Took my 10x42 SE's to the optics shop today. (1 Viewer)

[mikefitz6]

I am thinking that the folks behind the counter really need to look more and spew stats less. I got the impression that they had no idea what a Nikon SE is and even when they looked through them nothing registered.

I compared them to two pairs of Nikon roofs (not sure which models, but they were cheaper nikons), a Leupold roof, and the Swarovski SLC HD. All were in 10x42. None of the binoculars came close to the sharpness and brightness of the SE's. With one exception. I thought the Swarovski HDs had a little better color pop to them.

Of course this is all based on a few minutes of opinion and not a real exacting test.

Regardless, I left the shop thinking that I have done alright getting my pair of Nikon SE's. Yeah, I want a pair of Swarovskis, but the difference is not great enough that I can't live without a pair for awhile.

Mike

 

[spyglass]

Well, you're not alone in holding the SE's in high esteem. Based strictly on the view & handling, from all the dozens of units I've owned or had good use of, nothing is any better.....unless of course you just gotta have waterproofing.

 

[Jonathan B.]

I am thinking that the folks behind the counter really need to look more and spew stats less. I got the impression that they had no idea what a Nikon SE is and even when they looked through them nothing registered.

Although it has been awhile, I have had the same experience several times. In stores in California, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Oklahoma, and Texas, sales folks have scoffed at the idea that my SE outperforms the alpha bins in their cases, and even when I let them see for themselves, they can't perceive the difference.

Salespeople parrot what they are told by sales reps and other staff, who learn the same way. Very few anywhere spend the time to learn about optics. I found only three shops in all those states where staff really knew what they were selling. At least one of those no longer exists.

 

[Pileatus]

SE's are not waterproof, fogproof, dustproof, or salt-water tolerant. Every binocular buying guide insists on the above and that's why SE's no longer make the hit list. It makes perfect sense.

Personally, I don't care who says what. My new SV sat idle yesterday while I used my 2004 SE for more than 9 continuous hours. It's just so darn cute! Then again, I can afford the luxury of owning more than one. If I could only own one binocular it would be, without question, the Swarovision 8.5X42.

 

[John Dracon]

Mike - With over 60 years of constant use of binoculars under a variety of conditions, I have reached the conclusion that need for waterproofness (however that is defined) is similar to Twain's comment when he read his obituary in a newspaper, "The report of my death is greatly exaggerated."

The SEs while not "waterproof" are highly water resistant due to tight tolerances. Now if one turns the faucet on them, or inadvertently drops them into a stream or lake, then water will penetrate into the innards. I've seen 70 year old B&Ls used to the extent of abuse that show no problems of humidity or water entry.

The SE 10x42 is an alpha binocular. All you will get with a Swarovski is more status IMO and cost. I've read these tales about how important it is to have a waterproof binocular when birding in the rain. Who birds in the rain? Perhaps caught in the rain when birding, but deliberately birding in the rain? Like birding in a snow storm. Sure. Enough rain coming down to cause water entry into your Nikon is going to impair your view anyway. Then a 10 cent ziplock bag or tucked inside your shirt will keep things dry.

When the SE 8x32 first came out I gave a pair to a son-in-law, who professionally is a range management specialist working with ranchers. Over the years ranchers whom he has visited have compared their optics with his and constantly come away amazed how much better the SE is.

Most folks behind the counter are amateurs regarding optics. Their opinions
aren't work a bucket of warm spit.

John

 

[james holdsworth]

Mike - With over 60 years of constant use of binoculars under a variety of conditions, I have reached the conclusion that need for waterproofness (however that is defined) is similar to Twain's comment when he read his obituary in a newspaper, "The report of my death is greatly exaggerated."

The SEs while not "waterproof" are highly water resistant due to tight tolerances. Now if one turns the faucet on them, or inadvertently drops them into a stream or lake, then water will penetrate into the innards. I've seen 70 year old B&Ls used to the extent of abuse that show no problems of humidity or water entry.

The SE 10x42 is an alpha binocular. All you will get with a Swarovski is more status IMO and cost. I've read these tales about how important it is to have a waterproof binocular when birding in the rain. Who birds in the rain? Perhaps caught in the rain when birding, but deliberately birding in the rain? Like birding in a snow storm. Sure. Enough rain coming down to cause water entry into your Nikon is going to impair your view anyway. Then a 10 cent ziplock bag or tucked inside your shirt will keep things dry.

