ksbird/foxranch
Well-known member
I guess I must have missed a few "reasonings" in this thread because from what I can tell, nearly every reviewer who reviews the Nikon SE series says they are superior in image quality to any roofer out in the market today and only other porros (possibly) like the Fujinon FMT series are comparable. If the differences in sharpness, color balance etc. between the SE Nikons and the best roofers is not due to s and p phase distortion, what is the problem the roofers have? In addition, why can't Nikon use the same objectives or eyepieces from the SEs in their LX or HGE models if that is where the "SE superiority" rests. Unless the use of an internal focusing lens is the problem with the eyepiece/objective designs from the SE series)?
So while the amount of additional s and p phase distortion may seem negligible compared to porros which have no s and p phase distortion at all, assuming all other things like multicoatings are equal, why is it that the Nikon and Fujinon porros are nearly unanimously chosen as having superior image making ability?
Also I assume that there are few if any metal housing roofers to choose from so it is difficult to compare metal housing porros to metal housing roofers, but whenever I have a pair of each with similar housings, there doesn't seem to be much weight differential (Leupold Yosemite 8x30s vs Zeiss Diafun roofers for example). The same is true for size. Roofers are by design Narrower, but that doesn't mean that they are required to be much smaller. The Zeiss Diafun 8x30s I have are not smaller than many of the 8x30 porros I have, but they are narrower. This narrow hand-holding position is very uncomfortable for me almost all the time and whenever I have visitors in the winter, bundled up in their thick down coats, they seem to have trouble with the hand-holding position in front of their eyes as well (because the coats interfere). I guess that for me, a hand position slightly in front of but outside my outer eye socket ridges is much more comfortable than directly in front of my eyes.
While you mentioned the advantages that seem to show up with roofers, you didn't seem to list the advantages that usually show up in porros
#1 In 7x and 8x porro models (for certain), almost all porros have a substantially wider field of view than roofers. The 7x35 Nikon Action Extreme waterproof binocular with a 498ft wide FOV at 1000yds is likely a much wider FOV than ANY 7x/8x roofer made today.
#2 It is possible to make a binocular in a porro that is accepted as the Reference Standard by which all other binoculars are compared for roughly half the selling price of the highest end roofers that produce images not quite as good. This could easily translate into 2 pairs of Nikon SEs for a family to use instead of one high end Swaro, Leica or Zeiss roofer that produces images that aren't quite as good as the SEs.
#3 Truly Excellent images, can be produced in an ultra-lightweight, waterproof porro binocular like the Leupold 6x30 at prices that let small women and children (even those who wear eyeglasses) enjoy superb images when equivalent image quality wouldn't be even approachable in a roofer of comparable, weight and price (I'm assuming that all roofers are water resistant now).
So while some older ED porro binocular designs may have short eye relief (porros have the same freedom to use large eye lenses that can produce full wide angle views as roofer [in fact probably wider FOV because roofers generally have narrower FOV compared to porros]) obviously not all porro makers use larger eye lens eyepiece designs to maximize the use of their superior FOV. Maybe it is just a cost decision because if you look at a Yukon porro 7x50W with its wide FOV and the huge eye lenses, you know that these eye lens designs have been around for a long time (the Yukon 7x50W is a copy of the Jenoptem 7x50W but with even longer eye relief). I have a cheap Chinese Breaker 10.5x55 porro (labeled 14x60 LE???) with 22mm of eye relief and fold down eyecups that is a favorite for visitors who wear eyeglasses. The Steiner 8x30 porros models all have excellent eye relief due to huge eye lenses and fold down rubber eyecups (Steiner makes 62 porro 8x30 models I think, or perhaps they just add another 8x30 porro model each week), and these Steiners are all waterproof, lightweight and small.
