New binoculars from leica (5 Viewers)

[GLOBETROTTER]

This afternoon , under sunny conditions I had the occasion to test these in a parkland environment
Personally I have the Zeiss SF in use for 1 1/2 year now and my wife owns the swaro el latest version
In the past I had the Leica ultravid HD
I was attracted to the specs given and discussed on the birdforum so I was quite curious
General impression:very decent bin and lies good in the hand , very stylish!
In the hand : heavier than the other alpha bins was not detected and not considered as a con;the focus drive was smooth but not as smooth as the SF
Focus drive position is a real con : too much positioned towards the eyes and the drive was also too narrow to my feeling,perhaps a question of getting used to?
Optics: very confortable view , with good depth of field , but not the big difference I expected compared to other alphas
Sharpness impression:I was a bit disappointed here , perhaps due present CA , which is more present than with SF and SV,overall contrast impression is very good
Short focus : very smooth and easy to use
FOV : you see the difference with a zeiss SF directly, a pity they couldn't put the value a bit higher here
Conclusion:
Not my first choice of alpha bin for sure, but overall a decent product.
Service after sales still not at level as should, but they "are working on it"
Ps, about 2 weeks ago , we could test a new Nikon Monarch HG.
And to be honest , disregarding price, this has given me a better feeling!
Better FOV, lighter,very pleasant to glass wearers, and same amount of CA

This is a very different experience than those reported by Davidbowman few post above.

Sample variation ? can be.......

I already change 3 times my Leica APO Summicron 90mm Lens for my Leica M Camera.

Last one has less CA than previous one but is sharper, and 2 shiny points inside similar to those found on my 10x50 ultravid plus, coatings error ?

Amazing taking into account that is a 3600 Euros lens with only 5 optical elements inside.

More issues are reported on Leica Forum about other lenses.

What is going on Leica ?

 

[Ontario]

This is a very different experience than those reported by Davidbowman few post above.

Sample variation ? can be.....

You need to test these yourself.

Case in point the recently published findings below illustrate difference s in a individual s perception regarding the resolution of said binocular. " Leupold BX-3 Mohave Pro Guide 10x50 binocular "

The two reports are totally at odds with each other.

Note: OutdoorLife and Field and Stream both used USAF Resolution Test Charts.

OutdoorLife report done by the editor and chief Andrew McKean.

http://www.outdoorlife.com/2016-binocular-test-we-test-17-full-and-mid-size-binos

Leupold BX-3 Mojave Pro Guide HD 10x50

Score: 71.6
Price: $810
Upshot: Disappointing optics
Leupold could be forgiven for casting about to find a binocular that’s as distinctive and as dead-nuts reliable as its Gold Ring riflescopes. Unfortunately, this Pro Guide HD is probably not it. There’s nothing wrong with the Japanese-sourced Mojave, but there’s nothing particularly distinctive about its performance, either. We liked the grippy hand feel of the angular open-bridge design, but the finish is a little slick. We liked the cool Kryptex Typhon camo pattern, but the optics disappointed. We detected flaring in harsh light, and the Mojave’s resolution score was one of the lowest in our test.

Field and Stream report done by University of Rochester professor of optics James Zavislan.

http://www.foxnews.com/great-outdoors/2016/10/24/10-binoculars-ranked-and-rated.html

5. Leupold BX-3 Mohave Pro Guide
Score: 84.9 • $599 (as shown) • leupold.com • Specs: 10x50 • 6.6x5.1" • 29 oz. • 18.8mm eye relief • 4.9mm exit pupil • 283' FOV • 10' close focus

Lowdown: The Mohave scored 10s in resolution and build. In terms of detail in the middle of the image—say, for counting tines or duck ID—no model here did better. A tight FOV and some visual artifacts hurt, as did so-so low-light performance. We loved the ergonomics and the Kryptic finish.

..........

What I find really amusing is OutdoorLife s low light test results a 32 mm compact bin tied the highest scoring full size binocular they had on hand.

Subjective.

 

[SuperDuty]

I was getting all fizzed up thinking I might need to compare the Noctivid to my SF, fortunately you just saved me some time and money with your post. If the CA exceeds the SV I'm definitely out no matter what else they do well, CA was the only reason I didn't keep my SVs.

This afternoon , under sunny conditions I had the occasion to test these in a parkland environment
Personally I have the Zeiss SF in use for 1 1/2 year now and my wife owns the swaro el latest version
In the past I had the Leica ultravid HD
I was attracted to the specs given and discussed on the birdforum so I was quite curious
General impression:very decent bin and lies good in the hand , very stylish!
In the hand : heavier than the other alpha bins was not detected and not considered as a con;the focus drive was smooth but not as smooth as the SF
Focus drive position is a real con : too much positioned towards the eyes and the drive was also too narrow to my feeling,perhaps a question of getting used to?
Optics: very confortable view , with good depth of field , but not the big difference I expected compared to other alphas
Sharpness impression:I was a bit disappointed here , perhaps due present CA , which is more present than with SF and SV,overall contrast impression is very good
Short focus : very smooth and easy to use
FOV : you see the difference with a zeiss SF directly, a pity they couldn't put the value a bit higher here
Conclusion:
Not my first choice of alpha bin for sure, but overall a decent product.
Service after sales still not at level as should, but they "are working on it"
Ps, about 2 weeks ago , we could test a new Nikon Monarch HG.
And to be honest , disregarding price, this has given me a better feeling!
Better FOV, lighter,very pleasant to glass wearers, and same amount of CA

 

[GLOBETROTTER]

I was getting all fizzed up thinking I might need to compare the Noctivid to my SF, fortunately you just saved me some time and money with your post. If the CA exceeds the SV I'm definitely out no matter what else they do well, CA was the only reason I didn't keep my SVs.

Early models have always some issues, if one user report to much CA and other one not must be sample variation,i hope.

I will try to check more than one unit to see what the NV is able to do before make an early judgement.

The NV is longest than the HD so that means less CA for sure, as SF has less CA than the HT due to his longest body and focal length.

A severe Optical restriction is a compact size.

 

[Ontario]

I was getting all fizzed up thinking I might need to compare the Noctivid to my SF, fortunately you just saved me some time and money with your post. If the CA exceeds the SV I'm definitely out no matter what else they do well, CA was the only reason I didn't keep my SVs.

Just another reason to test them yourself "CA in the SV's is a non issue for me" it's the flaring that bothers me most.

Based on David Bowman s and Jan Van Daleen s recent post they are definitely worth a look!

 

[DavidBowman]

This afternoon , under sunny conditions I had the occasion to test these in a parkland environment
Personally I have the Zeiss SF in use for 1 1/2 year now and my wife owns the swaro el latest version
In the past I had the Leica ultravid HD
I was attracted to the specs given and discussed on the birdforum so I was quite curious
General impression:very decent bin and lies good in the hand , very stylish!
In the hand : heavier than the other alpha bins was not detected and not considered as a con;the focus drive was smooth but not as smooth as the SF
Focus drive position is a real con : too much positioned towards the eyes and the drive was also too narrow to my feeling,perhaps a question of getting used to?
Optics: very confortable view , with good depth of field , but not the big difference I expected compared to other alphas
Sharpness impression:I was a bit disappointed here , perhaps due present CA , which is more present than with SF and SV,overall contrast impression is very good
Short focus : very smooth and easy to use
FOV : you see the difference with a zeiss SF directly, a pity they couldn't put the value a bit higher here
Conclusion:
Not my first choice of alpha bin for sure, but overall a decent product.
Service after sales still not at level as should, but they "are working on it"
Ps, about 2 weeks ago , we could test a new Nikon Monarch HG.
And to be honest , disregarding price, this has given me a better feeling!
Better FOV, lighter,very pleasant to glass wearers, and same amount of CA

People's eyes and needs are obviously very different, which is why there's no "right" bino for everyone. Of the motley crew of birders with SFs, SVs and UV + present the other day, all felt that the image quality of the NVs, while not perfect (what is?) was the best on view by a noticeable margin.
Cheers David

 

[SuperDuty]

If they're noticeably better than that group they must one hell of a binocular.

People's eyes and needs are obviously very different, which is why there's no "right" bino for everyone. Of the motley crew of birders with SFs, SVs and UV + present the other day, all felt that the image quality of the NVs, while not perfect (what is?) was the best on view by a noticeable margin.
Cheers David

 

[Ontario]

If they're noticeably better than that group they must one hell of a binocular.

New Noctivid video https://youtu.be/0qAR3CkF5Is

Still waiting for a hands on assessment! They just arrived in North America.

 

[David in NC]

New Noctivid video https://youtu.be/0qAR3CkF5Is

Still waiting for a hands on assessment! They just arrived in North America.

"NoctiWid" :king:

 

[DavidBowman]

"NoctiWid" :king:

There's a brief initial review here:

https://www.all4shooters.com/en/Hunting/articles/Leica-Noctivid-binoculars/

Cheers
David

 

[Canip]

There's a brief initial review here:

https://www.all4shooters.com/en/Hunting/articles/Leica-Noctivid-binoculars/

Cheers
David

My pedantic nature forces me to declare that this is not an extremely well informed review for a hunting website - the Noctivid is NOT Leica's "first pair of open-bridge binoculars": the Leica Geovid HD-R with open bridge design (and Perger prisms) has been on the market for several years now.

 

[DavidBowman]

My pedantic nature forces me to declare that this is not an extremely well informed review for a hunting website - the Noctivid is NOT Leica's "first pair of open-bridge binoculars": the Leica Geovid HD-R with open bridge design (and Perger prisms) has been on the market for several years now.

True enough !

Cheers
David

 

[A2GG]

Two 'owner reviews' for the 10x42 on Allbinos:

http://www.allbinos.com/1782-Leica_Noctivid_10x42-binoculars_specifications.html

 

[NDhunter]

Two 'owner reviews' for the 10x42 on Allbinos:

http://www.allbinos.com/1782-Leica_Noctivid_10x42-binoculars_specifications.html

GG:

Thanks for those reviews, they sound just like many that have been
presented.

A very nice binocular, but those issues of weight, strap placement, leave
me wondering if Leica could have done better in this new design.
I think they could have.

Jerry

 

[A2GG]

GG:

Thanks for those reviews, they sound just like many that have been
presented.

A very nice binocular, but those issues of weight, strap placement, leave
me wondering if Leica could have done better in this new design.
I think they could have.

Jerry

I agree. It seems they focused a lot more on the optics , but sort of ignored the obvious ergonomic stuff. The weight is an issue for me, but I know there are some who wouldn't mind it or even prefer heavy binoculars.

Sounds like they did a great job on the view , build quality and mechanics, but ergonomics not nearly as good as SF. Several reviewers mentioned the balance of the NVid is good, so that helps a bit.

The reports of the focus action seem to be very good too.

Hopefully, future versions of the NVid will address the common complaints.

 

[etudiant]

GG:

Thanks for those reviews, they sound just like many that have been
presented.

A very nice binocular, but those issues of weight, strap placement, leave
me wondering if Leica could have done better in this new design.
I think they could have.

Jerry

Poor strap placement seems to be a bit of a blind spot elsewhere as well, the initial Zeiss Victory line was castigated for it also.
Why this is so is a mystery, the ergonomics of binoculars have been extensively studied and there are many very vocal customers.
Is there a universally popular example of strap placement?

 

[Alexis Powell]

...Is there a universally popular example of strap placement?

I nominate Zeiss 7x42 BGATP/Classic and Zeiss FL models for excellent strap placement. Actually, many bins have good strap placement. I don't like strap lugs that interfere with palm placement when index and middle fingers are used for focus. I also don't like strap lugs on "ventral" surface of bin (e.g. many older Nikon models) because it contributes to poor "hang", especially for folks with narrow IPD.

--AP

 

[Troubador]

I nominate Zeiss 7x42 BGATP/Classic and Zeiss FL models for excellent strap placement. Actually, many bins have good strap placement. I don't like strap lugs that interfere with palm placement when index and middle fingers are used for focus. I also don't like strap lugs on "ventral" surface of bin (e.g. many older Nikon models) because it contributes to poor "hang", especially for folks with narrow IPD.

--AP

The forward placing of the hand on Zeiss SF and to a lesser extent on HT keeps your hand away from the lugs.

Most bins I have tried have actually been OK though.

Lee

 

[Torview]

Hoping to try them again next week, first impression was underwhelming, really, really want to like these as the red dot is by far the most desirable logo IMHO.

But I can`t get past how significantly brighter and immersive my SV was first time around.

 

[Hermann]

Poor strap placement seems to be a bit of a blind spot elsewhere as well, the initial Zeiss Victory line was castigated for it also.

That was more a problem of the type of attachment lug they used at first. Later copies of the Victory 8x40/10x40 BGATP had more traditional lugs that worked OK.

In fact, I sometimes find people get their knickers in a knot about all sorts of details that are really not all that important. I think it goes without saying that you always need a period of time until you get used to a pair of binoculars, and the placing of the lugs is not really something I worry about all that much.

I'm only waiting till the first few people start complaining about the objective covers, another favourite of quite a few people here.

Hermann