Noctivid 8x42 is here (1 Viewer)

[galazie1]

After experiencing 2 glorious Noctivid 8x42s of my friends in the last couple of years, I finally decided to get one for myself. Now having it in my hands i am so glad with the decision. What an amazing pair of binoculars. Exactly same good experience as with the 2 previous units. Bright, sharp, 3D, colour, contrast, overall image beauty. Superior than most other binoculars I have i have seen.

 

[galazie1]

Now I am sure a Noctivid 7x42 will be binoculars nirvana

 

[master5]

Congratulations!

 

[Will K]

Beautiful binocular!

The Noctivid was my second choice for an alpha purchase this year. The body construction and physical quality of these binos are probably the best in the world; they're solid, elegant, and very reliable. They are more understated and classical than an NL or SF, and lack some of their rivals' standout stats, e.g., ergonomics, FOV and weight reduction. The Noctivids, however, are pure class.

I'm sure others would be interested to know your experience as you use and get to know them!

 

[A2GG]

Has anyone compared Ultravid HD+ with Noctivid ? I wonder how much of an improvement there is. I assume more detail with the Noctivid and even stronger contrast.

I've only held one Noctivid (10x42) several years ago. A fellow birder had one and let me try it while I had my Ultravid 7x42 with me.
I was able to feel a slight weight difference and I felt at the time the Uvid ergonomics were slightly better for me, but it was
hard to form any concrete conclusion in that brief time. I recall the Nvid focuser was super smooth and precise. My Uvid had a nice smooth focus action too, but the Nvid seemed a little better.

 

[Will K]

Has anyone compared Ultravid HD+ with Noctivid ? I wonder how much of an improvement there is. I assume more detail with the Noctivid and even stronger contrast.

I've only held one Noctivid (10x42) several years ago. A fellow birder had one and let me try it while I had my Ultravid 7x42 with me.
I was able to feel a slight weight difference and I felt at the time the Uvid ergonomics were slightly better for me, but it was
hard to form any concrete conclusion in that brief time. I recall the Nvid focuser was super smooth and precise. My Uvid had a nice smooth focus action too, but the Nvid seemed a little better.

I've not tried a UV+, as yet, but the NV certainly outperforms the ordinary UV in terms of brightness, contrast and overall clarity, as far as I can recall from brief in-store comparisons a few months ago.

The NV is probably the easiest to hold and use of all the Leica models I have tried so far, but that stuff is very subjective, of course.

 

[Conndomat]

Has anyone compared Ultravid HD+ with Noctivid ? I wonder how much of an improvement there is. I assume more detail with the Noctivid and even stronger contrast.

Just the Ultravid 7x42 with the Noctivid 8x42, it's something like apples and pears.

The Ultravid is fantastic in the hand, I can hold it very well, the thumb notches are intuitively just right, other binoculars sometimes have problems here.
The Noctivid is a bit bulky, the bridge is a bit too narrow and the focuser is a bit too high IMO, but the processing quality is one of the best.

The focuser is a little smoother on the Nocti than on the UV. it can sometimes hack but he seems reliable.
Viewing with glasses is more comfortable in the Nocti, but still good enough for the UV to see the entire field of vision.

The image in the Nocti looks a bit more immersive due to the AFOV, you are deeper in the landscape, the center sharpness is almost digital, in some situations I like the somewhat softer sharpness of the UV. better.
The edge sharpness in the Nocti is also slightly better (5-10%)

I feel the chromatic aberrations are identical for both glasses, the axis remains free, the first subtle colors appear slightly outside.

I find the UV of the color rendering interesting. looks a bit fresher that Nocti has the old Leica style, very saturated in the red, brown, yellow range, the UV actually seems a bit neutral, a mixture of SF and EL, very close to the SLC.

The contrast seems to be a touch better in the Nocti, the stray light suppression too, against the low sun there are small flares, but there are lighter in diffuse lighting conditions that are sometimes not explainable.

I wouldn't say that the Nocti is better, it's good in other ways, the UV has its advantages, the Nocti too, both are very good binoculars that can make the owner happy.

Andreas

 

[Elpha8888]

Excellent purchase, I'm considering a 10x42 Noctivid. Has anyone enjoyed using this binocular under the stars as well?

 

[MiddleRiver]

And i'm on the fence between NV10x and 10x32SF...
Leica build/quality or FOV?
Decisions....

