8x42 NL image circle (1 Viewer)

[Paultricounty]

I know exactly what your talking about , and feel that same effect with the NL’s. In my opinion there might be multiple factors combined to give this effect, the relatively flat and huge FOV combined with excellent edge correction. It’s similar when looking through an ultra wide 80 degree and up FOV on a telescope eyepiece. It’s one big round circle where you kind of have to look around for the edge stop.

It all depends on what your observing as to how much that feature is enjoyable, and it is enjoyable. On the other hand having a smaller and more defined sharp field stop also is very desirable and enjoyable because it makes you focus in (no pun) or frames a certain object without descraction from things going on in that large NL window. In wide open areas and vistas the NL is simply marvelous ( as well as the zeiss SF’s).

Im curious Robert , what was it that you didn’t like about the Ultravids you didn’t like, but you liked the Noctivids?

Paul

 

[Robert Moore]

Paul, i just can never get that razor sharpness that I like with all the ultravid’s I have had. The Noctivid was sharp but had more CA than I like. ( 10x ) version. The 8 was a lot better but I never owned it. My eyes like Zeiss and Swarovski seems like the best. I really value extreme resolution in the image and for me they are the best.

 

[Paultricounty]

Paul, i just can never get that razor sharpness that I like with all the ultravid’s I have had. The Noctivid was sharp but had more CA than I like. ( 10x ) version. The 8 was a lot better but I never owned it. My eyes like Zeiss and Swarovski seems like the best. I really value extreme resolution in the image and for me they are the best.

I understand, there are things that pop in an image that we like one way or another, I find all three of the premium bino makers options have there own personalties that excel in one are or another.

Interesting how Zeiss fans will need to accept or lower expectations on CA correction, as many here have indicated the SFL is on a similar level as Ultravids. As well as Leica fans who like some distortion, yet being interested in a sharper image.

Paul

 

[Robert Moore]

I actually think the SFL at least in 8 x is better for CA than the ultravid.

 

[Paultricounty]

I actually think the SFL at least in 8 x is better for CA than the ultravid.

I believe a few reviews here have compared the CA similar to Ultravids , not sure if they were referring to the plus model or not. I’m relatively sensitive to CA , yet have no issues with the UVHD+s I have. I don’t see CA on axis in most lighting conditions.

So if the Zeiss is as good or better on CA , that’s excellent.

Paul

 

[Robert Moore]

In the center of the image I can’t really see any at all and I have been trying. When looking at black print and racking the focus back and forth past and near fast the print stays black which is a good test I do. On binoculars that have even a little CA the black print will look a little blue on one side of focus. Even looking at power lines against a cloudy sky and doing the same they stay black. They have a little lateral color but I don’t care about that as long as they are good in the center. I don’t even see the lateral because the field of view is so wide and immersive.