• 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 is the Noctivid about? (1 Viewer)

I have a NV 8X42, the focus is fluid and OK,(slight soft spot but not alarming) I may send them in to tune them up. I have many EDGs, they have the best focus on any binocular IMHO, period. I think the UVHD+ 10X50 focus is sublime, the only really upgrade from the HD. The focus on the NV is likely the achillies heel of this glass, everything else is good. To me it was made for viewers who wear glasses, I have to use them with the eye-cups all the way out, the only 8X42 I have to do this with. I can see that many who do not wear glasses, the eye-cups do not extend far enough.

Andy W.
 
It is funny to hear so much praise heaped upon the focuser of a product that has apparently been out of production for 7 (?) years. The one EDG I own ironically has an incredibly stiff focuser, because someone had it set that way. I will say that the Monarch HG's I own 8x30, and 8x42, both have very smooth, low tension focusers.

The Zeiss Conquest and Victory SF both have excellent focusers as well. No issues. Smooth, low-resistance.

Leica Ultravid BR, smooth but a little clicky, Trinovid HD, smooth, Noctivid, smooth, with a little more tension counter-clockwise near close focus.

The Vanguard ED II has a very smooth focuser. Its fine to have a benchmark for judging the quality of focusers, I suppose, but its not like other manufacturers, or even binoculars made by Nikon BESIDES the EDG are sorely lacking in this dept.

-Bill
 
When you have spent a lot of money on a binocular , (as I also have) , it is sometimes somewhat difficult to admit that they actually have faults of one sort or another.
:-O :-O :-O:-O

Cheers.
 
I believe any binocular with a bridge that has a small foot print for the focus internals, will likely need readjustment/repair more often with use. The EL SV comes to mind. IMHO it is the design, does not matter who makes it, no room to place robust internals.
I do not wear glasses, so I CAN USE BINOCULARS WITH 12-15 MM OF EYE RELIEF with out any issues.

Andy W.
 
Last edited:
42za said:
When you have spent a lot of money on a binocular , (as I also have) , it is sometimes somewhat difficult to admit that they actually have faults of one sort or another.
:-O :-O :-O:-O

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Although some find it easier to find faults in expensive binoculars - apparently (and in a way understandably).
 
42za said:
When you have spent a lot of money on a binocular , (as I also have) , it is sometimes somewhat difficult to admit that they actually have faults of one sort or another.
:-O :-O :-O:-O

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Fault.

An error made in the manufacture of a product, or a subjective evaluation of performance?
 
wdc said:
It is funny to hear so much praise heaped upon the focuser of a product that has apparently been out of production for 7 (?) years. The one EDG I own ironically has an incredibly stiff focuser, because someone had it set that way. I will say that the Monarch HG's I own 8x30, and 8x42, both have very smooth, low tension focusers.

The Zeiss Conquest and Victory SF both have excellent focusers as well. No issues. Smooth, low-resistance.

Leica Ultravid BR, smooth but a little clicky, Trinovid HD, smooth, Noctivid, smooth, with a little more tension counter-clockwise near close focus.

The Vanguard ED II has a very smooth focuser. Its fine to have a benchmark for judging the quality of focusers, I suppose, but its not like other manufacturers, or even binoculars made by Nikon BESIDES the EDG are sorely lacking in this dept.

-Bill
Click to expand...

Bill,

The EDG I, which was sold only in the USA (and maybe Canada-I don't know for sure) had many problems. It was introduced around 2007 and discontinued in 2010. It had different exterior construction than the EDG II does which was introduced and first sold in Europe around 2009/2010.

In 2010 there was what can only be described as a fire sale on the EDG I American Version after they were discontinued. They sold very fast! I wanted a 7x42 but they went quickly so I purchased a 10x32 for $999.00 and Nikon threw in a basic Nikon SLR 35mm Camera with a 35-105 Zoom Lens which I sold to a friend for $250.00 to replace his wife's Basic 35mm SLR Canon which was broken.

I used my American EDG I for about 3 years when when its covering started to bubble and come loose. At the same time the corrugated rubber sleeve covering over the Focus Wheel got stretched from use and began interfering with the focusing. There were other well known problems with the diopter which was integrated with the focus wheel.

I had registered my American Nikon 10x32 EDG I with Nikon so I contacted them and they advised me to return it to them and they would decide to repair it or replace it. Within 2 weeks Nikon sent me a Brand New 10x32 EDG II which I am still happily using! The focus wheel it has is different from the EDG I and works perfectly, its diopter is also integrated with the focus wheel.

It's body is very much like the hard bodies on the earlier Nikon 8x and 10x32 HGL/LXL series. There isn't much chance of these bodies bubbling and peeling!:t:

https://www.allbinos.com/94-Nikon_HG_L_8x32_DCF-binoculars_specifications.html

Bob
 
Last edited:
Hi Bob, Thanks for relating your experience with the EDG. You may have misread my comment regarding the model. I own an EDG II.

-Bill
 
wdc said:
Dennis, You have described a long list of woes that have befallen you and your encounters with binoculars. However, with the exception of the binoculars that come to your house and mysteriously ejaculate grease, it seems that the primary problem you have is with yourself.

Reference your comments about Swarovski focusers. Have you ever considered that their consistent 'funky' behavior is actually an artifact of intentional design, material, and manufacture? You may not like the feel of their focuser, but thats not a flaw in the product. Take, for example, the Habicht 7x42 that you've been mentioning as of late... In your first go round with that one 5 years ago, you slammed it for poor eye relief, stiff focuser, and an exceedingly narrow field of view. Then, there more recently appeared some mention on the internet of light transmission tests rating that very binocular at the top of the heap. Suddenly, the binocular forum was flooded with effusive comments from a single individual (you), incessantly quoting that measurement in thread after thread, briefly acknowledging, but completely discounting all the potentially negative characteristics of that product. The binocular has remained the same the entire time, and it is the user who has changed. And you might ask yourself what has actually changed?

-Bill
Click to expand...
I didn't say all Swarovski's had funky focusers just a small percentage of them so I don't think it is inherent in their design. I have had many Swarovski's with great focusers including the 12x50 SV I have now. The Swarovski Habicht is a different animal though it's focuser has to be tight because of it's open design to maintain it's waterproof integrity. So that is something you just have to accept with the Habicht, as well as, it's short eye relief and in the case of the 7x42 it's narrower FOV because of it's simpler design Kellner eyepiece's which is one of the reason's it has such high transmission because there is less air to glass surfaces and this also helps keep's the weight of the binocular down to below 23 oz. It took me awhile to realize the advantages of the Habicht but I am the first to admit is not the binocular for everyone especially those with glasses. It does have a tight focuser, small eye cups, short eye relief and in the 7x42 a small FOV but it is kind of like the thread that was started saying the Habicht was akin to a Lamborghini. It is not real comfortable to use but it sure does perform.;). " I have many EDGs, they have the best focus on any binocular IMHO, period." I agree with you there Dries. Most EDG's I have had are the best focuser's I have ever used including the 8x32 EDG I have now.
 
Last edited:
wdc said:
The primary reason I’ve sent binoculars back is that they don’t have enough eye relief. Sometimes I gamble on the specs, hoping for the best. Doesn’t always turn out that way. I don’t recall that I’ve ever sent one back because of flaws in the product. That’s someone else’s schtick....

-Bill
Click to expand...

Gotcha! Swarovski's 16mm isn't the same as Zeiss 16mm isn't the same as Leica's 16mm!

dries1 said:
I have a NV 8X42, the focus is fluid and OK,(slight soft spot but not alarming) I may send them in to tune them up. I have many EDGs, they have the best focus on any binocular IMHO, period. I think the UVHD+ 10X50 focus is sublime, the only really upgrade from the HD. The focus on the NV is likely the achillies heel of this glass, everything else is good. To me it was made for viewers who wear glasses, I have to use them with the eye-cups all the way out, the only 8X42 I have to do this with. I can see that many who do not wear glasses, the eye-cups do not extend far enough.

Andy W.
Click to expand...

Canip said:
+1 :t:

and

+1 :t:

Canip
Click to expand...

I can't believe y'all don't like the Noctivid's focus! My two WERE stiff out of the box but in a short time smoothed up and zero slack.

BTW....MOST of my binoculars have a nice focus adjustment. From a $150 8X32 Leupold to a SV 12X50 and many in between. Some ARE better than others...
 
Dennis,
If we go back a few years to when Brock was around, I remember there were many many discussions and arguments about Swaro focusers and unless my memory is faulty (quite possible) I am sure it was discovered that Swaros have a spring in the focus mechanism which helps you to turn the focus in one direction but you have to push against in the other, hence the 'uneven tension'.

This means the different effort required to focus in the two directions isn't a quality fault but a design characteristic which anyone is free to dislike and avoid but should not be referred to as a defect.

Lee
 
hello All,

This is the way that I see it.

