• 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.
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia

Noctivid 7x42 will never be made? (1 Viewer)

ZDHart

Well-known member
Supporter
There will always be some combinations of magnification and objective size that are the biggest sellers and some that are not big sellers.

It's understandable that 8x32, 8x42, and 10x42 will be the biggest sellers (aside from some the pocket models). But there are still larger magnification and larger objective size options to be sold! And, lower magnification/large objective options, as well! Money to still be made there!

Those manufacturers who eliminate some of the more "special" combination bins may enjoy good sales success with their scaled down production offerings, but they leave some revenue on the table for those manufacturers who can economically continue to offer models, such as the Ultravid HD Plus 7x42.

As light fades on my property views right now, I shift from my 10x42 SF and 8x32 SF to my UVHD+ 7x42 and I am immediately rewarded with that dramatically wonderful Leica UVHD+ 7x42 view. How sweet it is! They don't offer a super-wide FOV, nor a super-flat view, and so what? When the view is that clear, that sharp, and that beautiful... those other optical aspects are of little significance.

If you have NOT experienced the UVHD+ 7x42, you probably just wouldn't quite understand.

I would not expect Leica to offer a 7x42 Noctivid. But, I would not be surprised to see that they continue to offer the superb 7x42 UVHD+, for some time to come. Yeah... they're pretty ding dang cool bins! :D
 
Last edited:

ZDHart

Well-known member
Supporter
I'm a hunter (in addition to a birdwatcher and general nature observer) and I've got a Leica Ultravid 7x42 HD+ on order.

Thought process:

I prefer 42mm over 50/54/56mm or 32mm. The 50's are too bulky/heavy, and the 32's are harder to hold steady & not as bright.

In the 42mm format, I'm not too fond of 10x due to the smaller exist pupil. Between 7x and 8x - the difference in magnification is negligible, but I'll get slightly easier eye placement with the 7x and slightly more light gathering (for my 25 year old eyes).

The Ultravid 7x42 is rather compact to boot - so I'm getting 42mm performance from a body which rivals most 32mm's in size. Sort of the best of both worlds.

As it stands, I'm a 'one' binocular man, so for me, it's about finding the perfect compromise, rather than picking a bunch of different tools for their individual strengths. Hopefully the 7x42's do the trick.

Or...I'll end up with the disease many of you've got, and start collecting the bloody things.


Dude... I wouldn't be surprised if you add a 10x42, to go with your magnificent UVHD+ 7x42. But you will do so in joy!

You will NOT regret having the UVHD+ 7x42. I have no shortage of alpha binoculars to choose from, and when I received the UVHD+ 7x42 binoculars, I was astounded. There was no way I could send those back! KEEPERS.

In the dim early light, and dim late light hunting hours, you'll find the 7x42 to be fabulous! And the view? The handling? The stellar build quality? Sheesh. It is no wonder why so many people LOVE these bins!

You'll see, when you receive yours.

As a hunter, there will likely be times when you will appreciate having a 10x42, as well. What a great pairing they, and the 7x42, make.

Is the UVHD+ 10x42 an awesome companion to the 7x42? You BET it is! And, the price -as with the 7x42- is quite right! No "latest/greatest" price extortion!
 
Last edited:

Mac308

Well-known member
As a hunter, there will likely be times when you will appreciate having a 10x42, as well.

As a hunter for many decades, I just have not found that to be the case. I've never had a problem with 7X on the plains on an antelope hunt, or in the mountains on an elk hunt. I've hunted from Maine to Alaska, but mostly here in Montana. Magnification is overrated on a big game hunt. The ability to resolve detail is king. And as I mentioned before, if 7 or 8x isn't enough, you'll need a LOT more than 10X... that's when the spotter comes out.
 

Mike F

Well-known member
As a hunter for many decades, I just have not found that to be the case. I've never had a problem with 7X on the plains on an antelope hunt, or in the mountains on an elk hunt. I've hunted from Maine to Alaska, but mostly here in Montana. Magnification is overrated on a big game hunt. The ability to resolve detail is king. And as I mentioned before, if 7 or 8x isn't enough, you'll need a LOT more than 10X... that's when the spotter comes out.
I'm not a hunter (or a birder) so my preferences/requirements are somewhat different to many here. I will also say that I own a 7x42 UVHD+ and love it for all the reasons often stated on this site - it's a truly special binocular. But, when it comes to resolving detail my humble opinion is that magnification is the determining factor (given an equal quality binocular). I realise that the ability to hand hold a high magnification binocular is often the determining factor here, but I'm fortunate to have steady hands, so apart from situations of adverse conditions or situations which more or less demand the use of a 7x (on a boat for example) I will use my 10x42NV or 12x50 UVHD+ when detail resolution is the most important consideration. Those same situations don't usually demand a large FOV either - at least not for me.
I think it's all down to personal preference in the end and I totally understand someone being perfectly happy with a 7x in all situations. There are certainly many benefits to 7x binoculars, but for me detail resolution isn't one of them. Just my opinion.......
 

