• 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.

Talk me out of Noctivids (1 Viewer)

Now when I switch back to the SV 8.5 I feel like something is missing (though I don't know what). Lord knows I don't need to spend any more $ on optics.

......the focus is not as nice, and I FEEL like resolution (or something) isn't quite as good. But reading it seems resolution is equal. Don't get me wrong, they resolve quite well and the views are still pleasing just different. Should I send my 9yr old SV 8.5's to Swaro for a check up? Would the Noctivid fill what I'm looking for or am I just chasing a ghost!?

Regardless of if you end up getting another Leica I'd still get the SV 8.5 serviced, especially considering it's 9 years old. At the very least it's worth giving them a really thorough clean with appropriate optics fluid, optics wipes etc. if you haven't already. Simply wiping with a lens cloth doesn't always do the job (and should be avoided due to possible scratching of the lens from dust/grit in the cloth). There's plenty of advice on BF about lens cleaning, but if you've done that best you can and it hasn't improved things then send them off for servicing.
 
Hi,

You nailed it. There is a basic difference between Swaro and Leica's optical design philosophy having to do with controlling the amount of distortion and field curvature. These optical aberrations are responsible for the rolling-ball illusion that can bother some people. Alternating from one design to the other can highlight these different perceptual effects. Sticking with one or the other allows better adaptation to occur, which is what I'd recommend.

Swaro's SLC series uses an optical design that's closer to Leica's, so I don't have that problem.

Ed
The highlighted portion should be a sticky note. :t::t::t:
 
Thanks to everyone for the replies. I think I've decided to stick with what I've got for now. Possibly send the Swaro's in for service though I'm not sure they need it, I can't really tell, maybe a check up. If I come across a good deal on a pre-loved Noctivid in 8x42 or Leica was doing a 10% off thing just before Christmas, I'm sure they'll do it again, I'd consider it. I don't think I'm gonna pay full tilt for a set.
 
How about these?

https://www.leicastore-uk.co.uk/collections/used-ex-demo/products/noctivid-8x42-green-ex-demo

You'd have to pay shipping - not sure how expensive that would make them.......

As Lee said, it sounds as though you prefer the Leica view. I don't think that anybody would argue that it's necessarily objectively better than the Swaro's, but it's certainly not (on balance) objectively worse either. Just depends on taste. Sounds like you have an excellent line up already though, and I'm sure it's nice to have both options.
 
Wow, yall really are enablers, LOL. I'll tell you what, I prefer black but for that price (came out to $1900 USD) I'd take green. I added them to the cart but it seems they wont ship to US so I guess I'll have to find a deal like that in the US.

Kinda glad though, it was all impulse and I'm sure the Mrs. wouldn't approve. LOL.
 
Last edited:
Wow, yall really are enablers, LOL. I'll tell you what, I prefer black but for that price (came out to $1900 USD) I'd take green. I added them to the cart but it seems they wont ship to US so I guess I'll have to find a deal like that in the US.

TX, I'm sorry about putting temptation in your way - I did at least think twice about it! ;)

I'm rather tempted to those myself, but I already have a 10x42 NV 7x42 UVHD+ and a Trinovid (2012-15) 8x42, so it would be hard to justify. FWIW I will say that I agree with Chuck. The NV's are an improvement on the UV's (to my eye), but the 7x42 UV (at least) is a superb instrument in it's own right, and I quite believe him when he says that the difference between a NV and UV of the same magnification is really very small.

I hope you get the opportunity to satisfy your curiosity when a NV comes along at the right price. B :)
 
I don’t think $1,913.58 is a particularly aggressive price for used demos. Maybe a while back closer to the NVD’s release that was a great price, but perhaps not now. There was an excellent used pair advertised on this site for $1,675 for over a month, but then they were withdrawn.
 
I don’t think $1,913.58 is a particularly aggressive price for used demos. Maybe a while back closer to the NVD’s release that was a great price, but perhaps not now. There was an excellent used pair advertised on this site for $1,675 for over a month, but then they were withdrawn.

Noted. Thanks
 
I don’t think $1,913.58 is a particularly aggressive price for used demos. Maybe a while back closer to the NVD’s release that was a great price, but perhaps not now. There was an excellent used pair advertised on this site for $1,675 for over a month, but then they were withdrawn.

It may be different in the States, but in the UK at least I would have said that £1,500 for an ex-dem 8x42 NV is very good, and I don't personally think it's fair to compare the prices of ex-dem and used. They are not the same thing. Ex-dem items would have just be used in a shop with people doing little more than stepping outside to have a look, or at most at a stand at the Birdfair. They would come fully boxed with all the (probably unused) accessories and full paperwork and guarantee. Used can mean anything - outside in the field in any kind of weather, stuffed into a bag, dangling around someones neck while walking/climbing etc. Nothing at all wrong with buying used, but no surprise that an ex-dem bin would command a higher price.
 
