• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leica Noctivid 8x42 design flaws and review - owners please check (1 Viewer)

Yes you are right: an unforgiveable oversight. We definitely miss the hill sheep of Scotland just now. We can see sheep about 3 km away but these are English sheep, confined to a comfortable easy-life field, that don't roam hills and coasts like the ones in Scotland and which exhibit a wide range of interesting behaviour.

Lee

I love sheep, and they love me, see attached (I had no food, nor did I give them any reason to believe that I had ;) )
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5137.jpg
    IMG_5137.jpg
    342.6 KB · Views: 96
Canip,

Those spikes you mention, what do they look like? How can I recognize them?

Renze

Artefacts in the form of light beams forming a cross-like impression on bright light sources.
Spikes are the result of diffraction at the roof edge; all roof prisms show this effect, some quite distinctly, some only minimally. The more precise the cutting / grinding of the roof edge, the less the effect will be visible.

See Holger Merlitz, Handferngläser, 2nd ed., page 61.

Canip
 
QUOTE: Tobias Mennie
the Zeiss SF will always remain an abomination to some users due to the optical construction.

This user has been successfully and enjoyably using SFs for nature observation for 5 years from the rugged islands off the west of Scotland through England's East Anglia, the French Vercors, Languedoc and the Eastern Pyrenees. Eagles, Otters, Hen Harriers, Seals, Alpine Swifts, Bee-eaters, Lesser Kestrels.....etc. Lovely optics, great handling.

Lee[/QUOTE]

Here's the quote from Tobias that caused me to re-think his 'authority and expertise' on optics:

The SF birdwatching thing is a bad joke. Why should a birdwatching bin have a strong green cast to increase contrast except to save Zeiss precision in manufacturing?

Granted ,Tobias subsequently got his hands on another SF and declared it to be free of a green cast. More recently the 'Dark EDG' was given a clean bill of health from Tobias, and he even admitted that it may not have been 'dark' in the first place.

For all the 'green cast' claims, no one has ever produced one that is 'green' and one that isn't, side by side. Sample variation? Improved coatings? Maybe, but show me 2 that exhibit this extraordinary difference in color cast.

I've had an 8x42 SF for over 2 years myself, and no complaints.

In this current thread, a basic mechanical component has suddenly been 'discovered' lurking inside a binocular, that may or may not contribute to glare. Show some actual results that make evident that it contributes to glare or loss of contrast. Until then, it sounds like fear mongering and subjective bias.

I do acknowledge the user experience vs. the engineer or designer, as I've observed several instances of the disparity between intent and use in film production. Its not unreasonable to point something out, but to criticize the manufacturer with no evidence of a negative impact for the user is going down the same road as before. Were there ever verifiable issues with the SF and the EDG that Tobias wrote about? Is there actually a problem with the Noctivid?

I've been using a 10x42 Noctivid for a year and a half, and take great pleasure in the view.

With regard to glare, my experience is that ALL of my binoculars exhibit some degree of this when exposed to enough bright light, while looking towards shadows. Just holding one's hands above the objectives under those conditions will show the difference. Some just do it more than others.

-Bill
 
Last edited:
QUOTE: Tobias Mennie
the Zeiss SF will always remain an abomination to some users due to the optical construction.

This user has been successfully and enjoyably using SFs for nature observation for 5 years from the rugged islands off the west of Scotland through England's East Anglia, the French Vercors, Languedoc and the Eastern Pyrenees. Eagles, Otters, Hen Harriers, Seals, Alpine Swifts, Bee-eaters, Lesser Kestrels.....etc. Lovely optics, great handling.

Lee[/QUOTE]

I can add to this that my SF 10x42 is an early grey model and the 8x42 is an early black model, so as samples they are drawn from cohorts quite widely separated in time.

Although this was only a brief encounter I could also mention trying out Noctivid at BirdFair with bright sunlight glancing off the surface of the lake straight towards me without generating noticeable glare.

Lee
 
Originally Posted by Tobias Mennle View Post
The SF birdwatching thing is a bad joke. Why should a birdwatching bin have a strong green cast to increase contrast except to save Zeiss precision in manufacturing?
Granted ,Tobias subsequently got his hands on another SF and declared it to be free of a green cast. And even more recently the 'Dark EDG' was given a clean bill of health from Tobias, and he even admitted that it may not have been 'dark' in the first place.

