[FrankD]

So what about someone that owns a $500 Porto and a $2000 roof? :-)

[denco@comcast.n]

"Porros are for those who enjoy the very best in the view, and for you to
dismiss that is disappointing."

I don't think we are on the same page here. My opinion after having the finest porro's including the Nikon SE's and the EII is that the view in the best roofs are slightly better and I had the porro's at the same time as I had the FL's and other alpha's. I disagree that the best porro's are better than the best roof's. I don't think it is porro's optical superiority that makes them popular. It is their price. An EDG or SV is at least as good as an SE plus they are waterproof, dustproof, fogproof and they won't go out of alignment. Why would you buy a porro? Because they are only $500.00!

[denco@comcast.n]

That's a binocular collector. That means you have an interest in binoculars that goes beyond pure function. You don't need a $500.00 porro if you have the $2K roof but you have an interest in binoculars and desire to have the porro because you simply like them and you have an interest in them. Frank, you are a collector and binoculars are a hobby to you. Nobody needs 30 pairs of binoculars. Similar to a watch collector or stamp collector. There is nothing wrong with that. You enjoy binoculars like we all do on Bird Forum. I would say that porro's are more for the binocular collector or purist than roofs. Roofs are more practical but the fact is porro's are cool.

[NDhunter]

Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n

"Porros are for those who enjoy the very best in the view, and for you to
dismiss that is disappointing."

I don't think we are on the same page here. My opinion after having the finest porro's including the Nikon SE's and the EII is that the view in the best roofs are slightly better and I had the porro's at the same time as I had the FL's and other alpha's. I disagree that the best porro's are better than the best roof's. I don't think it is porro's optical superiority that makes them popular. It is their price. An EDG or SV is at least as good as an SE plus they are waterproof, dustproof, fogproof and they won't go out of alignment. Why would you buy a porro? Becasue they are only $500.00!

Dennis:

I am on the same page that I started from. You mention the EDG
and SV being at least as good as the SE, and you are close to being right.

When watching your posts, you seem to compare a lot of optics from memory, as you sell them before the next new one arrives. I have had a
chance to compare some side by side and can to this day.
I have found the SE 8x32 better than the 8x32 EDG in some ways, and one was how it handled stray and direct lighting.
The EDG is heavy for its size, and is very good but not the better one in my mind. They are both very good.

I do think there is one important point to be brought out here, and that
is how good the Nikon SE 8x32 is. It does compare well to the very best,
and I'm including the Swaro. SV 8.5x42, in this summation.
We seem to hear about that quite often on this site.

Jerry

[stereotruckdriver]

I have now officially put Dennis on my ignore list, your i won't even go there!

[Pileatus]

The truth is that a good 8X32 SE will reveal the last bit of minute detail that escapes the finest roof prism binocular. I've seen this repeatedly in direct comparisons as I searched for a go-anywhere binocular. I replaced my Leica with a Swarovision but only because I'm picky. In reality, the alpha roofs are all first-class instruments...take your pick. A good 8X32 SE, however, is truly an adventure in observation. After more than eight years of steady use I'm still humbled by the image it delivers to my eyes.

PS
The 8X32 SE is still my favorite.

[NDhunter]

Originally Posted by Pileatus

The truth is that a good 8X32 SE will reveal the last bit of minute detail that escapes the finest roof prism binocular. I've seen this repeatedly in direct comparisons as I searched for a go-anywhere binocular. I replaced my Leica with a Swarovision but only because I'm picky. In reality, the alpha roofs are all first-class instruments...take your pick. A good 8X32 SE, however, is truly an adventure in observation. After more than eight years of steady use I'm still humbled by the image it delivers to my eyes.

+1.

[jaymoynihan]

“99% of the people that have an SE or EII have them because they can't afford a $2K alpha.”

I think the % is too high, but for many this is true.

“The truth is that a good 8X32 SE will reveal the last bit of minute detail that escapes the finest roof prism binocular.”

This is also true.

