12x50SE Eye Relief?
Posted 13 May 2005 - 08:29 AM
My local binocular shop does not stock the Nikon 12x50SE so I cant test before I order,my question today is about the eye relief,I dont wear glasses and, from the posts that Ive read it seems ER is a touch on the long side for non spectacle wearer"s.
I would particularly like to hear if the blackout problem is a major factor for non wearer"s?
Please feel free to respond even if your club has just been taken over by an American Billionare.
Seriously though Kenny,its no laughing matter!
Posted 13 May 2005 - 10:35 AM
Whilst apparantly not available in in some of the lesser developed parts of the country ,it is my understanding that Nikon 12 x 50 SEs CAN be obtained in other parts of the UK.
CN member Martin from Wales , for example , is an owner.
Why not try to arrange a " pay and try " arrangement with a supplier ?
As regards "the takeover" , I'm not sure the buyer IS a billionaire . Apparantly he is having to borrow around 40% of the "buying price" to help finance the deal , thus immediately placing the club in a multi -million pound DEBT situation from the outset , and hence much of the objection , reaction and outrage amongst the thousands of supporters who have paid for the stadium / business empire through the turnstiles and retail outlets over the past 50 years or so.
Regards , Kenny
Posted 13 May 2005 - 01:05 PM
Nikon 12x50Se's are available from several outlets on the web eg Warehouse Express Online, though it's hard to see how you'd get a trial without actually visiting the store (that one's in Cambs. Another, Kay Optical, is south London)).In fact, the binos were shipped direct from Nikon UK so maybe the stores just act as middlemen and take their profit on the transaction? I think this availability of the SE range is fairly recent for the UK - and very welcome.
As for eye relief - I don't wear specs and have no problems with the rubber eyecups rolled halfway down. Even fully rolled down I can still see the whole FOV without blackout, though these binoculars are quite sensitive to eye placement. I find resting the eyepieces against my brow works well and there's no cut off of the FOV (though there is with the eyecups fully up.)
The optics are great and they're ergonomically fine to hold - lighter in fact than my 10x50 Action Extremes. The right eye diopter is very firm and unlikely to be moved accidentally, ditto the IPD.
Hope this helps.
Posted 13 May 2005 - 01:23 PM
I get no field cutoff even with my glasses on and the cups extended half way.
Posted 13 May 2005 - 06:48 PM
Posted 14 May 2005 - 03:34 AM
Posted 14 May 2005 - 02:59 PM
I havent tried the 12 x 50 SE but i do own 10 x 42 SE and can confirm i do experience a little black out problem at times it is especially noticeable when panning in bright sunlight conditions but is less so in sky watching and dusk useage
I am not a spectacle wearer but the long eye relief on the bins is i think aimed more at allowing spectacle wearers a "full field view"
They are still very much worth persevering with on eye placement as the view is very clear and practically edge sharp imo
Posted 15 May 2005 - 12:50 PM
I don't know if this will be any help, but all three variations of the SE series were designed around the same eyepiece so if you can find the 8x32 or 10x42 in a shop you should still be able to determine if the eye relief is "right" for you....
The useable ER on the 8X32 SE is actually 16mm, though it's often advertised as the same as the other two models (17.4mm), so don't judge the ER of the 12X50 by the 8X32 model, it is less. In fact, you cannot roll the eyecups halfway down on the 8X32 SE, you can roll them down all the way and push a "lip" up a few mm, which is what I do to see the entire FOV while avoiding smudging the lenses, because the oversized eyecups do not fit comfortably in my eye sockets. Doing this, however, tends to give "blackouts", which others have complained about with the eyecups fully extended.
You'll have to try them yourself to be sure, because eyecup fit is a very personal matter. Edz and I are on opposite sides of the spectrum when it comes to eye relief, his facial features are such that his eyes must either be close to his brow or he has large eye sockets (hard to tell from the photo, but his eyes must be close to the EPs if he can see the entire FOV with his glasses with the cups rolled half way down on the 12X50 SE). I have deep-set eyes, so I lose about 3-4mm behind my thin polycarbonate glasses or if the eyecups can't fit into my eye sockets w/out glasses.
