• 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.

What if...... (1 Viewer)

Jan, I agree with you, the Noctovid does not make the grade in comparing to the Zeiss and Swarovski models.

I found a Noctovid and tried it in a store setting, it is not a great compromise in the open frame.

If looking Leica, the Ultravid is a better choice, with its classic character and nice optics.

Jerry
 
Probably futile to point out that not everyone prefers the nausea inducing SV or the just too big SF to the Noctivid....

Jan, just as a matter of interest, what is your price on an 8x42 NV? I can agree that the ergonomics are not perfect, but for me (and I’m sure a good many others) the view is the best of the big three.
 
I have the SV 8.5X42 and the Noctivid, I used to own the SF. I prefer the views of the Noctivid, but I also do like the extra 0.5X on the SV.
I am not a birder by definition more of a nature observer and what I have observed is that (some) Birders are obsessed by the weight of a glass to the nearest gram, others who use the glass (the other sport we are not allowed to talk about and who actually provide more $$ for the environment)) are not, and they actually trudge through the wilderness carrying more gear than a birder.

IMO the SF is not built to the standards of the FL, nice FOV but that is it for me. I still have and use a few of the FL models, great glass.

My favorite glass is still the EDG in both the 8 and 10X42.

Additionally when I buy a glass, I am not shopping for a warranty, I will pay for repairs myself, like I pay for my car when it needs repair, or anything on my residence which I cannot fix myself. I am not looking for a free lunch.

The design of glass many of the large companies today are driven by the Birding business and for the elderly population so I can understand the need for lighter weight and more eye relief for eyeglass clients, but not everyone needs to have a maximum of 600 grams of weight to go on a 2 hour walk in the woods.

Andy W.
 
Last edited:
Mike F said:
Probably futile to point out that not everyone prefers the nausea inducing SV or the just too big SF to the Noctivid....

Jan, just as a matter of interest, what is your price on an 8x42 NV? I can agree that the ergonomics are not perfect, but for me (and I’m sure a good many others) the view is the best of the big three.
Click to expand...

AMEN to all the above!
 
Mike F said:
Probably futile to point out that not everyone prefers the nausea inducing SV or the just too big SF to the Noctivid....
Click to expand...
I'm curious why you like the 2011-15 Trinovid 42 (as I do) if you so dislike the RB effect in SVs. I'm not very sensitive to RB myself, but do find that the Trinovid has a somewhat similar effect also, due to less pincushioning. Or perhaps it's more evident in my 10x than your 8x. In any case I assume it's one reason why this model was abandoned.

dries1 said:
The design of glass many of the large companies today are driven by the Birding business and for the elderly population so I can understand the need for lighter weight and more eye relief for eyeglass clients, but not everyone needs to have a maximum of 600 grams of weight to go on a 2 hour walk in the woods.
Click to expand...
As someone for whom birding is "only" part of general appreciation of nature, I have to agree with you here. I wish that 42mm binos in particular didn't suffer so many compromises in performance in order to be quite so lightweight and compact.
 
tenex said:
I'm curious why you like the 2011-15 Trinovid 42 (as I do) if you so dislike the RB effect in SVs. I'm not very sensitive to RB myself, but do find that the Trinovid has a somewhat similar effect also, due to less pincushioning. Or perhaps it's more evident in my 10x than your 8x. In any case I assume it's one reason why this model was abandoned.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I've never noticed any RB in my 8X42 2012-15 Trinovids, but it was immediately obvious to me when I tried some SV 8.5X42's. I've always assumed the reason why 2012-15 Trinovid was discontinued after such a short time was that it was too damned inconvenient to have to write '2012-15 Trinovid' every time (OK, only joking! 3:)), I mean, too close in performance to the significantly more expensive Ultravid, but to expensive to compete with mid-priced bins from other manufacturers.
 
Four years is not a particularly "short" time, and the Trinovid's positioning vs the UVs (and others) was obviously known in advance. And it was just 42s, not a whole line. That's why I suspect a market test of its optics, with a somewhat different character from previous Leicas. And apparently that was deemed a failure.
 
What are you all smoking? Jan, a very supportive dealer, got screwed by Leica. Doesn't mean their products are awful. He just chose to end his relationship with them. That's a divorce, not a condemnation of their product. Yes, Leica is over-priced, and, yes, they are not pursuing the cutting edge of performance in binocularland... Still, they have made, and continue to make, some fine products.

This eye relief rant... Non-eyeglass wearers have over a centuries worth of binoculars to collect and use. The fact that manufacturers are actually making an amazing optical device accessible to more people is a good thing. And you don't have to be elderly to wear glasses. I've had to wear them since I was 5 years old.

Back to hair splitting, gossip, and whining...

-B.
 
Last edited:
tenex said:
As someone for whom birding is "only" part of general appreciation of nature, I have to agree with you here. I wish that 42mm binos in particular didn't suffer so many compromises in performance in order to be quite so lightweight and compact.
Click to expand...

Tenex, I am curious. What compromises in performance are you referring to that 42mm binoculars have suffered? Glare? FOV?

-Bill
 
Just got back from Austria for the DG instruction so my answers are a bit delayed (as were the planes).
Price Nocti 8x42 inside EU 1.835,00 euro and outside EU (no VAT) 1.450,00 euro ex transport.

Jan
 
Patudo said:
I would never have expected you to have given that last opinion, not after reading your posts #352 and #354. It certainly seems from those posts that the NVs won't be missed by your clients, or yourself...
Click to expand...

Hi Patudo,

As said before, I just got back from a meeting and one of the things I found out was that the yearly turnover figures 2018 are:
Swarovski 156, Zeiss 61 and Leica 30 million euro.
IMHO Leica products belong, without any doubt, in the top of their class.
Leica management for that matter (in the way they treat their dealers) belong in the dungeons of the Leica basement.
Consumers response, given a choice by multi brand optics dealers, are reflected in the sales figures.
Hope this clears it a bit for you:smoke:

Jan
 
Last edited:
Hello Jan,
I assume that you are asking for the Retrovid 7x35B transmission data.
We found the following:
500 nm=90,6%
550 nm = 92,6%
Hope that helps to concur all curiosity viruses.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

O
Passport Warranty - what are the rules?
Replies
3
Views
781
Wilbr
W
K
Duovid 10/15 x 50 coatings question
Replies
6
Views
919
ticl2184
ticl2184
etc
New Leica Ultravid HD Plus 12x50 - compared with Swarovski EL 12x50 and Zeiss 10x54 HT
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
ReinierB
R
S
Leica view comparison idea...
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
LucaPCP
L
G
Leica Demo Shipment Just Arrived
Replies
0
Views
507
gr8fuldoug
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top