• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Which roofs are better for their 3D view? (1 Viewer)

cycleguy

Well-known member
Hi all,

"Which roofs are better for their 3D view"? In close... in the range of about 20' - 75' (nearby birds in trees and brush).

A fairly simple question but probably a subjective answer....:-O

Just wondering why some have more of a spacial quality (perceived distance between objects) to them and others appear flat (objects appear to be overlapped on the same plane).

I understand wider set objectives are supposed to cause greater stereopsys, but is there something more to it with roofs where the seperation between the barrels is relatively similair???

For reference, I tend to believe that I see 10x (higher magnification) and field flattener lenses as less 3D, and 7x (lower magnification) and traditional pincushion as more 3D.

OK, fire away....:brains:

CG
 
CG,

I think you have answered your question in the last two paragraphs of your post: indeed I cannot see any other reasons for an apparent 3D view than the ones already mentioned in your post.

Peter
 
Hi all,

"Which roofs are better for their 3D view"? In close... in the range of about 20' - 75' (nearby birds in trees and brush).

A fairly simple question but probably a subjective answer....:-O

Just wondering why some have more of a spacial quality (perceived distance between objects) to them and others appear flat (objects appear to be overlapped on the same plane).

I understand wider set objectives are supposed to cause greater stereopsys, but is there something more to it with roofs where the seperation between the barrels is relatively similair???

For reference, I tend to believe that I see 10x (higher magnification) and field flattener lenses as less 3D, and 7x (lower magnification) and traditional pincushion as more 3D.

OK, fire away....:brains:

CG

I think from what I've looked at first would be the Kowa Genesis and then the Zeiss SF.
 
Some 10X glass provides a purly flat view, others without field flatteners can provide better depth of focus. Leica 10X50 HD+ for example comes to mind.

Andy W.
 
The thing that seems most associated with 3D views is objective separation. Not much of that with roofs in general, however the Maven B2 has offset objectives, with the offset being some 15 mm. In other words when the IPD is 60 mm, the objective separation is 75 mm. The Zeiss HT may also have some offset, which seems to be associated with the AK prism design of both the B2 and the HT, but I have not seen an HT to know for sure. The 3D in the B2 is there. The B2 also comes in 7x42, which as Lee points out, may aid in the perception with its deeper dof. As I understand it, the 3D effect in general, is greatest in close and decreases with distance.

However you are correct in that the perception of 3D is largely subjective, and opinions on the matter will vary.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,

"Which roofs are better for their 3D view"? In close... in the range of about 20' - 75' (nearby birds in trees and brush)...

...I understand wider set objectives are supposed to cause greater stereopsys, but is there something more to it with roofs where the seperation between the barrels is relatively similar???

CG

CG,

No doubt, wider objective separation as in Porro, AK roof and a few SP roof prism optics contribute greatly to perceptions of "3D".

Two roofs I own and use present very nice stereopsis viewing. My EL 10X50 SV (SP prisms) has an objective +9mm spacing over any IPD setting, with very notable step-in depth throughout its in-focused DOF...to my eyes, viewing is extremely relaxed and 3D. My Zeiss Victory 7X42 FL (AK prisms) has only +5mm spacing difference, but along with the lower power and deeper in-focus DOF, also offers a notable step-in relaxed and natural viewing.

Stereopsis with equally spaced roof objectives is personal...some can feel it (see it?), some don't.

Ted
 
I have an older set of Steiner Merlin 8x50 that I favor because of the 3D view it (seemingly?) offers.
 
Hi all,

"Which roofs are better for their 3D view"? In close... in the range of about 20' - 75' (nearby birds in trees and brush).

A fairly simple question but probably a subjective answer....:-O

Just wondering why some have more of a spacial quality (perceived distance between objects) to them and others appear flat (objects appear to be overlapped on the same plane).

I understand wider set objectives are supposed to cause greater stereopsys, but is there something more to it with roofs where the seperation between the barrels is relatively similair???

For reference, I tend to believe that I see 10x (higher magnification) and field flattener lenses as less 3D, and 7x (lower magnification) and traditional pincushion as more 3D.

OK, fire away....:brains:

CG

As Ted alludes, types, brands, and models have nothing to do with stereopsis. That is strictly a feature of objective separation. At a fairly close range, it can be real. At a distance, it is PERCEIVED, only. I’ve been told that a view of the moon with the 3d “picture” of binoculars is “super.”

I just sold this fellow some ocean-front property 35 miles northwest of Wichita, Kansas. ;):cat:

Bill
 
Good Salesmanship, Bill! 3:)

Ted

Thanks, Ted:

If I would even approach that, I wouldn't be on a fixed income, today. Once the moguls see you won't bend the truth for them, they stay away from you in droves. But:

"Honesty is the first chapter in the Book of Wisdom."—Thomas Jefferson

:cat:
 
Only a porro at close range will give that 3-D effect, I frankly do not see it in any glass with field flatteners to the level of a porro. just my 2Cents.

Then again I would not use a 10X to look at something 10 feet away.

Andy W.
 
Last edited:
...Stereopsis with equally spaced roof objectives is personal...some can feel it (see it?), some don't...

Yes. For me, it is all about objective separation and stereopsis, which diminishes with distance (as WJC notes). I don't see depth differences when comparing bins with the same spacing between their objectives, and I think that people who do are crazy. :) Or at least need to find some new words to describe what they are experiencing.

--AP
 
Or at least need to find some new words to describe what they are experiencing.

--AP

That needs to be applied to many things in optical investigation. Persons seeking good answers to their questions need to invest time in phrasing those questions in meaningful ways. :cat:

Bill
 
Yes. For me, it is all about objective separation and stereopsis, which diminishes with distance (as WJC notes). I don't see depth differences when comparing bins with the same spacing between their objectives, and I think that people who do are crazy. :) Or at least need to find some new words to describe what they are experiencing.

--AP

Just curious if anyone knows at what distance the 3D effect of porros actually diminishes to the point where it's not noticeable?
 
I understand wider set objectives are supposed to cause greater stereopsys, but is there something more to it with roofs where the seperation between the barrels is relatively similair???

This gets debated a lot here.

The mathematics of stereopsis are straightforward. The brain, however, uses all sorts of cues to perceive something as having depth, and to see its (yes) three-dimensional shapes. I'd look at contrast and possibly shallow DOF as potential explanations for the compositional 3D pop that some binoculars have.

For example, go into photoshop with an image and play around with the curves. See if you can make an image 'pop' more. Its a brain thing.

Also, (I know your post was about things close-in), consider the angle between to lines from a point 1000 ft away to either of your eyes. Seem like a small distance? Do you think slightly wider binoculars would make much of a difference? The depth in that bird 1000ft away is seen via other cues.
 
Just curious if anyone knows at what distance the 3D effect of porros actually diminishes to the point where it's not noticeable?

BC;

That would probably differ with the observer. But, it might be helpful for those just now considering it to see a list of personal observations from a few observers, documenting distances and instruments used. :cat:

Just a thought.

Bill
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top