• 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.

Noctivid (1 Viewer)

dries1

Member
I am looking to procure a 8X42 Noctivid prior to the fall this year, (want to see what the green looks like) and while there are multiple reviews of the 10X42, I am curious of current Noctivid owners who have compared it to other 8X42s, for examle FL T, EDG, SF, HT, Leica HD, Meopta etc. I currently have the Leica Ultravid HD and really like the glass, was just curious if there are any significant differences etc, from an optical perspective.

Andy W.
 
Vespobuteo,

Thanks for that, (off subject) - I was wondering about the Transmission curve for the Ultravid HD, seems to have quite a bit of fluctuation.

Andy W.
 
Vespobuteo,

Thanks for that, (off subject) - I was wondering about the Transmission curve for the Ultravid HD, seems to have quite a bit of fluctuation.

Andy W.

You have to ask Gijs about the diagrams, and I noted that also. Most likely a plotting-issue. Maybe the points of measurement was a bit too sparse?

One of the biggest benefits with the 8x42 Noctivid is the viewing comfort, even with eye glasses the view immersive. Contrast and glare suppression are outstanding as well. Better than competition in all those areas I suspect.

I was a bit negative to the NV ergonomics at first but the short and compact size is a benefit and they feel lighter than they are. Still I think the UVHD:s have a slight edge in ergonomics.

Personally I find it very hard to rank the current alpha bins. All are excellent options.
 
Last edited:
About the plot, you are likely correct, the consistent pattern of fluctuation.
It is like splitting hair with a cleaver regarding comparison of the premium glass, I am just curious at this point, the price will be lower in time.

Andy W.
 
I can’t speak for the 8x but the 10 is really nice. I like the way it shows the reds and browns it’s just an incredible glass and no fuss at all with eye placement if you have glasses. People talk about the ca but I just can’t see it. I always am concentrating on the center of the field where the extreme sharpness is anyway so maybe that’s why. I can say I definitely like the 10x42 better than the 10x42 Swarovision I had pre field pro. My favorite 8x was the Zeiss ht. It has a beautiful transparent view and I like how the whites are so white in the Zeiss. Every binocular has certain things about them that I like so the real answer is to have more than one pair. I would love to compare the 8x Noctivid to my favorite the Zeiss ht. After having the 10 I am thinking the Noctivid would put up a good fight for top 8x and maybe beat the Zeiss. I no longer have the Zeiss so I can’t even compare it to my 10 Noctivid.
 
Vespobuteo, post 4,
We see sometimes such a "wave"character in transmission spectra and it has not to do with the number of measured points, since the spectra are measured using every nm as measured point, so between for example in the spectral range 450-700 nm we measure 250 points (every nm), that should be more than enough.
The spectrometer used is a prism based spectrometer conneted to a photon counter, so you can make the error very small by taking care that enough counts are collected to ensure a very small error in this case an overall uncertainty of around +/- 0,5% (we checked that over and over).
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Vespobuteo, post 4,
We see sometimes such a "wave"character in transmission spectra and it has not to do with the number of measured points, since the spectra are measured using every nm as measured point, so between for example in the spectral range 450-700 nm we measure 250 points (every nm), that should be more than enough.
The spectrometer used is a prism based spectrometer conneted to a photon counter, so you can make the error very small by taking care that enough counts are collected to ensure a very small error in this case an overall uncertainty of around +/- 0,5% (we checked that over and over).
Gijs van Ginkel

Ok, thanks for clarifying. Just noted that similar "wavyness" appears in some of Allbino's Leica-curves as well.
 
Having used both the 8x42 and the 10x42 NVD, for me it was easy to choose the 8x.

The only other Leica I have used that approaches the level of satisfaction with the 8X NVD was a 7X42 UVHD+ which has more eye relief than the same in 8X42. If gr8fuldoug ever mis-posts a like new demo in one of those here . . .

Vespobuteo says the NVD has, "lower user comfort". Maybe. For some. I guess maybe if you have smaller hands. Lower user comfort is not my experience with the NVD.

I tend to like the "extra good eye-relief with glasses" bins as well, and the 8x42 Noctivids are probably the best 8x42, in that aspect.

The quote on "lower user comfort" was from Gijs review.

I don't think that the Noctivid's ergonomics are better or worse than the Swaro SV:s but most bins might take some time to get used to.

Figures say that the NV:s are a bit heavier than the SV:s but to me they actually feel lighter.
Better balance I guess is the explanation, the SV feels a bit more front heavy perhaps.
 
