Henry, always a pleasure for you to share your expertise. My lack of optic knowledge is only surpassed by inept attempt in using a page to express a paragraph that at best is a ballpark figure.
In the sub-alpha bins it seems they are in one camp or another being "all" AMD or PC more or less. I oft wonder why not more of middle of the road. Then again if only a relatively small percentage are adversely affected by Globe effect why bother?
I noticed in the linked review the Noctivid was scored a mite different in the Distortion/Globe effect [4.5/4.5] than the Trinovid [4/5]. By contrast the Swarovski EL 10X42 came out 5-/3. [not sure if the '-' was a typo] Grade rating 1=bad, 2=moderate, 3=fair, 4-good, 5=excellent.
I realize you were not the author of review, but do you feel that distortion in the grade is a reference to PC? [taking into account Google translation Dutch/English] The EL is known to induce globe effect in some, so in Globe effect it is only rated as fair, in what I conclude, to be control of Globe Effect then excellent, again in what I conclude, in PC. That seems to be the explanation of the grading.
Which brings me back to the Noctivid rating that presume to imply half a grade better than the Trinovid in PC control whilst being half a grade worse in globe effect control.
In taking the long way around it appears the alpha Leica shows less pincushion w/flatter field compared to the Trinovid. Which perhaps is the view I seek though costing south of a grand.
Have I come full circle in answering me own inquiry in that I need to pay more for the view I want?
ETA:
http://www.holgermerlitz.de/globe/distortion.html
I went back for a refresher course. Perhaps I'll quit referring only to PC as distortion. It would seem I prefer light barrel distortion. That would explain me disdain for very the heavier doses of pincushion.
Apologies for drifting off the review.