So it would seem like the first ultra-high end porro that is made with large eye lenses and long eye relief (allowing for the full view of most porro design's extra large FOV), using whatever lens/coating technology is used in the Nikon SE series or Fujinon FMT series for superior sharpness (or ED/Flourite glass or aspherical eyepiece design), and with an internal CF design like Pentax uses in their 7x50 DCF WP II, may be expensive (but probably not as expensive as the high end Swaro, Leica or Zeiss models), and with a lightweight fiber/poly body material, will likely be a binocular superior or equal in so many aspects of viewing/using that roofers will never be able to catch up except for people who prefer having a narrower body style more than the best imaging.
So while the amount of additional s and p phase distortion may seem negligible compared to porros which have no s and p phase distortion at all, assuming all other things like multicoatings are equal, why is it that the Nikon and Fujinon porros are nearly unanimously chosen as having superior image making ability?
Also I assume that there are few if any metal housing roofers to choose from so it is difficult to compare metal housing porros to metal housing roofers, but whenever I have a pair of each with similar housings, there doesn't seem to be much weight differential (Leupold Yosemite 8x30s vs Zeiss Diafun roofers for example). The same is true for size. Roofers are by design Narrower, but that doesn't mean that they are required to be much smaller. The Zeiss Diafun 8x30s I have are not smaller than many of the 8x30 porros I have, but they are narrower. This narrow hand-holding position is very uncomfortable for me almost all the time and whenever I have visitors in the winter, bundled up in their thick down coats, they seem to have trouble with the hand-holding position in front of their eyes as well (because the coats interfere). I guess that for me, a hand position slightly in front of but outside my outer eye socket ridges is much more comfortable than directly in front of my eyes.
While you mentioned the advantages that seem to show up with roofers, you didn't seem to list the advantages that usually show up in porros
#1 In 7x and 8x porro models (for certain), almost all porros have a substantially wider field of view than roofers. The 7x35 Nikon Action Extreme waterproof binocular with a 498ft wide FOV at 1000yds is likely a much wider FOV than ANY 7x/8x roofer made today.
#2 It is possible to make a binocular in a porro that is accepted as the Reference Standard by which all other binoculars are compared for roughly half the selling price of the highest end roofers that produce images not quite as good. This could easily translate into 2 pairs of Nikon SEs for a family to use instead of one high end Swaro, Leica or Zeiss roofer that produces images that aren't quite as good as the SEs.
#3 Truly Excellent images, can be produced in an ultra-lightweight, waterproof porro binocular like the Leupold 6x30 at prices that let small women and children (even those who wear eyeglasses) enjoy superb images when equivalent image quality wouldn't be even approachable in a roofer of comparable, weight and price (I'm assuming that all roofers are water resistant now).
So while some older ED porro binocular designs may have short eye relief (porros have the same freedom to use large eye lenses that can produce full wide angle views as roofer [in fact probably wider FOV because roofers generally have narrower FOV compared to porros]) obviously not all porro makers use larger eye lens eyepiece designs to maximize the use of their superior FOV. Maybe it is just a cost decision because if you look at a Yukon porro 7x50W with its wide FOV and the huge eye lenses, you know that these eye lens designs have been around for a long time (the Yukon 7x50W is a copy of the Jenoptem 7x50W but with even longer eye relief). I have a cheap Chinese Breaker 10.5x55 porro (labeled 14x60 LE???) with 22mm of eye relief and fold down eyecups that is a favorite for visitors who wear eyeglasses. The Steiner 8x30 porros models all have excellent eye relief due to huge eye lenses and fold down rubber eyecups (Steiner makes 62 porro 8x30 models I think, or perhaps they just add another 8x30 porro model each week), and these Steiners are all waterproof, lightweight and small.
So it would seem like the first ultra-high end porro that is made with large eye lenses and long eye relief (allowing for the full view of most porro design's extra large FOV), using whatever lens/coating technology is used in the Nikon SE series or Fujinon FMT series for superior sharpness (or ED/Flourite glass or aspherical eyepiece design), and with an internal CF design like Pentax uses in their 7x50 DCF WP II, may be expensive (but probably not as expensive as the high end Swaro, Leica or Zeiss models), and with a lightweight fiber/poly body material, will likely be a binocular superior or equal in so many aspects of viewing/using that roofers will never be able to catch up except for people who prefer having a narrower body style more than the best imaging.