Canip (I always have to correct that username since spellcheck changes it to Catnip
)is, of course, correct about DOF being the same for a given magnification, but what can vary significantly from bin to bin is the
perception of depth, i.e., how far objects in the foreground appear to be from objects i the background.
Porros show are a better 3-D view vs. the same configuration roof due to the objectives being farther from each other than the EPs. It's closer to the stereoscopic view you see with your eyes.
Roofs, other on the hand, show a more compressed view where foreground objects and background objects seem closer together than you see with your eyes. To some people this doesn't matter.
But not all roofs are the equal in this regard. Those with field flatteners tend to compress the landscape more than roofs that have field curvature. Unfortunately, the Nikon 8x42 EDG II, though wonderful in every other way including its exeptional flare control, does not give a 3-D view equal to my other binoculars including other roofs. According to Tobias Meenle (did I get that right, tenex?, spellcheck changes spellings on me, including tenex to tenet) that is true even in the 7x42 EDG, which compared to the 7x42 UV HD, showed noticeably less perception of depth than the UV due to the former having field flatteners and the latter having field curvature (fall off in sharpness at the edge).
If you can deal with a view that looks somewhat like a painting, you can't beat the 8x42 EDG for sharp, sparkling images with excellent color rendition and flare control.
Here's what Tobias wrote:
Because, just as in the Swarovision, here comes one price to pay for the flat field. Despite superb contrast, images render space in a flat, compressed way, although not quite as flat as the Swarovision. The Ultravid 8x32 HD Plus - which has exactly the same stereo base as the EDG - blows the Nikon away in 3D rendering of space. Ouch, that really hurts in direct comparison.
It was even more painful to compare the 7x42 EDG to the Leica Ultravid HD Plus 7x42. The Leica drags you into a deep, naturally rendered space, while the Nikon flattens out everything. As my friend J. put it: With the Leica every branch is where it is supposed to be, whereas with the Nikon you are guessing what the branches postitions are...
If that doesn't bother you, but the high price does, look for an EDG on the used market. It doesn't have a transferrable warranty (Nikon once had a No Fault policy, I miss those days), but if you buy a good sample, it will last for years, and if needs some tweaks down the road, you can send them to Corey Suddarth or another binocular repairperson, who generally charges less than Nikon for repairs.
Brock