Follow up testing Noctivid (1 Viewer)

Troubador · Dec 30, 2016

Gilmore Girl said:
Interesting you add SLC in here with the likes of SF, SV and NVid. Is SLC really on this level? I looked through an SLC only once so I don't have any real experience with it. Just curious ... It's currently WAY cheaper than the rest and, if it's that good, then people should be looking at SLC first (if indeed it is the equal of the others).

If Nocti is a big step up from UVid+ then including SLC on the same level as noctivid means SLC is way better than Ultravid plus. I'm very skeptical SLC is somehow way better than Ultravid Plus. I would think they are on similar level of optical quality... both just a little better than Conquest. Not that it matters...I would never swap out my Ultravid + for any of the bins mentioned.
Based on user impressions here in BF I always thought of SLC as being almost the equivalent of an SV but not equal.

This year I had a few hours at a park with an SV 8x32 and thought it was a beast...I can see why people love the SV. I have always admired the look and ergonomics of the little SV.

GiGi

Maybe you are being a bit too literal and certainly I should have explained in greater detail. For a start Uvid HD and HD+ should also have been on the list. And phrases like 'up there' and 'deserve an audition' do not denote a precisely assessed equality. What I mean is they all have a set of attributes that when added together are of a very high standard indeed. Whether any one person will like any one model is up to them and their preferences and as you know we can be a picky lot.

For example I included SLC because I remember trying several a couple of Bird Fairs ago and I even reviewed SLC 15x56 and thought it was really great. However it wouldn't get to first base for me personally due to Swaro increasing the close focus distance on the latest version. Thinking about it my impression of SLC is based on the previous version so perhaps I was hasty to include it in the list.

Lee

james holdsworth · Dec 30, 2016

I've used a few SLC's and SV's and feel the SLC has a more neutral colour, more natural optical presentation, less CA and better stray light suppression.

So, for me, the SLC should be very near the top of anyone's list.

A2GG · Dec 30, 2016

james holdsworth said:
I've used a few SLC's and SV's and feel the SLC has a more neutral colour, more natural optical presentation, less CA and better stray light suppression.

So, for me, the SLC should be very near the top of anyone's list.

I think Ultravid+ price should come down more. I doubt it will until it is close to being phased out (in a few years I heard here on BF), as Leica rarely drops prices. But, if SLC price has been reduced drastically I think it's time UVid+ price comes down to something reasonable around 1500-1600 USD or so. I paid too much for mine when it first came out. I paid full price and it is already about 400 bucks cheaper.

A2GG · Dec 30, 2016

Troubador said:
GiGi

Maybe you are being a bit too literal and certainly I should have explained in greater detail. For a start Uvid HD and HD+ should also have been on the list. And phrases like 'up there' and 'deserve an audition' do not denote a precisely assessed equality. What I mean is they all have a set of attributes that when added together are of a very high standard indeed. Whether any one person will like any one model is up to them and their preferences and as you know we can be a picky lot.

For example I included SLC because I remember trying several a couple of Bird Fairs ago and I even reviewed SLC 15x56 and thought it was really great. However it wouldn't get to first base for me personally due to Swaro increasing the close focus distance on the latest version. Thinking about it my impression of SLC is based on the previous version so perhaps I was hasty to include it in the list.

Lee

Thanks for the explanation Troubsey

Canip · Dec 30, 2016

james holdsworth said:
I've used a few SLC's and SV's and feel the SLC has a more neutral colour, more natural optical presentation, less CA and better stray light suppression.

So, for me, the SLC should be very near the top of anyone's list.

Fully agree on this. To all those who have not tried a current model SLC (I am talking about 8x42 or 10x42) I can only recommend to try them. I know that not everybody agrees with me, but I like them a lot and personally prefer them over e.g. the (more expensive) HD+.

Piskeddu · Dec 30, 2016

Good evening everyone, I've never tried these wonders but I believe they are quite overvalued, the price paid for a view over the euro in 1500 I think they are a waste of money. You can not have a pair of binoculars that cost qualsi twice the written digit before and still have chromatic aberration, a flaw for those who must recognize the plumage is quite annoying. This is my thought.

