Torview
Well-known member
The fov is poor no question but the clarity of the view is amazing, like its been washed clean.
When I had my 10xHRWP I compared it side by side with my SE, not much in it for me.
-
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.
Have you discarded the Porro ? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Torview
- Start date
The fov is poor no question but the clarity of the view is amazing, like its been washed clean.
When I had my 10xHRWP I compared it side by side with my SE, not much in it for me.
bluespiderweb
Great Grey Looking Out
more Porros
Vixen Foresta ZWCF porros (small P) are still produced in 7x50, 8x32, 8x42 and 10x42. The 8x42 has a 7.5 degree FOV. I have, and like the '42's very much.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/searc...&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=
Vixen also have the Ascot line of porros that include the 8x42,
And Opticron have their Imagic TGA WP line as well:
http://www.opticronusa.com/Pages/im_tga.html
Vixen Foresta ZWCF porros (small P) are still produced in 7x50, 8x32, 8x42 and 10x42. The 8x42 has a 7.5 degree FOV. I have, and like the '42's very much.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/searc...&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=
Vixen also have the Ascot line of porros that include the 8x42,
And Opticron have their Imagic TGA WP line as well:
http://www.opticronusa.com/Pages/im_tga.html
Last edited:
It's been hard to put a finger on why I keep taking out the Porros. I think it's the organizing effect of the exagerrated 3D. I can look at a 'layer' of the picture easily for these ducks, that jay, those deer, etc., instead of having a detailed mural handed to me and playing 'Where's Waldo'. I find more things, especially the nearly-camouflaged. Roofs are fine when the subject stands out. The bird seems 'bigger', but it's likely just taking over the picture mentally. If I am seeking, it's Porro. Observing, roof or Porro.
Last edited:
bh46118
Well-known member
In the last couple of months I've compared my BD10X44BP to the Leupold McKinley 8X42, Kowa Genesis 8.5X44, and this very morning the Nikon 12X50 Premier SE. When I say compare, I mean in the most OCD, diopter balancing, back and forth, extended sessions under the best viewing conditions you can imagine. The Minox is without doubt the most resolving, tack sharp optic I've ever seen. Washed clean is also correct. There is a subtle patina, haze, artifice I find in other optics that is just not there with the Minox. For me there is just more "there" there. The main bugaboo for me in the BP is what I consider to be strong to moderate CA under certain conditions.
I would like to compare them first hand to the 10X42 SE, 10X42 OR 50 SLC HD and the EL 10X42 SV. If I can't a better match to me in those three, I need to throw in the towel on the comparisons.
I would like to compare them first hand to the 10X42 SE, 10X42 OR 50 SLC HD and the EL 10X42 SV. If I can't a better match to me in those three, I need to throw in the towel on the comparisons.
bh46118
Well-known member
bh46118
Well-known member
I did my silver maple tree trunk test again this afternoon, not to be confused with the DVD case test |
|, pitting the 12X SE against the 10X BP. At 20yrds atmospheric conditions are not much of an issue, and their is a plethora of minute textures and subtle color graduations that are beyond most optics ability to discern. In the past the BP is the only optic I've seen that has been able to resolve the minutiae in a more organic, lifelike manner. Today was no exception. I would love to report a different result, but I cannot tell a lie.:scribe:
|, pitting the 12X SE against the 10X BP. At 20yrds atmospheric conditions are not much of an issue, and their is a plethora of minute textures and subtle color graduations that are beyond most optics ability to discern. In the past the BP is the only optic I've seen that has been able to resolve the minutiae in a more organic, lifelike manner. Today was no exception. I would love to report a different result, but I cannot tell a lie.:scribe:
Last edited:
I was following a deer today, since it strayed across the path while I was downwind at the bird bench.
The color control on the MeoPros allowed me to track it quite a while, though it was nearly pine-spill color.
I'm guessing the depth and the contrast on the Minox' would be a lot of fun if you saw a deer. They stop
and check you out through a busy copse now and then. You could watch it slowly move an eye back
and forth in the sticks and shadows. Woodpeckers taking to the tree's backside are good for subtle contrast too.
They poke out and keep tabs on you from the dark side of a glaring tree. I'll have to also take the Selsi Luminous
Porros out the next time.
The color control on the MeoPros allowed me to track it quite a while, though it was nearly pine-spill color.