Premium Binoculars have always been expensive beasts , usually only available to a small number of people , and thus the premium manufacturers in the past always tried to ensure that their products were as perfect as they could make them , both mechanically and optically.

In the modern "throwaway" world standards have deteriorated markedly , and the easiest way to cut costs is to compromise on the mechanicals.

I believe that the premium binocular makers are making the mistake of trying to compete with the Chinese mass produced instruments , they will fail and lose their good names if they cannot maintain quality.

Cheers.
 
Troubador said:
Dennis,
If we go back a few years to when Brock was around, I remember there were many many discussions and arguments about Swaro focusers and unless my memory is faulty (quite possible) I am sure it was discovered that Swaros have a spring in the focus mechanism which helps you to turn the focus in one direction but you have to push against in the other, hence the 'uneven tension'.

This means the different effort required to focus in the two directions isn't a quality fault but a design characteristic which anyone is free to dislike and avoid but should not be referred to as a defect.

Lee
Click to expand...

Let us peruse a few recent gems from the relentless torrent of babble that emanates from dencoworld:

Denco, post 103:
"I was just in a Cabella's today and I tried a Swarovski SLC 10x42 and sure enough it was harder to turn in the clockwise direction. I told the sales girl and she said she would tell the Sales Rep from Swarovski. Good luck with that I told her! If you buy an SLC CHECK the focuser! "

Denco, Saturday, post 108:
"...and I won't even go into how many Swarovski's I have had with funky focusers."

Denco, Sunday, post 116:
" Many Swarovski's especially SLC's and even SV's have had funky focusers being sticky or having unequal focus tension. I have sent those into Swarovski and usually they come back about the same."

Denco, Monday, post 131:
I didn't say all Swarovski's had funky focusers just a small percentage of them so I don't think it is inherent in their design.

He's all yours Lee! ;-)

b.
 
wdc said:
Let us peruse a few recent gems from the relentless torrent of babble that emanates from dencoworld:

Denco, post 103:
"I was just in a Cabella's today and I tried a Swarovski SLC 10x42 and sure enough it was harder to turn in the clockwise direction. I told the sales girl and she said she would tell the Sales Rep from Swarovski. Good luck with that I told her! If you buy an SLC CHECK the focuser! "

Denco, Saturday, post 108:
"...and I won't even go into how many Swarovski's I have had with funky focusers."

Denco, Sunday, post 116:
" Many Swarovski's especially SLC's and even SV's have had funky focusers being sticky or having unequal focus tension. I have sent those into Swarovski and usually they come back about the same."

Denco, Monday, post 131:
I didn't say all Swarovski's had funky focusers just a small percentage of them so I don't think it is inherent in their design.

He's all yours Lee! ;-)

b.
Click to expand...

There was a time when we had quite a few complaints here on the forum about Swaro focusers ... this was pre- Field Pro edition EL and Pre- new CL B. It got kind of heated back then about this issue.

My first CL from several years ago had a gritty spot in the focus and some others complained about this on CL's and EL's as well I recall back then.
My current CL 8x30 (still the original CL) is a later production model and has a nice smooth focus action with no issues.

The Field Pro bins I tried in store recently have nice smooth focus and it seems from reports here the FP edition has improved focus action.

In general, Swaros are not known for ultra smooth focusers like Zeiss or Nikon.

Dennis' experiences are his own and I see nothing wrong with him sharing his experiences. You don't have to agree with them.
 
The problem with those experiences is the amazingly contradictory nature of them (shown above nicely), often coming full circle multiple times in a few years....not helpful IMO.
 
james holdsworth said:
The problem with those experiences is the amazingly contradictory nature of them (shown above nicely), often coming full circle multiple times in a few years....not helpful IMO.
Click to expand...

Then you just toss them away if they're not helpful. I take all user reviews, impressions, experiences with a grain of salt here. I know that I may have a very different impression when I try the subject bino myself. With that said, I do enjoy reading the reviews here for fun.
 
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

S
Noctivid 8x42- wow!
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
15K
hopster
hopster
chill6x6
A few quick thoughts, 7X35 vs. 8X32
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
John M Robinson
J
etc
New Leica Ultravid HD Plus 12x50 - compared with Swarovski EL 12x50 and Zeiss 10x54 HT
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
ReinierB
R
Joe H
Obituary for my Ultravid 8x20 BR, 2006-2022
Replies
19
Views
4K
Joe H
Joe H
J
A strange 8x32 choice.
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
Julian61
J

Users who are viewing this thread

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