Giorgio

litebeam · Dec 31, 2016

Look forward to trying the NV when I see some about.
I don't see how they will top our SV's, but as an owner of the latest geovid and at least one televid, I know Leica's reputation for quality.
The biggest problem for Leica imho, is their service center reputation. I've had stellar dealings, but not all have and its become a real issue for buyers of their sport optics.

Iceberg slim · Dec 31, 2016

litebeam said:
Look forward to trying the NV when I see some about.
I don't see how they will top our SV's, but as an owner of the latest geovid and at least one televid, I know Leica's reputation for quality.
The biggest problem for Leica imho, is their service center reputation. I've had stellar dealings, but not all have and its become a real issue for buyers of their sport optics.

I discerned they were better, when having the 3 Alpha dogs, side by side, i was ready for an upgrade, 4year itch, and the NVids won it for me, my mate has the new SVs so a nice little bit of banter when we're out Birding...

dwever · Jan 1, 2017

Piskeddu said:
Good evening everyone, I've never tried these wonders but I believe they are quite overvalued, the price paid for a view over the euro in 1500 I think they are a waste of money. You can not have a pair of binoculars that cost qualsi twice the written digit before and still have chromatic aberration, a flaw for those who must recognize the plumage is quite annoying. This is my thought. Giorgio

"I've never tried these wonders. . . ." Then shhhhh. Try them. Update us.

Iceberg slim · Jan 1, 2017

dwever said:
"I've never tried these wonders. . . I think they are a waste of money. . . ." Then shhhhh. Try them. Update us.

......Quite correct, everyone wants, and expects different, so try before uttering second hand mutterings, i again reiterate they are really fabulous optical instruments, today in driving snow, they still performed better than my Mk1 SVs...which i ultimately traded in for said Bins...

DavidBowman · Jan 28, 2017

Martin Smyth said:
......Quite correct, everyone wants, and expects different, so try before uttering second hand mutterings, i again reiterate they are really fabulous optical instruments, today in driving snow, they still performed better than my Mk1 SVs...which i ultimately traded in for said Bins...

I agree with that, Martyn. Tried side-by-side with 8 x 42 SVs the NVs (which I've been using daily since their day of first release) deliver a noticeably better image - slightly brighter, with significantly better contrast and colour fidelity plus absence of veiling glare and rolling globe. They really are a joy to use :t:

Iceberg slim · Jan 29, 2017

Spot on David...

These very gloomy viewing/birding conditions we seem to have at the moment, are ideal for really putting the NVs through their paces, and imho they surpass anything out there at the moment, Ease of use is a joy, the focussing wheel is spot on, and i can detect no degree of backlash the weight definitely isn't that much of an issue due to them being superbly balanced, also the very apparent Depth of field means less focussing required,and again the crisp image and superb detail acquired when using is a real treat to the eyes.

Themoog · Jan 29, 2017

Thank you

Really good to hear some good quality and well thought out hands-on reviews from actual owners.

Can't wait to try them out.

All the best

Tm

Torview · Jan 29, 2017

Could owners flesh out what they mean by "noticeably better" and "performed better" than an SV ?

I`m really interested to understand better.

I certainly did`nt need to focus less, factoring in the ever so slightly shallower dof on the 8.5x SV.

Also the SV for me (was brighter) certainly showed less C/A, and was of course sharp over the whole field, and has the most neutral colour balance I`v encountered.

Looking for more insight not a mine is better than yours argument.

Canip · Jan 29, 2017

Torview said:
Could owners flesh out what they mean by "noticeably better" and "performed better" than an SV ?
.....
.....

My humble opinion: it doesn't.
To be clear: the Noctivid is really, really great, and I like it a lot. A LOT!
But does it "noticeably" outperform the EL SV in any significant respect?
I don't think so (I own both).
Canip

Iceberg slim · Jan 30, 2017

... I owned a pair of Mk1 Swarovision bought about 2013, to my eyes, i know My NVs are clearer, and sharper than the said Swarovskis, so a mine is better, is a proper thought out response, i would never have the audacity to think NVs were better than SVs without a proper comparison.

Canip, That is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but it isn't a definite yes or no is it???

