• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Hello and information needed on Nikon 9x30 6.7 (1 Viewer)

fstop

Well-known member
Hi everyone, this is a great site! So many knowledgeable people here. By way of introduction, I have a Swift 8.5x44 MKII (large body), which Nicholas Christa made like new, as well as the below binoculars. I am well pleased with both of them.

I have Nikon 9x30 6.7 binoculars and would like to find more information about it, but other than what I have read in the archives, there is really little information. I would love to find an original brochure, or copy of one, as well as the following information: was it water proof/repellent; is it inert gas filled; were they fluorite glass; and years they were made. Any other information is welcomed!

I know, asking a lot for a newbie, thanks so much for the help!
 
Last edited:
The Nikon 9x30 roofs that I've seen are from a series that was released in the mid 1970s and produced in perhaps slightly modified form until the mid to late 1980s. My Nikon 8x40 Classic Eagle, which was Nikon's best roof prism prior to the Venturer LX/HG, borrows a lot of styling from the 9x30 but the 8x40 was the only model in this series that had good eye relief, was nitrogen filled, and was waterproof. None in the series were phase coated, and I don't think they made use of exotic glass. The 9x30 that I've seen had simple coatings, whereas my 8x40 has a rainbow of coatings of differing colors on the elements. I don't know about the prism coatings (i.e. whether silver or aluminum). Despite the fancy lens coatings on my 8x40, overall transmission is far below that of current models.

--AP
 
Thanks for the information, Alexis. One person had felt that fluorite glass was used, but that was the only mention of it that I've seen. As I mentioned, I'm perfectly happy with them, but beyond that, I would like to put together some information about them, rather than the scattered mentions of them currently available, and add it to the forum. It might be a little obscure, but then again, perhaps it will be use to someone down the road.
 
Here's a page from a 1986 Nikon brochure that includes your binocular. As you can see, not water resistant. A friend used these back in the late 80's, so I had a chance to evaluate them. I was not at all impressed. The lack of phase coating made them unsharp compared to Porros of the time and I found them to be dim and low contrast, possibly from aluminum prism coating and the single layer AR coating. I would think your Audubons would be much better.
 

Attachments

  • nikon page.jpg
    nikon page.jpg
    255.2 KB · Views: 564
Thank you for the copy of the brochure and comment! You're absolutely right, Henry,there is no contest with the Audubons, they are brighter, have a far better field of view and 3D "look" and a gentle roll off from the sweet spot for a nice relaxed view. I should have mentioned that I got the Nikons as an adjunct to the larger pair, not to be the equal; they're a lot smaller/lighter to carry around. Others have mentioned what you have, but I don't find them especially dim or low contrast for older 30mm roofs; aging eyes I guess... Optics have come a long way in the last few decades, no question about it, but for my needs and wallet, these are fine. I like to know about things and appreciate yours, and others generosity in sharing information.

Attached is what I have so far, perhaps this small amount of information will be useful to someone else who is curious about these binoculars.
 

Attachments

  • nikon 9x30 binocular data.pdf
    490.5 KB · Views: 287
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 10 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