Leica Ultravid 10x42BR or Swarovski EL 10x42

[wvdbroec]

Dear friends,

A difficult question. As microscopist, I am a “Leica person” because of the high quality of the Leica products in microscopy. Two years ago, I bought the Leica APO TELEVID, a very good scope. At the moment, I want to replace my binoculars, but I do not know whether I should take the Leica Ultravid 10x42 BR, or the Swarovski EL 10x42 WB.

Please, give me your comments, experience, advice …

Thanks in advance !

Wim.

[pduxon]

well someone will no doubt suggest the Zeiss FL 10x42

you might want to check up the round-up of 10x bins on the Alula website.

http://www.alula.fi/gb/test_leica10xGB.html

[Raptor]

Dear friends,

A difficult question. As microscopist, I am a “Leica person” because of the high quality of the Leica products in microscopy. Two years ago, I bought the Leica APO TELEVID, a very good scope. At the moment, I want to replace my binoculars, but I do not know whether I should take the Leica Ultravid 10x42 BR, or the Swarovski EL 10x42 WB.

Please, give me your comments, experience, advice …

Thanks in advance !

Wim.

I too own the Leica APO Televid and use to own the 10X42 Ultavid but made the move to El 10X42 I really preferred the grip of the whole barrell in my hand that the EL's provide, given that, the Leicas seem to have slightly better color rendition but the El's seem to be brighter, Leica products seem to lean more to contrast after a certain point of resolution (maybe because of their camera background?) wereas the Swaros seems to lean more to resolution in the quality of their glass, just my opinion, regards, Raptor, Rocky Mountain Eagle Research Foundation, Alberta, Canada.

[Andy Bright]

I'd put the Ultravids above the EL optically, with the Zeiss FL probably slightly ahead of the Ultravid. The newer binos (Ultravid & FL) do seem to make the EL's look a bit coloured, and to me make the contrast look a bit flat... something I never thought would be possible when I purchased my EL's a few years ago!

[Jonathan B.]

I want to replace my binoculars, but I do not know whether I should take the Leica Ultravid 10x42 BR, or the Swarovski EL 10x42 WB.…

Wim,

I highly recommend that you make the choice between Ultravid and EL (also perhaps Zeiss FL and Nikon HGL) by handling them. All of these offer superb views, but their handling is considerably different, and one is certain to fit your hands better. I for one do not agree that the FL is better than the Ultravid. I compared FL and Ultravid 7x42 recently (reported in another thread) and I found their optical performance to be practically identical. I, for one, don't like the handling of the FL, but like the handling of all three of the other binoculars. I own the Ultravid 7x42, but would happily own the EL.

[Alan G]

I'm a novice whose about to purchase a decent set of bins and I'm finding the arguments & counter-arguments (bordering on verbal abuse in some cases!) for and against the top end Leicas, Nikons, Swaros & Zeiss bins completely overwhelming and contradictory........not to mention confusing/baffling!

:bounce:

Isn't the bottom line here simply that we should get our hands on these things, try them out and buy the one we a) like the best and b) can afford?

:h?:

Alan

ps: It's currently between the 8x42 BNs (I'm not sure I can justify the price hike to the BRs as I didn't find any marked improvement in image between the two and a few extra ounces in weight doesn't bother me) or the 8.5x42 ELs.

[elkcub]

I'm a novice whose about to purchase a decent set of bins and I'm finding the arguments & counter-arguments (bordering on verbal abuse in some cases!) for and against the top end Leicas, Nikons, Swaros & Zeiss bins completely overwhelming and contradictory........not to mention confusing/baffling!

:bounce:

Isn't the bottom line here simply that we should get our hands on these things, try them out and buy the one we a) like the best and b) can afford?

:h?:

Alan

ps: It's currently between the 8x42 BNs (I'm not sure I can justify the price hike to the BRs as I didn't find any marked improvement in image between the two and a few extra ounces in weight doesn't bother me) or the 8.5x42 ELs.

Well, Wim asked a fair question and received several honest opinions. The last word ain't necessarily the one at the end of the bottom line. :smoke:

-elkcub

[leicaeddy]

AFAIK, Swarovski Optik changes the coating of its products quite frequently. the pre-2003 ELs' come with "reddish reflection" in the objective lenses whereas the latest models come with "greenish reflection". Their contrast and color-cast may be different.

[leicaeddy]

IMHO, both are serious contenders and you can't be wrong with either one of them. However, the quality control of Leica is questionable. Acting as a ***** inspector, you have to check it thoroughly before you buy. Zeiss FL is very good also (sweet color tone, artistic image feeling and outstanding brightness) but some may find it renders excessive pin-cushion distortion.

[ChrisSearle]

I'd put the Ultravids above the EL optically, with the Zeiss FL probably slightly ahead of the Ultravid. The newer binos (Ultravid & FL) do seem to make the EL's look a bit coloured, and to me make the contrast look a bit flat... something I never thought would be possible when I purchased my EL's a few years ago!

I just bought a pair of Ultravid 10x42 after ages agonising over the choice, trying out different makes/models, reading critiques on the forum and the net in general . Previously used a pair of Pentax DCF 8x42 which had become , virtually, a part of my body. They were hard wearing, easy to use, fitted my hand and I only decided I needed 'new glass' when I looked through a friends Minox 10x42. To be honest I found it extremely difficult telling any of the 'high-end' products apart, maybe it's my eyesight...... Anyway, the choice came down to ease of use, comfort, and build quality.
Let me say right now that even if you try out bins at a 'field day' it still does not tell you what they will be like to live with. When I took delivery of the UVs I was thrilled but they didn't seem as comfortable as me old Pentax's. However, with a few tens of hours of use I'm growing to like them very much. I have had no build quality issues, the focus is silky with no play and the exterior and interior seem flawless. They have a feel of indestructability which the Zeiss and Swaros did not. One thing tho' - they have far more CA than the Pentax but maybe thats because they are about twenty times as bright! The bottom line is that they enable me to see more of a bird, more quickly and more easily. I'm a little uncomfortable about the red dot tho'. Since I've had them I 've had three people ask me for IDs - That never happened when I was wearing pentax!

[salty]

well done on your choice, a mighty fine bino.

i have owned my 10x42br ultravids for about 2 month now, and im still in awe every time i view a bird through them - pure quality. they are particulary good when watching rivers, those dark spots under shade mixed with the shine from the water are no problem for the UVs. they are a dream to hold, and very light - i sometimes even hold them to my eyes with just the one hand!.

no doubt a debate will soon start again, saying swaros are better, and zeiss are better still - dont worry, they are all top bins! - it's all down to owners verdicts at the end of the day.

happy birding.

[kabsetz]

Chris,

If the red dot causes you problems, do not worry. The red paint will chip off in a year or two.

Kimmo