• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leica's Noctivid and 3D (1 Viewer)

If one subscribes to the argument that a "natural view" is one that retains the same visual cue relationships that would be obtained without binoculars, then Tobias' statement brings binocular design into conformity with nature. Zero field curvature and zero distortion are arguably "unnatural."

Ed

Hi Ed,

I'm not following you here. Are you saying that field curvature and distortion are naturally present in the light that falls on the eye "without binoculars"?

Henry
 
Ed, post 32,
when I wrote "depth sharpness" I meant that the picture shown is sharp from (estimate) 1-5 meters. Does that clarify the "new concept"? In Dutch it would be "scherptediepte".
I tested my brain over and over, but the one-eye 3D observation in the picture we are discussing does not occur, so I made an appointment with a medical doctor for this afternoon.
Gijs van Ginkel

I was always taught that depth of field relates to lense focal length and apeture.
At any given point of critical focus,depth of field, or acceptable focus, extends both forward and backwards (closer/further) from this critical plain in a ratio of roughly one third in front to two thirds behind the critical plain.

Whilst this ratio remains constant, the distances each depth represents varies with not only the variables mentiones above but also the distance at which one sets critical focus from the focal plain.

It is of course also known that telephoto lenses have the effect of 'compressing' our sense of relative depth perception with this effect being more apparent in longer lenses and less so as we move back towards a 50mm (in 35mm camera format or its equivalent) which shows objects at the same relative distance to each other as the human eye.

As much as I am enamoured by Leica and indeed may end up buying a pair (they're certainly in the mix), at this point and in light of what is stated above I would be rather sceptical of any such chimera as 3D.

Remember, Leica is only suggesting, in it's marketing material at that, a (I paraphrase from other posts on this forum having not yet pored over the Leica catalogue myself) '3d like effect' ('like' & 'effect' being operative here). As for plasticity, well, a jolly comprehensive thesaurus and a stein or two of Warsteiner, Krombacker, Bitburger or any other of Germany's unsurpassed, reinheitsgeburt compliant (i.e. any of them) pilsners might explain all one needs to know.

Side note: could you chaps get on with educating our pub culture that the corolary of cask ale in lager is NOT Fosters?(no disrespect to our Australian friends but I know even you guys don't drink it having travelled there).
Who knows how long one has to live and I look forward to the recent and healthy enthusiasm we have for real ale in th UK being reflected in high quality european blonde beers before I die. ...please !

Back on topic.

I'm not flatly contradicting those that appear to see such an effect, albeit fleetingly and in seemingly unreplicatable ways. Since porros regularly seem credited with being able to offer up an effect in a more replicatable fashion I would probably throw into the mix, like fuel on a fire perhaps, something broadly within the realm of parallax and prismatic corrections. Combine that with DOF , what appears to be genuine and well intentioned enthusiasm on the part of some and probably leave it at that.

In certain conditions, a perfectly focussed lense, at the right distance with very good optics (and all of the planets in the right configuration - so to speak ) can give us a view that is simply so breathtaking that it temporarily blocks out the backgrond hum of life and puts us in the immediate moment with nature. An optically perfect moment if you will.

Of that I have no doubt.

The glint of light off the custard yellow ring in a male blackbirds eye against a deep black and almost dusty but pristine wings folded away and that proud, listening tilt of the head. 99 out of a hundred times, beautiful. One in a hundred- breathtaking.

3D? No.
3D-like effect? With a degree of poetic license permitted - why not - caveat emptor.

(Note to Zeiss and Swarovski: Come on guys, you need to up the stakes in your next catalogue. Might I suggest, in the spirit of one Edmund Blackadder, trying to shoehorn the word, 'Contraphibulations' in there somewhere? - he he he)

My last thought is this;

One of the very few things that I remember from my much missed physics teacher is the following;

'The propogation of light is rectilinear'

(Runs for cover clutching imported and beloved bottle of Bitburger, a dunkel glass and one of those little paper doilies that catches the drips and condensation)

All the best,

Tm
 
Man is intelligent.
Huh.
End of hypothesis.

Yes that hypothesis is proven false.

Better change it to 'some humans display behavioural, conceptual and analytical characteristics similar to those expected of intelligent beings'.

