Telescope Reviews: Nikon SE 12x50s

Folks, let me be perfectly blunt about these binoculars. They're not for everybody. I really, really like mine for most pursuits, both terrestrial and celestial. But, they do suffer some major drawbacks:

1. They're not waterproof. (Though I believe they're a good bit more water resistant than most non-wp optics.)

2. They are both the max, or even over the max power that many people can comfortably hold still.

3. They are not as easily tripod mounted as most binoculars. Though it's easy enough to mount them with a special additional cost adapter either through Nikon or via a handful of aftermarket or homemade solutions.

4. If they must be mounted, then they really aren't high power enough, or large enough to justify the expense.

5. They cost a mint.

6. They're hard to find locally to test, and in this case testing them for your own personal use prior to purchase, is practically mandatory.

The only reason that I wound up with a set of these is that I just stumbled upon an online dealer, (whom I'd had several good camera purchases with), who was just happening to be getting out of the retail binocular business at precisely the time that I decided that I wanted some SEs. In fact, I was initially torn between the 8x32s and the 12x50s. They'd already sold out of the 10x42s, that would, for most folks, make a more versitle, all around choice. It was one of those deals where I knew that I just had to act, and act quickly. In all honesty, I don't think I'd buy them at the current street price of $850. That's a lot of money. Now, having said all that, I'll add some reasons why they still might appeal to those for whom spending that kind of money on an optic isn't really an issue:

1. These are the brighest, clearest optics that I've yet seen. That's true of all 3 sizes in the SE line. The reason that Nikon doesn't offer the standard 8x42, 10x50 and 12x60 in this line is that their engineers have figured out how to get all the brightness from a smaller objective. Everybody that's ever looked through mine, (which would include dozens of bird club members as well as a few am. astro folks), have commented on the bright, clear view. Some of these folks are no strangers to Leica BNs and Swarovski ELs, etc.

2. That, coupled with some subtle but important erogonomic design improvements, means that this SE series is extremely handholdable for many people, including me. The comment that I usually get right after the exclamation about the brightness, is one of disbelief when they find out that they're 12x. Even little old ladies have found that they can hold these things, provided that they know how to hold themselves. But, there have been at least two Astromarters who sold off their sets, apparently because they couldn't hold them steady. So be warned.

3. The 12x50SEs represent the highest power, in the smallest, easiest to control package that I can actually use for both birding and astronomy.

4. I expect a lot out of my binoculars, and these have never failed to deliver, with one important exception: They don't focus as close as most birders require. That doesn't bother me because my interests lean more to waterbirds and raptors and other long distance viewing.

5. With that in mind, these actually can substitute for a very low power, small diameter spotting scope, but are no replacement for a good 30x scope.

6. Personally, having compared these in my hands to a few of the Cannon IS series, I prefer the brighter, better images of the Nikon SEs. *However* , that's highly subjective, and is irrelevent if you can't hold them still to begin with. (Something a lot of folks tend to gloss over is that the circuitry in the IS binoculars really does rob a bit of resolution. Even with it off, I haven't seen a set of IS bins that can really compete with top end glass from Nikon, Leica or Swarovski. But, again, that's a subjective interpretation, and there are legions of people who see things quite differently, apparently to include some highly respected optics critics. To me, the IS views always look a bit flat, and lack the 3D depth of field of really highend optics. But then, I've never looked through any IS bins other than Cannon. So I can't comment on Nikon or Fuji IS. )

These are NOT for everybody. They came into my life at a time when I was willing to pay the price that I could get them for. Weigh your own needs carefully. I would hate for anybody to drop that kind of money on them and then be disappointed.

Regards to all,
Mike Swaim

--------------------
18" Starsplitter II f/4.5
8" Hardin Dob f/6
C5 workhorse mini SCT f/10 or f/6.3
70mm TV Ranger dual purpose birding/astro
77mm Leica Televid APO
16x70 Fujinons on UA Deluxe Mt.
12x50 Nikon SE
8x30 Nikon E2s
and many others