 

[Will K]

And i'm on the fence between NV10x and 10x32SF...
Leica build/quality or FOV?
Decisions....

An NL 10x32 would provide the best of both worlds, I would imagine. Better build quality and FOV than the SF, too, from what I've seen.

Might that be an option? (I guess not, if you already have one )

 

[galazie1]

I have compared the Noctivid 8x42 vs the SF 8x42 before the purchase. The SF image maybe slightly better technically (sharpness, brightness), but there is more soul in the Noctivid image. To me the decision to choose the Noc was obvious. My friend also already sold the SF and kept the Noc since then

 

[Paultricounty]

And i'm on the fence between NV10x and 10x32SF...
Leica build/quality or FOV?
Decisions....

Those are two different animals. Leica build/image or FOV (SF, NL) you’ll never be satisfied with one because they are so different in multiple ways. It’s not just build or FOV, it’s 42 and 32, it’s modern design ergos and traditional style/feel. Either Leica will need to come up with a wide FOV 32 or you’ll need to buy them both. 🙏🏼

Happy holidays

Paul

 

[Trinovid]

I've not tried a UV+, as yet, but the NV certainly outperforms the ordinary UV in terms of brightness, contrast and overall clarity, as far as I can recall from brief in-store comparisons a few months ago.

With most feedback on the Ultravid HD vs HD+ leaning towards very, very close it sounds like there may be a noticeable difference then from the HD+ to the Noctivid.

 

[Paultricounty]

I think Andreas covered a lot of ground here, I’ll throw in my two cents for what it’s worth.

I’ll dispense first on build quality. My impressions are that Leica gets better and better and Zeiss goes the other way (sorry Zeiss guys). As with the UVHD’s the Nocs feel a little more smooth and elegant, less grippy than UVHD ( that might be a con for some) , fit and finish is almost perfection. The focusers just get better and better with Leica with each upgrade and the Nocs are as good as it gets. The design of the double hinge is not the best, especially if you have a small IPD. There are some that say the focuser position could’ve been better, but if you never picked up a SF or NL then this probably wouldn’t be mentioned except for a few with very small hands. The lesser than perfect focuser position can be said for about a third of all binoculars on the market. Enough said there.

I had the 8x42 UVHD+ and Nocs at the same time and compared them extensively, I sold the UVHD after a few weeks. I did keep other UVHD’s in different magnifications and sizes, so it wasn’t that i didn’t like the UVHD 8x42. It’s just that if you have the Nocs you may never pick up the UVHD’s , at least that was my feelings when I had them both. The image is slightly brighter, sharper, better resolution and has a substantially wider sweet spot that the UVHD’s. The FOV is closer to being flat, but not EL flat, even with that flatter field it doesn’t lose it’s nice immersive feel, not quite as good here as the UVHD , which has that curved field. Panning is excellent and I didn’t notice any difference from the two in that area, glare control is also excellent. Because the UVHD has a small FOV for an 8x and with the curved field the FOV felt much smaller to me, that was another reason I didnt keep it. I agree with Andreas that the Nocs are not quite as saturated in color as the UVHD. With the flatter field and less color saturation they have a different image feel. They’re both very nice, but they are like two completely different binoculars, but certainly still Leica like 😄. When Leica releases their 32’s in 8x and 7x, I’ll be all over those. I’m wondering how they’ll fix the double bridge on 32’s.

Happy holidays

Paul

 

[A2GG]

I agree with Andreas that the Nocs are not quite as saturated in color as the UVHD. With the flatter field and less color saturation they have a different image feel.

I thought Andreas said the opposite; the Ultravid is more neutral while the Noctivid has more saturated colors.

 

[Paultricounty]

I thought Andreas said the opposite; the Ultravid is more neutral while the Noctivid has more saturated colors.

Yeah I see that , I did miss read it. I feel all the ultravids lean more to a Nikon color saturation, EDG. My eyes are feeling a more neutral color leaning in the Nocs ,somewhere between the ultravids and the NLs.

I found that to be true with the whole ultravid line and the 8x and 10x Nocs I’ve compared.

 

[A2GG]

Yeah I see that , I did miss read it. I feel all the ultravids lean more to a Nikon color saturation, EDG. My eyes are feeling a more neutral color leaning in the Nocs ,somewhere between the ultravids and the NLs.