NDhunter · Jan 30, 2017

Martin Smyth said:
... I owned a pair of Mk1 Swarovision bought about 2013, to my eyes, i know My NVs are clearer, and sharper than the said Swarovskis, so a mine is better, is a proper thought out response, i would never have the audacity to think NVs were better than SVs without a proper comparison.

Canip, That is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but it isn't a definite yes or no is it???

Martin:

I prefer someone with more experience. Canip has offered his, and that
seems reasonable.

A side by side evaluation, is much better than a memory from years
ago.

Think about that for a minute.

Jerry

Canip · Jan 30, 2017

Martin Smyth said:
... I owned a pair of Mk1 Swarovision bought about 2013, to my eyes, i know My NVs are clearer, and sharper than the said Swarovskis, so a mine is better, is a proper thought out response, i would never have the audacity to think NVs were better than SVs without a proper comparison.

Canip, That is your opinion, which you are entitled to, but it isn't a definite yes or no is it???

Yes it is.

I spent several hours last week with the Noctivid, Zeiss SF and EL SV mounted side by side on three tripods, trying to come to a definitive opinion which of the three was providing the "sharpest" image with "the best contrast". I could not come to a final conclusion, on some objects the Noctivid seemed best, on other the EL SV or the SF seemd to provide more detail.

The test on the USAF 1951 table, using a booster, produced no clear winner either.

I am inclined to believe that which one you find best will to a large part depend on your eyes and on personal preferences (for some, the globe effect in the SF and the EL SV are a killer, whereas others, myself included, can live with it).

The only thing I am pretty certain about is that the Noctivid is a distinct improvement over the HD+ and one of the best binoculars available today.

Torview · Jan 30, 2017

Thanks Canip,

Your explanation affirms my own difficulty in declaring a clear top dog from these three.

I went down the SV route shortly before trying a NV, it was very close for me between the SV and SF.

Thing is I easily see the pros and cons in both SF and SV, but thus far I have`nt seen the much lauded reduced need for focusing, or 3d in the NV, just another good top roof with well above class average stray light control, but "sharper" ?, hmm, I do not question the validity of anyone stating they see it as such, I just have`nt concluded such myself, and it seems neither have you.

Pileatus · Jan 30, 2017

Canip said:
Yes it is.

I spent several hours last week with the Noctivid, Zeiss SF and EL SV mounted side by side on three tripods, trying to come to a definitive opinion which of the three was providing the "sharpest" image with "the best contrast". I could not come to a final conclusion, on some objects the Noctivid seemed best, on other the EL SV or the SF seemd to provide more detail.

The test on the USAF 1951 table, using a booster, produced no clear winner either.

I am inclined to believe that which one you find best will to a large part depend on your eyes and on personal preferences (for some, the globe effect in the SF and the EL SV are a killer, whereas others, myself included, can live with it).

The only thing I am pretty certain about is that the Noctivid is a distinct improvement over the HD+ and one of the best binoculars available today.

I was quite interested in the Noctivid but after comparing it to Zeiss SF and Swarovski SV I found no reason to part with my 8.5X42 and 10X50 SV's. I enjoy the SV's flat field and have no problem with rolling ball, the mustache effect or glare of any kind. I am absolutely convinced some people are genuinely affected by one or more aberrations but that many also go looking for trouble...and easily find it.

The Leica rep tried to verbally sell me on 3D, DOF, etc. but I just didn't see it. The image is clearly a step or two above the Ultravid's and it is a traditional Leica image (deeply saturated and pleasing to the eye). The centerfield is deadly sharp but I checked the edges and found they were not even close to the sharpness in an SV. I was always distracted by my Ultravid's edges and I saw the same thing, to a lesser degree, in the Noctivid.

I was actually more impressed with the new black SF. If I didn't own the SV's I'd be sorely tempted. But, as time has clearly demonstrated to me, an old friend is generally a good friend.

At this level it's about preference, not excellence. It's good to see people excited about the Noctivid and I hope owners produce a steady stream of WOW's as they use it in the field. It beats a start test every time!

Follow up testing Noctivid (1 Viewer)

Moderator

Consulting Biologist

Beth

Beth

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Fly by night

Well-known member

Fly by night

Active member

Fly by night

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Fly by night

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Well-known member

"Experientia Docet”

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread