Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 8th July 2017, 21:20   #101
dwever
African Fish Eagle Rwanda
 
dwever's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Dystopia
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chosun Juan View Post
I'm sorry that you feel that way guys, I don't think anyone has deliberately tried to hijack the thread . . .

Bird Forum (particularly the optics forum) has always allowed some 'latitude' for exploration provided it is good natured. I for one, welcome the additional technical information, and I'm grateful to those who contribute it. . .

I also welcome the way the OP so thoroughly structured the initial post to offer some guidance . . .


Chosun
I don't think it was deliberate either. It is fine. No worries. Latitude is good. It had just gotten a little eye popping at 75 somewhat tangential posts, one may also need longitude. Heck, this many posts later maybe squatters' rights apply :-). The original post had probably run it's course anyway.
__________________
Leica NTV 8X42; UVHD+ 8x42; Zeiss Marines

Last edited by dwever : Saturday 8th July 2017 at 22:46.
dwever is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 8th July 2017, 22:28   #102
PIER PAOLO
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: rome italy
Posts: 65
OK: back on topic!

I have done it and now I have my new noctivid 8X42.
At the beginning I did not realize how good was the view but after one hour of obsevations I was (and I am) completely sold! I have and I have had some of the best binoculars of all times but this one is in a different category. The differences can't be described with specs or measures; to me, the view through this binoculars is really fantastic. The image is...better than reality. Contrast, colors, bokeh, sense of depht, you can focus once and you can forget the focus knob. Really beautiful.
There is only a very very little play in the smooth focus wheel (sometimes, may be), but frankly, who cares!

Last edited by PIER PAOLO : Saturday 8th July 2017 at 22:33.
PIER PAOLO is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 8th July 2017, 22:50   #103
dwever
African Fish Eagle Rwanda
 
dwever's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Dystopia
Posts: 306
Quote:
Originally Posted by PIER PAOLO View Post
OK: back on topic!The image is...better than reality. Contrast, colors, bokeh, sense of depht, you can focus once and you can forget the focus knob. Really beautiful.
Very happy for you.

Huh. I had never thought about bokeh re binoculars.
__________________
Leica NTV 8X42; UVHD+ 8x42; Zeiss Marines
dwever is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 01:22   #104
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by PIER PAOLO View Post
OK: back on topic!

I have done it and now I have my new noctivid 8X42.
At the beginning I did not realize how good was the view but after one hour of obsevations I was (and I am) completely sold! I have and I have had some of the best binoculars of all times but this one is in a different category. The differences can't be described with specs or measures; to me, the view through this binoculars is really fantastic. The image is...better than reality. Contrast, colors, bokeh, sense of depht, you can focus once and you can forget the focus knob. Really beautiful.
There is only a very very little play in the smooth focus wheel (sometimes, may be), but frankly, who cares!
Phew! It's great to finally get some feedback and opinion from somebody who actually owns a Noctivid, as outlined in the OP and thread title.

I had stated that I was excited about the prospect of a 7x42 Noctivid. I've had use of some 7x42 Ultravid HD+, but I'm so stunned with the performance of the 10x42 Noctivid that I'm planning to have a closer look at the 8x42. Against the 7x42, I'll be losing only 5m/1000m in fov, 0.75mm of exit pupil and perhaps some Depth of field...but would be gaining all which is so incredibly alluring in the NV.

At this stage of ownership, the only very minor downside I can possibly think of is the slightly odd positioning of the strap lugs. This has already been mentioned, but I've found that without thinking, I've adjusted my grip accordingly and its become a virtual non issue (barely thought about) in the scheme of things. For reference, I have 4XL hands in glove size, and find the ergonomics of the binocular to be absolutely fine.

Cheers,

Rathaus
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 02:28   #105
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 10,737
I wonder when Allbinos is going to review the Noctivids? There are 2 owner's opinions on the 10x42 posted.

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 03:00   #106
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 712
Latest count-

We're up to 5 confirmed 10x NV owners who have given feedback comments in this thread.
There appear to be 3 owners giving feedback comments relating to the 8x NV.

There are a further two or three owners who do not state which magnification they purchased, and another couple who tested the 10x but do not own it.