I also had the 12X50 SE and found the ER worked fine for me, but my eyes probably put me past the 17.4mm ER distance.
The 10X42 SE does have the same ER as the 12X50 model and the diameter of the eyecups appear to be the same size, so the 10X42 eyecups and ER would be a fair comparison with the 12X50 model. The ergonomics are the same if not identical. I know the 8X32 and 10X42 SEs share the same prism housing.
I highly recommend the 12X50 SE for astronomy IF you can handhold them or use them with a Finn stick or monopod or a double armed lounge chair. If you have to drag out a complete tripod set up, you have to ask yourself if it's worth buying a Fuji 16X70 for less money since you'll see more detail on DSOs.
The nice part about the 12X50 SE is that it's light enough and medium powered so you can use it for handheld terrestrial viewing. I think Mike Swaim uses his for birding. The FOV is a bit narrow for backyard birding, IMO. I remember searching for a bird in the trees. I could hear him, even see him naked eye, but by the time I found him, he took off. At a distance, however, they 12X50s work well for terrestrial observation.
The optics are superb, exceptionally sharp, good color correction, and good edges. For day use, they appear to be sharp nearly to the edge, though Rich N. who has used them extensively for stargazing says they are not (can't remember what he quoted as the percentage, Rich?).
The focuser can get stiff in cold weather, and the right diopter was stiff always, same on my 8X32 SE. But better stiff than too loose, and even for day use, you don't need to continually adjust the right diopter, and for astronomy, you're focused at infinity.
The ergonomics on the SE series is the best I've tried. They seem fit my hands like a glove, and I have large hands. The beauty of the campfering is that they also work well for smaller hands.
If you find you have trouble holding 12X and also want to use your bins for terrestrial obsevation, consider the 10X42 SE. Despite the smaller aperture, they are surprisingly good for astronomy and have a wider FOV and CF for birding and wildlife observation. Best all around non-WP 10X porro out there, IMO.
Posted 16 May 2005 - 11:45 AM
I intend to use them against a solid object and I also have a light weight photographic tripod.
The Fujinons sound great but,I was wanting something a bit smaller and more portable as well.
Posted 16 May 2005 - 12:02 PM
I was using the 12x50SE yesterday to watch what appeared to be a humming bird in my back yard. I had a hard time holding them steady. And I had a hard time keeping the distance to my eyes correct.
I measured the eye relief at 18mm, usable about 15mm. The cups don't really fold half out. But as Brock said [and push a "lip" up a few mm] You can get them raised slightly to take up about 2-3mm of distance. I still have a slight problem with blackout even with that. Best position for me with my glasses on is when I use my thumbs on my cheekbones to get another 2-3mm of space between my glasses and the slightly raised lip of the eyecups. I have found this to be a very difficult binocular to use for handheld viewing as I just cannot get the eyerelief distance right. Mounted, I have no problems at all.
Posted 16 May 2005 - 12:20 PM
I imagine the vast majority of viewing through these will be nightime.
Posted 16 May 2005 - 12:45 PM
On a recent night recording limting magnitude limits in M44, under the exact same conditions on the same night, I recorded 64 stars seen in the 10x60 Oberwerk Mariner, 67 stars in the 10x70 Fujinon FMT-SX and 72 stars with the 12x50 Nikon SE.
Posted 16 May 2005 - 01:52 PM
As mentioned I think in an earlier post of mine on this subject, by resting the top of the eyecups against my eyebrow ridge, just the correct amount of distance is achieved and although there isn't a lot of room for manoeuvre, it's a comfortable view. However, this may not be any use to you at all as your own face will have individual configuration!!
If you start with the rubber eyecups rolled right down and then gradually and progressively ease them up all round, you can with care create a lip as EdZ explained. Actually on mine I've found I can roll up about 4 or even 5mm.
The special Nikon adapter retails for about £39 in the UK.