When the SE 8x32 first came out I gave a pair to a son-in-law, who professionally is a range management specialist working with ranchers. Over the years ranchers whom he has visited have compared their optics with his and constantly come away amazed how much better the SE is.

Most folks behind the counter are amateurs regarding optics. Their opinions
aren't work a bucket of warm spit.

John

After ruining my prize pair of B & L Elite's, [the armoured but not waterproof version] when caught out in a half hour downpour, I respectfully disagree. I will NEVER spend big bucks on a non-waterproof pair of bins again.

And, as to not birding in the rain, you are missing much. Many of my best birds have been in driving snow, rain, wind and spray. In fact, on the nicest days I can almost be assured that I will see nothing of consequence.

 

[John Dracon]

James - Was it Kippling who wrote, "Only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noon day sun"? Best birding in "driving" (my emphasis) snow and rain? My experience in such conditions is that water or snow flakes get on the oculars rendering the view comparable to looking through a coke bottle. But oh well, if that is not your experience, fine. My point is really this. Binoculars which are not water proof are not essential for most birding situations. Even in inclement weather they can be protected with reasonable care. Do I have binoculars which are suppose to be waterproof? Of course. One even has a moisture ring inside the ocular which isn't suppose to be there. I have come to trust only a few binoculars as being waterproof such as the Zeiss IF Safari 8x30.
That one has met the test when accidentally being submerged for a lengthy period of time. Happy birding. John

 

[Jonathan B.]

SE's are not waterproof, fogproof, dustproof, or salt-water tolerant. Every binocular buying guide insists on the above and that's why SE's no longer make the hit list. It makes perfect sense.

Personally, I don't care who says what. My new SV sat idle yesterday while I used my 2004 SE for more than 9 continuous hours. It's just so darn cute! Then again, I can afford the luxury of owning more than one. If I could only own one binocular it would be, without question, the Swarovision 8.5X42.

You do know what I am talking about though. Few manufacturers spend any time educating or cultivating salespeople at retail outlets. Here are a few of my experiences relating to the SE and salespeople.

While traveling on business to the San Francisco Bay Area several times between 1999 and 2005, I visited birding-oriented shops in several cities. Not one of them stocked the SE. One store that was Zeiss-crazy completely dismissed the SE as worthy of birding. That was after I had purchased my SE, and I had it with me. I offered to let the salesperson look through it. He did, and he pulled it away from his eyes with a look of disgust, suggesting it was crap compared to the bins they stocked.

The owner of another store, which stocked a large line of Swarovski including the superb 8x30 porro (which really was hard to resist), said that they were unable to keep the attention of their Nikon rep and consequently could not maintain a worthwhile sample of Nikon's high-end bins. As a result, they gave up on Nikon. That was a small store, and perhaps Nikon didn't think they did enough business to warrant their attention. On the other hand, that store sold a lot of Swarovski glass, and the owner said the Swaro rep was extraordinarily attentive to their needs.

No wonder sales of the SE were never big in the USA. In dozens of stores in the six-state region where I looked at binoculars, the only ones where I found the SE were Christopher's in Norman, Oklahoma, and a Wild Birds Unlimited store in the Dallas area--specifically in University Park--where one staff person was a knowledgeable binocular enthusiast. He let me handle and look through a pile of bins for about an hour before taking me outside with Nikon Venturer LX 8x42 and the SE 8x32. I bought my SE from that store on that day in 2000. That store now stocks only a few second-tier or lesser bins.

 

[ronh]

Mike,
A guy at Sportsman's Warehouse told me and my wife that the Swarovision has crystal prisms. Which might have have been a really smart tongue in cheek funny thing to say, in a perfect world. Naaaa.... Hey, he knew binoculars had prisms!

