Torview
Well-known member
Last edited:
-
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.
Leica's Noctivid and 3D (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Renze de Vries
- Start date
Thats OK as far as it goes Robert, but what today's ambitious, competitive and thrusting birder needs is hyperplasticatedsmartconceptualisticillusionizedbedazzlement.
Lee
And no amount of editing will get rid of that unwanted space in bedazzlement, even copying it from this sentence to the one above doesn't get rid of it.
Last edited:
crinklystarfish
Well-known member
I definitely, absolutely, unequivocally saw a clear three-dimensional effect with my Habicht 10x40 at distances greater than 100m.
As before, it seems to me that bins (or indeed monos) with very high resolution and very high contrast capability; that also have a generous depth of field, consistently provide the most pronounced 3D views. As generally agreed, porros also have an additional clout courtesy of wider separation of objective cells.
That 3D effect is more or less pronounced in different bins is - for me - a given.
To what extent it's prevalent in the NV is possibly influenced by a degree of autosuggestion given the (largely consumer) fuelled hype.
For me, there's way more bin-related BS generated by aficionados than by marketing departments / companies.
Hello,
I have read this thread with interest. I don't simply understand, all the arguments about the 3D in a roof prism binocular being different to others WITH THE SAME objective spacing. The 3D perception in a binocular is primarily a direct function of the objectives distance, as far as I know.
I have, as I have said a few times, both roof and Porro prisms binoculars. And, by the way, the Porro is one of the last Swarovski Habicht 10x40 WGA and one of the roofs is a Zeiss HT 10x42 wich, by their Abbe-Koenig prisms have a little more objective separations than others. But I cannot see ANY difference of 3D with others roofs. BUT, as crinklystarfish say, "I definitely, absolutely, unequivocally saw a clear three-dimensional effect with my Habicht 10x40 at distances greater than 100m". Period.
I want to see the Leica Noctivid. If they have that great view with the resolution, contrast, colour corrections as the top Z, S and N "alphas", PLUS THE IMPROVED FLARE AND VEILING GLARE, reported, SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE OTHERS comparable binoculars, the new Leica would be, TO ME, a real step forward.
PHA
I have read this thread with interest. I don't simply understand, all the arguments about the 3D in a roof prism binocular being different to others WITH THE SAME objective spacing. The 3D perception in a binocular is primarily a direct function of the objectives distance, as far as I know.
I have, as I have said a few times, both roof and Porro prisms binoculars. And, by the way, the Porro is one of the last Swarovski Habicht 10x40 WGA and one of the roofs is a Zeiss HT 10x42 wich, by their Abbe-Koenig prisms have a little more objective separations than others. But I cannot see ANY difference of 3D with others roofs. BUT, as crinklystarfish say, "I definitely, absolutely, unequivocally saw a clear three-dimensional effect with my Habicht 10x40 at distances greater than 100m". Period.
I want to see the Leica Noctivid. If they have that great view with the resolution, contrast, colour corrections as the top Z, S and N "alphas", PLUS THE IMPROVED FLARE AND VEILING GLARE, reported, SO MUCH BETTER THAN THE OTHERS comparable binoculars, the new Leica would be, TO ME, a real step forward.
PHA
Are you sure? I was until I thought about this: if you are in an environment where you are aware of several examples of the same object and they are all approximately the same size, it could be chimney stacks on many houses in an estate stretching away from you, or it could be Herring Gulls flying nearby and also 500 metres away or more. The more distant objects look smaller so you know they are farther away, and they give 'depth' to the view, but is this really 3D?
Lee
Yes it is Lee.
It depends on the distance to the object I am looking at and the distance of the background to that object.
In this case a building at 124m and clouds or 'sky' at several miles.
With a binocular I can separate trees at say 50m, 80m and 120m.
It depends on the difference in angle between the objects and different types of resolution relevant to the situation.
Also on contrast and to some extent colour differences.
