Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

CA On The Noctivid

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Saturday 21st April 2018, 00:18   #1
b3rd
Reg1stered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Washington, DC USA
Posts: 70
CA On The Noctivid

Do I need to worry about CA on the Noctivid? I think I am sensitive to this phenomenon--I've noticed it on multiple binoculars, although nothing so high-end as the Noctivids. I like the philosophy of these binoculars a lot. Classic, photographic image without distortion, high contrast, good low light performance... But I have some concerns that I will get them and be disappointed when I see green and magenta fringes on a backlit seabird.

I've looked through them in unchallenging light, and I really liked them a lot.

If I bought these, they would probably be my primary birding binocular in just about all conditions. Living in DC, I'd opt for the 10x for its reach, spending a decent amount of time looking at birds over water or at a bit of a distance. Never had a problem with shake unless I am on a boat or trying to do things one-handed.

Other things I've considered but not looked through: SLC 10x42 (quite a chunk cheaper)

Things I've considered seriously and have looked through: Maven B2. Thought they were really good. I did notice a bit of CA, although it might have been a problem with my IPD adjustment. Still might go that route, but for some reason I"m drawn to the Leica brand due to their excellent reputation in photography.
b3rd is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 21st April 2018, 01:08   #2
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,072
HT has the same design philosophy as the NV - high contrast, low glare, neutral colour, non flat-field but the HT is nearly free from any CA.

I've used many hundreds of binoculars and the HT is my favourite view thus far - not tried the NV yet though! You would be making a great choice with the SLC as well - great image and low CA, to my eyes at least.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 21st April 2018, 16:16   #3
apuapu25
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 11
CA on the Noctivid

Hello evebody. I use a Noctivid 8 X 42 since 16 months. To my eyes, I have lot of CA. A french commercial director writes my that CA is the against part of shine... Noctivid have lots of qualities: nice view, hight contrast, good low light performances, ergonomics to my hands and hight quality of manufactury. But I can't bare CA ans I think to sell them. I am more happy why my Trinovid 10 X 42 BA of the 90's! No CA to my eyes with them. Perhaps I am going to buy Zeiss with ABK. Sorry for my poor english!Yours sincerely.
apuapu25 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 07:58   #4
Gijs van Ginkel
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: utrecht
Posts: 1,428
One of the first things the persons invited for the introduction of the NV was the occurrence of Color diffraction and I also saw it when I got NV samples to be tested (test published on the WEB--site of House of Outdoor).
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 12:34   #5
jremmons
Wildlife Biologist

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 989
I think most Leica, including the Noctivid samples I have seen, show more CA than other alpha level binoculars.
jremmons is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 19:06   #6
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,072
Asking the group about CA is only going to get a myriad of responses, as peoples sensitivity is far too personal. If you are sensitive [I'm in that group] sounds like the NV might not be for you - if not, all of the bins other attributes would likely keep you happy.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 19:28   #7
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by james holdsworth View Post
Asking the group about CA is only going to get a myriad of responses, as peoples sensitivity is far too personal. If you are sensitive [I'm in that group] sounds like the NV might not be for you - if not, all of the bins other attributes would likely keep you happy.
This is an excellent and very sensible response to one of the most frequent questions that comes up in the Binocular Forum.

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 20:12   #8
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 2,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by jremmons View Post
I think most Leica, including the Noctivid samples I have seen, show more CA than other alpha level binoculars.
Agreed, when it comes to x32 and x42 mm bins. Most pocket roofs seem largely free of CA, even Leica.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 20:17   #9
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 2,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar View Post
This is an excellent and very sensible response to one of the most frequent questions that comes up in the Binocular Forum.
???

Sensible because if one is sensitive to CA one shouldn't pick a bin w/a lot of CA (like the Noctivid)? Agreed.

Sensible because those who don't see CA should be happy w/a bin w/CA since they can't see it? I would argue against that thought. Whether one sees CA or not, it still degrades the quality of the view, so all else being equal, I consider it a bad characteristic.

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 20:42   #10
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,072
I'm told [by Henry, whom I would trust to be correct] that my HT has spherical aberration. I don't see it, maybe my eyes are not sharp enough, don't know but the view is superb. If I just went with Henry's view, I would have discounted the HT flat-out...and missed out on what I consider my true optical treasure that impress and awe day after day, even after years of use.

The overall consensus on the NV seems to be - great sharpness, contrast, 3D but too much CA for some. It seems as though those that don't see the CA are left with a great image. A problem is only a problem if it manifests itself in the users reality, rather than the hypothetical, which seems to be the case here...
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn

Last edited by james holdsworth : Sunday 22nd April 2018 at 20:46.
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 22:06   #11
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,171
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
???