With regard to color, several properties can be physically measured and standardized without observer bias by computing the (1) luminosity, (2) dominant wavelength and (3) excitation purity from transmission analysis data. These correspond with psychological properties of brightness, hue, and saturation and conform with the CIE Color Specification System. Based on these measurements, standard color chips could be synthesized to visually compare different binoculars, or measurements from several specimens to evaluate sample variation.

These calculations are nicely summarized in an industry paper attached below, but they are by no means new to the literature. From the paper one can link to the Color Vision Research Laboratory data in the UK.

Ed
 

Attachments

  • Erdogon How to Calculate Luminosity.pdf
    895.7 KB · Views: 30
Last edited:
If someone gave me a Noct I would adopt it , but it wouldn’t be my purchase choice :)

Actually I tried one today, it didn’t whisper ‘buy me, I will be your precious’!

I think one should get an alpha because of its qualities, not the lack of faults. Every time I stow away my Pocket, I hear it say ‘I did my job and I did it well, and I’ll be right here again when you need me’.



Edmund
 
Last edited:
Edmund,

I feel the same way about the SF, different strokes for different folks.

Andy W.

Yes. We wouldn’t want a single type of music of painting etc!
To each his choice of binoculars.
However concerning the OP I am surprised there isn’t a workshop somewhere that will open an instrument and blacken a screw.

Edmund
 
It should be possible to test whether that shiny brass installation is of any harm: Under a low light situation, use an LED to illuminate that brass part and check whether that spoils the overall contrast of the image. Then move that LED to another angle so that its light does not fall directly onto the brass; check again. The loss of contrast may possibly arise somewhere else, e.g. from a poorly sharpened roof edge or a not completely finished polishing of the objective lenses.

Cheers,
Holger

Motivated by Holger's alternative suggestions to explain Tobias' complaint of flare and glare, I once again took a dive into the Noctivid's internals and I found this (see my picture - an original work of art). Under certain conditions with strong sun light entering the binocular in a specific angle, these rainbows can be found at the 5 and 7 o'çlock position in the viewing circle. And also but with more effort at 11 and 1 o'çlock.
This may look alarming, especially regarding my beautiful drawing, but note that these phenomena can only be seen when one looks from the eyelens into the binocular from a rather awkward, completely unusual angle. When looking through the binocular, as we all are used to do by nature, these rainbows don't show up, they're nicely out of sight.
I then turned the binoculars upside down and searched for the colors again. Nope. When the Noctivid is used upside down there are no rainbows to be seen.
Then I tried to ascertain if I could detect changes in flare and glare between the usual and upside down type of use. My verdict is: no. I don't see any differences in flare, glare or contrast. Which leads me to the conclusion that the 'rainbows' do not have an effect on the Noctivid's optical performance.

Renze
 

Attachments

  • Noctivid reflection.JPG
    Noctivid reflection.JPG
    58.1 KB · Views: 86
Last edited:
Nicely done, Renze.

One might imagine that some rigor would have been put into testing the product before it was introduced, not that there haven't been oversights in some early production models that we're all aware of.

The Noctivid has been on the market for almost 4 years, before this issue was raised, and by someone who has effectively walked back earlier claims, concerns, and criticisms about various models.

-Bill
 
Indeed Bill, I also checked for these phenomena in Leica's Ultravids and yes, I found them there too. All Ultravids, from the first generation BL and BR's 'till the HD+ types, show these rainbows. However they are at different spots, on the 10 and 2 o'çlock and the 4 and 8 positions. Comparing these locations between Noctivid and Ultravid I'd say that if they would have had negative effects, the effects would have been more prominent, or at least easier observed in the Ultravids. But have there ever been complaints about these design traits, here or elsewhere? Not to my knowledge.
Lastly, what can be said about the nature of the rainbow-like phenomena? I think that they don't resemble what one would expect from reflections of light coming from shiny objects like the brass bolt hinted at by Tobias. On the contrary, the rainbows look very much like reflections from prisms or lens rims, probably the latter.

Renze
 
I’m sure if one looks for a fault one can make one; more interesting is whether it really appears under real world usage. Are people sensing flare and looking for the cause, or looking for engineering details that aren’t perfect?