It may be different in the States, but in the UK at least I would have said that £1,500 for an ex-dem 8x42 NV is very good, and I don't personally think it's fair to compare the prices of ex-dem and used. They are not the same thing. Ex-dem items would have just be used in a shop with people doing little more than stepping outside to have a look, or at most at a stand at the Birdfair. They would come fully boxed with all the (probably unused) accessories and full paperwork and guarantee. Used can mean anything - outside in the field in any kind of weather, stuffed into a bag, dangling around someones neck while walking/climbing etc. Nothing at all wrong with buying used, but no surprise that an ex-dem bin would command a higher price.

Totally agree. Demo from a reputable dealer is like new. Used bins can have varying degrees of wear and you will need to ask questions about the condition and have good photos available.
 
TX, I'm sorry about putting temptation in your way - I did at least think twice about it! ;)

I'm rather tempted to those myself, but I already have a 10x42 NV 7x42 UVHD+ and a Trinovid (2012-15) 8x42, so it would be hard to justify. FWIW I will say that I agree with Chuck. The NV's are an improvement on the UV's (to my eye), but the 7x42 UV (at least) is a superb instrument in it's own right, and I quite believe him when he says that the difference between a NV and UV of the same magnification is really very small.

I hope you get the opportunity to satisfy your curiosity when a NV comes along at the right price. B :)

Mike,
You are WELL COVERED in the selection for MOST birding situations! ;)
Since you are a Leica man, it WOULD be hard for me to resist an UVHD+ 12X50! I've always wanted one but afraid of the ER.

So yesterday I did some birding/binocular comparing. I've been using this Meopta Meopro HD 8X42 that I REALLY like. Yesterday I took along a Leica UVHD+ 8X42 to compare. One thing that really stands out about the UV that will never be said about the Noctivid...ERGONOMICALLY EXCELLENT! Sure one can learn to love the Noctivid. It can become second nature if that's what you use and use it for a while. The UVHD+ is INSTANTLY excellent. That big 'ol wide focus on it is in the perfect place. The SIZE of it just fills your hand. I hadn't used the UVHD+ in a while but it's easy to see why it a favorite. Mercy what a nice binocular....a 7X42, even better!
 

Attachments

  • fullsizeoutput_fdf.jpeg
    fullsizeoutput_fdf.jpeg
    119.4 KB · Views: 266
  • IMG_3474_5.jpg
    IMG_3474_5.jpg
    122.5 KB · Views: 194
Mike,
You are WELL COVERED in the selection for MOST birding situations! ;)
Since you are a Leica man, it WOULD be hard for me to resist an UVHD+ 12X50! I've always wanted one but afraid of the ER.

So yesterday I did some birding/binocular comparing. I've been using this Meopta Meopro HD 8X42 that I REALLY like. Yesterday I took along a Leica UVHD+ 8X42 to compare. One thing that really stands out about the UV that will never be said about the Noctivid...ERGONOMICALLY EXCELLENT! Sure one can learn to love the Noctivid. It can become second nature if that's what you use and use it for a while. The UVHD+ is INSTANTLY excellent. That big 'ol wide focus on it is in the perfect place. The SIZE of it just fills your hand. I hadn't used the UVHD+ in a while but it's easy to see why it a favorite. Mercy what a nice binocular....a 7X42, even better!

Chuck, did you really have to say that?! ;)

We talked about the virtues of the 12x50 UVHD+ via pm several months ago (before last summer I think) and I've been agonising, on and off, about whether to pull the trigger since then. I'd finally managed to convince myself that I didn't need them and, more importantly, didn't want them, and then you had to say that. Thanks buddy! 8-P So, the tempter has become the tempted...........!

.......... so much so that I've just placed an order! :eek!: Oh boy, this is an expensive place to be..........

I totally agree with you about the UV's vs the NV's ergonomics. Yes, the NV is just fine and feels very comfortable when you adjust, but there's simply no adjustment needed with the UV's. Same for the Trinovid of course.

PS. I'm actually quite glad that you finally tipped me over the edge regarding the 12x50's! :t:B :)

PPS. Perhaps I should start another thread entitled ‘Talk me out of the 12x50 UV’s’!
 
Last edited:
Chuck, did you really have to say that?! ;)

We talked about the virtues of the 12x50 UVHD+ via pm several months ago (before last summer I think) and I've been agonising, on and off, about whether to pull the trigger since then. I'd finally managed to convince myself that I didn't need them and, more importantly, didn't want them, and then you had to say that. Thanks buddy! 8-P So, the tempter has become the tempted...........!

