• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Now I am a Leica guy.. (1 Viewer)

The Kingfisher

Well-known member
I have been a Nikon fan for many years because I have several binoculars and scopes made by them. Really love my Nikon EDG 8x42 that I have had since 2011. But unfortunately I have some issues with a creeping diopter and some play in the focus wheel. Not much, but it is irritating. The rubber armoring is also loose. Today I talked to some Nikon guys about service on my old Nikon EDG, but they told me that maybe they can not fix the issues because the may not have the spare parts needed for it. In worst case they do nothing..or just would give me a pair of the cheeper Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 instead. Sad, because I really like my Nikon EDG and think they are very comfortable for my eyes. Now I have decided to give Leica my money, so today I bought a new pair of the Noctivid 8x42. They are not so easy on the eye as the Nikon EDG, but the Noctivid is really sharp, has good colors and are brighter than the EDG. I hope they will be fine.. 🙂
 
I have been a Nikon fan for many years because I have several binoculars and scopes made by them. Really love my Nikon EDG 8x42 that I have had since 2011. But unfortunately I have some issues with a creeping diopter and some play in the focus wheel. Not much, but it is irritating. The rubber armoring is also loose. Today I talked to some Nikon guys about service on my old Nikon EDG, but they told me that maybe they can not fix the issues because the may not have the spare parts needed for it. In worst case they do nothing..or just would give me a pair of the cheeper Nikon Monarch HG 8x42 instead. Sad, because I really like my Nikon EDG and think they are very comfortable for my eyes. Now I have decided to give Leica my money, so today I bought a new pair of the Noctivid 8x42. They are not so easy on the eye as the Nikon EDG, but the Noctivid is really sharp, has good colors and are brighter than the EDG. I hope they will be fine.. 🙂
I think that’s a good choice… I had an EDG for a while, an 8x32 and really liked it but there’s something special about Leica and the colours I can’t put my fingers on it. Enjoy your Leica !
 
The Noctivids will be fine and then some! You could still try to get the EDG serviced. Maybe they can adjust the focuser looseness for you. Or getting a new pair of very lightweight Monarch 8x42 to go with the Noctivid would be fun
 
Kingfisher, let us know how they fit you going forward, it is a nice glass indeed.
Only one day as an owner of this nice Leica Noctivid 8x42. It definately feels better in my hands and the focus wheel has gone from not so good to very smooth operation as the Leica guys I talked to said a couple of days ago. I still have some issues with eye placement, but also that is easier now than when I bought the binocular. I can only complain on one thing..and that is how it handles CA. I thought it was as good as the Nikon EDG when I tried it at the Falsterbo Bird Show and I did not see CA in the binocular when I used the Noctivid twice at my way home from Falsterbo Bird Show. I did not see CA the morning after either when I tried the binocular for an hour or so. But after work in the afternoon when I tried it at the island I live on I saw more CA than I am used to with my Nikon EDG. It was different light in that afternoon..more cloudy and a soft light. The CA was not terrible, but a little more than I want to see in a binocular. But other than that..the Leica Noctivid 8x42 is a really fine and beautiful binocular! 🙂
 
The Noctivids will be fine and then some! You could still try to get the EDG serviced. Maybe they can adjust the focuser looseness for you. Or getting a new pair of very lightweight Monarch 8x42 to go with the Noctivid would be fun
I think I will just use the Nikon EDG as they are. They are usable even if it is a little bit irritating with the creeping diopter sometimes. The loose rubber armering just below the focus wheel I will try to fix my self (maybe with glue?!).
 
I use them with the EDGs quite often. Proper eye placement is critical in many of the new glass - designed for users who wear glasses to view. I do however prefer them to my 42 SLCs these days.
 
Another thought on CA w/ new binos is the diopter setting. If it's off and one of your eyes is slightly out-of-focus, CA and also more edge blur can result. I usually go out at night and use some bright stars to check it, although mine is usually set to zero.
 
That is what people generally say, except for that (typical for Leica) CA. And the mediocre FOV. And the weight. And the handling.
I can not complain about the FOV. No one can I would say. It is not spectacular, but it is good. It has the same FOV as the Nikon EDG 8x42, but it feels wider. Handling? It did not feel great in my hands compared to the Nikon EDG at first, but after some hours of birding I can not complain about that either. The focus wheel is more or less silky smooth now after some hours of use. I thought it was bad when I bought it, but the Leica guys said it would be smoother with time..and so it did. The handling is nothing I can complain about. The weight is on the heavy side..I agree with that. But I don't know if that will be something that will mean something in the field. I do not think so. The only thing I can complain about is CA in certain situations. Otherwise it is really sharp in center, good sharpness at the edges, has nice colors, fantastic contrast, build like a tank (maybe the weight also helps to make it feel like that), the diopter is perfect etc. It does not hurt that the Noctivid (especially in olive green) is a beauty either, I think.. 🙂

But I have to say that my personal favourite binocular is still Nikon EDG 8x42.. 😎
 
I can not complain about the FOV. No one can I would say. It is not spectacular, but it is good. It has the same FOV as the Nikon EDG 8x42, but it feels wider. Handling? It did not feel great in my hands compared to the Nikon EDG at first, but after some hours of birding I can not complain about that either. The focus wheel is more or less silky smooth now after some hours of use. I thought it was bad when I bought it, but the Leica guys said it would be smoother with time..and so it did. The handling is nothing I can complain about. The weight is on the heavy side..I agree with that. But I don't know if that will be something that will mean something in the field. I do not think so. The only thing I can complain about is CA in certain situations. Otherwise it is really sharp in center, good sharpness at the edges, has nice colors, fantastic contrast, build like a tank (maybe the weight also helps to make it feel like that), the diopter is perfect etc. It does not hurt that the Noctivid (especially in olive green) is a beauty either, I think.. 🙂

But I have to say that my personal favourite binocular is still Nikon EDG 8x42.. 😎
Recent & unexpected owner of a pair of 10x42 Noctivids & even stranger a pair Zeiss Sf 10x42 as well, last time I used 10x was decades ago. Before anyone remarks both are used & relatively speaking were steeply discounted. Now on to the Noctivid. I feel you're spot on! I might differ a little on the CA, I seem to be seeing less of it but it is present. As to the inevitable comparison to the Zeiss the following applies in my opinion. Sf clearly trounces the Noctivids in ergonomics & user comfort. Honestly there's really no comparison its that marked. But, and its a big one, I fine the view through the Noctivids mouthwatering, crystalline & absolutely entracing! Now I'm in that classic dilemma of not being able to justify having both. Other edge the Sf would have is that their clearly better for sky gazing, I can't call what I'm doing astronomy, amateur or otherwise. But the wider field of view & flatter field make them better. Not remotely experienced enough to say they're ideal in this regard, but to me they seem perceptibley better than the Noctivids. One caveat! I also snagged a pair of Nikon SEs off the internet. When I'm out of the nursing center, discharge this Saturday, I'm sending them in for cleaning, they seem to have a hazr & some spots on the occulars, otherwise they're beautiful & I love the weight! So before I make that comparison, I may have already sold one of the former two. I want the SEs to be their best. I just also really, really, want to use them in the field. In their heyday I couldn't touch these, soo outta my price range at the time. Oh and I also accquired used pair of near mint, Ultravids HD Plus. And no it wasn't the Plus, it was the price. We'll talk about that later. Be well.

P.S. I blame my burgeoning obsession on you, Bino Lords! What with your fancy reviews & hoochy koochy, binocular pics!

Jim
 
For me it has been 3 years since I started birding due to the most unexpected birthday gift I received. Since then I have used few binos and based on my little experience since I started, I can say that you will enjoy some binos more than others regardless of the latest bino model from X or Y company or priciest one in the market. For some reason you will enjoy more viewing through one bino more than other. The view, the weight, the focus wheel.
It is excellent that you can compare those 3 binos you got the SF, NV and UV+.
 
Thank you Claves. Its nice to have these dilemmas. And I have nothing to add to what you just wrote. Sums it all up very nicely! Be well.

Jim
 
Recent & unexpected owner of a pair of 10x42 Noctivids & even stranger a pair Zeiss Sf 10x42 as well, last time I used 10x was decades ago. Before anyone remarks both are used & relatively speaking were steeply discounted. Now on to the Noctivid. I feel you're spot on! I might differ a little on the CA, I seem to be seeing less of it but it is present. As to the inevitable comparison to the Zeiss the following applies in my opinion. Sf clearly trounces the Noctivids in ergonomics & user comfort. Honestly there's really no comparison its that marked. But, and its a big one, I fine the view through the Noctivids mouthwatering, crystalline & absolutely entracing! Now I'm in that classic dilemma of not being able to justify having both. Other edge the Sf would have is that their clearly better for sky gazing, I can't call what I'm doing astronomy, amateur or otherwise. But the wider field of view & flatter field make them better. Not remotely experienced enough to say they're ideal in this regard, but to me they seem perceptibley better than the Noctivids. One caveat! I also snagged a pair of Nikon SEs off the internet. When I'm out of the nursing center, discharge this Saturday, I'm sending them in for cleaning, they seem to have a hazr & some spots on the occulars, otherwise they're beautiful & I love the weight! So before I make that comparison, I may have already sold one of the former two. I want the SEs to be their best. I just also really, really, want to use them in the field. In their heyday I couldn't touch these, soo outta my price range at the time. Oh and I also accquired used pair of near mint, Ultravids HD Plus. And no it wasn't the Plus, it was the price. We'll talk about that later. Be well.

P.S. I blame my burgeoning obsession on you, Bino Lords! What with your fancy reviews & hoochy koochy, binocular pics!

Jim
You, having them in front of you, are the best able to draw your own conclusions! But still, if you want to hear the opinion of others, here is mine:

Use in terrestrial observations
I chose Zeiss SF 10x42 over Noctivid because it has a larger AFOV. But not so exaggerated larger, that I can still confortable easily see it all the way to the black fieldstop edges. Here I also appreciate that the 10x models have a higher AFOV than the 8x ones, being more immersive with the "huge" window towards nature. SF is, as you noticed, an extremely comfortable pair of binoculars. I positioning in front of the SF eyepiece pupils without problems, perfect balance in the hands, with the center of gravity fixed in the focus wheel. The SF 10x42 model has very small chromatic aberrations (paradoxically smaller even than the SF 8x42 model). Light transmission is excellent 93% in the green wavelength where our vision is most sensitive. Zeiss SF 10x42 dissection


Use in astronomical observations
The geometric management of the image is well balanced by Zeiss with a discrete angular magnification correction, so it does not have the rolling globe effect. This is achieved by leaving minimal linear distortion (here Noctivid have a bit more linear distorsion). This is especially useful in astronomy. As opposite example to SF and Noctivid, binocular like Swarovski EL and NL Pure is thought more for terrestrial because it has only a slight angular magnification distortion (AMD) correction, and a more aggressive correction of linear distortions, the lines being parallel. This AMD also induces rolling ball. But the most unpleasant is the fact that in astronomy this AMD causes a lower magnification on the edges than the magnification on the center, something that is easily noticed difference with double stars on the edges. This AMD observed by me in the EL 10x42 or 8x32 is similar to what I saw in the Nikon NAV SW 17.5mm or APM UFF 24mm telescope eyepieces.
So I also use the Zeiss SF10x42 with great pleasure for astronomy with no AMD or rolling ball efect. Also the star test is ideal for the practical estimation of the resolution of a binocular. In the Zeiss SF 10x42, the stars are like a tip of a needle without astigmatism. Only the last 10% of the FOV stars lose a bit of clarity, but not too much. I have completed the Messier list observed only with binoculars. I used binoculars starting with 8x20 and ending with 28x110. But the most messier objects seen with a single binocular were through the Zeiss SF 10x42. Like you, I like very much this SF for astronomy.

But if for terrestrial observations you like Noctivid 10x42 more, having the flash of colors and the vibe to your taste, then I have to admit that the choice is more difficult for you. Both are superb binoculars but cover different claims
 
Last edited:
I tried twice to respond in detail to your post Durobird because you obviously put a lot of thought behind it. Either user error or BF, both were substantial responses. So I'm cheating and doing this in notes for a cut & paste job.

I really appreciated your expanding on the use of the Sf for astronomy. For which I have neither the experience or practical knowledge. Just a long winded way of saying I quite agree. As much as I was rooting for the Noctivids for astronomy they were soundly trounced by the Sf, ergonomics, FOV, more stable views/less hand shake. And again the Sf offers beautiful, crystalline, views itself and only lose out in my opinion to the Noctivids by a hair in terms of clarity and color resolution. Still to me a noticeable amount in terrestrial use thats all but obliterated while stargazing except for exactly on axis with a noticeably smaller FOV. Also the Noctivids show the most CA in my opinion when moon watching. What I see far less of during the day is very evident when scanning a bright moon in any phase. For that the Sf and even the Ultravid 7x are discernably more neutral and sharper.

Still I find that "Leica view" intoxicating. And no I'm not an effete snob with an endlessly disposable income. I buy used on eBay and frankly I've had some luck with that, a talent I didn't know I had but still not necessarily cheap. Without going too far into it, I had tapped into some retirement benefits. I thought I was going to die within a year or two. Then I got a movie of the week, Hallmark Channel, miracle cure. Absurdly enough to keep the medical assistance that's keeping me alive I had to spend down to a certain level. No politics here but I would have just gladly given it to them if such a mechanism existed. Its all so very Kafkaesque.

Anyway I enjoyed confirmation from a much more knowledgeable member for some of my observations. Thanks again Durobird, be well.

Jim
 
Still I find that "Leica view" intoxicating. And no I'm not an effete snob with an endlessly disposable income. I buy used on eBay and frankly I've had some luck with that, a talent I didn't know I had but still not necessarily cheap. Without going too far into it, I had tapped into some retirement benefits. I thought I was going to die within a year or two. Then I got a movie of the week, Hallmark Channel, miracle cure. Absurdly enough to keep the medical assistance that's keeping me alive I had to spend down to a certain level. No politics here but I would have just gladly given it to them if such a mechanism existed. Its all so very Kafkaesque.
Jim - good to hear you're getting over your health situation, good luck to you. It's interesting to see this feedback from you guys regarding the 42mm SF's and astronomy - I have also found them to be exceptional astronomy binoculars - my favorites for astronomy. I wish Zeiss made a 50mm SF or SFL, I would love to get a larger version. The stars are visibly smaller, tighter points in the SF than any other bino I've tried. I would call that sharpness. Stray light control is also the best I've seen. I just watched the partial lunar eclipse in the 8x42 SF and it was amazing. Moon observing is a torture test of binocular optics.

As much as I love my 8x42 SF for astronomy, I don't like them much for birding. If it's a sunny day out, I have terrible problems with eye positioning and blackouts. To the point where they're barely useable. On cloudy days or at night, it's not as bad. Something to do with my pupils contracting to a smaller size maybe? Also during the day I don't care for the bending or warping in the FOV of the SF's as you pan around. To my eyes it's very strong in the SF's.

For these two reasons I have settled on my 7x42 EDG as the birding bino and 8x42 SF for astronomy. The SF's are sharper on the stars at night, but not during day observing. The EDG have very easy eye placement, even under bright sun there is zero blacking out or struggling with eye position. And the EDG have virtually no warping/bending of the view in 7x42 or 8x42.
 
Jim - good to hear you're getting over your health situation, good luck to you. It's interesting to see this feedback from you guys regarding the 42mm SF's and astronomy - I have also found them to be exceptional astronomy binoculars - my favorites for astronomy. I wish Zeiss made a 50mm SF or SFL, I would love to get a larger version. The stars are visibly smaller, tighter points in the SF than any other bino I've tried. I would call that sharpness. Stray light control is also the best I've seen. I just watched the partial lunar eclipse in the 8x42 SF and it was amazing. Moon observing is a torture test of binocular optics.

As much as I love my 8x42 SF for astronomy, I don't like them much for birding. If it's a sunny day out, I have terrible problems with eye positioning and blackouts. To the point where they're barely useable. On cloudy days or at night, it's not as bad. Something to do with my pupils contracting to a smaller size maybe? Also during the day I don't care for the bending or warping in the FOV of the SF's as you pan around. To my eyes it's very strong in the SF's.

For these two reasons I have settled on my 7x42 EDG as the birding bino and 8x42 SF for astronomy. The SF's are sharper on the stars at night, but not during day observing. The EDG have very easy eye placement, even under bright sun there is zero blacking out or struggling with eye position. And the EDG have virtually no warping/bending of the view in 7x42 or 8x42.
Scott thanks so much. Its been surreal. And now to find myself online, engaged in binocular pit fights is something else!

As Clave said a few posts up it's a truism that everyone is different and it all comes down to nuance and personal predilections. The Sf is clearly superior for astronomy Also my brother, in a direct comparison, clearly preferred the Sf over the Noctivids. Bright sky, on south shore, barrier beach, on a windy day looking west around noon on the bay side, looking a tidal island at some distance. Sorry I can't give an accurate estimate, that was teeming with Double Crested Commorants, Ring-Billed and Herring Gulls, with as always a few Greater Blacked Gulls strutting around like insufferable tyrants.

Incidentally this was on a home visit. My brother's no binophile but he made his preference clear without really knocking the Noctivids. Like you though I just find something lacking in the daytime view. By nowise a wide margin, but still perceptible to me.

Your also certainly right about the moon, its an absolute brutal test of a binocular. I mentioned it a little before that the Ultravid is very useful for sweeping the sky and picking out constellations (in my case really the absolute brightest stars in the constellations) Light pollution not NYC bad, but not great either. Unless really east anymore or on the water its at least urban-suburban. Where I am now and where I'm moving used to be rural-suburban or just simply rural as late as the 70s & into the early to mid 80s. Also the city is always a dull orange glow on the western horizon depending on how close you are. But trust me you can still see it well to the east.

I'm full of digressions. But thanks again Scott for your thoughtful reflections. Be well.

Jim

P.S. Look at these two bruisers!
 

Attachments

  • e6b4ab18faffe31d1595aba5071a7ba5c8569948.jpg
    e6b4ab18faffe31d1595aba5071a7ba5c8569948.jpg
    62.1 KB · Views: 9

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top