Edmund
 
Motivated by Holger's alternative suggestions to explain Tobias' complaint of flare and glare, I once again took a dive into the Noctivid's internals and I found this (see my picture - an original work of art). Under certain conditions with strong sun light entering the binocular in a specific angle, these rainbows can be found at the 5 and 7 o'çlock position in the viewing circle. And also but with more effort at 11 and 1 o'çlock.
This may look alarming, especially regarding my beautiful drawing, but note that these phenomena can only be seen when one looks from the eyelens into the binocular from a rather awkward, completely unusual angle. When looking through the binocular, as we all are used to do by nature, these rainbows don't show up, they're nicely out of sight.
I then turned the binoculars upside down and searched for the colors again. Nope. When the Noctivid is used upside down there are no rainbows to be seen.
Then I tried to ascertain if I could detect changes in flare and glare between the usual and upside down type of use. My verdict is: no. I don't see any differences in flare, glare or contrast. Which leads me to the conclusion that the 'rainbows' do not have an effect on the Noctivid's optical performance.

Renze

Hi Renze,

Now that you've made the world aware of it through your artwork, there will always be a tendency to use an awkward view to see what's really going on in there. That's guaranteed.

BTW, did you catch a glimpse of any line riders or hear faint refrains of Beethoven's Fifth? I'm sure you will. Tell me if I'm wrong.

Regards,
Ed
 
Last edited:
Tobias,

Let me be brutal: I don't think you have a screw problem, that is a contrived explanation, but if you feel you have veiling glare, then you quite possibly really have veiling glare. People who use optics often end up knowing what they want, just like people who play musical instruments often end up knowing whether their flute or piano is in tune.

Whether veiling glare is an issue with a batch of Nocts or a fault of your glass only is a different question which is irrelevant here. Send your instrument back to have it checked out. Or if you really want to know, send your instrument to one of the experts on this forum who have a measuring setup and can test for flare and transmission objectively.

While trying out the Noct the first time, I was dazzled while watching corvids against a white winter sky; I still remember the sensation because it was unexpected and unpleasant.Two days ago I had a very slight impression of light intrusion, whitening, whatever, when comparing the Noct to the Retrovid. The Retrovid seemed somehow to have a touch more contrast, while the Noct had a more full and 3D image. But my eyes are 64 years old and probably full of cataracts, and it's perfectly feasible that this is not a fault of the binocular but a relative of the same perception which I have when walking straight into the sunset. In any case the Noct I tried was hugely superior to my own Victory Pocket :)

Sometimes I think it's better to buy a decent priced midrange object in order to be continually surprised by what it can do for you, rather than some alpha object that surprises you with its faults ...

On a sidenote I'm writing this on a computer I fixed, and although i could get a new one, every minute I squeeze out of this one now feels like an achievement :)

Edmund


I have owned the Noctivid over a year now in which I have mostly used the Nikon EDG instead. The name seems program - the Noctivid is great in low or subdued light, but probably much more due to a strongly boosted contrast by skewing the transmission curve than due to more transmissive glass. Similar to Zeiss and Swarovski SLC.

But the Nocti seems to hate strong light flowing through it. I got frustrated by the level of veiling glare that makes the images dull and flat. It is an often very weak glare, just hardly noticeable unless you play around trying to shield the objectives, but it destroys contrast. The extreme sharpness of the glass counteracts this a bit.

Finally I used a torch and have a closer look through the objectives - see attached image. Should have done that on day one and will do on day one with all new purchases.

An unblackened, unbaffled, very reflective brass knob at the base of the focuser axis. It can easily be hit by sunlight and will scatter part of it back into the image path.

This is either a serious design flaw, or Leica just forgot a baffle when assembling my glass - could other Noctivid owners check on their samples, please, if there is a baffle? The Ultravid 8x32 is completely baffled.

I assume it is a design flaw though because I could provoke heavy flare in the 10x42 I had.

Sic transit gloria mundi.

Such stuff has happened before though, for example in the 8K APO Summicron 50/2, where lens rims were not been blackened etc.

The contrast boost due to skewed transmission is much more aggressive than in the Ultravids. I don't buy Leica´s statement of a whiter image at all but I'm happy to be taught otherwise after the contrast issue is solved. Colours are a tad on the yellow green side but without proper global contrast it is a useless discussion anyway. As always, it shows in the shadows and midtones, not in the highlights. Black dogs and male blackbirds look on the brownish side of things when they are a cold black seen with the Nikon EDG.