I'm guessing the depth and the contrast on the Minox' would be a lot of fun if you saw a deer. They stop
and check you out through a busy copse now and then. You could watch it slowly move an eye back
and forth in the sticks and shadows. Woodpeckers taking to the tree's backside are good for subtle contrast too.
They poke out and keep tabs on you from the dark side of a glaring tree. I'll have to also take the Selsi Luminous
Porros out the next time.
brocknroller
porromaniac
I did my silver maple tree trunk test again this afternoon, not to be confused with the DVD case test |
Dennis...er...George Washington... I mean.. bh3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510,
It would appear from the numerous comparisons you've made on different threads that the Minox 10x44 BP might just be "the best" pair of binoculars in the world. Maybe even better, dare I say it, than the Swao 8x32 SV EL?
I'd be curious to try the BP if I did not suffer from claustrophobia.
Brock
Some of them do appear 'comparatively' narrow. I handled a 6x30 Jap individual focus Porro recently which had a nice 8 degree FOV, 140m @ 1000m ; looking at their 10x50 it's a different picture !
Nikon give a guide for using IF binoculars for anyone thinking of buying one of their forgotten but not gone Tropicals :
http://www.nikon.com/products/sportoptics/how_to/guide/binoculars/using/using_02.htm
bh46118
Well-known member
Very possibly as good as any for resolution, but not for FOV or CA correction. I've seen the most recent EL 10X42 SV first hand, and the BP would be in trouble in that comparison in everything except resolution and 3D, but for another $2300 more than I paid for the BP. It's the combination of resolution, transmission, and 3D that really do it for me and the BP has that in spades.. The view is a bit of a portal, but within that portal is quite a slice of optical heaven.o
Dennis...er...George Washington... I mean.. bh3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510,
It would appear from the numerous comparisons you've made on different threads that the Minox 10x44 BP might just be "the best" pair of binoculars in the world. Maybe even better, dare I say it, than the Swao 8x32 SV EL?
I'd be curious to try the BP if I did not suffer from claustrophobia.
Brock
Last edited:
bh46118
Well-known member
According to AllBinos the Bynolyt has excellent CA control. My Minox doesn't unfortunately. Another problem with these IF binoculars is prism intrusion, you won't see a problem in the day, but light sources at night are very spiky. I've believe I've also been told that they have "fast" optics, does that exist ? Would that have anything to do with the "washed clean" clarity ?
http://www.allbinos.com/96-binoculars_review-Bynolyt_Hawk_10x42_BCF.html
http://www.allbinos.com/166-binoculars_review-Minox_BD_8x44_BP.html
http://www.allbinos.com/96-binoculars_review-Bynolyt_Hawk_10x42_BCF.html
http://www.allbinos.com/166-binoculars_review-Minox_BD_8x44_BP.html
henry link
Well-known member
I can't remember anyone ever describing how the internal focus works on these. Are there moving focusing lenses in front of the prisms?
henry link
Well-known member
They're all pretty "fast" by telescope standards, meaning they have low focal ratio objective lenses, around f/4 or a bit lower. That makes them small, not good.
Torview
Well-known member
Henry, looking at the body design I`d have thought the moving elements must be at the eyepiece end.
bh46118
Well-known member
There is nothing that causes IF to be narrower per se. It would make the
threaded diameter bigger, but that's no big thing. An asset in IF binoculars is
to more easily focus to the sharpest resolution at long distances, so it might
be that the fov is shaved down to improve the peak resolution. You actually
see that in most Alphas, too. They can't be the 'sharpest tools in the shed'
without reducing field width, so they do. It gains you sharpness, flatness,
and contrast. The wide aberration affects the whole field a bit.
My favorite compromise is about 8 degrees. Still plenty sharp and not bad
at the edges, with the right eyepiece. So 8 degrees seems 'right' at 6x, 7x,
and 8x.
WJC
Well-known member
One thing that might be helpful for some members is the defining of "IF." Traditionally, "IF" stands for "individual focus." It would appear that some are equating that with "internal focus." That's like comparing apples to eggs.
Internal focusing instruments have additional orifices on retainers used to move certain elements fore and aft. Unless they are oversize, diffraction can become an issue to be corrected or masked.
I feel confident some will find reason to question my thoughts on the matter. So, when I choose not to get involved with the traditional One-Up-Man-Ship, all can know my reason.
Bill
Last edited:
