Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

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.

Leica 10x50 BA vs new models

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 19th July 2019, 17:26   #51
forent
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhauer View Post
Has anyone ever compared the SLC 8x56 to the Noctivid 8x42 as far as brightness in low light? Is there a substantial difference?
As the SLC 10x56 HD is incredibly bright already, the SLC 8x56 HD - that shares the same Abbe-Knig prisms - should be even better in this respect. And the SLC 10x56 HD is visibly brighter than the Ultravid 10x50 HD+. Therefore I would bet that the Noctivid 8x42 is clearly less bright than the SLC 8x56 HD. But in fact I have not compared them side by side so it remains just my assumption.

Last edited by forent : Friday 19th July 2019 at 20:19.
forent is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 19th July 2019, 23:48   #52
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhauer View Post
Has anyone ever compared the SLC 8x56 to the Noctivid 8x42 as far as brightness in low light? Is there a substantial difference?
Hello,

the Noctivid is something as bright as the Zeiss SF 8x42 or the Swarovski 8,5x42, under these three binoculars I could not notice noticeable brightness differences!
The Noctivid I do not have anymore, but the Zeiss and the Swarovski and here is the difference to the SLC 8x56 more than clear.
The SLC is in terms of brightness, a real powerhouse, so much brighter than the Noctivid!
It is important, however, that one can really use the exit pupil, which uses the glass when the pupil "only" about 5mm. opens?

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 02:07   #53
Bhauer
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Piedmont SD
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
Hello,

the Noctivid is something as bright as the Zeiss SF 8x42 or the Swarovski 8,5x42, under these three binoculars I could not notice noticeable brightness differences!
The Noctivid I do not have anymore, but the Zeiss and the Swarovski and here is the difference to the SLC 8x56 more than clear.
The SLC is in terms of brightness, a real powerhouse, so much brighter than the Noctivid!
It is important, however, that one can really use the exit pupil, which uses the glass when the pupil "only" about 5mm. opens?

Andreas
Thanks! Im trying to decide between the 8x42 Noctivids and the SLC 8x56. I really like the idea of brighter SLC for early morning and late evening.
Bhauer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 13:40   #54
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by forent View Post
The Swarovski came out first, both optically und ergonomically just wonderful. A close second - to my surprise - was the least expensive Zeiss Conquest.
Hello,

Interesting!

Where would you see exactly the advantages of the SLC over the Conquest, sharpness, brightness, chromatic aberration, edge sharpness and so on?

Thank you,
Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 14:45   #55
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhauer View Post
Has anyone ever compared the SLC 8x56 to the Noctivid 8x42 as far as brightness in low light? Is there a substantial difference?
Most would not compare those models since they are different platforms, 42mm and 56mm AND different brands. Also there is a size/weight difference as you well know.

I have the Noctivid 8X42 and a SLC 10X56. The Noctivid weighs 30.5oz and the SLC 42.6oz.

There won't be much that you could ask of an 8X42 binocular that the Noctivid WON'T do. It is a very bright binocular as is typical of most at that price point. The SLC will be ever so slightly brighter due to a larger objective and the use of AK prisms. Will you notice that and will it be useful to you is the question. IMO it is certainly not 12 ounces better. I'd pick the Noctivid for 99.9999999% of my uses.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 16:14   #56
forent
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 116
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conndomat View Post
(...) Where would you see exactly the advantages of the SLC over the Conquest, sharpness, brightness, chromatic aberration, edge sharpness and so on? (...)
When I ordered the four Nachtglser at the reputable German dealer optik-pro.de, their advisor recommended to ignore the Zeiss 10x54 HT and the Leica 8x50 and to concentrate on the two 10x56 from Swarovski and Zeiss. I was sceptic but have to admit that he was right.
To your very question:
The Conquest is less expensive and it feels cheaper. The coating and the armor are IMHO not superior to Asian medium-class products. The diopter adjustment on the right ocular is rather primitive and moves the outer lens. The eye cups however are comfortable and suit my face very well, even better than the SLC's.
The field of view is also larger but at a price: I am sensitive to cromatic aberration and the Conquest shows visible green/purple halos on contrasty edges in daylight. CA artefacts in the SLC are minimal. Moreover the edge sharpness of the Conquest is ok but not really good. The colours are fine, slightly warmer than the SLC's. Brightness is excellent but the SLC is still a tad brighter. All in all the Conquest is a very good bino but the SLC is in my opinion a bit better optically and distinctly more convincing in terms of construction and build. The SLC feels like an alpha to me and the Conquest not. And because I wanted simply the best the choice was easy. Nevertheless the Conquest is a very fine bino that should satisfy most even demanding customers. If the SLC 10x56 wouldn't exist, I'm sure that I would be happy with the Conquest 10x56, especially since I mainly use it in low-light surroundings. On walks in bright light I prefer my more compact Leica Trinovid 8x42 BA that I bought back in 1993.
forent is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 16:35   #57
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 123
> forent <

Thanks a lot!

I know the Conquest series, myself have the 10x32 and had the 8x32 so I know that you have mechanically lost something, I was mainly interested in the visual differences and how large they judge.

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 20th July 2019, 16:42   #58
Conndomat
Registered User
 
Conndomat's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Bielefeld
Posts: 123
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
The SLC will be ever so slightly brighter due to a larger objective and the use of AK prisms.
Hello Chuck,

Do not forget the almost 2mm. larger exit pupil, which is already important here, always provided you can use it.

Andreas
Conndomat is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 22nd July 2019, 02:33   #59
Bhauer
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Piedmont SD
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
Most would not compare those models since they are different platforms, 42mm and 56mm AND different brands. Also there is a size/weight difference as you well know.

I have the Noctivid 8X42 and a SLC 10X56. The Noctivid weighs 30.5oz and the SLC 42.6oz.

There won't be much that you could ask of an 8X42 binocular that the Noctivid WON'T do. It is a very bright binocular as is typical of most at that price point. The SLC will be ever so slightly brighter due to a larger objective and the use of AK prisms. Will you notice that and will it be useful to you is the question. IMO it is certainly not 12 ounces better. I'd pick the Noctivid for 99.9999999% of my uses.
Thank you for this response. You have helped me make up my mind! Im going with the Noctivid 8x42.
Bhauer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 24th July 2019, 14:51   #60
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhauer View Post
Thank you for this response. You have helped me make up my mind! Im going with the Noctivid 8x42.
You are welcome! I think you'll enjoy those binoculars!
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th August 2019, 16:44   #61
Bhauer
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Piedmont SD
Posts: 18
8x42 Noctivids arrived today. Found a great deal on brand new in the box pair from the Netherlands for less than $1900. Tried them out a little this morning. The best part is how they work with my eyeglasses. On the second setting of the adjustable eye cups they are perfect as far as the FOV. Much much better than my 10x50 BAs Ive had for 25 years. They are brilliant and magic as far as sharpness. I cant wait to try them out in low light tonight and compare them to the BAs for light transmission. They are heavy but much smaller than the BAs which I take on a hike almost every evening. That will be nice not having to lug the 10x50s around. Carried those on my shoulder instead of around my neck.
Bhauer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th August 2019, 17:12   #62
wdc
Registered User
 
wdc's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Moraga, California
Posts: 406
Congratulations on the Noctivids. I also found them to be a great fit with eyeglasses. Compared to the 10x50 BA's you'll be getting more than half a pound reduction in weight, as well a full degree wider field of view.
Please report your observations about brightness at dusk and early morning between these 2 bins. If your pupil is adjusted for low light, I expect the 10x50's will prevail, but am curious as to how and when you'll perceive the difference.

Also, you might try a Rick Young Harness for the Noctivids. It distributes the weight very well on both shoulders.

Enjoy.