I'd certainly be keen to hear more feedback from current owners or owners down the track. I find it interesting because unhurried and long term ownership/use can reveal subtleties of a binocular which may otherwise not be noted.

Rathaus

Last edited by Rathaus : Sunday 9th July 2017 at 03:11.
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 04:08   #107
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar View Post
I wonder when Allbinos is going to review the Noctivids? There are 2 owner's opinions on the 10x42 posted.

Bob
Bob:

I would not expect very soon, they embarrassed Leica when they reported
on the leakers and how some were not waterproof.

On topic, is that I did read the new Noctovid, is waterproof to a higher
standard than the other alphas. That means a deeper test level.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 08:42   #108
elkcub
Registered User
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,043
NOTE: I've sent a message to Steve requesting a new thread concerning Field Flatteners as per Henry Link's post #98. I also included a suggestion that a new Binoculars forum be established with the title Optics Technology to cover future conversations involving mechanical and optical design, performance methods, data exchange, and so forth. If Steve picks up on that, the field flattener thread would then be the first on that forum, beginning with posts #25 through #100 taken from this thread. Feel free to message Steve with additional comments if you wish.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 08:52   #109
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,196
Jerry, post 107,
Do not believe things that have not been investigated thouroughly, so if you want to know how waterproof the Noctivids are if not tested independently by good immersion and strong rain tests. From my experience I find it hard to believe that the Noctivids beat all other alphas with regard to water resistance, but proof of the puddding comes by eating it. I think that Leica is professional enough to let Allbinos test it, despite disappointing data in the past.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 13:43   #110
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
NOTE: I've sent a message to Steve requesting a new thread concerning Field Flatteners as per Henry Link's post #98. I also included a suggestion that a new Binoculars forum be established with the title Optics Technology to cover future conversations involving mechanical and optical design, performance methods, data exchange, and so forth. If Steve picks up on that, the field flattener thread would then be the first on that forum, beginning with posts #25 through #100 taken from this thread. Feel free to message Steve with additional comments if you wish.

Ed
Excellent idea and suggestion.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 22:22   #111
elkcub
Registered User
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Jerry, post 107,
Do not believe things that have not been investigated thouroughly, so if you want to know how waterproof the Noctivids are if not tested independently by good immersion and strong rain tests. From my experience I find it hard to believe that the Noctivids beat all other alphas with regard to water resistance, but proof of the puddding comes by eating it. I think that Leica is professional enough to let Allbinos test it, despite disappointing data in the past.
Gijs van Ginkel
Hi Gijs,

Without a doubt this post belongs on a boring Waterproof Technology thread that covers the empirical methods, sampling requirements, and proper statistical procedures needed to reach valid conclusions about product quality. Sorry to bite your head off here, but based on previous so-called "tests" of Leica binoculars, Allbinos is simply not qualified to do such work in a meaningful way, and I would certainly hate to see Leica's reputation again be placed at the mercy of this perhaps well-meaning, but definitely amateur outfit. I'd be happy to pontificate at greater length elsewhere, but the good news is that there are qualified, independent companies that could do the work to professional standards, — although it would be very costly and require Leica's cooperation in several ways.

Regards,
Ed

Thank you Pileatus.
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 22:43   #112
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,196
Hi Ed,
I checked but my head seem still to be attached as before. I agree that waterproof testing must be done in a professional way and I have seen for example recently how thouroughly that is done for example at Meopta, but I have also seen it at other binocular companies, so I know how it works and with our testing methods we try to do that thouroughly as well. I have not read a claim by Leica that their Noctivids beat all other producers with regard to the waterproof resistance of the Noctivids and Jerry did not give a reference in his post 107, that was the trigger of my post.
Best regards,
Gijs
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 23:33   #113
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 712
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Hi Gijs,

Without a doubt this post belongs on a boring Waterproof Technology thread that covers the empirical methods, sampling requirements, and proper statistical procedures needed to reach valid conclusions about product quality. Sorry to bite your head off here, but based on previous so-called "tests" of Leica binoculars, Allbinos is simply not qualified to do such work in a meaningful way, and I would certainly hate to see Leica's reputation again be placed at the mercy of this perhaps well-meaning, but definitely amateur outfit. I'd be happy to pontificate at greater length elsewhere, but the good news is that there are qualified, independent companies that could do the work to professional standards, — although it would be very costly and require Leica's cooperation in several ways.

