• 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.

Roof binoculars you think was better than the Porro you discarded. (1 Viewer)

Highway Dog

Well-known member
This thread I want people to post of the roof binoculars you prefer over the Porro binoculars you discarded. Maybe we can list some anecdotal evidence of this phenomena.

I want to start with that I prefer the roof Minox BR 13x56 over the Nikon Superior E 12x50. In my case I was comparing them with star gazing. It was true that the Nikon SE was better than the Nikon Action Extreme ATB 12x50. The stars in the SE did not stay dots of round light in the outter fourth of the field of view. They began to streak slightly. The MInox did have better stars. No streaking that I could tell. I also like the instinctual targeting in using the roof.

I started with the Oberwerk LW 12x56. I used it for several years. Then I got the idea that I would fold back the eyecup all the way. I did not need glasses. I don't know why my eyes seem to work that way with such generous exit pupil distance. When I had placed the eyepieces on my eyes, I was shocked to find the field of view was huge! The stars in the center were good. In the outer half of the field of view they began to streak. I was did not worry about it. The binoculars were fine but they seemed to shake a little. Years later I picked up a discontinued Brunton eterna 11x42. The weight was lighter and the stars seem to be better, though the field of view was not as big. Sure, the 11x is a challenge to hold steady. I have been using it ever since.

(My eyes are not as sharp as other peoples. I have been holding off getting glasses. )

What experience do you have?
Thanks for reading this.
Rob A.


Staff member
Do yourself a big favour and get spectacles. It is the best thing I ever did. Binoculars are artificial aids to your eyes. Spectacles fall into the same category, don't be afraid of them, they help you spot things that you can then look at with your binos and can correct eye problems (such as astigmatism) that the dioptre adjuster cannot.



Well-known member
If your eyes are "not as sharp as other peoples" you need to find out why.

If you only have refractive errors, you should be able to compensate when you focus, otherwise there will be no improvement.

Hie thee to an ophthalmologist forthwith.


New York correspondent
United States

I replaced a Nikon 8x32SE with a Leica BN 8x32. I could not get along with that Nikon.
I also shed a Nikon 8x30 EII as I thought that it was too fragile for a clumsy old man. The Zeiss 8x32 FL became my primary binocular but I still have the Leica.

Stay safe,


Well-known member
I replaced a Nikon E2 8x30 and the 10x35 with a Nikon MHG 8x42 . The MHG is brighter , has a larger sweet spot and more eyeglass friendly than the E2's . Eyeglass friendly was the deal breaker otherwise I would still have the E2's .
Funny that people consider the E2's fragile . I bet if they were reskinned with thick rubber armour people would consider them tough, robust .


Well-known member
Currently, there is no porro prism binocular I like better than its roof prism counterpart. I have tried several too! Mainly it has been an ER issue for the most part. Many are also IF which isn't suitable for my uses. I still have a 8X30 E-II, Habicht 7X42, and a Swift Audubon 8.5X44. These all have adequate ER and the E-II and Swift have nice focus adjustments. The Swift and E-II come the closest to the roofs I'm partial to. I'm not going to part with those three. I really like and appreciate the classic look.

Users who are viewing this thread