CloseFocus
Well-known member
I think Leica will be making binoculars long after the Chinese makers have gone bankrupt. A warranty is no good if the company no longer exists to back it up.
-
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!
Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
New binoculars from leica (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter PIER PAOLO
- Start date
I think Leica will be making binoculars long after the Chinese makers have gone bankrupt. A warranty is no good if the company no longer exists to back it up.
This is true, and worth mentioning that it was becausse Leica had blinders on in that market as well until it was almost too late. Seems to be a pattern there.
It's not a personal attack on any member here. I hope that is understood. However, please try telling the Leica owner that just got screwed over by Leica's CS that warranty isn't part of the equation. Especially when the Swaro owner will tell you how Swaro went above and beyone to take care of them, even when they had no right to.
It's more important than you guys lead on, guaranteed, which is one reason Leica is losing ground to the competition. I am all for a person buying whatever they want, for whatever reasons they want though.
It's more important than you guys lead on, guaranteed, which is one reason Leica is losing ground to the competition. I am all for a person buying whatever they want, for whatever reasons they want though.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I won't buy Swaros because of the, to me, horrible flat field optics. And I'm not willing to pay a premium so a second hand buyer can get free repairs. Actually, that's actually what I like about the Leica warranty - no free rides. Even so, I have two Leicas that I bought used without even thinking about the warranty. The worse thing about Leica, to me, is the long wait to see what's new, since they aren't readily available in my location, yet.
dalat
...
Obviously the warranty is very important to you, you keep mentionning that basically in every single post (at least on Leica). That's fine, but it's not as important to others, and I also don't think that the Leica warranty is remotly as terrible as you put it. I don't even know what exactly is the warranty we get here, 5 years or 10 years or something. In any case way more than for any other product I can think of. And good enough for me not to worry about that criteria and rather focus on whether I like the Leica-black more than the Swaro-green :-O
All the 3 or 4 top makers have great products, the differences are mostly minute and buying decisions are mostly down to feel, handling and personal preference of this or that feature, I think we can all agree to that.
In my view, the success of Swarovski has as much to do with perfect marketing (the reputation they made for their CS is a good part of that) as it has with their excellent products. Zeiss, Leica and Nikon make also excellent products, but somehow they don't throw everything behind marketing them in a smart way (they seem unable to hide the fact that binoculars are not that important to their overall business).
Of course I also find the business aspects very interesting, and find it quite amazing how Swaro managed to overtake the traditional leaders by smart management. Similarely fascinating is the history of Leica or Zeiss. I'm aware that these things reflect on the brand image, which naturally creeps into the buying decision. But I try to keep that out of my personal decisions as much as I can.
Your choice, which is fine, but that's why Swaro makes a "non flat field" SLC HD, which can be had brand new for $1600.
Appreciate the comments guys. Interesting as always. Have a great day everybody!
Before you go... take it with you that Swaro didn't roll out that red carpet customer service for me when I called on them about a focuser that wasn't working as well after a few years of use, and an objective lens cover that disappeared during a day in the field... I think people should know they (Swaro CS) are not 100% as some people lead people to believe.
My .02,
CG
So maybe I'm just throwing fuel on the fire but I was quite disappointed that the new Noctivid is a dual hinge affair. It would be interesting to know from an ergonomic standpoint the number of individuals who benefit from this design? For me personally, and all those with smaller IPD's the layout seems counterproductive for getting a sure grip. I have one bin with dual hinges and the barrels leave zero space for my fingers to grip. The UVHD+ is a great format and I wish they would have expanded on that line and pushed for weight savings. Thoughts?
It just looks quite fancy. I like my Hawke 8x43 Sapphire and I find it well balanced and just as a personal preference I like it's substantial feel in the hand. Just feels like you have a proper high performing optical delivery system but it wouldn't be for small handed folks. The thumb indents help a lot. There have been times when I've felt that I could just walk around with it held up to my eyes permanently. My Kowa SV 8x32 single bridge has a very nice comfortable curve to the body which is quite unusual with bins but does add something good especially when held one handed although not so easy to focus while doing so but still possible to some extent.
Didn't Nikon move in the opposite direction with their EDG. Don't recall why that was. Patient argument with Swaro or something?
I don't find any significant benefit either way whether it's single or dual hinge. I never particularly liked the Ultravid in 42mm, sort of round sausagey feel to me.
Maybe a few more sensuous
curves like the Kowa. 8-P
I have a very narrow IPD, so that whenever I pick up a pair of bins, I close the hinge up and then open it a little and then only a minor tweek is required to get a circular FOV. I like the twin/triple/open bridge design a lot because even with the IPD closed down and the space between the barrels non-existent or very narrow, with the two barrels being pretty tubular in shape I can still grip them. I think SF is brilliant at this, but as Alex has pointed out you can get a decent grip on ELs using a different technique, HT is a great balance between trad bin and SF with its shifted focus wheel and hey, I really love using Meoptas and Conquests.
Coming from extensive use of HT and SF, when I gripped the Noctivid barrels with three fingers I got a bit frustrated that my 1st finger landed on the bridge below the focus wheel. I had to move my hand north up the barrel and relinquish some of my grip on the barrel. OK, I or anyone else would get used to that in a very short time but it did seem a shame that Nvid has these elegant gripable tubes and you can't make full use of them.
