No ulterior motives. I just want to add a good porro to my collection and I am trying to find the best one for me. Maybe there was something wrong with the EII I bought off of E-bay. Like Frank says the EII is a little short on ER. It just barely had enough for me without glasses. I honestly noticed a big difference in contrast and no amount of arm bending by bird forum members is going to convince me I didn't see what I saw. The EII may be legendary but sometime legends die. It is starting to get long in the tooth and they are making advancements in ED glass and coatings. I saw what I saw.
-
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.
Are Nikon SE's and EII's the best porro's made? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Steve:
You may be right about the Swaro. porros being a nice optic. My reply was
to PHA, and he was placing the Habicht, at a level above the Nikon SE's.
It was about being in a "higher league", and I don't know if he has tried any
of Swaros. newer optics, it would be nice if he would comment.
I do admit I have no experience with the Swaro. porros. but I do with the latest Swaro. roofs.
The Nikon SE's, are very good and optically compete very well with the
very latest of the Swarovski's. And that includes the Swarovsion. And I am
thinking Swaros. latest roofs beat the Swaro. porros by a good margin.
Jerry
God, I love the looks of those Habicht's. I would buy them just to look at them and keep them in a glass case. They are beautifuly made binoculars. They represent the perfect classic porro prism binocular. I have heard the focus is tight and it gets to be a PIA when it gets cold actually cutting into your finger. Is that true? If it wasn't for that I would buy a pair just to look at.
brocknroller
porromaniac
Steve,
With the 8x32 SE selling for $679 these days and the 8x30 Habicht for $829 at Camera Land, that's only a $150 extra for WPing and added robustness.
Considering that you'd have to pay over $1,500 more for an 8x32 SV EL for WPing and added robustness, the Habicht's "premium" is a small price to pay. Can't count the SV EL's field flatteners as an added feature, because the SE has had them since 1998.
How was the focuser on the Habicht? Hard to turn?
Also, can you see the entire FOV w/out digging your eyes into the eyecups?
Those are my two concerns.
<B>
The Habichts are classically designed for sure and classy looking to boot! But their eye relief is so short I would have to try them out first before I bought one. The 8 x 30 has 12mm, the 7 x 42 14mm and the 10 x 40 13mm according to Cameraland.
Brin Best has written about them, the SE and the EII and 5 or 6 others with his ratings here: http://brinbest.com/id38.html
Bob
Brin Best has written about them, the SE and the EII and 5 or 6 others with his ratings here: http://brinbest.com/id38.html
Bob
steve@37n84w
Well-known member
Jerry
The newer Swaro roofs are great binos but to my eyes the only noticeable difference (optically speaking) between the Swaro roofs and the Habicht are the roofs better edge performance due to their field flattener lenses. I don't own a Swaro roof but I have the use of my youngest son's 8.5x42 Swarovision during the off season (he's an avid hunter). I also got to test drive a 10x50 EL and was very impressed with it, optically it was as good as my 10x50 FMTR SX which is saying a lot.
I know the Nikon SE's are very good optically and as you say compete very well with the latest Swarovskis including the Swarovision, I have several SEs and use them often.
Steve
steve@37n84w
Well-known member
Brock
The focuser on the Habicht is harder to turn than a SE or EII but I don't find it problematic for a couple of reasons. If using both hands to hold a small/medium sized porro I normally keep both forefingers on the focuser and employ a combined "push/pull" action which enables me to focus very easily and quickly. If using one hand I can still easily focus the Habicht because I can hold it so securely with only one hand; unlike the SE or EII you can easily slide your middle and ring finger between the center hinge and body for a very secure grip. When using the Habicht under the night sky I find its stiffer focus a bonus because there is no focus shift when viewing at or near the zenith.
I can easily see the entire fov with my eyes just barely touching the eyecups; however, the Habicht (for me at least) isn't a binocular where the eyecups nestle into your eye sockets for a perfect fit. At my IPD setting most of my porro's eyecups rest on the bridge of my nose about the time I'm at the correct distance from the ocular to see the full fov but not so with the Habicht due to its very small diameter oculars. I either let the top of the eyecups rest against my brow while the sides of my forefingers are in contact with my forehead which makes for a very steady view or I use add on winged eyecups. The winged eyecups block out all extraneous light and increase the diameter of the ocular just enough for a perfect fit.