-Bill
wdc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th August 2019, 03:13   #63
Bhauer
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Piedmont SD
Posts: 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdc View Post
Congratulations on the Noctivids. I also found them to be a great fit with eyeglasses. Compared to the 10x50 BA's you'll be getting more than half a pound reduction in weight, as well a full degree wider field of view.
Please report your observations about brightness at dusk and early morning between these 2 bins. If your pupil is adjusted for low light, I expect the 10x50's will prevail, but am curious as to how and when you'll perceive the difference.

Also, you might try a Rick Young Harness for the Noctivids. It distributes the weight very well on both shoulders.

Enjoy.

-Bill
Thank you Bill. I was not able to stay out as late as I wanted to tonight but just after the sun went down I was able to compare the Noctivids to the 10x50 BAs. There was clearly a difference with the Noctivids being brighter than the BAs. Ill try again tomorrow to compare a little later in the evening. I was surprised that the BAs werent brighter but that is probably a result in the difference between 8 x and 10 x powers. I will definitely look into the Rick Young Harness. Thanks for the tip!!!
Bhauer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 11th August 2019, 02:12   #64
Bhauer
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Piedmont SD
Posts: 18
The 8x42 Noctivids are slightly brighter in late evening hours than the 10x50 Leica BAs. Not a huge difference but I was surprised it is noticeable. The best thing about the Noctivid is the full frame of view when looking through my eyeglasses. I dont quite get that advantage with the Leica BA even with the lens cups all the way down. Interesting how they accomplished that. I have the Noctivids eyecups screwed up to the first setting. Really like the much more compact size!
Bhauer is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 11th September 2019, 12:10   #65
SeldomPerched
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: England
Posts: 243
Just to chime in with a more general question in the 8x / 10x / 12x big glass discussion...

I have an 8x56 T*FL and it is probably my best glass in terms of the easy view - compared with serious 42s such as 7x42 T*FL, 7x42 UVHDplus, 8x42 HT.

But despite being pretty fit and shake-free I'd have to admit it's not easy to hold them still even without yomping up a hill, fighting a gale, and being generally warry!

So in the discussion of big SLCs, SVs, UVHDs etc (50 & 56-size objective glass) are you mostly talking about supported use? Tripod or resting on a ledge and so on, or are you all/mostly quite sure of getting a steady view by arms only viewing? (Not meaning you look through your arms!)

I ask because though I have such respect for my 8x56 and would love to see the extra detail a 10x50/54/56 would give I don't feel confident it would work out in practice.

Thank you,

Tom
SeldomPerched is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 12th September 2019, 00:19   #66
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,112
Tom:

You are mentioning the topic of optics that need supporting, and that is not a question of weight,
but is all about the magnification. Typically optics of 15X need tripod support, a 12X will benefit but
it is not necessary. This about image shaking from the larger image, when handheld.
Anything less than that may benefit from tripod support, that means 10X. If you want to carry a
binocular, make sure you are able to carry it. For some that like large size objectives, the big
50-60X models are very nice, but they are not for all around all day use.
That is why many users have different size binoculars, and 42 mm, is considered the best all around size.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 13th September 2019, 22:52   #67
SeldomPerched
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: England
Posts: 243
Jerry,

Thank you for summarizing that. I agree about the 42mm size for general use - in fact it has taken some time to find any happiness with 32mm as 42mm strikes me as FAR easier to use even in bright conditions. I didn't know why I was finding 32s so hard to focus but it must be to do with reduced depth of field presumably. Now I am learning just to whisper to the focus wheel rather than shove it too far.. (The 32mm's are however very easy and satisfying to focus close up: Zeiss 8x32 FL.)

Regarding weight and magnification, the 56 is an interesting case being only 8x magnification but the whole instrument is basically two large heavy glamour bottles and I can't hold them up for very long at all before getting shaky. I have used the 8x56 on a tripod and that shows me just how good it is, almost makes me want to trash the smaller general purpose inventory.