I found that to be true with the whole ultravid line and the 8x and 10x Nocs I’ve compared.

thanks. I hope Leica announces 8/10x32 Nvids early next year.

 

[Conndomat]

I thought Andreas said the opposite; the Ultravid is more neutral while the Noctivid has more saturated colors.

Hello Beth,

right, I find the Noc 8x42 of the color saturation more intense than the UV. 7x42.

The perception of the colors is of course always a very subjective matter, Paul also compares the 8x42 UV with the Nocs and here there is some agreement with some reviewers.

Neue Domain bei der webgo GmbH

"Colour reproduction
is something to marvel at, in fact these are the nicest colours I have seen in a binocular. Fitting with the high macro- and microcontrast we have together with the Nikon EDG the most saturated colours of all six 8x tested, neutral with a little touch of warmth, chrystal clear, vibrant. These "plasma coatings" seem to work extraordinary well."

I don't know the Leica 8x42 UV., but I've read a few times that it's supposed to have the most saturated colors in the UV. line, the UV. 7x42, on the other hand, is supposed to be a little more neutral.

A very good difference in color range between the UV. 7x42 and the Noc. 8x42, for example, can be seen very well in green spectra, while the color in the UV 7x42 looks very bright and neutral, the Noc. the color is a bit turquoise-blue, the Zeiss SF 8x42 intensifies the green tone again, which sometimes oversizes it.
The human eye is very sensitive to green tones.

But everything remains very subjective and the statements made above do not claim to be universally valid, my eyes are also different in the perception of colors, therefore a description can only be an approximation and never a substitute for seeing with your own eyes.

And...happy Chrismas all...

Andreas

 

[Paultricounty]

Hello Beth,

right, I find the Noc 8x42 of the color saturation more intense than the UV. 7x42.

The perception of the colors is of course always a very subjective matter, Paul also compares the 8x42 UV with the Nocs and here there is some agreement with some reviewers.

Neue Domain bei der webgo GmbH

"Colour reproduction
is something to marvel at, in fact these are the nicest colours I have seen in a binocular. Fitting with the high macro- and microcontrast we have together with the Nikon EDG the most saturated colours of all six 8x tested, neutral with a little touch of warmth, chrystal clear, vibrant. These "plasma coatings" seem to work extraordinary well."

I don't know the Leica 8x42 UV., but I've read a few times that it's supposed to have the most saturated colors in the UV. line, the UV. 7x42, on the other hand, is supposed to be a little more neutral.

A very good difference in color range between the UV. 7x42 and the Noc. 8x42, for example, can be seen very well in green spectra, while the color in the UV 7x42 looks very bright and neutral, the Noc. the color is a bit turquoise-blue, the Zeiss SF 8x42 intensifies the green tone again, which sometimes oversizes it.
The human eye is very sensitive to green tones.

But everything remains very subjective and the statements made above do not claim to be universally valid, my eyes are also different in the perception of colors, therefore a description can only be an approximation and never a substitute for seeing with your own eyes.

And...happy Chrismas all...

Andreas

That is one review on the Nocs that I disagreed with quite a bit, except on build quality, somewhat on the double bridge design and his opinion on colour neutrality. I had five people on three occasions with the 8x42 Nocs, one 8x42 UVHD+ and one non plus UV as well as the SF. Nobody had the opinion the Noctivid was much less immersive that the UV’s, which was a surprise to me. Everybody thought they were brighter, had better resolution and I had no issues with veiling glare. I’ve never heard anybody say that the Nocs were to sharp.

I’m certainly no expert like Tobias. I didn’t read through the whole review again but I don’t believe he did a side-by-side comparison. I have a lot of these Leica’s , a collection of the Swaros and tested all the SF’s , and currently own the SF 8x32 ( my favorite of the SF line). I find these Noctivids have a stunning and gorgeous image quality that all the others don’t quite match. Of course all of this is subjective and others may just find that quality in other top premium options. For me it’s not always about which one is the brightest or which one has the widest FOV, it’s more about the pleasure that the image brings and how easy it is on my eyes after a long day of observing. The Nocs and the EDG’s are the only two binoculars that I can spend hours observing without eye fatigue. Although I also enjoy my EL’s and NL’s, but after an hour or two my eyes are tapping out.

Happy holidays

Paul

 

[galazie1]

.