Nikon torture tests?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 17, 2012
Messages
3,551
Location
West Michigan
Has anybody seen ANY Nikon torture tests? I saw one video on youtube where a gentleman was discharging his AR underwater with a Nikon on board and no problems but I'd like to see some other scenarios. Specifically looking at the P-223 3x32 if that helps!
 
I thought you were referring to camera torture tests ... the legendary Nikkormat model was known as the camera you could use as a hammer to drive a nail, then take the photo of your project.

Along the same lines, while carrying my Nikon FM2 and my Nikkor 28mmF/2.0 lens (a LOT of glass) I once was accosted by a mugger. I have always shortened the stock camera strap to one where the hand fit snugly against the body, for a steadier shot. This provides what amounts to a nice handle, and I used it, swinging the camera and that half pound of glass at the assailant, nailing him square in the jaw, whereupon he went down hard. I just calmly walked away; looking back almost a block later, he was still on the sidewalk, but was sitting up and moving.

And the camera and lens survived that as well.
 
Originally Posted By: buck91
Has anybody seen ANY Nikon torture tests? I saw one video on youtube where a gentleman was discharging his AR underwater with a Nikon on board and no problems but I'd like to see some other scenarios. Specifically looking at the P-223 3x32 if that helps!


What exactly are you looking for? Real world testing of the P-223? There are plenty of You Tube videos of that scope being run through it's paces. You'll learn more than watching some silly rigged, "torture test". Firearms manufacturers do the same thing, and it proves nothing. Remember Larry Vickers throwing the Daniel Defense DDM4 out of a helicopter? It ran fine afterward. Why didn't he throw a Colt and a Bushmaster out with it?

These type of "tests" prove nothing as to real world quality. I'm currently running 2 Nikon P-223 Models. Both provide a nice clear, bright sight picture. The adjustments are precise and firm. Both scopes return to zero accurately. They are a good scope for the money. Nikon is making some very good rifle glass these days. I would purchase another based on that performance. Not some silly ad. But in today's world, I guess it's whatever sells your product.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: buck91
Has anybody seen ANY Nikon torture tests? I saw one video on youtube where a gentleman was discharging his AR underwater with a Nikon on board and no problems but I'd like to see some other scenarios. Specifically looking at the P-223 3x32 if that helps!


What exactly are you looking for? Real world testing of the P-223? There are plenty of You Tube videos of that scope being run through it's paces. You'll learn more than watching some silly rigged, "torture test". Firearms manufacturers do the same thing, and it proves nothing. Remember Larry Vickers throwing the Daniel Defense DDM4 out of a helicopter? It ran fine afterward. Why didn't he throw a Colt and a Bushmaster out with it?

These type of "tests" prove nothing as to real world quality. I'm currently running 2 Nikon P-223 Models. Both provide a nice clear, bright sight picture. The adjustments are precise and firm. Both scopes return to zero accurately. They are a good scope for the money. Nikon is making some very good rifle glass these days. I would purchase another based on that performance. Not some silly ad. But in today's world, I guess it's whatever sells your product.









When he threw the Daniel Defense out the helicopter, the sight was no longer zeroed.

It still functioned, however.

Even after they blew it up with a grenade, if I remember correctly...
 
By the way, Nikon is only one of two Japanese optics manufacturers; that is they make their own glass, rather than a company that operates by buying glass and grinding / polishing whatever they are given. Very few brands can make such a claim, and I mean very few.

You can probably guess who the others are; look at the price tag. If you can't afford it, then they probably make their own glass, and probably cost many times more than Nikon optics.
 
The underwater shows the scope is waterproofatthatdepth forawhile. The shoting part means little.
 
Originally Posted By: LaCocina27
When he threw the Daniel Defense out the helicopter, the sight was no longer zeroed. It still functioned, however. Even after they blew it up with a grenade, if I remember correctly...


Here is what's funny about all of that. And why it's all complete nonsense and dramatics, nothing more. When the Garand and M-14 battle rifle were approved by the military, one test the government required was using the rifle to help boost a soldier in full gear up and over a wall. With one soldier holding it at the muzzle, and the other at the butt. The soldier being boosted placed his foot on the middle of the weapon, while being boosted up and over. When they tried the same test with the M-16, the rifle simply broke in half. So the test was eliminated.
 