I have spent a lot of time with my brother's in law 10x42 SE and it is equal or better than any other binocular I have looked through. Comparing it to my 8x42 Zeiss FL the last time we got together, the two seemed equally bright, sharp and colorful, with central CA that required a nearly painfully contrasting scene to see, all very impressive considering the SEs higher magnification. The SE was sharper at the edge. The SE would black out on me if I got too rambunctious scanning the field, and could have benefited from finely adjustable eyecups. The sleek Zeiss felt better in my hands, and its focus knob was easier to work. The SE felt lighter. His SE has lived in the southeast US about 25 years now, and he uses it a lot, and it's just like new as far as I can see.

Not hard to crank up an SE lovefest here! Highest congratulations.
Ron

 

[Pileatus]

You do know what I am talking about though. Few manufacturers spend any time educating or cultivating salespeople at retail outlets. Here are a few of my experiences relating to the SE and salespeople.

While traveling on business to the San Francisco Bay Area several times between 1999 and 2005, I visited birding-oriented shops in several cities. Not one of them stocked the SE. One store that was Zeiss-crazy completely dismissed the SE as worthy of birding. That was after I had purchased my SE, and I had it with me. I offered to let the salesperson look through it. He did, and he pulled it away from his eyes with a look of disgust, suggesting it was crap compared to the bins they stocked.

The owner of another store, which stocked a large line of Swarovski including the superb 8x30 porro (which really was hard to resist), said that they were unable to keep the attention of their Nikon rep and consequently could not maintain a worthwhile sample of Nikon's high-end bins. As a result, they gave up on Nikon. That was a small store, and perhaps Nikon didn't think they did enough business to warrant their attention. On the other hand, that store sold a lot of Swarovski glass, and the owner said the Swaro rep was extraordinarily attentive to their needs.

No wonder sales of the SE were never big in the USA. In dozens of stores in the six-state region where I looked at binoculars, the only ones where I found the SE were Christopher's in Norman, Oklahoma, and a Wild Birds Unlimited store in the Dallas area--specifically in University Park--where one staff person was a knowledgeable binocular enthusiast. He let me handle and look through a pile of bins for about an hour before taking me outside with Nikon Venturer LX 8x42 and the SE 8x32. I bought my SE from that store on that day in 2000. That store now stocks only a few second-tier or lesser bins.

In 2004 I purchased my Leica at NYCV, the store that recently sold old stock Nikon E's. I brought my SE's along for comparison. The excellent salesperson looked through my SE exclaiming, "They're as good as the Leica". I replied, "I know. By the way, I see you have SE's in your display case right there alongside the E2's". I bet some of the recently sold E's sat in that case since 2004!

If it weren't for the Internet the SE line would have died long ago. I know people who appreciate the view through an SE but still won't use one. They'd rather buy one fully functional binocular, regardless of cost.

Wait until Swarovski produces a Swarovision 8X32...it may be the real SE killer. My wife will let you know.

 

[spyglass]

OK, bottom line.....those of you who are the "the 10/10ths birders", where seeing birds is, while not quite life or death, the biggest deal there is, maybe should deny yourself the joy of the SE's & use only waterproof-to-six-fathoms roofs.....and spend ALL your allowance doing so. In my 15yrs or so of espying birds, I've yet to see one in crummy weather that I didn't also see when it was not precipitating. I'm willin' to wait. I see birding as just a pastime, a hobby....in other words, non-critical. That dudden mean that if somethin' very unusual shows up, I don't load up and head to where the report of the....albatross (or whatever.....Kirtland's Warbler, etc) occurred.

As to "getting caught" in a downpour, there are a few places where it probably isn't in the forecast (banana republics, the tropics, etc) and where you might get soaked in a matter of a minute or so.....but not too much in CONUS. Now with 'net access almost everywhere, it's very easy to get local forecasts almost immediately (or flip on the Weather Channel....every 8 mins for yr area), or better yet, pull up the NOAA Nat'l Radar Site and you can see every system, how big it is, how intense, and where it's headed....then you can localize it for detail. No real excuse to get caught unawares any more.

Finally, there will never be an "SE killer". They will remain at the upper reaches of their respective mags (8-10-12), being as close to "not looking thru glass", without adding or subtracting anything, as you will get. I suppose another mfr could copy that incredible eyepiece design.....about the only thing (IMHO) that could improve an SE is if a way could be found to add another few 10ths of a degree to the fov, without affecting anything else. And I should add, I have no real "brand loyalty" or style preference. I have, or have had, Zeiss, Pentax & Swaro roofs....SE, Swift Audubons (which is also, view-wise, as good as it gets, if ya don't need yr specs), the premium B&L's. A good view is a good view, regardless. The only "pricey" bino I would use for a paperweight is any Steiner, which belong down there with Jason, Simmons, WalMart Bushnells, etc.