And with binoculars, their objective separations and magnification, and possibly in addition the objective diameters.
Furthermore, with my good quality 317mm aperture Dall Kirkham f/3.5-f/14.7 windowed thin edge mirror scope I could clearly measure distances at over 1 mile by the slight focus changes needed.
Whether the Noctivid focuses accurately enough for this at moderate distances, I don't know. It also depends on a person's acuity.
It depends on the distance to the object I am looking at and the distance of the background to that object.
In this case a building at 124m and clouds or 'sky' at several miles.
With a binocular I can separate trees at say 50m, 80m and 120m.
It depends on the difference in angle between the objects and different types of resolution relevant to the situation.
Also on contrast and to some extent colour differences.
And with binoculars, their objective separations and magnification, and possibly in addition the objective diameters.
Furthermore, with my good quality 317mm aperture Dall Kirkham f/3.5-f/14.7 windowed thin edge mirror scope I could clearly measure distances at over 1 mile by the slight focus changes needed.
Whether the Noctivid focuses accurately enough for this at moderate distances, I don't know. It also depends on a person's acuity.
Last edited:
Hermann
Well-known member
I personally think it would be better not to focus on the "3D-effect" too much. After all, it may well be highly subjective, and I don't think people will come to any sort of agreement.
There are other aspects, like resolution and image quality in general, that are far more interesting, including the question of whether Leica managed to reduce image aberrations further than its leading competitors. And the question of how well Leica managed to cut stray light and veiling glare. That is far more important in the field than any 3D-effect, as it addresses one of the major weaknesses of many (if not most) modern binoculars.
Hermann
There are other aspects, like resolution and image quality in general, that are far more interesting, including the question of whether Leica managed to reduce image aberrations further than its leading competitors. And the question of how well Leica managed to cut stray light and veiling glare. That is far more important in the field than any 3D-effect, as it addresses one of the major weaknesses of many (if not most) modern binoculars.
Hermann
SuperDuty
Well-known member
Hi Lee
Amazingly enough I saw a prototype binocular at Billy Bob Hendricks's underground bunker recently that incorporated hyperplasticatedsmartconceptualisticillusionizedbedazzlement, the enhancement to image quality was impossible to explain or quantify, but DEFINITELY created the best overall optical image that has ever been seen or ever will be. I'm not sure how Billy Bob gets his hands on such esoteric unobtainium, but let's just say, (don't ask). Billy Bob, being the free spirit he is, had his leopard thong on that day, needless to say I keep my eyes above waist level. Every visit to (the bunker) is like being in a Hunter S. Thompson novel, you should tag along sometime.
Amazingly enough I saw a prototype binocular at Billy Bob Hendricks's underground bunker recently that incorporated hyperplasticatedsmartconceptualisticillusionizedbedazzlement, the enhancement to image quality was impossible to explain or quantify, but DEFINITELY created the best overall optical image that has ever been seen or ever will be. I'm not sure how Billy Bob gets his hands on such esoteric unobtainium, but let's just say, (don't ask). Billy Bob, being the free spirit he is, had his leopard thong on that day, needless to say I keep my eyes above waist level. Every visit to (the bunker) is like being in a Hunter S. Thompson novel, you should tag along sometime.
Robert you have my utmost admiration: anybody who has the courage to visit someone in their underground bunker while they were wearing a leopard thong, is a hero.:t:
You didn't mention what you were wearing........ :eek!:
Lee
:-O:-O
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
SuperDuty
Well-known member
I did not ask for a clarification of 3D.
I asked if you could compare the Noctivid 3D (or whatever it is we see) to a reference bin which everyone agrees has very good 3D.
After all, you say that you see the same 3D in the SF and SV, this in contrast to the claims made by some other posters and arguably even Leica.
It's that you said there was a lot of noise regarding this 3D effect, so lets reduce this noise. A reference point is a great way to achieve this.
Last edited: