Noctivid 8x42 tested vs HT and SV Field pro. (2 Viewers)

[GLOBETROTTER]

Noctivid coatings.

They look different than the HD plus coatings.

 

[SuperDuty]

Always, I got caught up in the glowing 10X50 SV threads, sprung for a pair, then over time realized I couldn't tolerate the CA, for many CA isn't an issue though. I'm learning to be more measured and non hyperbolic with my assessments, or at least I think I am.:king: Not slamming the SV either, if it weren't for the one incompatibility (for me), I would still own them.

But better to check directly of course.:t:

 

[typo]

David,

Can you share the source with us? Like a title and/or a ISBN number?

Thanks

Jan

Jan,

I found that download as an isolated chapter without credits, but it's obviously from Warren J Smith's "Modern Optica Engineering" series. I think the 4th, 2008 is the latest edition.
ISBN-10: 0071476873
ISBN-13: 978-0071476874

David

 

[Vespobuteo]

They look different than the HD plus coatings.

Interesting. Perhaps Leica have manages to increase the number of layers.
First photo looks a bit Swaro like, the last looks like an LSD-trip..

 

[Dennis Mau]

I am not saying I tried the Noctivid. I was referring to previous Leca Ultravids Plus and such. It just makes sense to me if Leica uses a lot of baffling to curb flare it could affect the exit pupil.

 

[Dennis Mau]

With the HT who is a superb binoculars observing with low sun the binocular produces as others veil and crescent glare.

With the Noctivid NO. in fact in so good that only a slight veil was visible with the sun almost in the FOV.

Yes is so good and the contrast is better on NV and easy to notice than the SV and HT too.

The plasticity and rendering of this binocular is something special and probably some of the Magic of the Leica camera lenses was put on this model.

But better to check directly of course.:t:

I am going to have to try a pair of these new Noctivids. If you can get that close to the sun without veiling glare and the contrast is better than an SV or HT these must be some binoculars.

 

[Dennis Mau]

"Swarovision's without a doubt are an easier view" ... Without actually having tried the Noctivid, a completely new product? Great stuff.

And you want to be taken seriously?

Hermann

Those coatings look really different. Maybe Leica is increasing contrast in that way. Flare would have to be better controlled with baffles I am sure.

 

[jan van daalen]

Jan,

I found that download as an isolated chapter without credits, but it's obviously from Warren J Smith's "Modern Optica Engineering" series. I think the 4th, 2008 is the latest edition.
ISBN-10: 0071476873
ISBN-13: 978-0071476874

David

Thanks David, I'm gonna order some right away.

Jan

 

[Iceberg slim]

I'm reading the reviews and very entertaining, forthright and informative they are, but actual time and usage in the field is i guess what we should be really wanting to really know about?.
The few weeks i have seen actually out birding have been excellent, the clarity, and sharpness of image is my No1 priority, staring into the tops of Alder trees looking at Redpolls and Siskins very easy, going through a big flock of Linnets and Meadow Pipits trying to find a scarcer bird a lot easier imho they are better than my old Els 10x42 Swarovision (Mk1)s, the Nocts just add a new feel to my birding, pretty simple really, i don't want to sound patronising, but its just my opinion really....

 

[A2GG]

I'm reading the reviews and very entertaining, forthright and informative they are, but actual time and usage in the field is i guess what we should be really wanting to really know about?.
The few weeks i have seen actually out birding have been excellent, the clarity, and sharpness of image is my No1 priority, staring into the tops of Alder trees looking at Redpolls and Siskins very easy, going through a big flock of Linnets and Meadow Pipits trying to find a scarcer bird a lot easier imho they are better than my old Els 10x42 Swarovision (Mk1)s, the Nocts just add a new feel to my birding, pretty simple really, i don't want to sound patronising, but its just my opinion really....

Yes, I prefer reviews like this...thank you. Lee's reviews are nice too because he tests the bins in the field and reports on how well they did observing nature.

 

[Kevin Conville]

I don't come around here much anymore, but I wanted to read the latest of what folks are saying about these new Noctivids.
Unfortunately the dialog is being polluted by the same old…

 

[DavidBowman]

Just a quick few comments, having used the 8 x 42 Noctivids, almost daily in the field for 8 hours at a time, since the day of release in the UK. Firstly, handling. I've been used to using Ultravids for years and found the transition to the NVs tricky at first. This is due to the already noted higher placement of the focus wheel, just above the strap lugs. I soon learned that if you just hold them slightly differently (left hand slightly lower down the barrel, right hand higher and fingers slightly splayed) then they handle really well and it becomes a non-issue. Field of view is excellent, though not as wide as the SFs. Though you do have to wind them in for close focus (2 turns from infinity to 2 metres), for general birding the focussing is superb - a quarter turn covers from a few yards to infinity, with exceptional apparent DOF leading to minimal re-focussing. In terms of weight, they are beautifully balanced and so I don't experience this as an issue, though some might. For the viewing experience they offer, though, I'd put up with a lot! Its hard to describe if you haven't tried them, but they deliver a more real and immersive image than anything I've tried before. There is a combination of sharpness, brightness, colour accuracy and saturation, depth of field and three-dimensionality which is simply awesome. They clearly won't suit everyone, particularly if people are looking for the widest field of view or the flattest image possible but if its the most beautiful, almost tangible image of birds you're after, then, for the moment at least, I think the NVs are unbeatable. I've also been able to test them in the field against SFs, UVs and the most recent SVs, though not HTs, with several groups of birders repeatedly swapping bins round between us. Doing this is an interesting process because, in almost every case, users of other premium bins have uttered an almost involuntary "wow!", or something similar, when first looking through the NVs. The shared consensus has been that the NVs deliver a noticeably superior image, setting aside individual preferences in terms of weight, handling, FOV etc. Looking at birds silhouetted against the light, all felt that the NVs simply seemed brighter, pulled in more colour and had less veiling-glare. The proof of the pudding is that several have already ordered NVs and others are giving it some serious thought!
Cheers David

 

[Alexis Powell]

Just a quick few comments, having used the 8 x 42 Noctivids, almost daily in the field for 8 hours at a time, since the day of release in the UK. Firstly, handling. I've been used to using Ultravids for years and found the transition to the NVs tricky at first. This is due to the already noted higher placement of the focus wheel, just above the strap lugs. I soon learned that if you just hold them slightly differently (left hand slightly lower down the barrel, right hand higher and fingers slightly splayed) then they handle really well and it becomes a non-issue. Field of view is excellent, though not as wide as the SFs. Though you do have to wind them in for close focus (2 turns from infinity to 2 metres), for general birding the focussing is superb - a quarter turn covers from a few yards to infinity, with exceptional apparent DOF leading to minimal re-focussing. In terms of weight, they are beautifully balanced and so I don't experience this as an issue, though some might. For the viewing experience they offer, though, I'd put up with a lot! Its hard to describe if you haven't tried them, but they deliver a more real and immersive image than anything I've tried before. There is a combination of sharpness, brightness, colour accuracy and saturation, depth of field and three-dimensionality which is simply awesome. They clearly won't suit everyone, particularly if people are looking for the widest field of view or the flattest image possible but if its the most beautiful, almost tangible image of birds you're after, then, for the moment at least, I think the NVs are unbeatable. I've also been able to test them in the field against SFs, UVs and the most recent SVs, though not HTs, with several groups of birders repeatedly swapping bins round between us. Doing this is an interesting process because, in almost every case, users of other premium bins have uttered an almost involuntary "wow!", or something similar, when first looking through the NVs. The shared consensus has been that the NVs deliver a noticeably superior image, setting aside individual preferences in terms of weight, handling, FOV etc. Looking at birds silhouetted against the light, all felt that the NVs simply seemed brighter, pulled in more colour and had less veiling-glare. The proof of the pudding is that several have already ordered NVs and others are giving it some serious thought!
Cheers David

I know it wasn't your intention, but this reads to me like pretty damning criticism.

...For the viewing experience they offer, though, I'd put up with a lot!...

And it seems, from your description, that you do!

I'll give them a try, but it seems that the Noctivids aren't quite there when it comes to elegant, mature, considered design as a "whole package" birding binocular. Too bad. Surprising too, as I'd think that Leica would know these things.

We've seen a lot of very good bins in the past that don't quite get it right. Some examples off the top of my head: Nikon 8x32 SE with its poor hang, low ratio and stiff-in-cold focus, eye placement issues for some users; Canon 10x42 L IS with its weight and odd ergonomics; original B&L 8x42 Elite with its too high focusing ratio and contrast issues; original Swarovski 8.5x42 EL with its painfully low ratio focus; original Zeiss 8x40 Victory with its poorly placed strap lugs, contrast issues, and plastic feeling focus/diopter; new Swift 8.5x44 Audubon with its too flexible ocular lens yoke. You might say that every bin has its failings for some users, which is true. What bother me are design flaws that could have been avoided without compromising the bin's utility for those who get on with it regardless. Some of the above models were fixed with mid-model updates. I'm looking forward to the next incarnation of the Noctivid.

--AP

 

[DavidBowman]

I know it wasn't your intention, but this reads to me like pretty damning criticism.



And it seems, from your description, that you do!

I'll give them a try, but it seems that the Noctivids aren't quite there when it comes to elegant, mature, considered design as a "whole package" birding binocular. Too bad. Surprising too, as I'd think that Leica would know these things.