I've never tortured any of my Nikon scopes but the Buckmaster and Monarch Gold models are very nice optics and quite a value. Very high light transmission and crystal clear. I've been using the Buckmaster model on my M1A at the range for several years now without issue. The adjustments seem to be reliable, too, always going back to zero as they should on a high quality scope.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
Along the same lines, while carrying my Nikon FM2 and my Nikkor 28mmF/2.0 lens (a LOT of glass) I once was accosted by a mugger


I do dearly love my FM2n(along with all of the other FM and FE series cameras, albeit I don't have an FM3a) but it's a featherweight compared to the contemporary single digit F series cameras. I have bunches of Fs and F2s, and examples of everything through the F5(F6s are still too expensive for me).

I finally found a "dream" camera not too long ago-an F2AS from 1980. It came with an MD2 motor drive complete with the AA battery pack. I have been using the camera, but haven't taken the time to re-assemble it for use without the motor. The F2 in any trim is heavy, but the MD2 with 10 AAs makes it absolutely massive. I haven't weighed it, but Wiki says 6lbs with a 50mm 1.4.
 
Originally Posted By: bunnspecial
I do dearly love my FM2n(along with all of the other FM and FE series cameras, albeit I don't have an FM3a) but it's a featherweight compared to the contemporary single digit F series cameras. I have bunches of Fs and F2s, and examples of everything through the F5(F6s are still too expensive for me).

I finally found a "dream" camera not too long ago-an F2AS from 1980. It came with an MD2 motor drive complete with the AA battery pack. I have been using the camera, but haven't taken the time to re-assemble it for use without the motor. The F2 in any trim is heavy, but the MD2 with 10 AAs makes it absolutely massive. I haven't weighed it, but Wiki says 6lbs with a 50mm 1.4.


I have a Cannon A-1, along with an AE-1. Both purchased around 1980 with a bunch of Cannon F-Series lenses. Are they worth anything in todays market? I keep hoping they'll make a comeback like vinyl LP's did. But so far, no such luck.
 
Originally Posted By: billt460
I have a Cannon A-1, along with an AE-1. Both purchased around 1980 with a bunch of Cannon F-Series lenses. Are they worth anything in todays market? I keep hoping they'll make a comeback like vinyl LP's did. But so far, no such luck.


I'm rather partial to the A-1 as it was my first "real" camera.

AE-1s are still a popular student camera. The local shop sells them by the truckload with a 50mm 1.8 every fall and spring for $100/pop but they're placed to do that. They also offer things like a semester or year long warranty on everything(including the battery).

In any case, you will probably find that same combo selling for $75 or so on Ebay. Move up to an A-1 and you might see $100.

Certain lenses still have some value but unfortunately, the FD system has been "soft" for 20 years or better. Canon changed mounts entirely when they went to autofocus, which made the FD mount lenses orphans. They're also not easily adaptable to other mounts. The rift has become even bigger in the digital age since there's no easy solution(aside from micro 4/3) to get FD lenses on a digital camera.
 
Originally Posted By: bunnspecial
Originally Posted By: billt460
I have a Cannon A-1, along with an AE-1. Both purchased around 1980 with a bunch of Cannon F-Series lenses. Are they worth anything in todays market? I keep hoping they'll make a comeback like vinyl LP's did. But so far, no such luck.


I'm rather partial to the A-1 as it was my first "real" camera.

AE-1s are still a popular student camera. The local shop sells them by the truckload with a 50mm 1.8 every fall and spring for $100/pop but they're placed to do that. They also offer things like a semester or year long warranty on everything(including the battery).

In any case, you will probably find that same combo selling for $75 or so on Ebay. Move up to an A-1 and you might see $100.

Certain lenses still have some value but unfortunately, the FD system has been "soft" for 20 years or better. Canon changed mounts entirely when they went to autofocus, which made the FD mount lenses orphans. They're also not easily adaptable to other mounts. The rift has become even bigger in the digital age since there's no easy solution(aside from micro 4/3) to get FD lenses on a digital camera.


cry.gif
cry.gif
cry.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top