Regards,
Ed

Thank you Pileatus.
I agree.

'Evidence based' upon empirical and appropriate scientific methods is indeed a good thing

I far prefer it to amateur technical conjecture masquerading as fact. Take away the 'masquerading' and I have no problem with the 'amateur technical conjecture'.

Conclusions based on technical theory, some knowledge, excellent logic and associated amateur procedures do not in any way equate to conclusions and evidence based upon empirical scientific methodology.

Rathaus

Last edited by Rathaus : Monday 10th July 2017 at 01:04.
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 9th July 2017, 23:39   #114
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 3,494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gijs van Ginkel View Post
Hi Ed,
I checked but my head seem still to be attached as before. I agree that waterproof testing must be done in a professional way and I have seen for example recently how thouroughly that is done for example at Meopta, but I have also seen it at other binocular companies, so I know how it works and with our testing methods we try to do that thouroughly as well. I have not read a claim by Leica that their Noctivids beat all other producers with regard to the waterproof resistance of the Noctivids and Jerry did not give a reference in his post 107, that was the trigger of my post.
Best regards,
Gijs
Gijs: I will try to find it.

Edit to add: The article is from Birdwatching.com. The Porters review from 3-12-17.

They state the Noctovid is waterproof to 5M, 16.5 ft. the Zeiss SF and Swaro. SV, 13-13.4 ft.

If you click on the link above, it will bring you to the site and article.

Jerry

Last edited by NDhunter : Monday 10th July 2017 at 02:06. Reason: Add information.
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 07:55   #115
Torview
Registered User
 
Torview's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Dartmoor.
Posts: 2,009
I thought this forum was for purely "amateur technical conjecture", is`nt discussing our likes, dislikes and impressions why we visit here ?
Torview is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 08:19   #116
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
Without a doubt this post belongs on a boring Waterproof Technology thread that covers the empirical methods, sampling requirements, and proper statistical procedures needed to reach valid conclusions about product quality. Sorry to bite your head off here, but based on previous so-called "tests" of Leica binoculars, Allbinos is simply not qualified to do such work in a meaningful way, and I would certainly hate to see Leica's reputation again be placed at the mercy of this perhaps well-meaning, but definitely amateur outfit. I'd be happy to pontificate at greater length elsewhere, but the good news is that there are qualified, independent companies that could do the work to professional standards, — although it would be very costly and require Leica's cooperation in several ways.

Regards,
Ed
Ed:

I agree with you that any meaningful test should be based on rigorous sampling and careful statistical analysis, but what do you say when a randomly selected sample gets water inside after a simple dip in a bucket of water? I would say that's not a good sign, and I recall that Leica sent Allbinos an explanatory note that ....did no explain at all why that happened.

Peter.

Last edited by PeterPS : Monday 10th July 2017 at 08:52.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 08:29   #117
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
I thought this forum was for purely "amateur technical conjecture", is`nt discussing our likes, dislikes and impressions why we visit here ?
That's why I think Ed's suggestion to have a separate sub-sub-forum about "Optics Technology" is a good one: if you only want to read about "impressions" you just do not go there.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 08:42   #118
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,196
Jerry, post 114,
Thank you for the quotation of the paper in which you read about the waterproofness of the different binoculars. The authors of the paper did not do any research themselves on how well the different binoculars are waterproof, they only quoted the data published by the different producers, so that does not tell us everything and it is not based on any independent investigation. If Albinos had a test Leica binocular that was filled with water upon a simple immersion test, than that is a serious problem for Leica and, Ed, you really do not need sophisticated equipment to draw that conclusion.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 15:40   #119
Martin Smyth
For a minute there I lost myself
 
Martin Smyth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ancient county of Coventry
Posts: 1,245
I'd stop posting when it got far to technical for me, not that i didn't understand, just unnecessary clutter, its how it performs in my/your hands that count, otherwise you wouldn't shell out 2k, and again i reiterate the best i have looked through.
__________________
“The hammer of the gods
Will drive our ships to new lands”
Martin Smyth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 16:29   #120
PeterPS
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Gainesville, Palo Alto, Uppsala
Posts: 490
Quote:
i reiterate the best i have looked through.
Martin:

I agree with you that it is how it performs in your hands that counts, but vague statements such as the one above tell me nothing: I have no idea which other binos you have looked through, nor do I know what's your definition of "the best". IMO a few "technical details" are often useful.