We've seen a lot of very good bins in the past that don't quite get it right. Some examples off the top of my head: Nikon 8x32 SE with its poor hang, low ratio and stiff-in-cold focus, eye placement issues for some users; Canon 10x42 L IS with its weight and odd ergonomics; original B&L 8x42 Elite with its too high focusing ratio and contrast issues; original Swarovski 8.5x42 EL with its painfully low ratio focus; original Zeiss 8x40 Victory with its poorly placed strap lugs, contrast issues, and plastic feeling focus/diopter; new Swift 8.5x44 Audubon with its too flexible ocular lens yoke. You might say that every bin has its failings for some users, which is true. What bother me are design flaws that could have been avoided without compromising the bin's utility for those who get on with it regardless. Some of the above models were fixed with mid-model updates. I'm looking forward to the next incarnation of the Noctivid.

--AP

Just trying to give a balanced critique! The NVs are a brilliant bino - probably the best currently on the market, taken as a whole package. Again, the general consensus from a fair variety of birders was that they outperform their rivals in the most important way - i.e. the experience of using them to look at birds and other wildlife. People critiqued the yellow image cast, soft outer field and (for some people) off-putting level of rolling globe in the SFs. They also weren't taken by the flat, cold, duller image and rolling globe of the SVs. The superior image quality of the NVs drew many compliments from afficionados of other premium bins.
So, we're not talking about design flaws for any of these brilliant binos. Its more a matter of design philosophy and opting for what suits you - optically, there is no free lunch and they are all compromised in some way. I always go for the best possible image quality, with the most accurate colour - as a birder, this is critical when seeing accurate leg or bill colour of small birds in cover can be a key aspect of ID. I tried all the other top-line bins before choosing the NVs and have definitely made the right choice - for me!
Cheers David

 

[james holdsworth]

Again, given the specs and ambitions of the NV, the HT and / or the SLC should be the benchmark, as both seem to be the optical equivalents. I would be amazed if the NV are really a big step [or any step] up on these two, as they both have great contrast, colour neutral, clean whites, very bright and great CA / glare control.

 

[GLOBETROTTER]

Again, given the specs and ambitions of the NV, the HT and / or the SLC should be the benchmark, as both seem to be the optical equivalents. I would be amazed if the NV are really a big step [or any step] up on these two, as they both have great contrast, colour neutral, clean whites, very bright and great CA / glare control.

To be honest and having used both HT & NV in the field for a while the NV surpass the HT in glare control by a country mile, in fact every time i can see slight withe veil thru the HT when compare with the NV.

Same happen when people compare the old FL vs the HT so there is a improvement.

The 3D of the NV and plasticity is there and is not needed to be a photographer or cinematographer with a very well trained eye to pick up this details.

The color is better in the NV than HT, the contrast like 2 times better etc etc.

For me is a clear improvement and having used both side by side in many different light conditions shows me the true different more than a quick look at your local seller.

Take a look to this links guys

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/problem-modern-lenses/

 

[Alexis Powell]

...Take a look to this links guys

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/problem-modern-lenses/

Hilarious article. Surely the author is joking. If not...sad. And I say that as an owner of many of the lenses he likes.

--AP

 

[Torview]

When I put an 8x42 NV against my 8.5x42SVFP the other day, the SV was clearly brighter, had better contrast and a more generous afov, for me the SV was clearly "better", of course this is just one opinion, but I surely was not seeing anything remarkable in the NV, and let me again state what a huge fan I am of the UVHD+ 7X42.

 

[GLOBETROTTER]

When I put an 8x42 NV against my 8.5x42SVFP the other day, the SV was clearly brighter, had better contrast and a more generous afov, for me the SV was clearly "better", of course this is just one opinion, but I surely was not seeing anything remarkable in the NV, and let me again state what a huge fan I am of the UVHD+ 7X42.

Better contrast on SV than on NV ????

WOW !!!! amazing and interesting how different each person see.

 

[DavidBowman]

When I put an 8x42 NV against my 8.5x42SVFP the other day, the SV was clearly brighter, had better contrast and a more generous afov, for me the SV was clearly "better", of course this is just one opinion, but I surely was not seeing anything remarkable in the NV, and let me again state what a huge fan I am of the UVHD+ 7X42.

It just demonstrates the difference between peoples' vision, perceptions and maybe brand-loyalty . So far, eight of my friends who use SVs have tried the NVs. All have commented on the significantly better brightness and colour-richness of the NVs. One good friend who only bought his SVs six months ago just handed me back the NVs with a grimace and said "If I'd known they were coming out I'd never have bought SVs!"

Cheers David