Last edited:
dwever and Vespobuteo, posts 12 and 13,
My conclusion of a "lower user comfort"for the Noctivid as compared with the SF and SV was based on weight and handling comfort and the arguments in favor of my concusions are given in that paper.
It seems that I am not the only one with that conclusion, since the Noctivid lags far behind the SF and the SV with regard to sales in some large binocular stores I regularly visit to ask about sales figures and experiences.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
dwever and Vespobuteo, posts 12 and 13,
My conclusion of a "lower user comfort"for the Noctivid as compared with the SF and SV was based on weight and handling comfort and the arguments in favor of my concusions are given in that paper.
It seems that I am not the only one with that conclusion, since the Noctivid lags far behind the SF and the SV with regard to sales in some large binocular stores I regularly visit to ask about sales figures and experiences.
Gijs van Ginkel

As they are all priced in the same order of magnitude, do you think the weight of the Noctivid is more of the issue than other ergonomic factors.


A.W.
 
dries1, post 14,
Listening at the consumers and the remarks of salespersons the weight obviously is a factor of importance not to take the Noctivid.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
dries1, post 14,
Listening at the consumers and the remarks of salespersons the weight obviously is a factor of importance not to take the Noctivid.
Gijs van Ginkel

I'm a consumer. I have both the 8X42 UVHD+ and the NVD 8X42, and I do not think the weight difference is enough to matter; it doesn't matter to me in actual use. Back in my LE days, I had a pair of apparently indestructible Zeiss Mariners in my car day in and day out, and durability with low-light performance was far more important than weight. Hair splitting over a few ounces is only a recent luxury for me.

I have used the UVHD+ in South Africa and Rwanda extensively and the NVD in Alaska and Siberia (the NVD's are a bit blended in with the parka but you can see it). Weight has nothing to do with which one I take. I have found 7X and 8X to be lacking at times such as the Savanah's in Akagera National Park and also in Alaska, but I only carry one pair so 8X is definitely the best overall balance for me. If I were going 10X it would be > or = 50mm.

As is often pointed out among modern alphas from the big three, it is close to a no-lose choice, but pressed to pick an order, the Noctivid 8X42, followed by the 7X42 UVHD+, followed by the EL 8.5X42, followed by the 10X50 UVHD+, followed by the 8X42 UVHD+. Honorable mention would be HT's in 8X (if I were wearing glasses, well that would push the 10X50 and 8X42 into a more distant 4th and fifth place). I have owned all but two of the the optics mentioned; and obviously there's a lot of good stuff out there I've peered through in stores but don't have real-world experience with.

As an aside, my glove size is XL, and when wearing gloves as I often do, the Noctivids extra size and especially the open space between the barrels is a plus.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2018-03-28 at 10.24.18 AM.jpg
    Screen Shot 2018-03-28 at 10.24.18 AM.jpg
    61.8 KB · Views: 179
  • fullsizeoutput_776.jpg
    fullsizeoutput_776.jpg
    123.3 KB · Views: 167
  • Screen Shot 2018-03-28 at 10.26.19 AM.jpg
    Screen Shot 2018-03-28 at 10.26.19 AM.jpg
    75.3 KB · Views: 168
Last edited:
dries1, post 14,
Listening at the consumers and the remarks of salespersons the weight obviously is a factor of importance not to take the Noctivid.
Gijs van Ginkel

What is the weight difference to the new Swaro FieldPro, 15-20 grams?
Hardly noticeable.

https://www.birdwatching.com/optics/2017_titans_revisited/chart_2017.html

Zeiss SF might be 80 grams lighter but also quite a lot bigger. SF:s are also 500-600€ cheaper than the Noctivids.

My theory is that most people tend to stick with the make they are used to.
 
Last edited:
I can not help it, that customers give among others the weight of the Noctivid as an argument not to buy it, but it seems a fact of life, so do not blame me for it. I would not buy the Noctivid myself, because of its price, but that is also the case for other binoculars, so I am quite happy with the one I use frequently.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
I can not help it, that customers give among others the weight of the Noctivid as an argument not to buy it, but it seems a fact of life, so do not blame me for it. I would not buy the Noctivid myself, because of its price, but that is also the case for other binoculars, so I am quite happy with the one I use frequently.
Gijs van Ginkel

There might be some psychology involved here, people tend to find all kinds of faults on binoculars they cannot afford. It's a part of the psychological immune system that makes our lives a bit easier. :-O
 
Vespobuteo, post 18,
Liking an instrument or a person is always a matter of psychology. However paying the price of a used car for a binocular is a barrier which I find hard to take, of course also a matter of psychology, but it does not feel bad for me. I get to test many binoculars and telescopes without having to buy them and I find that a privilege, which I enjoy a lot and again: joy is also a matter of psychology.
Gijs van Ginkel
 
Vespobuteo, post 18,
Liking an instrument or a person is always a matter of psychology. However paying the price of a used car for a binocular is a barrier which I find hard to take, of course also a matter of psychology, but it does not feel bad for me. I get to test many binoculars and telescopes without having to buy them and I find that a privilege, which I enjoy a lot and again: joy is also a matter of psychology.
Gijs van Ginkel

What binocular do you use?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 2 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.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top