ceasar]

Brock,

Swift's website still says that the 8.5x44 828 Audubon has 5 element oculars.

BTW, is Holgers "new" 820 ED the same binocular shown in the Swift link he supplied? It says the 820s also have 5 element oculars.

Bob

 

[Holger Merlitz]

Holger.

Thanks for those observations on the "new" 820. I've been interested in this version, because I tried the original, and the oversized, hard plastic eyecups and the protruding center post were a very poor fit for my face, I couldn't get the EPs close enough to my eyes to see the entire FOV. The B&L version eyecups also look big, but different than the original 820. Do you find the eyecups comfortable?

As to your guess about the new 820 being a re-badged B&L Discoverer, I thought you couldn't add an ED element to existing doublet without having to reconfigure the other element(s) to match it? I remember this discussion about some bins, perhaps the Nikon HGs, and one of the experts said that.

If the new 820 is a re-badged 8x42 B&L, that must mean the five element HR/5 EPs are gone, and from what I've read about the Audubon, that 5-element EP configuration made the images very sharp.

Have you tried the original 820? If so, how does the B&L version compare in terms of overall image quality and off-axis performance?

Someone did a review earlier of the new model, and he wasn't happy with the fit and finish and untidiness inside the tubes. My original 820 was pretty shoddily constructed. There were lumps on the paint of the frame, which I thought was dust, so I flicked them with my finger, and the paint chipped off! The dust was under the paint, and the paint was rather thinly applied.

Also, the black paint on the frame was gloss black while the paint on the focuser rack was flat black. The armoring was thin, and I could see every nook and cranny in the housing underneath it, probably not as noticeable on the black ED version. The armoring on the B&L version seems thicker, similar to the 828 Audubon roof, rather than a "skin" like the original 820.

The focuser bridge also flexed, as mentioned above. Is the focuser bridge more rigid on this model?

Perhaps the prisms intruding into light path are cutting down the exit pupils? I noticed this on the original 820, a bit more on one side than the other. Back when Swift Sports Optics was part of the parent company, I got to talk to a Swift optics technician, who said not to worry about it, the vignetting was the way it was designed and wouldn't be noticeable in the field.

Arek also noted the prism cut off, though the vignetting in his sample was less than mine:

Swift 820 Audubon review

Finally, how smooth is the focuser? WP porros often have stiff focusers.

Brock

Hi Brock,

Thanks for additional information.

The eyecups have a diameter of almost 44mm, so they are big, too, but they are rather flexible, no hard-plastic, and feel fairly OK when pressed against the face. My problem is: With eyecups fully out, I can't see the full field of view, and one notch lower, I am a little too close and sometimes observe kidney beaning. But that disappears in low light and I am particularly interested in their performance under the night sky.

What I mean is, of course, that they replaced the entire objective lens and tube assembly and perhaps left everything else in place, including prisms and oculars (of the former 8x42 version). If the new objective lenses had a slightly longer focal length compared to the previous ones, this would be the way to do. In this case, they would use the same oculars as the old B&L (which were not bad at all). Anyway, we would have to compare them side by side to confirm my 'wild guess'.

I have - years ago - once used the old Audubon ED, and in my memories its field of view appeared larger. But again, to be sure, I should compare these two side by side (apart from the fact that Allbinos have given some data about the old version).

If I look into the objective tubes, I see the same, partially reflecting components of the prism mounts which have been pictured and criticized in the earlier post. But I also see internal tube walls painted in proper black and baffled, and prisms which are shielded with black covers. So, there are installations to reduce stray light, and during my first (very preliminary) tests I didn't have any obvious stray light problems.

The 'armor' is just a rather thin skin that is not fitting perfectly well over the body, there are regions (where the thumb rests) in which this skin is deformable, since there is air between skin and body. So, the external finish doesn't resemble that of a high quality binocular, although the feel is fine. The focuser is somewhat stiff, but the large wheel is comfortable to turn and everything feels precise, the way I like it. The speed of the focuser is moderate, from the close point (about 4m) to infinity it turns 270°.

Vignetting is rather low, and when including my recent correction of the magnification, the exit pupil size is within specs.

Altogether I think these 'Discoverer ED' binoculars are among the better Porros I have seen, but whether their price is in fact justified shall be seen after additional tests.

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Holger Merlitz]

Brock,

Swift's website still says that the 8.5x44 828 Audubon has 5 element oculars.

BTW, is Holgers "new" 820 ED the same binocular shown in the Swift link he supplied? It says the 820s also have 5 element oculars.

Bob

Yes, the binocular shown there is the one I am talking about.

Cheers,
Holger