From a different perspective, now that Leica has an open bridge design it means the consumer has more choice and surely this can't be bad.
Lee
Maybe a few more sensuous
Sounds as if you would like some of the top Meoptas or Zeiss FL.
Lee
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
Hi Holger, I read your original post linked above. Very fascinating! I need to work through the formulas one more time to understand them fully (for example, I was surprised that the virtual image is formed at a distance proportional to the square of the magnification). The sentence at the end of your analysis should be noted by those who tested the Nuctivid at the birdfair and observed great DoF:
Thank you again. Looking forward to reading your book once it is translated into English.
Hello Omid,
To be more precise: If the binocular is focused on infinity, then the accommodation distance of an object (of finite distance) is reduced by the squared inverse of the magnification. This is the reason why a binocular of high magnification has a narrow dof. Of course, you can always focus onto any object of finite distance, too. The virtual image of that object then is at the accommodation distance of infinity. But once again, each of the objects that are now closer than the focusing distance are similarly quickly closing in (in terms of accommodation distance, that is, not in terms of perceived distance, which diminishes only linearly with the inverse magnification).
In other words: If a 10x binocular is focused on infinity, then a tree at distance 20m has an accommodation distance of 20m/100 = 20cm, tough for elder people, who cannot see it sharp. From its size, the tree appears to be at the distance of 20m/10 = 2m (neglecting perspective effects ...).
Thanks, I hope you will like the book ...
Cheers,
Holger
Vespobuteo
Well-known member
It's the same as with the SV and I don't like it. Not very intuitive or ergonomic.
In addition the Noctivids seem to have the strap mounts interfering with the grip (more than the lugs on SV:s do).
http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=596161&d=1472123730
Last edited:
Hello,
I am looking at the Noctivid pictures and specifications. Surely OUTSTANDING optically and in the mechanics. Like the UVHD+, HTs, SF, ELSV, SLC and EDG...
But, like Troubador and Vespobuteo are saing, I see the position of the focus wheel not too logical. Nothing like the HT and SF. And not even like the UVHD+ (and like all the Leica roofs since the Trinovid BA...), with the very large "double" focus wheel.
At this optical level, these "little" things are, for me, the important differences to like ones over the others...
I am looking at the Noctivid pictures and specifications. Surely OUTSTANDING optically and in the mechanics. Like the UVHD+, HTs, SF, ELSV, SLC and EDG...
But, like Troubador and Vespobuteo are saing, I see the position of the focus wheel not too logical. Nothing like the HT and SF. And not even like the UVHD+ (and like all the Leica roofs since the Trinovid BA...), with the very large "double" focus wheel.
At this optical level, these "little" things are, for me, the important differences to like ones over the others...
Agree completely. I also have a narrow IPD and find most open bridge not too comfortable. The only ones I find quite nice to hold are Swaro SV 32mm especially and Zeiss SF 42.
Optics at the top tier level are already excellent, so I would have preferred only a little improvement on optics and more attention given to ergonomics and weight reduction.
Even though they are criticized for it, at least Zeiss considered balance and hand placement in their last set of binos. I found both HT and SF to be designed well and comfy to hold. Noctivid supposedly has good balance, so that's a positive there.
Last edited:
CloseFocus
Well-known member
Agreed. I don't see the point of a forward hinge unless it's absolutely needed. I like the way dual hinged binos look, but in practice, the second hinge just ends up getting in the way.
hgalbraith
Well-known member
Noctovid weight
I would like to support GiGi's statement about the importance of weight reduction in new bins. Saying that the Noctovids are only a few percent heavier than the Swarovski SLs doesn't cut it with me, because I already find the 42mm SVs, Zeiss SF, or Nikon Edges far too heavy. I refuse to consider any bin that is above 25g (which is why the 32 mm SVs are my go-to bin). Sadly, tHe manufacturers appear to be obsessed with fiddling around with disappearingly small "improvements" to the optics while "the last great frontier" - weight reduction goes ignored.
I would like to support GiGi's statement about the importance of weight reduction in new bins. Saying that the Noctovids are only a few percent heavier than the Swarovski SLs doesn't cut it with me, because I already find the 42mm SVs, Zeiss SF, or Nikon Edges far too heavy. I refuse to consider any bin that is above 25g (which is why the 32 mm SVs are my go-to bin). Sadly, tHe manufacturers appear to be obsessed with fiddling around with disappearingly small "improvements" to the optics while "the last great frontier" - weight reduction goes ignored.
Subzero888
Well-known member
I agree GG. I don't have a narrow IPD, but still found it difficult to wrap my fingers around the barrels of SV 8.5x42 and 10x42. The SV 8x32 with long slim barrels and 20oz/600gm is perfect for me. It is the only bin I have which allows me to look through and focus with one hand. An absolute delight to use. The Leica UV 10x32 I tried was too small to be comfortable. I hope to compare the Noctivid to my UVHD 10x42 once they show up in local stores. Can some one who has handled the Noctivid comment on how it handles compared to the SF?