Sensible because those who don't see CA should be happy w/a bin w/CA since they can't see it? I would argue against that thought. Whether one sees CA or not, it still degrades the quality of the view, so all else being equal, I consider it a bad characteristic.

--AP
I was responding to what James Holdsworth wrote and he did not imply anything like what you have written above.

Personally I don't see it under most circumstances when I am using my binoculars but I do consider it a "bad characteristic."

Is there any proof that people who do not "see" CA are handicapped by a degraded view?

Bob

Last edited by ceasar : Sunday 22nd April 2018 at 22:17.
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 22:17   #12
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar View Post
I was responding to what James Holdsworth wrote and he did not imply anything like what you have written above. I don't see it but I do consider it a "bad characteristic."

Is there any proof that people who do not "see" CA are handicapped by a degraded view?

Bob
Exactly what I was going to say.

At what point does CA that I don't see in Noctivids that I own impede or hamper my ability to enjoy this binocular while birding?

How many binoculars does that leave for those of us to buy/use that don't have CA that some see?
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 22:30   #13
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 899
CA is like ro;;ing ball, color rendition, etc, all subjective, I myself am not affected by CA, with certain glass viewing dark objects against the sky once, I could see the color on the image edge, but I was really looking for it.
Some folks are prone to seasickness, I grew up on the water in the USVI and some would get seasick with just the slightest of choppy seas. I never had to take Dramamine because I do not get seasick.

Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 22:37   #14
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,479
Quote:
Originally Posted by b3rd View Post
Do I need to worry about CA on the Noctivid? I think I am sensitive to this phenomenon--I've noticed it on multiple binoculars, although nothing so high-end as the Noctivids. I like the philosophy of these binoculars a lot. Classic, photographic image without distortion, high contrast, good low light performance... But I have some concerns that I will get them and be disappointed when I see green and magenta fringes on a backlit seabird.

I've looked through them in unchallenging light, and I really liked them a lot.

If I bought these, they would probably be my primary birding binocular in just about all conditions. Living in DC, I'd opt for the 10x for its reach, spending a decent amount of time looking at birds over water or at a bit of a distance. Never had a problem with shake unless I am on a boat or trying to do things one-handed.

Other things I've considered but not looked through: SLC 10x42 (quite a chunk cheaper)

Things I've considered seriously and have looked through: Maven B2. Thought they were really good. I did notice a bit of CA, although it might have been a problem with my IPD adjustment. Still might go that route, but for some reason I"m drawn to the Leica brand due to their excellent reputation in photography.
I've looked at the Noctivid on two different occasions in very bright sunlight and I did not have a problem with CA (something I look for). Like every other bin CA can be seen on the edges.
Leica recently upgrade the optical train on my 7X42 Ultravid BR and I've noticed a serious improvement in CA control. Whether the upgrade was HD or HD/Plus or just original BR glass I don't know. I do know the view is improved, quite pleasant and true to the Leica color scheme. The center field is tack sharp. Not bad for an old Ultravid.

Side-by-side the Noctivid is a definite upgrade to the Ultravid HD/Plus models...yes I compared them side-by-side.

Good luck!
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 22:39   #15
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 2,887
Quote:
Originally Posted by dries1 View Post
CA is ...subjective...
No. CA is an objective, measurable performance characteristic of the optical system and can't really be corrected away by the brain, only hidden from awareness. Not bringing all wavelengths of light to same focus can't be anything but bad for contrast and effective "sharpness".

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 22nd April 2018, 23:33   #16
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
No. CA is an objective, measurable performance characteristic of the optical system and can't really be corrected away by the brain, only hidden from awareness. Not bringing all wavelengths of light to same focus can't be anything but bad for contrast and effective "sharpness".

--AP

In optical theory I'm sure that's correct, although it sure doesn't jive with user reports of the NV having class-leading contrast. Even Kimmo thought so, so I remain flummoxed...
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 00:00   #17
henry link
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: north carolina
Posts: 4,138
Quote:
Originally Posted by dries1 View Post
CA is like ro;;ing ball, color rendition, etc, all subjective, I myself am not affected by CA, with certain glass viewing dark objects against the sky once, I could see the color on the image edge, but I was really looking for it.
Some folks are prone to seasickness, I grew up on the water in the USVI and some would get seasick with just the slightest of choppy seas. I never had to take Dramamine because I do not get seasick.

Andy W.
I have to agree with Alexis about this.