 

[spacepilot]

OK, bottom line.....those of you who are the "the 10/10ths birders", where seeing birds is, while not quite life or death, the biggest deal there is, maybe should deny yourself the joy of the SE's & use only waterproof-to-six-fathoms roofs.....and spend ALL your allowance doing so. In my 15yrs or so of espying birds, I've yet to see one in crummy weather that I didn't also see when it was not precipitating. I'm willin' to wait. I see birding as just a pastime, a hobby....in other words, non-critical. That dudden mean that if somethin' very unusual shows up, I don't load up and head to where the report of the....albatross (or whatever.....Kirtland's Warbler, etc) occurred.

I am by no means a 10/10th birder. I don't chase the reported rarities unless they are close to town, I don't more than 10 miles to bird unless it's an organized trip. In fact, I try to drive as little as possible to my birding places, because birding is supposed to be an eco-friendly hobby, isn't it? That said, I enjoy going out in windy, rainy, or snowy weather, perhaps more than the sunny days. When I see the sparrows popping in and out of bushes, braving the same late-fall rain, or bitter winter wind that I am enduring, I often wonder how they can, with their sub-ounce body weight, survive in the wild. It's times like this that make me appreciate the wonders of nature more and feel closer to be one with the universe. A rarity on such days would be the icing on the cake, but just seeing the usually birds going around with their rainy-day routines is reason enough for me to go out the next time it rains.

So I would say birding is a hobby for me, non-critical. However, I suspect I enjoy less-than-optimal-weather birding more than a lot of other people. For this reason, if I can only keep one bin, it would be something waterproof, something other than the SE. Even in rains much lighter than "driving", I often see little pools of water form at the edges of the objectives in the barrels after a little bit of use. With the SE, this would cause problems sooner or later.

 

[oldbird13]

Nikon SE 8x32 vs. Swarovski

In 2004 I purchased my Leica at NYCV, the store that recently sold old stock Nikon E's. I brought my SE's along for comparison. The excellent salesperson looked through my SE exclaiming, "They're as good as the Leica". I replied, "I know. By the way, I see you have SE's in your display case right there alongside the E2's". I bet some of the recently sold E's sat in that case since 2004!

If it weren't for the Internet the SE line would have died long ago. I know people who appreciate the view through an SE but still won't use one. They'd rather buy one fully functional binocular, regardless of cost.

Wait until Swarovski produces a Swarovision 8X32...it may be the real SE killer. My wife will let you know.

I recently took my Superior E 8x32 to Wild Birds to compare to Swarovision 8.5 and I decided to keep my $2,300. Happy birding!

 

[John Dracon]

Oldbird - Those Nikon 8x32 SEs have a way of doing that to you. Everytime I compare mine to my Zeiss 8x32 Fl, I come away with mixed emotions. The Zeiss is lighter with slightly more field and better cups. The view? A toss up. With the Nikon cups rolled down, I have perfect ER wearing my glasses, which is all the time. I like them both.

The Swaro is a great glass. But $1700 difference? Don't think so. John

 

[oldbird13]

Nikon Superior E 8x32

Oldbird - Those Nikon 8x32 SEs have a way of doing that to you. Everytime I compare mine to my Zeiss 8x32 Fl, I come away with mixed emotions. The Zeiss is lighter with slightly more field and better cups. The view? A toss up. With the Nikon cups rolled down, I have perfect ER wearing my glasses, which is all the time. I like them both.

The Swaro is a great glass. But $1700 difference? Don't think so. John

It makes you wonder after reading all these replies in just a few short days what the impact of marketing/pushing a particular brand or model/ignoring a wonderful product has on how a quality item might sit and not have the oppotunity to impress a potential buyer. My daughter recently returned her iPhone 4 because some young kid at the AT&T store told her it was a piece of crap. I'm sure it had nothing to do with how much they make off or subsidize it. I have rambled enough. Happy Thanksgiving to all!