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.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kabsetz" data-source="post: 3522866" data-attributes="member: 10167">Henry,I did some normal panning and looked at the behavior of straight lines, round objects and rectangular objects as they approached field edges. Nothing too systematic, but to me it looks like there's a little bit of compression towards the field edge, but only a little, and slight pincushion distortion, but only slight. To my eyes, no rolling balls or carousels.I fully agree with your first paragraph. It is the relative absence of axial aberrations and stray light that gives the image its snap and purity which in turn makes the job of ours eyes and brains easier and more natural.I have said this before on other threads: from experience with numerous otherwise identical scopes but with varying levels of aberrations and consequently sharpness and contrast, the best ones exhibit better subjective depth of field to a surprising degree. This with magnifications much higher (up to 75x) and hence depths of field much shallower than with binoculars ever. So I think this is what gives the Noctivid a "better depth of field," which I also see.Kimmo</blockquote>