Mac308

Well-known member
'm not a hunter (or a birder) so my preferences/requirements are somewhat different to many here. I will also say that I own a 7x42 UVHD+ and love it for all the reasons often stated on this site - it's a truly special binocular. But, when it comes to resolving detail my humble opinion is that magnification is the determining factor (given an equal quality binocular). I realise that the ability to hand hold a high magnification binocular is often the determining factor here, but I'm fortunate to have steady hands, so apart from situations of adverse conditions or situations which more or less demand the use of a 7x (on a boat for example) I will use my 10x42NV or 12x50 UVHD+ when detail resolution is the most important consideration. Those same situations don't usually demand a large FOV either - at least not for me.
I think it's all down to personal preference in the end and I totally understand someone being perfectly happy with a 7x in all situations. There are certainly many benefits to 7x binoculars, but for me detail resolution isn't one of them. Just my opinion.......
Mike, you’re confusing magnification with resolution. They’re different things.

Resolution is the ability of an optical instrument to deliver the very finest possible clarity of detail. Magnification is the ability of a magnifying optical instrument to make an object appear larger/closer based on its magnifying power.

You’re saying that because an object appears larger and closer with your 10x over the 7x, you’re achieving greater resolution. You’re not. In fact, because the 10x has one more glass element than the 7x, it’s entirely possible the 7x is giving finer resolution than the 10x. However, the object always will appear larger/closer with the 10x, and you may see more features of that object. But that’s NOT resolution.
 

dorubird

Well-known member
Romania
Yes, resolution is another optical aspect that has nothing to do with magnification! But ultimately it matters whether or not your eye sees more detail in an object at long distance... With 10x our eyes will perceive more details than with a 7x at the same optical quality and same long distance. For example a small writing at long distance, the ribs of some leaves at long distance, a fine plumage in a bird at long distance, details on the Moon, they are all easier to see with 10x than 7x. (An exception may be made only when we have big problems to stabilize 10x, in this case we see about the same level of detail!)

If we want visual comfort and depth of field then 7x, if we want to recognize more easily some birds at a long distance and bigger AFOV then 10x
 
Last edited:

Mike F

Well-known member
Mike, you’re confusing magnification with resolution. They’re different things.

Resolution is the ability of an optical instrument to deliver the very finest possible clarity of detail. Magnification is the ability of a magnifying optical instrument to make an object appear larger/closer based on its magnifying power.

You’re saying that because an object appears larger and closer with your 10x over the 7x, you’re achieving greater resolution. You’re not. In fact, because the 10x has one more glass element than the 7x, it’s entirely possible the 7x is giving finer resolution than the 10x. However, the object always will appear larger/closer with the 10x, and you may see more features of that object. But that’s NOT resolution.
Yes, you're absolutely right, I was. And I do know the difference(!) but I replied in haste and had thought that you meant detail retrieval rather than resolution. Given similar quality binoculars (and I would argue that the 10x42 NV is at least on a par with the 7x42 UV+) you will see more details with a 10x vs 7x.
 

dorubird

Well-known member
Romania
on the other hand there is the concept in atronomy of "resolving magnification". "Resolving Magnification" it is how many times we have to enlarge an image at an angle so that the eye reaches the separation power of the lens. The separation power of the human eye is 1 minute of arc. According to some calculations made by others, this means that Resolving Magnification is equivalent somewhere to the radius of the objective. The "resolving magnification" indicates from which magnification upwards the objective is exploited at its maximum resolution.
For example a 42mm bino has 12x "resolving magnification"
 
Last edited:

Patudo

Well-known member
Mike, you’re confusing magnification with resolution. They’re different things.

Resolution is the ability of an optical instrument to deliver the very finest possible clarity of detail. Magnification is the ability of a magnifying optical instrument to make an object appear larger/closer based on its magnifying power.

You’re saying that because an object appears larger and closer with your 10x over the 7x, you’re achieving greater resolution. You’re not. In fact, because the 10x has one more glass element than the 7x, it’s entirely possible the 7x is giving finer resolution than the 10x. However, the object always will appear larger/closer with the 10x, and you may see more features of that object. But that’s NOT resolution.

There is a link between the two though, as your last but one sentence notes. There is not, to my mind, a great practical difference between "seeing more features" and "the ability to resolve detail". I agree a top-quality 7x will show more detail (small text at distance, as mentioned by dorubird, being a good example) than an average 7x, but there comes a point, distance-wise, that the detail you wish to see (ie. to read the text) can simply be achieved better with 10x magnification than 7x. I can't speak as to their qualities for hunting, but 10x does have greater reach (at least to me) than 7x, and if I need to find distant targets I much prefer the former.

In saying that, some folks simply see better, or differently than others; my brother can pick out specks in the sky better with his 8.5x than I can with my 10x (much to my frustration at times; although it seems that on closer targets I'll sometimes pick out details such as colour or markings that he misses).

I very seldom use my 7x binoculars now because so much of my observations are made at distance. I (lucky me), have the choice between 7x, 8x, 10x and 12x and, looking back over the years, I have consistently used 10x the most, maybe something like 40% of the time, with 8x used maybe 35%, 12x 15-20%, and 7x not more than 5% now (though used more often in the past). I ought to sell my 7xs really - but on those occasions I use the 7x42 Dialyt the beauty of its image gives me such enjoyment I just know the regret of losing it outweighs what I could get for it. Likewise, the old Swift 7x35 extra wide offers a truly panoramic view - edge sharpness is far from good, and I do like my image to be sharp to the edge, but you see so much that I can forgive it that. Would that I had better opportunities to use these binoculars whose qualities I greatly appreciate and enjoy, but which are not as important for my birding as the ability to see more detail, or to resolve a faraway speck from the background of sky, call it what you will.
 
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia

Users who are viewing this thread

Top