“The truth is a three edged sword.” An old Vorlon saying

[Torview]

Is Dennis one of the people who "can`t afford an alpha", as I seem to remember him boasting on a different thread that his EDG II was in fact a free replacement from Nikon for a $750 used EDG I.

Dennis you are a character and I enjoy your post`s, but to suggest porro "lovers" choices are based on a financial footing is insulting.

[Simon S]

I am just about to buy a Nikon SE, and although these Alfa models may well be a tiny bit better optically, I would never sacrifice the stereoscopic view of a Porro. And a good Prorro will never shift in collimation even after a drop from chest height. Not sure a roof prism assembly could withstand such treatment although I could be wrong.

[denco@comcast.n]

Originally Posted by Pileatus

The truth is that a good 8X32 SE will reveal the last bit of minute detail that escapes the finest roof prism binocular. I've seen this repeatedly in direct comparisons as I searched for a go-anywhere binocular. I replaced my Leica with a Swarovision but only because I'm picky. In reality, the alpha roofs are all first-class instruments...take your pick. A good 8X32 SE, however, is truly an adventure in observation. After more than eight years of steady use I'm still humbled by the image it delivers to my eyes.

PS
The 8X32 SE is still my favorite.

Do you feel the Nikon 8x30 EII resolved more detail than the best alpha roof also? Or is it just the SE that in your opinion outperforms the alpha's? Just curious.

[FrankD]

Dennis,

Actually I no longer own 30 pairs of binoculars. I sold most of my vintage porros but kept a few because certain unique traits appealed to me. Beyond those few I have the Sightrons, a Zen Ray 7x43, the Vixen 7x50, the Bushnell Excursion 8x28, the Dakota Elite 7x28s, the Leupold Yosemite 6x30s and the Nikon 7x35 WFs. A fairly even split between roofs and porros. Some days the image from the roofs just appeals to my eyes more. Some times it is the porros.

Out of that group though it is the Vixen 7x50 Foresta porro that I feel gives my eyes the most glorious image. In this instance you are correct. I chose the Vixen because I can't afford a $2000 Zeiss FL. Interestingly enough though the Vixen might actually provide better overall image quality. I won't know until I put them side by side.

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by denco@comcast.n

Do you feel the Nikon 8x30 EII resolved more detail than the best alpha roof also? Or is it just the SE that in your opinion outperforms the alpha's? Just curious.

The 8X30 E's are superb in the centerfield. Major drawbacks (to me) are shorter eye relief and edge distortion. If E2's were available for $250 I think they'd severely cripple the low and mid-range roof market.

Many birders I know have never used a porro day in and day out. Many of those who have replaced their porros with watertight, lighter weight, less-bulky roofs. I see a lot of Zeiss 10X40 Classics still used by some great birders. The 10X42 SLC also comes to mind.

Not all 8X32 SE's are "perfect" but I've seen very little variation among the two dozen or more I've looked at. Personally, I'd gladly pay $5000 for the "perfect" binocular. As it is I use an 8X32 SE and a Swarovision 8.5X42.

Leupold et al almost got it right with the internally focused porro but, in my opinion, they blew it. Not enough FOV and not enough "quality" in the final product. The image, however, was extremely sharp and pleasant, just like my SE.

FWIW, I was never a fan of the 10X42 or 12X50 SE's. I believe the 8X32 squeezes every ounce of perfection out of the optics (prism/eyepiece). A few people don't care for the 8X32 SE but the number of long-term love affairs surely says something about the instrument. Name another binocular that is referenced so often.

[John Dracon]

Certainly, the lower cost of quality porros, new or used is a big plus in favoring them over roofs. Why tie up big bucks in one or two alpha roofs, when the same cash outlay can allow a purchaser to acquire more and different binoculars? Besides, then comes along a model such as the Nikon 8x32 SE which optically competes with the best at a much lower cost. No brag, just fact.