If you ever make it down to proudpapas be sure and try the Habichts and let us know what you think about them.
Steve
Torview
Well-known member
I could`nt agree more, but Dennis seems determined to compare everything with his EDG.
I`v yet to try any of the Habichts or an SE so I don`t know the awnser to the op question.
With the caveat of nfov and slow focus, I really like the Opticron HR WP, a thoroughly modern Porro.
Also the Opticron 8x32 SR GA is wonderful.
The Nikon E and SE porros are simply brighter than the EDG's. Depending on lighting conditons, subtle colors (like dark grays) may appear black in the EDG and dark gray in the porros. Look carefully for fine details buried within coloration to determine which binocular delivers a more "faithful" view.
mulligatawny owl
Well-known member
Sometimes I'm convinced my HR WP's are able to resolve more detail than my SE 8x32's, especially at long range, the larger objectives no doubt helps. I really must do a proper side by side comparison between the two.
If you can live with the nfov the HR WP is simply one hell of a great all round modern fully waterproof porro. It doesn't quite tick all the boxes in overall image pleasingness that the SE does but it ticks a few boxes that the SE cant, namely full waterproofing and twist up eyecups.
bh46118
Well-known member
A good Porro will win this contest against a roof every time from what I've seen. I was looking at the base of a maple tree at about 25 yards with the Minox Porro and Zen ED2. The Porro was resolving fine color graduation and textural details in the shaded areas that the roof was totally missing. The Porro had an organic rightness to the view that drew me in. The roof had a flat, artificial image by comparison .
Bruce
Bruce
bh46118
Well-known member
I've been harping this on here for a while. I believe that for the $180 I paid for the BD10X44BP, I have most of the performance that people pay $600 to $2500 for. I would love to here your comparison of the Nikon and the Opticron.
Bruce
Bruce
Torview
Well-known member
I would love to try the Minox, but have`nt been able to yet. Found this:-
http://www.binomania.it/binocoli/minox/bd8x44bp.php
http://www.binomania.it/binocoli/minox/bd8x44bp.php
looksharp65
Well-known member
Though I honestly believe in what you say, I have to ask whether you compensated for the magnification difference by getting 5 yards closer with the ED2?
If the Minox has a warmer colour bias than the ED2, that can be the reason for its better colour graduation rendition. Was the ED2's image too bright, maybe washed-out even in the shaded areas?
Still, I think that the absence of phase-coating and any mirror coating in porros contribute to a more easy view. Designing the coatings of a binocular is a delicate balance to keep, and with advantage in certain light condition comes a disadvantage in others.
With porros (porri!
) the task may be somewhat easier, I guess.//L
Last edited:
bh46118
Well-known member
I did step 5 yards closer to compensate. It made absolutely no difference in the results. I did the same with my Fury and as much as I like them for the things they do well, they are not any closer than the Zen to the Minox in raw Image quality. As shown in the Binomania review, I believe the Minox and the others like it may very well be as sharp in resolution as an optic can be made. I use my Minox with the eye cups down and my glasses on just like the Fury. The view with the Minox, as with the Fury, seems so much more immersive with the eye cups down, even though I suppose in reality the FOV is not changed.
Bruce
Bruce
bh46118
Well-known member
They still have the Leupold 8X at Amazon. I don't know about getting them in the UK though.
http://www.amazon.com/Leupold-Cascades-8x42mm-Intrn-Focus/dp/B000H6QXMQ
http://www.amazon.com/Leupold-Cascades-8x42mm-Intrn-Focus/dp/B000H6QXMQ
Read post 20 & 24. They are great binoculars Frank but the eyecups were big for my eyesockets and I also wonder if their FOV isn't smaller than stated. The view is quite sensational though. I have never seen so much 3D effect in any binoculars.
Good insight. I will try that with the SE's. I just assumed the EDG's had better contrast because the blacks were darker but I really didn't try to look into the grey for detail.