Any advice? Donīt know which one is better.
They have very similar price (200€ here in Spain), but are quite different (roof prism vs porro prism).
Both of them seem to be ok, but I have tried them at different moments, so comparison is difficult for me...
Thank you very much in advance.
Regards,
[QUOTE=Xabi]Any advice? Donīt know which one is better.
They have very similar price (200 here in Spain), but are quite different (roof prism vs porro prism).
Both of them seem to be ok, but I have tried them at different moments, so comparison is difficult for me...
Thank you very much in advance.
Regards,[/QUOTE]
Actually, I only have the 10x version. We have enough light here most of the time. I do have some cheap porros that go 7x and have noticed that they are better at sunset, to see colors and such.
The Nikon Sporters are not water proof, merely resistant, but should stand up to light rain quite well, and are generally rugged. The opticron may not be. I would bet the Opticron has much better field of view.
For owners of high end binoculars, I would recommend the Nikons as back up, when you don't want to risk the more expensive pair, to theft etc.
The Opticrons look like a nice pair, nitrogen filled and all. You will have to wait for comments on their optical qualities.
'Fraid have only experience of the Imagic 10x50, so like Tero can only offer a guess that both perform to a similar level optically. I think it will largely come down to whether you tend to do dawn or dusk birding or star gazing for which the Opticrons would almost certainly give a brighter view (as Tero suggests), or whether the roof prism shape of the Nikon is much more ergonomically satisfying to you (though the twist-up eyecups of the Opticron porros should be better designed). I notice published specs for FOV, eye relief, closest focus and weight are pretty similar for each.