OK, now test it.

Lee
 
Canip,
You are quite right, I should have dived to a depth of 10 meters and have a good view through the binoculars.
What I have missed as yet in the whole discussion of the new Leica Noctivid, is to compliment Sigrun Kammans, the optical designer of Leica and Stephan Albrecht, the produkt manager, and their colleagues for their excellent work in designing, constructing and making it ready for the market of a very nice binocular.
Gijs van Ginkel

Seconded.

It's an outstandingly beautiful bit of industrial design.

My compliments:clap:
 
Side note: could you chaps get on with educating our pub culture that the corolary of cask ale in lager is NOT Fosters?(no disrespect to our Australian friends but I know even you guys don't drink it having travelled there).
Who knows how long one has to live and I look forward to the recent and healthy enthusiasm we have for real ale in th UK being reflected in high quality european blonde beers before I die. ...please !


'The propogation of light is rectilinear'



Tm

Bitburger, Scherdel, Pilsner Urquell, any number of Weiss Biers and Alt Biers.....bliss

And did your physics teacher ever mention light travels as a wave but arrives as a particle?

Lee
 
I think one way Leica achieves 3D or plasticity or vividness, whatever you want to call it, is by detaching the foreground from the background through. Yes, it's distortion as someone mentioned above, but not by bending straight poles and rectangular buildings but by letting the background move at a different rate than the foreground, the same as would happen if you stare at an object with on eye whilst moving your head sideways (like a cat does to better judge depth just before it jumps on its prey). The object moves at a slower rate than its background. So as soon as you put the Noctivid to your eyes, small movements of your hands, eyes, the object and the background itself render the whole picture 'vivid', almost like 3D ;).


I'm on holiday so I haven't had the chance to test this idea against my 'flat' Ultravid, but staring at the tropical birds trough the Noctivid whilst sitting in my beach-side cabin the above mentioned effect is very strong, much stronger than I remember from my other bins. Or is it the pina coladas? B :)
 
Last edited:
Alexis, foreground and background move at a different rate, that's a given, just as it happens in your eyes. The more that effect can be replicated in a binocular, the more lifelike the image?
 
Alexis, foreground and background move at a different rate, that's a given, just as it happens in your eyes. The more that effect can be replicated in a binocular, the more lifelike the image?

It's just a consequence of perspective, not eye or binocular function, so it can't vary by optical design.

--AP
 
Hi Ed,

I'm not following you here. Are you saying that field curvature and distortion are naturally present in the light that falls on the eye "without binoculars"?

Henry

Hi Henry,

Yes, the human eye has all the aberrations of a focal system, like a camera. Since a binocular is optically coupled to the eye, the eye+telescope system aberrations can be approximated using the standard lens equations.

Ed
 

Attachments

  • Field Curvature of eye.pdf
    238 KB · Views: 109
Last edited:
I wished I'd have access to the Swarovski SLC-HD instead of the Swarovision for a decent comparison (several days in different conditions), but unfortunately I didn't. The SLC would be better comparison because the optical design is more akin and so Leica's assets and/or improvements could be illuminated.
As I have owned and used the SLC-HD for a span of time large enough to have good, and certainly pleasing, memories of this instrument, I can say that one of the nice things in the Noctivid is the way it conforms to the peripheral view (i.e. my peripheral view) in a way I can't remember from the SLC. So my advice is to have a look at the Noctivid when you have the chance and compare on this aspect.
I'm very interested in your findings.

best regards,

Renze

Hi Renze,

I'll get right on it. Unfortunately, the last Leica dealer in the bay area shuttered their doors a few months ago, so I'll have to order it from EO for evaluation.

I'm not sure what you mean by conformity to (your) peripheral view. Could you explain that a little more?

Ed
 
Ed, post 32,
when I wrote "depth sharpness" I meant that the picture shown is sharp from (estimate) 1-5 meters. Does that clarify the "new concept"? In Dutch it would be "scherptediepte".
I tested my brain over and over, but the one-eye 3D observation in the picture we are discussing does not occur, so I made an appointment with a medical doctor for this afternoon.
Gijs van Ginkel

In a word, you are evaluating the (physical) picture, not the perceptual (psychological) response.

