BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kevin Purcell" data-source="post: 1304382" data-attributes="member: 68323">Bad assumption. Most middle and high end roofs have metal cases. The same case is always going to be heavier in a porro because a tube (the roof) is always going to be lighter than the same tube with a box in it i.e. the surface area of an porro enclose will always be large than the same roof because the objectives are spaced further apart and the bins are the same height (with the same focal length and focal ratio). But with a light case material (and most of the weight in the glass) this should be a small fraction of the total weight but it will always be the case.Do you have references for the reviews you mention? When where the review made? Are they comparing current roofs? Or roofs from 2000 or whenever the SE was released? Objective measurements or just looking through the bins? It's a big claim so I'd like to see the evidence it's based on.I don't list the advantages of porros because I fully acknowledge them and said so in my original post. See for example my Budget Bin review were I point out how much better cheap porros are than even mid-range roofs. I was trying to point out that your original argument "you can't phase compensate a roof prism correctly" is bogus but the conclusions you hold to are correct (good porros are cheaper than good roofs).Just because they can (and do make porros) with performance that at least equals the best roofs for half the price doesn't mean that the optics makers want to build them. Because they can make more money making roofs and their customers want to buy them. Optics businesses are businesses first and optics companies second. That was the second part of my post.And I suspect you may find that ergonomics trumps optics for most optics customers. Even for quite a few birders. This is the driving force of the demise of the porro even when we have good, light, cheap bins like the Yosemite or excellent mid-priced bins like the E, E2 or SE.If you want to fix this (as I suggested in my previous post) then you need to get into the bin business making new high quality porros for half the price of the alpha roofs using all the latest innovations. I'd buy one! There's a few others here who would buy them too. But I fear after that you might struggle to find customers. That's the real root of the problem.Finally, I'm waiting for my Nikon SE to arrive. It'll go really nicely with my 6x30 Yosemite and my Celestron Ultima DX 8x32. Oh, and I'm waiting for an 8x30 Yosemite to arrive too. Clearly I'm a roof nut <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification