Noctivid eyecups (2 Viewers)

[TonyWilliams]

I own a couple of Swarovski EL bins - I'm a professional ornithologist working internationally in hot and humid climates with bins used almost daily - in five years the rubber armouring has completely fallen off both my ELs twice and had to be sent to Swarovski for repair. Colleagues with other brands have had no such issues. Until Swarovski start using non-biodegradable armour their bins are not tools that can withstand regular field use in hot weather, so I require an alternative.

Hearing good things about Leica build quality I ordered the UVHD+ 8x32 and 7x42 to try. Brilliant optically, but just not useable for me. I don't wear glasses and when using bins jam the fully extended eyecups into my sockets. But the eyecups are far too short on the 8x32 to do this, and whilst marginally better on the 7x42 it's still giving me blackouts. I've had no such issues with Swaro or Zeiss bins. I sent both back, and am now planning on ordering the Noctivid 8x42 to try. I know everyone's face shape is different, but to save me the hassle I was wondering if any members could advise if the Noctivid has similarly short eyecups to the Ultravid series?

 

[John M Robinson]

So they have too much eye relief, they’d work better for you with longer eye cups? I’m a big Leica fan, love the image, but the 32 size BNs and Ultravids are too finicky. The 42 size are fine, as are my 7x35 Retrovids. I tried the 10x42 Noctovids in the store and they were fine. Like you, I also don’t wear glasses with my bins, but I have deep set eyes, for what that’s worth.

Sorry I really don’t know the answer to your question about relative lengths of the eyecups, I imagine eye relief is stated in their specs.

 

[TonyWilliams]

So they have too much eye relief, they’d work better for you with longer eye cups? I’m a big Leica fan, love the image, but the 32 size BNs and Ultravids are too finicky. The 42 size are fine, as are my 7x35 Retrovids. I tried the 10x42 Noctovids in the store and they were fine. Like you, I also don’t wear glasses with my bins, but I have deep set eyes, for what that’s worth.

Sorry I really don’t know the answer to your question about relative lengths of the eyecups, I imagine eye relief is stated in their specs.

Thanks. Yes I suppose the issue is eye relief is too long for me in the Ultravids I tried, it felt like longer eyecups would have solved the problem.

 

[jafritten]

I sent both back, and am now planning on ordering the Noctivid 8x42 to try. I know everyone's face shape is different, but to save me the hassle I was wondering if any members could advise if the Noctivid has similarly short eyecups to the Ultravid series?

As you said, everyone's face shape is different and so is the way people bring up their binoculars to their eyes. For what it's worth, the UV 8x32s and the UV 10x42s don't give me blackouts, the UV 7x42s require a more careful placement even though (or: because?) they have greater eye relief. The Noctivids in 8x42 didn't work for me at all because it was so difficult for me to get a view without blackouts.

I hope, they'll work for you! The image is addictive.

 

[Chotacabras]

Tony, you sound like me, face-shape-wise. I recently tested a lot of binoculars, to replace (or rather supplement) my practically perfect 1990s Leica BA 8x42s. Sadly all current Leica 8x42 models (including Noctivid) had too-short eyecups for me, producing irritating blackouts. [Though of course it's not necessarily the case that you'd get the same, Noctivids might work for you.] Given these issues, I went for Swarovski EL 8.5x42s: and even on these, eyecups are slightly too short for my face. Eyecup length was also okay for me on Zeiss SFL 8x40s, but I ruled these out because I lack confidence in Zeiss build quality (which might just be me, I'm only a sample size of 1). Secondhand Leica BNs might be an option to consider, as was suggested to me when I sought advice here: I bet they'd survive the tropics! And I suppose there are workarounds to insufficient eyecup extension, like glueing a rubber extension ring to the eyecups: but that feels a bit heath-robinsonian with such costly devices.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Tony, you sound like me, face-shape-wise. I recently tested a lot of binoculars, to replace (or rather supplement) my practically perfect 1990s Leica BA 8x42s. Sadly all current Leica 8x42 models (including Noctivid) had too-short eyecups for me, producing irritating blackouts. [Though of course it's not necessarily the case that you'd get the same, Noctivids might work for you.] Given these issues, I went for Swarovski EL 8.5x42s: and even on these, eyecups are slightly too short for my face. Eyecup length was also okay for me on Zeiss SFL 8x40s, but I ruled these out because I lack confidence in Zeiss build quality (which might just be me, I'm only a sample size of 1). Secondhand Leica BNs might be an option to consider, as was suggested to me when I sought advice here: I bet they'd survive the tropics! And I suppose there are workarounds to insufficient eyecup extension, like glueing a rubber extension ring to the eyecups: but that feels a bit heath-robinsonian with such costly devices.

Thanks, I will consider the BNs! The ELs work well for me, so maybe there is hope for the Noctivids. I recall trying out someone's Ultravid 10x42s many years ago and they worked fine, so I was surprised when the 8x32 and 7x42 were such a poor fit. Agree with you on build quality of Zeiss, I've not been impressed with models I've tried (although no blackouts issues!)

 

[John M Robinson]

Thanks, I will consider the BNs! The ELs work well for me, so maybe there is hope for the Noctivids. I recall trying out someone's Ultravid 10x42s many years ago and they worked fine, so I was surprised when the 8x32 and 7x42 were such a poor fit. Agree with you on build quality of Zeiss, I've not been impressed with models I've tried (although no blackouts issues!)

I get the 8x32s being troublesome, but I’m surprised the 7x42 don’t work for you.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I get the 8x32s being troublesome, but I’m surprised the 7x42 don’t work for you.

As was I as I'd read great things about the ease of view. When I completely unscrewed the eyecups then placed them back in they were the perfect length to allow me see the image without blackouts (although I would have had to secure them with tape to keep them from falling out!), but once properly screwed in and fully extended they were just too short for me.

 

[William Lewis]

Hi Tony.

Sorry to hear about your El armour issues, I suppose there is a good case for biodegradable armour but maybe a longer term of say 150 years before the biodegredation begins might have been a better design.

I also found the eye cups on the noctivid didn't extend far enough unfortunately.

Just about the only swarro's that still use actual "armour" is the habicht line - they are very robust tools if you can live with their quirks.

By the way you have my dream job although I'm not sure my wife would think the same ...

Will

 

[TonyWilliams]

Hi Glenn,

The 8x32 and 10x32 Ultravids are listed as having the same eye relief (with the 8x32 actually fractionally longer at 13.3 mm vs 13.2 mm), see the first image.
But seemingly in contradiction of this, the 10x32 has a longer eyecup as shown in the second image.
So the slightly longer 'standoff' of the 10x32 eyecup may explain your differing experience with the 8x32 and 10x32 models.


The issue of seemingly contradictory eyecup length has risen before with the x50 Ultravids, see post #32 at: Where is the Leica Ultravid 8x50 HD-Plus?
And similarly with the x42's, while the 7x42 has the longest ER, the 10x42 has the longest eyecup.

Usefully, Canip/ Pinac provides a measurement of the effective ER of the binoculars that he's tested, see: The PINACOLLECTION – Binoculars Today
In relation to the effective (vs listed) ER of the Ultravid HD+ models:

8x32 - 12 mm (13.3)

7x42 - 14 mm (17)
8x42 - 13.5 mm (15.5)
10x42 - 13.5 mm (16)

8x50 - 14 mm (17)
10x50 - 12.5 mm (15)
12x50 - 11 mm (13)


But as to why the contradiction exists between the listed ER and eyecup length across the various Ultravid lines . . . ?


John

Hi CharleyBird and Mike,

I’ve never understood the assignment of the short and long eyecups on the UV line
As indicated in the attachment to CB's post #26, the long ones are only fitted as standard to the 10x42, 8x50 and 12x50
And an image from a 2013 catalogue confirms this (also note the eyecups unique to the two BL x42 models)

However, the listed eye relief figures from shortest to longest, as shown in the specifications attached to post #24, are as follows:
• 8x42 15.5 mm; 10x42 16 mm; 7x42 17 mm
• 12x50 13 mm; 10x50 15 mm; 8x50 17 mm

So clearly eye relief isn't the deciding factor


John

I was browsing old threads and found this. It appears that the 10x Ultravids have longer eyecup lengths than the 7/8s. This makes sense as I recalled looking through a 10x42 UV in the past with no issues. So perhaps if I can get my hands on some 10x42 eyecups and put them on a 7x42 my problem will be solved?!

 

[TonyWilliams]

Hi Tony.

Sorry to hear about your El armour issues, I suppose there is a good case for biodegradable armour but maybe a longer term of say 150 years before the biodegredation begins might have been a better design.

I also found the eye cups on the noctivid didn't extend far enough unfortunately.

Just about the only swarro's that still use actual "armour" is the habicht line - they are very robust tools if you can live with their quirks.

By the way you have my dream job although I'm not sure my wife would think the same ...

Will

One solution I'm considering is getting some older used Swaros. I think pre-2010 models (possibly later) didn't use the biodegradable armour. I would be interested to try the habichts but the narrow FOV puts me off.

 

[Craig H]

You probably know already but just in case.....I had been using my 8x32 UltravidHD+ for two years and tolerating the short eye cups and thinking I had extended them to the max. It was only when I was discussing with my local optics dealer that I discovered there was another click stop. It took a bit more pressure to get it but it made all the difference to me. Quite possibly me just being a bit dumb.

 

[Patudo]

The 8x30 and 10x40 Habichts aren't narrow FOV - but my concern would be the eyepiece lens fogging up in very humid tropical conditions. You have to place your eyeball quite close to the glass due to their short eye relief - which means you'll almost certainly not get blackouts, but the close proximity can result in fogging. It's more of an issue in cold weather, but can happen if it's very still and humid, as may be the case in forested areas. Focus speed may also be an issue if your birds are close in and moving about erratically. Birding was a fringe activity back when they were designed.

They are well built though and the GA (rubber) versions (which may not be easy to find) have the traditional tough rubber armour, unsexy but hard wearing.

 

[Conndomat]

Agree with you on build quality of Zeiss, I've not been impressed with models I've tried (although no blackouts issues!)

Hello Tony,

which Zeiss models have you tried?

Andreas

 

[Canip]

when using bins I jam the fully extended eyecups into my sockets.

Timid question: Why are you doing that?
And:
Could you not live with a different method of placing the bino before your eyes (I probably use a dozen different methods, depending on the model I use)?

 

[hopster]

I own a couple of Swarovski EL bins - I'm a professional ornithologist working internationally in hot and humid climates with bins used almost daily - in five years the rubber armouring has completely fallen off both my ELs twice and had to be sent to Swarovski for repair. Colleagues with other brands have had no such issues. Until Swarovski start using non-biodegradable armour their bins are not tools that can withstand regular field use in hot weather, so I require an alternative.

Hearing good things about Leica build quality I ordered the UVHD+ 8x32 and 7x42 to try. Brilliant optically, but just not useable for me. I don't wear glasses and when using bins jam the fully extended eyecups into my sockets. But the eyecups are far too short on the 8x32 to do this, and whilst marginally better on the 7x42 it's still giving me blackouts. I've had no such issues with Swaro or Zeiss bins. I sent both back, and am now planning on ordering the Noctivid 8x42 to try. I know everyone's face shape is different, but to save me the hassle I was wondering if any members could advise if the Noctivid has similarly short eyecups to the Ultravid series?

You should be OK, I usually use the NV 8x with glasses but if not then fully extended works fine for me (though see below).

Having said that, there is no reason to discard a great binocular just because it has a little too much ER. Just add a (winged if necessary) rubber eyecup! I do this with the Zeiss VP 8x25 when using it without glasses and it works very well also helping with the image and fixing the right eye position. I can also do it with the NV both with and without glasses to get exactly the correct ER in combination with the click stops. I find that important to ensure the best image circle and avoid unnecessary CA.

This one (OT004-11 @ 40mm diameter) is a nice tight fit on the NV eyecups and being winged also helps keep out extraneous light:

2PCS Dia.27-40mm Rubber Eyepiece Eye Cups for Stereo Microscope or Telescope | eBay

Looks like it's out of stock there but there will undoubtedly be other sources and other eyecups. You may want to cut out some of the inner rings with a small scissors to ensure that there is no vignetting of the image - a 5 minute job.

Let us know how you get on. The NV gives a beautiful, informative and addictive image in my opinion as well as being fantastically sharp in the centre, and I don't think the armour will ever fall off!

M

 

[Russ Bart]

I own a couple of Swarovski EL bins - I'm a professional ornithologist working internationally in hot and humid climates with bins used almost daily - in five years the rubber armouring has completely fallen off both my ELs twice and had to be sent to Swarovski for repair. Colleagues with other brands have had no such issues. Until Swarovski start using non-biodegradable armour their bins are not tools that can withstand regular field use in hot weather, so I require an alternative.

Hearing good things about Leica build quality I ordered the UVHD+ 8x32 and 7x42 to try. Brilliant optically, but just not useable for me. I don't wear glasses and when using bins jam the fully extended eyecups into my sockets. But the eyecups are far too short on the 8x32 to do this, and whilst marginally better on the 7x42 it's still giving me blackouts. I've had no such issues with Swaro or Zeiss bins. I sent both back, and am now planning on ordering the Noctivid 8x42 to try. I know everyone's face shape is different, but to save me the hassle I was wondering if any members could advise if the Noctivid has similarly short eyecups to the Ultravid series?

I have noctivid 8x42 (which I do not recommend owing to focus issues) .I use the eyecup retracted and have Zeiss night owls rubber eyecup fitted. Nice and comfy .

 

[hopster]

I have noctivid 8x42 (which I do not recommend owing to focus issues) .I use the eyecup retracted and have Zeiss night owls rubber eyecup fitted. Nice and comfy .

What focus issues Russ?

 

[Russ Bart]

My Leica Noctivid 8x42 have been back 3 times to Leica Portugal as they seize up at the focus ends of the range. They say it is because I force the focus? No others I tried do it.

 

[hopster]

My Leica Noctivid 8x42 have been back 3 times to Leica Portugal as they seize up at the focus ends of the range. They say it is because I force the focus? No others I tried do it.

Oh. 3 times with no resolution sounds excessive and annoying!

Mine don't have that problem and without glasses I am up against one end of the focus range for infinity, though I usually use them with glasses now. I did once try a Zeiss HT 8x42 that almost jammed at the infinity end, like it was stuck in treacle internally. I think it had been sitting on the dealer's shelf untouched for a long time.