I have a wondering. I know that roof prism binoculars are more durable with characteristics as inner focusing and in general shorter focusing distance.
But today there are many durable porroprism binoculars in waterproof performance for less than 200 dollars with an optical performance in every aspect not much worse than the the high grade roofs as more than 1000 dollars.
Are the expensive roofs really worth the price? Even if I buy a durable binocular I'm careful of it, and don't demand it has to survive dropping to the floor from some meters height. In some cases I think porrobinos are more comfortable to hold also. So what is the reason to buy a many time more expensive binocular? A slightly better image quality (which normal people don't will notice the difference if they don't attemt to do it)? Two meters shorter focusing distance? Or the more handy shape? Or is the reason that many birders only want the famous high grades just vain status thinking?
Personally I have been convinced that the binoculars for many birders to a high degree are status symbols. Amateur astronomers, unlike to birders, usually don't ask in which country the binoculars are made in, but ask for the practical useful quality. I think many birders pay more for the brand than for that. Today you don't need to pay a (half) monthly salary for getting a high quality binocular.
Any comments?
Patric
[QUOTE=Swedpat]I have a wondering. I know that roof prism binoculars are more durable with characteristics as inner focusing and in general shorter focusing distance.
But today there are many durable porroprism binoculars in waterproof performance for less than 200 dollars with an optical performance in every aspect not much worse than the the high grade roofs as more than 1000 dollars.
Are the expensive roofs really worth the price? Even if I buy a durable binocular I'm careful of it, and don't demand it has to survive dropping to the floor from some meters height. In some cases I think porrobinos are more comfortable to hold also. So what is the reason to buy a many time more expensive binocular? A slightly better image quality (which normal people don't will notice the difference if they don't attemt to do it)? Two meters shorter focusing distance? Or the more handy shape? Or is the reason that many birders only want the famous high grades just vain status thinking?
Personally I have been convinced that the binoculars for many birders to a high degree are status symbols. Amateur astronomers, unlike to birders, usually don't ask in which country the binoculars are made in, but ask for the practical useful quality. I think many birders pay more for the brand than for that. Today you don't need to pay a (half) monthly salary for getting a high quality binocular.
Any comments?
Patric[/QUOTE]
This is a very dangerous advice especially for beginners. For using a binocular only from time to time 200 dollars might be enough.
But for serious observers it will very quickly turn into a waste of money, because the human eye becomes more and more ambitious with growing observation experience.
Excellent porros are extremely rare and they are expensive too.
I would be very pleased to hear, that there were good binoculars for 200 $ on todays market.
Walter
Walter,
My question is based of my own experience of what I feel it's some kind of snobbery about the choice of optics. In many cases the indication beginners get from the experienced birders is that "if you want a binocular of a quality to count on, you have to pay almost a fortune". That isn't true.
Regards, Patric