Ergonomy is a huge step back from the Ultravids.

The Nikon EDG, although it does have many annoying flaws, is my reference glass for global contrast and colour accuracy, employing no artificial contrast boost whatsoever.

Here is my (hopefully preliminary) review. The Noctivid has great potential but with this issue it is a shame for Leica.

http://www.greatestbinoculars.com/allpages/reviews/leica/noctivid8x42/noctivid8x42.html
 
Last edited:
Motivated by Holger's alternative suggestions to explain Tobias' complaint of flare and glare, I once again took a dive into the Noctivid's internals and I found this (see my picture - an original work of art). Under certain conditions with strong sun light entering the binocular in a specific angle, these rainbows can be found at the 5 and 7 o'çlock position in the viewing circle. And also but with more effort at 11 and 1 o'çlock.
This may look alarming, especially regarding my beautiful drawing, but note that these phenomena can only be seen when one looks from the eyelens into the binocular from a rather awkward, completely unusual angle. When looking through the binocular, as we all are used to do by nature, these rainbows don't show up, they're nicely out of sight.
I then turned the binoculars upside down and searched for the colors again. Nope. When the Noctivid is used upside down there are no rainbows to be seen.
Then I tried to ascertain if I could detect changes in flare and glare between the usual and upside down type of use. My verdict is: no. I don't see any differences in flare, glare or contrast. Which leads me to the conclusion that the 'rainbows' do not have an effect on the Noctivid's optical performance.

Renze

Renze:

I like your photo but I do not see anything about optics there.

It look more like the view from above of a lady in a swim suit. ;)

Jerry
 
Hi Renze,

Now that you've made the world aware of it through your artwork, there will always be a tendency to use an awkward view to see what's really going on in there. That's guaranteed.

BTW, did you catch a glimpse of any line riders or hear faint refrains of Beethoven's Fifth? I'm sure you will. Tell me if I'm wrong.

Regards,
Ed

Ed,

Thank you. Yes indeed, I will never be able to see my Leica's in the light of old. But note the rewards: I see birds in the flesh, accompanied by the complete soundtrack of Finian's Rainbow. Now, how about you, Swarovskian?

Renze
 
Tobias,

Let me be brutal: I don't think you have a screw problem, that is a contrived explanation, but if you feel you have veiling glare, then you quite possibly really have veiling glare. People who use optics often end up knowing what they want, just like people who play musical instruments often end up knowing whether their flute or piano is in tune.

Whether veiling glare is an issue with a batch of Nocts or a fault of your glass only is a different question which is irrelevant here. Send your instrument back to have it checked out. Or if you really want to know, send your instrument to one of the experts on this forum who have a measuring setup and can test for flare and transmission objectively.

While trying out the Noct the first time, I was dazzled while watching corvids against a white winter sky; I still remember the sensation because it was unexpected and unpleasant.Two days ago I had a very slight impression of light intrusion, whitening, whatever, when comparing the Noct to the Retrovid. The Retrovid seemed somehow to have a touch more contrast, while the Noct had a more full and 3D image. But my eyes are 64 years old and probably full of cataracts, and it's perfectly feasible that this is not a fault of the binocular but a relative of the same perception which I have when walking straight into the sunset. In any case the Noct I tried was hugely superior to my own Victory Pocket :)

Sometimes I think it's better to buy a decent priced midrange object in order to be continually surprised by what it can do for you, rather than some alpha object that surprises you with its faults ...

On a sidenote I'm writing this on a computer I fixed, and although i could get a new one, every minute I squeeze out of this one now feels like an achievement :)

Edmund

Very, very nice. There's a lot of wisdom here. A very serious problem in these quarters is that in binocular evaluation we never specify our instruments, i.e. our eyes. We just do if our eyes are of superb, undisputable, objective quality. Possibly because we are completely unable to ascertain the quality of our eye sight. For instance, I had cataract surgery and it's a miracle. But it also has its drawbacks. There's a fixed lens in there, right? What does it to my eye sight? What happens when I suddenly change focus, from nearby to infinity? What happens when I put a binocular in front of the eyes? Well, I can tell you it instigates glare, very temporarily and with no serious consequence, but it does. It makes A-B comparisons between binoculars difficult because my eyes have to get used to the changes in optical design (my explanation). It slows things down a bit.

Renze
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top