.......... so much so that I've just placed an order! :eek!: Oh boy, this is an expensive place to be..........

I totally agree with you about the UV's vs the NV's ergonomics. Yes, the NV is just fine and feels very comfortable when you adjust, but there's simply no adjustment needed with the UV's. Same for the Trinovid of course.

PS. I'm actually quite glad that you finally tipped me over the edge regarding the 12x50's! :t:B :)

PPS. Perhaps I should start another thread entitled ‘Talk me out of the 12x50 UV’s’!

HEHE! I think this is GREAT!

I'm looking forward to hear what you think of those! I especially want to hear about the ER....
 
HEHE! I think this is GREAT!

I'm looking forward to hear what you think of those! I especially want to hear about the ER....

Chuck, I will certainly give you a full report! The ER is of interest to me as well. Although I wear glasses most of the time I generally prefer to use binoculars without them, so ER isn't necessarily too important. However, although my acuity with glasses is around or better than 20/12.5 (slight difference L to R) and I manage with binoculars very well without them, I'm 55 and I realise that my eyesight is probably going to deteriorate to the point where I need to use glasses to enjoy binoculars to the full. I'll certainly bear this in mind when I'm deciding whether to keep or return them if the ER is too short for me when wearing glasses.
 
The UV HD 12X50 has less eye relief than stated, and confirmed by Roger Vine on Scopeviews. I do not wear glasses and to me the ER is at the bare minimum, if one wants to see the entire FOV it is not a glass for someone who wears glasses. However, ER aside I do like the immersive views much like the UV 10X50.

Andy W.
 
Andy, thanks for that insight. I’ve seen pictures of the 12x50 UV (and the 8 and 10x) with what appear to be eyecups of differing lengths (or depths). Most of the pictures that I’ve seen of the 12x50 seem to have the deeper eyecups, which would make ER worse, and the 10x50’s I’ve seen appear to have the shorter eyecups. Do you know if there are indeed differing eyecup lengths (or depths) for the 50 mm UV’s or is it just an illusion of the photographs that I’ve seen?

Lee, sorry if I’ve hijacked this thread! Please move the last few posts to another new thread if you see fit!
 
Last edited:
Y’all talked me into Noctivid. It’s not a matter of IF anymore, it’s WHEN the right price comes along. So....

Ya man, you should definitely do it! Buy it! Life is too short not to. (Haha, not so fun when the rabbit got the gun). ;)
 
Andy, thanks for that insight. I’ve seen pictures of the 12x50 UV (and the 8 and 10x) with what appear to be eyecups of differing lengths (or depths). Most of the pictures that I’ve seen of the 12x50 seem to have the deeper eyecups, which would make ER worse, and the 10x50’s I’ve seen appear to have the shorter eyecups. Do you know if there are indeed differing eyecup lengths (or depths) for the 50 mm UV’s or is it just an illusion of the photographs that I’ve seen?

Lee, sorry if I’ve hijacked this thread! Please move the last few posts to another new thread if you see fit!

Measured eye-reliefs here:
http://www.tvwg.nl/testrapporten/kijkers/leica_ultravid-hd.shtml
 

Goudvink, thanks for that! I've been looking at the ER issue more carefully and I've decided, sadly, to cancel my order for the 12x50 UV.

Checking the bins I have I've realised that the stated 13mm of the 12x50 UV won't be enough for me, even if it is 13mm and not just 11.5mm, as measured in the above test.

The Trinovid 8x42 (40008) has 15.5mm (according to Leica) and that is just enough for me (if I push my glasses to my face with the eyecups). My Trinovid 10x25 BCA's have 14.6mm according to Leica (although the specs on the Leica Mayfair store state 13.7mm) and that is not enough, so the stated 13mm of the 12x50 UV will definitely not be sufficient for me.

As I said before, I often choose to use my bins without eyeglasses, but in order to get the best out of them I need to use glasses these days so it really makes no sense to drop 2Kish on a bin without enough ER. It's a shame, but there it is.... sorry Chuck! :-C

Back, then, to finding a pair of Noctivids at a good price for TX! ;)
 
Last edited:
So, looking around it seems there aren’t many used Noctivids in 8x42. Its ok as I’m not in a super hurry to part with my money. They’re awful proud of the new ones. It seems no one is advertising deals on Leica and Swaro. Looks like they have controlled pricing. This strikes me as there are discounts to be found on Zeiss. I can get a new SF from a dealer for under $2300 and I didn’t look that hard.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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