Tried Noctivid and SF 10x today (1 Viewer)

[tenex]

It’s not really obvious to me exactly what the differences are between SLC, EL and NL.

SLC is a traditional optical design with a modest amount of field curvature (quite small actually in the 56). EL and NL are flat-field, and NL has a more sophisticated distortion profile that works better for panning (also a wider field). This is clearly "good better best" only if you prefer flat-field optics, otherwise a question of taste.

None taken. It stems from my LASIK surgery.

Something's been nagging me about this. The principle of the near/far approach seems to be that the brain will rely on whichever eye works best at the distance in question. If this works without further correction for normal vision, why wouldn't it with binoculars? Why would you need to use the diopter to cancel it?

 

[NDhunter]

None taken. It stems from my LASIK surgery.

One eye was corrected for long vision and the other got close vision. In the brain the two images merge so I have perfect sight from about 8” to infinity.

Of course in binoculars, each eye is effectively looking through its individual telescope and the SF issue was that the range of adjustment doesn’t go far enough. The NV and my existing UV are fine in this regard.

Now we find out more about your issues. It is hard to come on here with that type of vision and comment much
about anything of substance.
That means much of what you say is not useful.
Jerry

 

[Kiwimac]

Now we find out more about your issues. It is hard to come on here with that type of vision and comment much
about anything of substance.
That means much of what you say is not useful.
Jerry

About as useful as what you wrote there, I would say...

 

[Kiwimac]

SLC is a traditional optical design with a modest amount of field curvature (quite small actually in the 56). EL and NL are flat-field, and NL has a more sophisticated distortion profile that works better for panning (also a wider field). This is clearly "good better best" only if you prefer flat-field optics, otherwise a question of taste.


Something's been nagging me about this. The principle of the near/far approach seems to be that the brain will rely on whichever eye works best at the distance in question. If this works without further correction for normal vision, why wouldn't it with binoculars? Why would you need to use the diopter to cancel it?

Well, for the same reason I needed it before I had the surgery I suppose?

 

[Scott98]

How did you find them overall compared to the SLC?
It’s not really obvious to me exactly what the differences are between SLC, EL and NL.

I'm not well-versed on the Swarovski lineup. To my knowledge the current 56mm SLC's are different from the discontinued smaller SLC's, and I've never tried the 42mm SLC's. The 10x50 UVHD optics were similar to the 10x56 SLC, almost like 2 binos of the same series. I thought I could detect an ever-so-slight increase in scattered light in the UVHD+ versus the SLC's. But both were very clean optics on the full moon which is a super difficult target for binoculars. They both have a "natural" FOV and panning, meaning very little rectilinear distortion "rolling ball" which I like.

I liked the 10x56 better mostly for eye placement, it was easier and more comfortable to keep my eye in place with the SLC. I assume that's from the larger exit pupil. The 10x50 were much lighter and more reasonable to carry around for birding. I tried a bunch of different sizes and decided to keep the 10x56 mostly for astronomy, and to keep some 42mm's and 35mm's for birding.

I like the Zeiss SF's and Nikon EDG in 42mm, with the smooth focuser and lack of thumb grooves being the top reasons. I almost bought a pair of Swaro EL's, I do like the optics in the EL and NL's. To me these are all very nice and it comes down to personal quirks & preferences in what you like. Sounds like you'll end up with whichever one has a big enough diopter adjustment, no way to know except trying them in person.

 

[Maljunulo]

There are people who naturally have a “near eye” and a “far eye” but as far as I know, those folks lack binocular vision. Their brain never learns to fuse the images.

I was surprised that some would recommend this, and voluntarily undergo a procedure which would cause the condition.

During the time between my two cataract surgeries, I found having a “mismatched” pair of eyes most distressing, to say the least.

 

[Paultricounty]

I'm not well-versed on the Swarovski lineup. To my knowledge the current 56mm SLC's are different from the discontinued smaller SLC's, and I've never tried the 42mm SLC's. The 10x50 UVHD optics were similar to the 10x56 SLC, almost like 2 binos of the same series. I thought I could detect an ever-so-slight increase in scattered light in the UVHD+ versus the SLC's. But both were very clean optics on the full moon which is a super difficult target for binoculars. They both have a "natural" FOV and panning, meaning very little rectilinear distortion "rolling ball" which I like.

I liked the 10x56 better mostly for eye placement, it was easier and more comfortable to keep my eye in place with the SLC. I assume that's from the larger exit pupil. The 10x50 were much lighter and more reasonable to carry around for birding. I tried a bunch of different sizes and decided to keep the 10x56 mostly for astronomy, and to keep some 42mm's and 35mm's for birding.

I like the Zeiss SF's and Nikon EDG in 42mm, with the smooth focuser and lack of thumb grooves being the top reasons. I almost bought a pair of Swaro EL's, I do like the optics in the EL and NL's. To me these are all very nice and it comes down to personal quirks & preferences in what you like. Sounds like you'll end up with whichever one has a big enough diopter adjustment, no way to know except trying them in person.

The SLC 42's and all the Leica's use SP prisms, the SLC 56 use AK prisms, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Kiwimac]

There are people who naturally have a “near eye” and a “far eye” but as far as I know, those folks lack binocular vision. Their brain never learns to fuse the images.

I was surprised that some would recommend this, and voluntarily undergo a procedure which would cause the condition.

During the time between my two cataract surgeries, I found having a “mismatched” pair of eyes most distressing, to say the least.

I literally don’t notice. I didn’t when I achieved the same result using only one contact either. It’s simply presented as whatever I look at is in focus.

It’s technically correct name is LASIK monovision.

 

[Maljunulo]

I literally don’t notice. I didn’t when I achieved the same result using only one contact either. It’s simply presented as whatever I look at is in focus.

It’s technically correct name is LASIK monovision.

Interesting.

Do you usually go about without either contact or spectacles? (just bare eyeballs)

 

[Kiwimac]

Interesting.

Do you usually go about without either contact or spectacles? (just bare eyeballs)

No no longer need any glasses other than off the peg no prescription sunglasses.

I used to wear graduated bifocals.

 

[tenex]

Well, for the same reason I needed it before I had the surgery I suppose?

But you said that surgery was the reason you now need a huge diopter correction.

I can't understand what's going on here, but do hope you find a binocular that works well for you. By the way, my wife has contact lenses that do the same near/far thing, and we pass binoculars back and forth without any fiddling. She sets a diopter close to 0, as I do.

 

[Kiwimac]

I still needed diopter correction before like most people presumably do. If there were no need for it I’m sure binoculars makers wouldn’t spend time and money including it.

Now I just need different correction.

For example my UV 10x32 are set to +4 and that works fine.

 

[BayAreaBirder]

It's unfortunate the chromatic aberration issue with the Leica Noctivid 10x--I experienced the same issue, a few months ago, and ended up returning the pair and swapping it for a pair of Swarovski NL. I otherwise love the Leica tones, and their general construction (so sturdy). Oh well!

 

[Trinovid]

I was surprised that some would recommend this, and voluntarily undergo a procedure which would cause the condition.

During the time between my two cataract surgeries, I found having a “mismatched” pair of eyes most distressing, to say the least.

Same here, and the worst part of it is that many clinics think of it as the default choice, even though for the most part nature disagrees. At the very least patients should be advised that while some like it, others can’t deal with it well, meaning that the patient should always be allowed to decide based upon balanced information on both sides of the issue.