When my wife and I began birding I had a Swift Audubon porro and she had a Swift Saratoga porro. They were such huge ungainly lumps we were delighted to discover roof prism binos that were so compact and fitted comfortably in our hands.
Lee
-
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.
Old versus New (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Rg548
- Start date
Lee
Bino Steve
Well-known member
Yeah, I can see some going for that, but I find porros, especially B&L style(vs zeiss) easier to hold as your hands are further apart and you can grip fully around. On my roofs , my finger tips and thumbs knock into each other. I have to stagger my hands or not grip fully. Feels awkward. Gloved hands are even worse. Plus your hands are more in front of your eyes keeping hot air in your face, causing more sweat. Maybe not an issue in certain lands that don't get 45-50 C temps. I get they are easier to waterproof, less prone to prism damage from dropping, but it takes a ridiculous amount of technology to beat a porro and if mfgs wanted to be brave, a porro could be made way that is better and still be cheaper than the best roof.
I know that when I first compared my Leitz 8x32b to the 149xxxx 8x32 BN and 8x32 Ultravid HD+, the biggest and most obvious difference was between the first two, with it being very subtle in almost all lighting and only stood out at all (to my eyes) in very dark situations, and mainly visible in side-by-side comparisons only.
It would be great to see a study done of the differing transmission figures for Leica during their seeming leap from the darkness somewhere in the history of the BN series and where the narrative of 145xxxx being the transition point originated.
rdnzl
Not Sure.
I think it was because they could be smaller.
Bino Steve
Well-known member
Not sure I buy that. I have some very small reverse porros that are shorter and optically better than an equivalent roof of the same era. I'm still guessing it was only for water/dust resistance. Binos were driven by military needs back then. Probably had the biggest influence.
Binocollector
Well-known member
In case of the old east German NVA 7x40 they went from porro (DF) to roof design (EDF) because of size and weight - the porro model was over 1 kg. Both were IF models so both were water proof.
rdnzl
Not Sure.
There arent many reverse porro 10x50's that I know of, and a regular porro 10x50 is pretty large compared to a roof 10x50. Just as an example.
There are Minolta Activa 10x50 and 12x50 that are Porroprism up down tubes, very little difference to a roof 10x50.
The Activas may be fully coated or fully multicoated. They are bright.
There are other up down tube binoculars.
Also the Avimo 7x42.
Above about 56mm or 58mm, roof prism binoculars don't work.
Regards,
B.
The Activas may be fully coated or fully multicoated. They are bright.
There are other up down tube binoculars.
Also the Avimo 7x42.
Above about 56mm or 58mm, roof prism binoculars don't work.
Regards,
B.
Binocollector
Well-known member
My 9x63 begs to differ
. It has AK-prisms but there are 9x63 models with SP-prisms, too. Unfortunately not many companies even still make 9x63 -- I like that format especially for astronomy. Only downside is the narrow FoV.Currently the only makers of roof 9x63s that I am aware of are Chinese. I think it is basically just one single model sold under different brands like "Bresser". I wonder though what the minimum IPD is on those (edit: the description on the Bresser homepage says 56mm).
The following models all seem to be basically the same. Only the "Schweizer" offers ED-glass. None has p-coatings it seems.
Bresser | BRESSER Condor 9x63 Dachkant-Fernglas | Expand Your Horizon
Expand Your Horizon! Kaufen Sie ✚Bresser direkt vom Hersteller! ✓Optik-Kompetenz seit 1957! ☎Exzellenter Service ★Preis-Leistungs-Sieger ᐅKategorie: Ferngläser > Entfernungsmesser > Sport Optiken > Kameras > Spektive > Nachtsicht > Mittelklasse
www.bresser.de
Schweizer Fernglas Falke 9x63 - Foto Schweizer, 249,00 €
Ein lichtstarkes Nachtglas zu einem überragend günstigen Preis
Last edited:
rdnzl
Not Sure.
Is the key phrase here.
tenex
reality-based
...and they cost more, and most of those coatings didn't exist for decades! But I think the real question is, why were so many people eager to buy roof models even so, after WW2? Because they valued compactness, maybe even close focus. Because Dialyts and Trinovids looked more elegant than Porros, perhaps even reminded people less of the war. Sales showed that Zeiss and Leica got this right. My father lugged around 7x50 IF, but he was an outlier.
Bino Steve
Well-known member
I have a 7x21, 8x30, 10x40, 12x50 reverse skeletons . They are bright, crisp to edges. But keep them out of dust and moisture ! Plus drop them and you'll cry at the damage. The biggest I know of is 18x50. See miniature binoculars website. Tenex you make some good observations. We put up with many decades of substandard performance of roofs to get to today. Odd why that happened. Any other product it would have been dropped as a flop.
Elkhornsun
Well-known member
7x50 is perfect for use on a boat where they greatly enhance ones night vision. Nikon puts out light transmission values for its models and the 10x are also rated higher than the 8x for the same diameter objectives. In low light I prefer the 10x binos I own. But I put inexpensive Monarch binos in both our cars so we always have them available.
What greatly improved optics was the introduction of the personal computers. Even circa 1980 many optical engineers were still doing their calculations by hand and it took a lot of time to create a new design. When CAD software allowed to design in the computer it changed everything. We can see it especially with zoom and variable power optics.
What greatly improved optics was the introduction of the personal computers. Even circa 1980 many optical engineers were still doing their calculations by hand and it took a lot of time to create a new design. When CAD software allowed to design in the computer it changed everything. We can see it especially with zoom and variable power optics.
lilcrazy2
Well-known member
After I bought my 10x32 BN ser 147xxx, I read that article on the 2001 BN transmission of 75-77% and after comparing them to my 10x32 Hawke Frontier ED X, I didn't see much if any of a brightness difference, but only compared them for 30 min in afternoon sun and not at dark thirty. Don't know the transmission on the Hawkes but would imagine around 85-87% or so.
I wonder if anyone has the serial number ranges for different years, and when the coatings changed?
Bino Steve
Well-known member
Chk year 2006 Birdforum thread called. "Evolution of Trinovid coatings" . Quite a discussion on Leica serial numbers and coatings. Maybe some help there.
lilcrazy2
Well-known member
Steve
Thanx for the tip but there wasn't much there in that thread of help to really pinpoint anything, but the search for that thread found some very interesting threads on Leica that are well worth reading for any of the Trinovid / Ultravid owners.
Coatings questions
OK, I'm in the Leica forum this time, and will try this again! My 8x42 Trinovid BA loses 9% of the light right off the top due to the silvered, rather than dielectric prism coating, but would like to discuss and ask about the antireflective coatings. Astronomers are constantly staring into...
www.birdforum.net
Trinovid BAs still a 'sweet spot' among Leica binoculars?
The Trinovid BA series, early designated Trinovid 'Ultras,' now over 20 years old, still attracts attention and praise in threads on birdforum.net. Some experienced users appear to prefer BAs to subsequent Leica models and to high-end 'alpha' binoculars of other brands, despite recognized...
www.birdforum.net
In the first thread, an interesting observation by Henry on effect of blue transmission, and some by Surveyor (Ron Watson) which are classics, with all the various tests he used to run. Back in 2011/2012 Ron was my mentor in buying and setting up test equipment to run various tests, and advising me how to interpret them. I wonder what has happened with him?