Pileatus touches on another aspect of the SE group that I have noticed and pondered. Why doesn't either the 10x42 SE or the 12x50 SE elicit the same response from countless users? When the 10x42 first came out, its superiority was instantly recognizable. Then the 8x32 emerged, but hold on. There is something different in this particular binocular. It surpassed countless other eight power models and makes. The 12x50 SE later appeared, and it was the best of 12 powers out there. But neither it nor the 10x42 SE caught on with the bird watching crowd. The terms "a cult like status" applies only to the 8x32. Is this a function of ergonomics, only?

No, the SE 8x32 is different optically, even though words cannot convey the differences which users see. All the SEs have a least a 4 mm exit pupil. All possess basically the same construction. We assume that the same quality materials and coatings are used in the three models. Even when an extender such as the Bushnell Elite 2.5 is used, the 8x32 shows superior resolution.

I think that the size of the SE 8x32 creates that good "fee"l so often mentioned. But it is the "view" which demonstrably is unmistakable. Perhaps there is an optical engineer out in bird land who can explain just why the SE 8x32 has such strong visual appeal.

John

[stereotruckdriver]

Originally Posted by Torview

Is Dennis one of the people who "can`t afford an alpha", as I seem to remember him boasting on a different thread that his EDG II was in fact a free replacement from Nikon for a $750 used EDG I.

Dennis you are a character and I enjoy your post`s, but to suggest porro "lovers" choices are based on a financial footing is insulting.

Thats my whole point it is insulting and has no merit and doesn't even belong here?!!! To try and label a certain group of people and boast about yourself having the best? What does that even have to do with ( why do you like porro's) ? It doesn't! I own both and to be honest i can buy any bino i want, so i have an se and a el and an slc, you have one edg and a sightron and you are better why? Oh yeh you got a freebie from Nikon, did you pay $2000 no! So your comments have no merit, enough said!!!

[ceasar]

"Different strokes for different folks!" A cliche of course but it has some merit.

I prefer my 10 x 42 SE over my 8 x 32 SE because in 8x I would rather use my 8 x 30 EII. However I don't prefer my 10 x 35 EII over my 10 x 42 SE. The SEs optics here are clearly superior to the EII in spite of the EII's much wider FOV.

I haven't owned my 12 x 50 SE long enough to make any judgement on it except to say it is clearly an SE!

Bob

[Trogon4323]

Originally Posted by FrankD

So what about someone that owns a $500 Porto and a $2000 roof? :-)

Interesting timing given that I have a Nikon 10x42 se on the way from Adorama to complement my Zeiss 7x42 FL. I've always wanted to add this to the collection primarily for its optical qualities and the fact that it's an endangered species (threatened may be more accurate). The fact that it's cheaper than another alpha is pure bonus. The Nikon's in stock btw as of June 5th for 699$

Cheers

[ceasar]

Originally Posted by ceasar

"Different strokes for different folks!" A cliche of course but it has some merit.

I prefer my 10 x 42 SE over my 8 x 32 SE because in 8x I would rather use my 8 x 30 EII. However I don't prefer my 10 x 35 EII over my 10 x 42 SE. The SEs optics here are clearly superior to the EII in spite of the EII's much wider FOV.

I haven't owned my 12 x 50 SE long enough to make any judgement on it except to say it is clearly an SE!

Bob

I thought I would add that I bought that 8 x 30 EII over 10 years ago from Astronomics for $235.00. I chose it over a very neat little 8 x 32 Swift Porro that came in a nice gift package.

Bob

[steve@37n84w]

Originally Posted by stereotruckdriver

Thats my whole point it is insulting and has no merit and doesn't even belong here?!!! To try and label a certain group of people and boast about yourself having the best? What does that even have to do with ( why do you like porro's) ? It doesn't! I own both and to be honest i can buy any bino i want, so i have an se and a el and an slc, you have one edg and a sightron and you are better why? Oh yeh you got a freebie from Nikon, did you pay $2000 no! So your comments have no merit, enough said!!!

Dennis likes to incite a little class warfare by inferring certain people prefer porros because they "can't" afford the best. Of course it goes without saying that the "best" binocular is Dennis's current favorite.

