-
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.
Prism or Roof? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter peter1964
- Start date
peter1964 said:
Porros are easier to get right optically, but bulkier and very difficult to make waterproof. So very cheap and very old binoculars are porros, but so are some of the best binoculars you can get, rated by optical quality alone, e.g. the Nikon SE range. It also seems to be the case that most roofs have a narrower field of view that equivalent porros. Porros may be less robust than roofs (but nothing will survive rock vs lens - people do break top-line roofs, too).
Traditional porros have the objective lenses much further apart than your eyes, whereas roofs have them the same distance as your eyes. This means that porros produce a different and more striking feeling of depth than corresponding roofs, and a further knock-on effect of this is that roof binoculars appear to produce a larger image than porros of the same magnification, whether or not they allow you to see more detail. (I was going to describe the subject feel I get with my favourite porros vs my favourite roofs, but that it would probably be different for you: "try before you buy" is much better advice)
Porros are much less fashionable than roofs. Most birdwatcher's ideal binocular is a top-line waterproof roof.
FrankD
Well-known member
I would tend to agree with the previous post. I believe that both of my two previous bins, the Nikon EII and the SE probably offered the best images overall of any binocular I have tried. However, I have since opted for almost strictly roofs because of their size and ergonomics.
Tero
Retired
Aside from all that, the selection is bigger for roofs.
If you want inexpensive bins, Nikon, Opticron etc all make fine porros at 80-150 doillars. The field of view is often better with porros. Disadvantage may be bulk and weight. I have yet to find a 10x porro binocular I like and can afford now, 8x is fine. That is, for the same low price, the 10x big brother of an 8x model, say Nikon Action, is much less useful. Close focus is limited, weight is higher. But this 10x is close to ideal
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=19&purch=1&pid=3720
I just want better eye cups.
On the roof prisms, cheap models are almost useless. The ones that cost 20 dollars or 40 dolars here, 9 out of 10 are useless. But for 50-60 dollars you could find a useable porro bin.
If you want inexpensive bins, Nikon, Opticron etc all make fine porros at 80-150 doillars. The field of view is often better with porros. Disadvantage may be bulk and weight. I have yet to find a 10x porro binocular I like and can afford now, 8x is fine. That is, for the same low price, the 10x big brother of an 8x model, say Nikon Action, is much less useful. Close focus is limited, weight is higher. But this 10x is close to ideal
http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=19&purch=1&pid=3720
I just want better eye cups.
On the roof prisms, cheap models are almost useless. The ones that cost 20 dollars or 40 dolars here, 9 out of 10 are useless. But for 50-60 dollars you could find a useable porro bin.
Last edited:
peter1964 said:
Peter,
Before phasecoating was invented the best roofprism binos could not compete to the best porro binos. With the phasecoating they can. I think. As mentioned above and according to what I have read some people claim that the best porro binos is still sligthly better than the best roofs. The difference isn't nearly the same as before, however. The most people will never notice the difference.
One difference which is seldom mentioned between them is the starfilter effect which all roof constructions show when looking at strong light sources when the brightness at the light source is strong enough, especially at a dark background.
It's a stray of light across the light source and field of view. The better the quality of the roof construction - the brighter light needs to make this effect come up. (excuse my faulty english). This effect can during such circumstances be a disadvantage, but if you choose the better roof binos it will almost never be a problem.
Patric
jedku
Marc
[
While I think your technical points are true, they can be misleading. For most budgets under $500-$1000, there is a significant difference in optical quality at any given price point between Porro and roof.
If Peter has $300 to spend. He will get an optically superior bin by choosing a Porro prism in most cases. At $150 the difference is even more pronounced. Sorry I don't know the Pound coversion.
Peter, I suggest you begin researching the best reputed models of roof and Porro in your price range and find a way to try them out yourself and see the difference. Try as many bins as you can and decide which are best for you. The best thing you can do is a side by side comparison of a Porro and a roof prism bin in the same price range. Consider the brightness, sharpness and field of view.
Swedpat,Swedpat said:
While I think your technical points are true, they can be misleading. For most budgets under $500-$1000, there is a significant difference in optical quality at any given price point between Porro and roof.
If Peter has $300 to spend. He will get an optically superior bin by choosing a Porro prism in most cases. At $150 the difference is even more pronounced. Sorry I don't know the Pound coversion.
Peter, I suggest you begin researching the best reputed models of roof and Porro in your price range and find a way to try them out yourself and see the difference. Try as many bins as you can and decide which are best for you. The best thing you can do is a side by side comparison of a Porro and a roof prism bin in the same price range. Consider the brightness, sharpness and field of view.