Telling us you don't get seasick isn't useful if what we want to know is whether the boat is rocking.

Angular Magnification Distortion (the cause of "rolling ball"), as well as Longitudinal and Lateral Chromatic Aberrations are real instrument characteristics that can be accurately observed and even photographed with a little effort. Anyone who truly doesn't see these things can't tell the rest of us anything useful about them.
henry link is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 00:25   #18
Rathaus
Registered User
 
Rathaus's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by henry link View Post
I have to agree with Alexis about this.

Telling us you don't get seasick isn't useful if what we want to know is whether the boat is rocking.

Angular Magnification Distortion (the cause of "rolling ball"), as well as Longitudinal and Lateral Chromatic Aberrations are real instrument characteristics that can be accurately observed and even photographed with a little effort. Anyone who truly doesn't see these things can't tell the rest of us anything useful about them.
I think, as usual, you are attracted to the ‘idea’ that this phenomena is somehow measurable....and yet when challenged, you will be unable to adequately do so. Perhaps some crude measurements could be cobbled together,,,but much more will not be possible.

I’ll throw out an estimate that 90%+ of what folk on BF refer to as CA is in fact some form of defective vision.
Rathaus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 00:32   #19
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 899
Point taken regarding CA.

Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 00:50   #20
adhoc
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Anon.
Posts: 364
Alexis Powell:
Quote:
CA is an objective, measurable performance characteristic of the optical system and can't really be corrected away by the brain, only hidden from awareness.
Henry Link:
Quote:
I have to agree with Alexis about this.
It is not certain to me whether "agree" covers what I quote below.
AP /?and Henry,
What is the difference, as meant here, between "corrected away by the brain" and "hidden from awareness"?
If it is easier for you, just an example will be enough, even unrelated to optics.
Personally, I am sensitive to CA when I look for it, but do not notice slight appearances of it "in the field".
Thank you!

Last edited by adhoc : Monday 23rd April 2018 at 02:50.
adhoc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 00:50   #21
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 899
Just to add - and ask, does the person who sees CA mean that they have superior vision than one who views through the same glass does not? or is it One can view through a glass, not see CA, but it is there at a level that cannot be seen/observed.

Andy W.

Last edited by dries1 : Monday 23rd April 2018 at 00:55. Reason: grammer
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 01:24   #22
Maljunulo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 694
I think that it is logical to postulate that if all the rays don't come to the same point of focus, you are looking at a degraded image.

Whether or not you perceive it as such is a whole different matter, and is dependent on your eyes and the signal processing circuits in your brain.

That's just my opinion, and I ain't no expert.
__________________
All behavior offends someone.
Maljunulo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 03:11   #23
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,171
Back in the 1990s I had Cataract surgery and received a new lens in my eye. (I am writing about this from memory.) For a short period of time after the surgery I saw under some conditions a fine ring of color around my vision. I discussed it with my Opthamologist and he said I should expect it to disappear shortly. I believe he said my brain would not see it or something like that and he was right; it disappeared. I specifically asked him if what I saw was Chromatic Aberration and he said "exactly."

I can state categorically that I was able to see better without it. What ever happened to it, I don't know, but it is gone and it does not affect what I see today.

Seeing is believing!

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 04:13   #24
ronh
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Alamos, NM
Posts: 1,959
Henry's finding of excessive SA in the HT was confined to the 54mm models. He tested the 42mm and found it up to snuff.

Henry has also, some few years back, photographed various versions of field geometry presentation, including the kinds that often lead to the perception of rolling ball and the absence thereof, and also both longitudinal and lateral CA, all creatively conceived, accurately carried out, and lucidly discussed.

He has made such uniquely valuable contributions here, that I don't like seeing him misunderstood and dissed. When he goes, sorry, guys, you haven't got another one. Naturally, my opinions are completely subjective, ha!

Ronh
ronh is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 23rd April 2018, 04:27   #25
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 899
Henry was right in his post, if I cannot see CA then I can provide no useful information to those who see it. I consider myself very fortunate not to observe it in any of my glass.

Back to night time viewing.
Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Noctivid dries1 Leica 43 Thursday 5th April 2018 13:57
Noctivid dries1 Leica 22 Saturday 27th January 2018 09:42
My Noctivid are Back !!!!!!.......... GLOBETROTTER Leica 29 Tuesday 2nd January 2018 14:29
Noctivid sako Leica 5 Wednesday 6th December 2017 15:06
noctivid fov Hgalbraith1 Leica 11 Friday 10th March 2017 15:04

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.22213411 seconds with 37 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:43.