Ed
 
Bitburger, Scherdel, Pilsner Urquell, any number of Weiss Biers and Alt Biers.....bliss

And did your physics teacher ever mention light travels as a wave but arrives as a particle?

Lee

He may well have done, memory does not recall.


It's a subtle masterstroke of almost subliminal marketing by Leica for which they can be duly credited but in no way adds or detracts from what I perceive as the merits of their products. For some perhaps. Either way the Noctivid appears to have brought them up to broad speed with Zeiss and Swarovski at the (very expensive end of ) top technical and mechanical performance.

A new open bridge design, better ER and FOV than UV HD+ and all wrapped up in a reasonably compact package and seemingly classic Leica rich tones. A little later to the +18mm ER, +400 ft FOV (8x) party perhaps but there nonetheless and none the worse for it. If you're in the market for such - you choose your idiosyncrasies , pays your money and takes your chances...

.....and thats it.

No voodoo.
No kings birthday suit.

Nothing any optics lab wouldn't have exploited, pinned down and marketed by now were it possible.


I'll be delighted to witness this effect and will certainly mention it (along with gulping down a huge portion of humble pie) if/when that comes to pass.

Same but no more or less than with rolling ball, overly green filtration, CA, veiling glare, too tight/loose focussing etcetera etcetera all of which seem, almost to a unit, subject to personal experience.

On a lighter note :

It's as much about delivery platforms as product availability Troubador. We use a lower pressure mix and less tap baffling in our pubs than on the continent. We get effectively, flat, sweet, headless muck. I remember going over this with some Dutch and German guys once. If the lager comes without a nice big foam on the top it's considered stale and undrinkable. Here we complain if there's more than a bubble or two floating around the meniscus.

So unless we can get that bit right, it's not as good. There's a place down the road which has Bitburger on tap (which is VERY unusual ime) but it's just not as good. Neither cold enough, crisp enough nor foamy enough.

Shame really. Still, one of the joys of travel.

All the best

Tm
 
Hi Henry,

Yes, the human eye has all the aberrations of a focal system, like a camera. Since a binocular is optically coupled to the eye, the eye+telescope system aberrations can be can be approximated using the standard lens equations.

Ed

And the model referred to has these estimates (see top).

Ed
 

Attachments

  • Field Curvature of eye 2.pdf
    167.7 KB · Views: 100
Sorry Ed, I still don't understand why the addition of field curvature by the binocular would be beneficial. The afocal light that falls on the eye directly from the natural world is inherently free of field curvature. Isn't it desirable for the afocal light that falls on the eye from the binocular eyepiece to be just like the direct afocal light except for magnification?

Henry
 
I've owned the 10X42 and 12X50 SE, and still own a Minox BD BP, have I seen a level of 3D approaching the Noctivid ?
 
Ed, post 53,
No I described what I see in the picture we were discussing and the depth of field is what I see, and something similar is happening when I make a photograph with a wide-angle lens as compared with a telephotolens.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
When I tried the Noctivid back in August I found them subtlety better than the UV+, ELSV and HT in the way they allowed me to interpret the view. The outlook from BirdFair marquee includes banks of reeds in the fore and middle ground and I felt I was seening not only better definition of each reed but also a much clearer interpretation of where each was in relation to the next and where that reed bunting was in that complex swaying mass of vegitation. So I though the spacial positioning was better, even if, in the true sense, the depth of field and stereopsis was probably no different from the others. I can't say I thought to try one eye onthat occasion but I suspect it would have made little difference.

The question is, how is this possible? Is it the elimination of aberrations or optimising field curvature? Those may be well be part of the story, but I suspect they have also optimised the MTF (contrast) at the optimal spatial frequence for sharpness perception. They simply made the view easier to interpret, spatially and otherwise.

When I asked Meopta about their sharpness optimisation they sent me MTF values for multiple wavelengths for an apparent frequency of 10 lp/degree. The frequency where our brains can optimally interpret visual detail. That 12x50HD I reviewed had excellent resolution results, but I suspect it was the high contrast at lower spatial frequency which really gave the view the visual impact.

Just speculation, but I think the Noctivid's MTF 10 lp/degree values might just the best on the market at the moment.

David
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top