Peter.

PS. I almost forgot: regarding technical details you could simply say that you would dive into them "If you had but the time and we had but the brain".

Last edited by PeterPS : Monday 10th July 2017 at 16:33.
PeterPS is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 16:30   #121
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,196
Martin, post 119,
In the Netherlands the Noctivids cost almost 3000 euros and if you want to read a test report that is not technical at all: look at the WEB-site of House of Outdoor under "verrekijkers"and "verrekijkers testen en vergelijken", and, more important try one yourself in comparison with other binoculars before you decide to spend an impressive amount of money.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 16:57   #122
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torview View Post
I thought this forum was for purely "amateur technical conjecture", is`nt discussing our likes, dislikes and impressions why we visit here ?
John

This is one very important reason why I visit here but I would gently object to your word 'purely' as we surely don't mind serving or retired professionals giving their opinions too.
Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 17:40   #123
elkcub
Registered User
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,043
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterPS View Post
Ed:

I agree with you that any meaningful test should be based on rigorous sampling and careful statistical analysis, but what do you say when a randomly selected sample gets water inside after a simple dip in a bucket of water? I would say that's not a good sign, and I recall that Leica sent Allbinos an explanatory note that ....did no explain at all why that happened.

Peter.
Peter,

That's exactly the problem with drawing population conclusions from a sample of size n=1. Basically, you can't do it.

Holger Merlitz said that Leica did a binopsy on the Allbinos sample and found the valve seals leaked. That's the equivalent of Schrader valves leaking on two different sized auto tires.

Make of it what one will, — a mountain or a mole hill.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Tuesday 11th July 2017 at 06:54.
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 10th July 2017, 18:03   #124
Troubador
Registered User
 
Troubador's Avatar

 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterPS View Post
Ed:

I agree with you that any meaningful test should be based on rigorous sampling and careful statistical analysis, but what do you say when a randomly selected sample gets water inside after a simple dip in a bucket of water? I would say that's not a good sign, and I recall that Leica sent Allbinos an explanatory note that ....did no explain at all why that happened.

Peter.
This example is surely an anomaly, an aberration, considering the number of Leicas out there (thousands) and the number of complaints on Bird Forum about leaky Leicas (none?).

There is certainly not a steady stream of folks complaining about leaks in fact I can't recall any since I started visiting this forum in May 2012.

For sure Leica should feel embarrassed but lets keep things in perpective.

Lee
Troubador is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 10th July 2017, 20:05   #125
Martin Smyth
For a minute there I lost myself
 
Martin Smyth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ancient county of Coventry
Posts: 1,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterPS View Post
Martin:

I agree with you that it is how it performs in your hands that counts, but vague statements such as the one above tell me nothing: I have no idea which other binos you have looked through, nor do I know what's your definition of "the best". IMO a few "technical details" are often useful.

Peter.

PS. I almost forgot: regarding technical details you could simply say that you would dive into them "If you had but the time and we had but the brain".
I'd suggest you look through some of the threads ( on noctivids) or my previous posts, and you'll find they are not so vague!!!!!

post 786 onwards in the {New binoculars from leica} thread
__________________
“The hammer of the gods
Will drive our ships to new lands”

Last edited by Martin Smyth : Monday 10th July 2017 at 20:30.
Martin Smyth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leica 7x42 Ultravid HD+ owners thoughts. Torview Leica 147 Saturday 18th June 2016 21:40
Leica Owners Pileatus Leica 56 Saturday 22nd June 2013 03:32
Leica repairs for secondhand owners in the UK? Boogieshrew Leica 14 Monday 10th December 2012 11:28
Calling all Leica 10x32 owners!! Adam C Leica 13 Saturday 3rd February 2007 17:27
Good news for Leica BN & BA Owners TrackersNZ Leica 19 Thursday 24th November 2005 07:28

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.22347403 seconds with 35 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:07.