Cameras and Lenses
Porro extra "3D" view
Just noticed this put forward as a selling point in the Opticron USA brochure for the Savanna porros. I understand at very close distances the extra distance between the objectives in a traditional porro can be a nuisance while at great distances it presumably ceases to be a factor at all.
For viewing something in thicket I guess at moderate distances the separation of the viewpoints for the two eyes reduces the liklihood of the same branch or twig obstructing the item of interest, which is handy.
As for the nicety of an enhanced 3D view, has anyone identified the circumstances where this effect is most noticeable and where it effectively ceases to be significant?
PS. Just did a quick AB at about 3 metres. Was trying to remember the sense of 3D through the porros and when swap to roof completely thrown by the (false) sense of greater magnification. Tricky.
I find the depth perception thing tricky to understand. My little 7x26 reverse porros give excellent spacial positioning at close range but I suspect that is due to some trick of the field curvature. The big 12x porros I've reported on still give a better perspective than my roofs several hundred yards out where I guess the advantage should have diminished.
David
Depth perception and spacial awareness in general seems to vary greatly between individuals (certainly amongst my relatives) - with or without binoculars.
I sometimes wonder whether our lack of need to spear a fish in recent centuries is leading to this being evolved out of town dwelling homo sapiens?
I don't have a problem with porros at close range, but my spacial awareness with binoculars is more to a lack of accomodation in my eyes than with binocular vision in thickets. i.e. I need to adjust focus far more then when younger and judge distance better that way.
I do find porros far more relaxing to look through when scanning in open countryside where, in theory, the 3D effect is minimal!
For real close up work I do find Papilios much better for getting a feel for the shape of a specimin than a similar monocular style device.
So I guess it may boil down to a lack of standardisation between humans.