-
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.
Why No More High End Porros? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fleurviola
- Start date
Exactly and how inset the front objective lens is. The more the better. There can be other causes as Henry explains here why the Habicht 8x30 W has veiling glare in the link.I find the reasons why some binoculars control veiling glare and flare better than others baffling.:h?::smoke:
Bob
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3201487&postcount=23
Last edited:
I find the reasons why some binoculars control veiling glare and flare better than others baffling.:h?::smoke:
Bob
I see what you did there.
I find the reasons why some binoculars control veiling glare and flare better than others baffling.:h?::smoke:
Bob
It also baffles me that some high-end manufacturers don't baffle their barrels with better baffling, when Nikon could do it in the SE that cost around 450 euro. It gets my goat, I'm not kidding...(okay I'll stop nowB
)Nixterdemus
Well-known member
Why No More High End Porros?
Coz all the cool kids have roofs.
Me mid 70's Habicht 10X40 is a champ at controlling CA. It's only when you ease close to the sun that glare becomes an issue. Looking Sw this morning at a Red tailed hawk perched in a back yard tree under overcast winter sky the auld Swaro showed no CA. Cannot say the same for the Trinovid HD 10X42.
Coz all the cool kids have roofs.
Me mid 70's Habicht 10X40 is a champ at controlling CA. It's only when you ease close to the sun that glare becomes an issue. Looking Sw this morning at a Red tailed hawk perched in a back yard tree under overcast winter sky the auld Swaro showed no CA. Cannot say the same for the Trinovid HD 10X42.
I find the reasons why some binoculars control veiling glare and flare better than others baffling.:h?::smoke:
Bob
I nominate this for 2017 Pun of the Year Award. :t:
Lee
Hermann
Well-known member
AND the manufacturers have been exrtolling the virtues of roofs since the 1960s.
Only at the time roofs weren't anywhere close to well-made porros. Now they are closer, and yet I feel a well-made porro would be better than ANY roof, at least optically.
I've got two Habicht porros, a 7x42 and a 10x40. No CA, and the 7x42 is one of the best binoculars I know when it comes to controlling reflections and veiling glare. The only roof that is on the same level is the Noctivid. The Habicht 10x40 is also very good, better than most roofs.
A shame Swarovski never made the changes to the Habicht 8x30 to get rid of its glare problems. Would have made an excellent binocular for long hikes and so on.
Hermann
Nixterdemus
Well-known member
It seemed to me that the lighter roofs did not handle CA well. Perhaps I haven't sampled enough bins. Howevah, the 10X40 Habicht, lacking armour, even as a porro is extremely light.
I'm beginning to think that overall optical quality might be readily judged by the ability to handle CA.
I'm beginning to think that overall optical quality might be readily judged by the ability to handle CA.
It is interesting that the 7x42 Habicht is good at controlling glare and the 8x30 W is not. I tried the 7x42 Habicht once and it didn't work well for me eye relief wise. The two Nikon porro's. The SE and EII are very good with glare so why couldn't Swarovski correct the problem on the 8x30 W Habicht. It has been said by another member the Canon 10x42 IS-L is your alpha porro. It is one of the only porro's with ED glass and optically I find it one of the best binoculars made and then it has IS on top of that.
That "baffles" me why you would nominate that? It went right over my head the first time.
You have a SUBURB called "Goatstown"? That is funny. We have a town in the state of Arkansas called "Wiener". Now top that one.3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weiner,_Arkansas
"I'm beginning to think that overall optical quality might be readily judged by the ability to handle CA."
I think you are on to something here. In telescopes CA is everything. I think binoculars are very similar in that respect.
WJC
Well-known member
You can't remove one aberration without making others worse. UNLESS you want to add elements which will add cost that some folks would refuse to pay and weight. And as you know some people would like an 8x40 that weighs as much as 6 postage stamps. Then there is the lessening of throughput and scatter because of those extra elements. Our logic (with nothing at stake) does not match the manufacturer's logic (with EVERYTHING at stake). :cat:
If someone on this forum will show the manufactures how they can make such improvements without losing their corporate shirts, I'm confident they would follow suit.
Bill
Dennis you know I hate how porros feel in the hand, but I can't walk past the Habichts on the Swaro stand at Bird Fair without picking up the 7x42, it is just so handsome. Every time I pick it up I should know that the eye relief just doesn't work for me, but there I go picking it up again. It never works.
Lee
Last edited:
This is just so true. Optics are a high-wire balancing act with this aberration and that distortion and the half a dozen other things at least, all trying to push the optics engineer off his wire. And even if he hits all of his design targets bulls eye centre, there will be crowds of folks complaining that the sweet spot is 5% too small or the eye relief is too much or there is a colour cast that is just the wrong shade of something.
But thats also the fun of optics.
Lee
That "baffles" me why you would nominate that? It went right over my head the first time.
How tall are you Dennis?
Whats that?
As high as what?
A big goat? Really?
Lee
Just joshing Den.
You have a SUBURB called "Goatstown"? That is funny. We have a town in the state of Arkansas called "Wiener". Now top that one.3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weiner,_Arkansas
Dennis your link is for Weiner but your joke was about Wiener and I am guessing that the placement of the e and the I makes all the difference.
Place names can be fun though. About 35 miles from where I live is Rhodesia and about 125 miles away is California. 200 miles away in southern Scotland there is Moscow.
However in the spirit of your 'Wiener' I would draw your attention to a village about 125 miles from where I live called Bell End:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_End
I shall say no more.......
Lee
