Hi Rathaus, How do compare the eye relief and ease of eye placement when using EII vs the new 8X30 Habicht? I don't wear glasses and find the EII very easy to look through. Is the Habicht easy to use as well with respect to eye placement? Yesterday I compared the 8X30 EII with UV HD 10X42 at a lake looking at Beavers and Roseate Spoonbills till dark and it was very hard to find a few areas where the UV HD was better. The glorious 3D Depth of EII more than compensated for the few things Leica was better at. EII's only deficiency I noticed was veiling glare.
Good question....I don't wear glasses either. You may notice that I put the big eye cups on the little Habicht. With these fitted, there wasn't a lot in it. I'd have to go back and check it critically. Put it this way....It didn't enter my mind at the time either way...except the Habicht eye cups were better. Eye fatigue was another matter.
I know I need to get down my comparative Habicht impressions too.
As a quick summary - from my two hours of viewing so far..on that day. These are Just my own views and opinions. Everyone will vary.
Habicht 8x30 vs Nikon EII
The Habicht has significantly better contrast (aircraft tails and bird wing tips....everything)
The Nikon looks washed out slightly dull in direct comparison. The Nikon is good in isolation, but the Habicht is just in another class here.
Habicht is sharper on axis, has higher resolution/contrast (individual razor wire definition and individual blade sweep and minute shading from 30 yards)
Even The yellow tint 25yr old habichts were at least as good as the new black nikons here.
Habicht is brighter. It just is. And it's Not always a good thing. Sometimes I need sunnies for this bino.
Habicht sweetspot is at least as large, despite the larger fov of the Nikon, which falls off pretty fast 2/3 out.
Nikon has a better depth of field up to 50 metres.
The Nikon may have a deeper 3D image up close....it's very very good...yet landing aircraft clearly popped more realistically through the habichts. Probably the resolution. The 3D scaling may also change depending on distance. Heaps of plane landings in differing light conditions, and the Habich simply provides a higher definition and more startling image every time.
No CA on the day in either to my eyes.
Ease of view...immediate ease of view is similar but I'd give it to the Nikon with its big fov. After a minute or so, there's nothing between them in the ease of view to me. After half an hour or more, the Habicht was slightly more relaxing to my eyes, and more so the longer I viewed...less fatigue, as though it was better collimated...though the Nikon appeared to have perfect collimation.
Build quality...I see nothing obviously wrong with the build of the Nikon externally, but everybody cautions about its sealing and fragility. No problem here with the Habicht which is sealed and demonstrated tough through its long history. The fact that my 25year old habichts are performing perfectly is testimony to their build. I have 50-60 yr old habichts which are untouched and function perfectly. No grit or moisture or mould in there. The 35yr warranty is good too.
Value
Tough one this....I think here for me the Nikon cost 3/5 of a Habicht. Both great value without paying silly money. But a sealed and tough bino with that monster warranty and factory backing takes the cake.
Let's get real...the Nikon is far more bin than anyone needs. Within ten years my visual acuity may no longer see the advantages of the Habicht...
Yet, this is a place for optical nerds and geeks who enjoy the delights of splitting optical hairs. At this point for me, the Habicht is clearly the better Bino. The Nikon has no glaring weakness...though probably for me, the stunning contrast and associated razor like resolution of the Habicht is where it clearly pulls ahead of the Nikon.
Other viewing sessions may reveal different outcomes, I'm cognisant of that.
Rathaus