Relevant to the OP's thread on 10x50 Leica vs. 8x42 Leica Noctivid, they sound very different animals and hard to compare but both inspiring for observation. Would the 10x50 be conceived more for astronomy and the 8x42 for nature observation? Not sure if pre-flat field technology encouraged astronomy though.

All the best,

Tom

Last edited by SeldomPerched : Friday 13th September 2019 at 23:02.
SeldomPerched is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 11:11   #68
Sebzwo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 64
After using a 7x50 for like 30 years I have now some 10x50 as well and it has certainly many uses aside from astronomy. Everything punctual and far away like deer, ships at sea airplanes and such are very nice to watch at tenfold magnification. Quite a difference to 7 times. Sevenfold however gives that huge overview and wide picture. "Guarding" or observing something for longer times is easier this way. And it is less shaky as shakes are magnified as well.
I'd agree some 8x42 makes for some very good general use binocular. Strong but with some reserves for low light and not overly bulky.
Sebzwo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 15:19   #69
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeldomPerched View Post
... I didn't know why I was finding 32s so hard to focus but it must be to do with reduced depth of field presumably. Now I am learning just to whisper to the focus wheel rather than shove it too far..

Regarding weight and magnification, the 56 is an interesting case being only 8x magnification but the whole instrument is basically two large heavy glamour bottles and I can't hold them up for very long at all before getting shaky.
For me focusing is all about mechanics. Perhaps your 32s have a rather different ratio/travel to get accustomed to? As for weight, I find my SLC 56s heavy around the neck after a couple of hours, but not difficult to hold. (The 10x is really nice, if you're contemplating that.) My everyday 32s are actually more challenging to hold steady, expecially during mountain hiking, due to their lovely low weight. With a large glass it could also be a matter of balance and finding the right ergonomics, like getting the elbows a bit more underneath rather than far out to the sides.
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 20:51   #70
SeldomPerched
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: England
Posts: 243
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex View Post
For me focusing is all about mechanics. Perhaps your 32s have a rather different ratio/travel to get accustomed to? As for weight, I find my SLC 56s heavy around the neck after a couple of hours, but not difficult to hold. (The 10x is really nice, if you're contemplating that.) My everyday 32s are actually more challenging to hold steady, expecially during mountain hiking, due to their lovely low weight. With a large glass it could also be a matter of balance and finding the right ergonomics, like getting the elbows a bit more underneath rather than far out to the sides.
Thanks for your help on this, Tenex. I will check out your suggestions for good handling form. I think I've got it pretty much right but it's encouraging to hear what I've already found to be true from camera use: that a heavier item can give better balance and be held more steady. The gearing on the 32 is probably the secret as you mention; I had another go today as a treat (well, sort of) in between hour long work blocks and pretty much nailed it while focusing on some pottery that has finely detailed leaves, flowers, dragonflies, and butterflies.

More relevant to the current thread, a demo 10x50 is being sourced by my local store to try out. I'll be interested if in SV form it is as I'm told MUCH easier to hold steady than the very good 8x56 FL. Though my focusing practice this afternoon confirmed that Leica is still my favourite for colour and the 3D rounded effect. Personal taste as usual.

Tom

Last edited by SeldomPerched : Sunday 15th September 2019 at 20:54.
SeldomPerched is offline  
Reply With Quote
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
leica 10x50 HD Plus vs Swarovision 10x50 Hati Binoculars 20 Friday 1st September 2017 20:25
Swarovski SV 10x50 vs Leica ultravid HD PLUS 10x50 bockos Leica 22 Monday 14th December 2015 14:47
Leica BA vs BN models Omid Leica 3 Tuesday 25th November 2008 00:11
Swarovski SLC 10x50 VS Leica Ultravid 10x50 szybszy Swarovski 19 Sunday 6th July 2008 09:46
New Leica Ultravid Models tlb Leica 10 Friday 3rd September 2004 15:47

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.18205190 seconds with 32 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:12.