In a previous post when I pointed out that the optical performance of my premium porros was the full equal of my alpha roofs Dennis couldn't argue that I couldn't afford an alpha so I obviously "needed to get my eyes checked".

Bottom line is Dennis gets upset when people disagree with his obviously biased sentiments. Dennis isn't satisfied with just owning a good binocular, he wants EVERYONE to recognize his current favorite as the "best" and pay homage to his optical knowledge for being astute enough to purchase said binocular.

Your comment that Dennis's comments have no merit is true about 99.99% of the time, this thread being a perfect example. Dennis wants to tell everyone what HE doesn't like about porros and why roofs are superior instead of discussing the ops original question.

I think someone needs to start a new thread just for Dennis entitled "Why I like to own the current Allbinos highest rated roof so I can try to empress everyone".

Steve

[joe101]

Originally Posted by steve@37n84w

Dennis likes to incite a little class warfare by inferring certain people prefer porros because they "can't" afford the best. Of course it goes without saying that the "best" binocular is Dennis's current favorite.

In a previous post when I pointed out that the optical performance of my premium porros was the full equal of my alpha roofs Dennis couldn't argue that I couldn't afford an alpha so I obviously "needed to get my eyes checked".

Bottom line is Dennis gets upset when people disagree with his obviously biased sentiments. Dennis isn't satisfied with just owning a good binocular, he wants EVERYONE to recognize his current favorite as the "best" and pay homage to his optical knowledge for being astute enough to purchase said binocular.


Your comment that Dennis's comments have no merit is true about 99.99% of the time, this thread being a perfect example. Dennis wants to tell everyone what HE doesn't like about porros and why roofs are superior instead of discussing the ops original question.

I think someone needs to start a new thread just for Dennis entitled "Why I like to own the current Allbinos highest rated roof so I can try to empress everyone".

Steve

Nailed it

[newfie ghost]

To answer my own question. Because they don't break. If it is a Steiner that is.

[Torview]

Its pouring rain here, yet again, some June, been amusing myself looking across the valley at a Wood Pigeon perched in the top of a dead tree about 250m away.

Despite the rain the porro shows a real perception of the space between the tree and the woods some 100m behind it.

With the roof even though I know that space is there it really looks flat, like the view through a telescope.

I love my new roof, but I`d forgotten about this 3d effect when reviewing and purchasing.

I`m really surprised some feel immune to this, it adds so much more to the view, beyond, which is sharpest or flattest of field.

Maybe I was a porro convert all along and just forgot it, getting swept up in the whole roof`s are the only way to go now.

[etudiant]

Interesting that your perception would be so much different between porro and roof.
There may be a physiological reason for the differences in ability to perceive the depth of field. The Zeiss OEM-2 was a Cold War range finder built around very high performance 14x60 optics. In tests, a third of the trainees were unable to perceive the depth effect on which the sets functioning was dependent. For those who could, the product gave very accurate ranges out to about 15,000 meters.

[newfie ghost]

Originally Posted by etudiant

Interesting that your perception would be so much different between porro and roof.
There may be a physiological reason for the differences in ability to perceive the depth of field. The Zeiss OEM-2 was a Cold War range finder built around very high performance 14x60 optics. In tests, a third of the trainees were unable to perceive the depth effect on which the sets functioning was dependent. For those who could, the product gave very accurate ranges out to about 15,000 meters.

Very interesting. I find the 3d effect dramatic, especially in a back to back comparison. I just compared the EDG 8x32 to the Steiner 8x30 and the effect is large to my eyes. It also might differ depending upon the binocular. To me the effect is easier to see in glass that has a bigger field of view and lower power.

[Torview]

Finally, here on Dartmoor the rain and drizzle has gone and a warmer spell is upon us, so I took the Optolyth Alpin 8x30 out for a spin.

I don`t know how this stacks up to the EII but its a lovely view, I was watching some Yellowhammers for a while, to me its like you`re holding the bird at arms length, somehow the image seems less contaminated after its passage though lens coatings, prisms et al of a porro than a roof, in answer to the op question, for me, because its "purer".