32 or 42?

[Gio]

Hi all, I'm going to buy a new pair of binoculars and I have to take a decision. I had a pair of Leica Trinovid 8x42 but the seemed heavy to me, so this time I'll opt for Leica Ultravid or Swarovski EL series.
My main doubt is about the size (magnification will be 10x): 32 or 42? I'd really prefer the 32s for their weight, but I'd like to have some comments from someone who tried them..
Thanks in advance
Giorgio

[postcardcv]

I tried the 10x32 ultravids and would not recommend them. They are very small and light weight, but this makes them harder to hold steady. The only 10x32s I'd consider are the Nikon HG, or the Leica Trinovid, they both have a nice solid feel and are easy to use.

The weight reduction in ultravids over trinovids is quite significant so I'm sure you'll be more than happy with 42s. The 10x42 ultravid is a very nice binocular, easy to use and hold still.

[level seven]

The 10x42 ultravid is a very nice binocular, easy to use and hold still.

I don't own one (I wish!), but having tried out a friend's briefly I can agree with it being easy to use and hold still. It felt more like a x8 in that respect.

[Blincodave]

Hi all, I'm going to buy a new pair of binoculars and I have to take a decision. I had a pair of Leica Trinovid 8x42 but the seemed heavy to me, so this time I'll opt for Leica Ultravid or Swarovski EL series.
My main doubt is about the size (magnification will be 10x): 32 or 42? I'd really prefer the 32s for their weight, but I'd like to have some comments from someone who tried them..
Thanks in advance
Giorgio

If you wear glasses be aware that the 10 x 32 ELs have poor eye-relief.

Dave

[black lark]

when you are using the bino for birds there is only one choice and that is 42, (10x42 or 8x42), i use 10x42 ultravid BL

[Otto McDiesel]

Hi all, I'm going to buy a new pair of binoculars and I have to take a decision. I had a pair of Leica Trinovid 8x42 but the seemed heavy to me, so this time I'll opt for Leica Ultravid or Swarovski EL series.
My main doubt is about the size (magnification will be 10x): 32 or 42? I'd really prefer the 32s for their weight, but I'd like to have some comments from someone who tried them..
Thanks in advance
Giorgio

Giorgio,
if you want 8x, 32mm or 42mm are fine, but if you want 10x, better stick to 42mm. I've looked long at the 10x32's out there, and i was not convinced. I wanted really bad to like the Swarovski EL 10x32, because they felt so god in the hand, but i got a Leica Ultravid 10x42 instead, and i am HAPPY.

[Otto McDiesel]

when you are using the bino for birds there is only one choice and that is 42, (10x42 or 8x42), i use 10x42 ultravid BL

Nevermind the fact that i saw over 1000 species of birds with a very inappropriate 7x50 porro prism....

[Gio]

Thanks to all for the advice, I think that I will buy the Ultravid 10x42..
Giorgio

[xenophobe]

I own the Ultravid 10x42 BL, and I have to say that it is the most comfortable and easy to steady 10x binocular I've ever used. They're great and really lightweight. I would buy them again if I had to.

[salty]

Thanks to all for the advice, I think that I will buy the Ultravid 10x42..
Giorgio

i own these, simple the best binos i have ever used.......awesome. :clap:

[Rob Hutchinson]

If size is not a factor then I would definitely go for 10x42, the Ultravids are superb.
However if you travel alot then size can be more of an issue, I have used 8 and 10x32 (Trinovids and Ultravids) for more than 10 years, and believe that (for me) the savings in weight and size outweigh the reduced light gathering, even in rainforest habitats.

[denco@comcast.n]

i own these, simple the best binos i have ever used.......awesome. :clap:
How about the Zeiss FL 10x42(or 8x42). I believe they are lighter than the Leica and just as good if not better optically. If you want the Leica there is a guy on Astromart selling a like new in the box 8x42 set of Ultravids for $900.00 right now.

Dennis

[Swissboy]

Hi all, I'm going to buy a new pair of binoculars and I have to take a decision. I had a pair of Leica Trinovid 8x42 but the seemed heavy to me, so this time I'll opt for Leica Ultravid or Swarovski EL series.
My main doubt is about the size (magnification will be 10x): 32 or 42? I'd really prefer the 32s for their weight, but I'd like to have some comments from someone who tried them..
Thanks in advance
Giorgio

I have just had another chance to compare a number of top-brand binoculars under low-light conditions. I concentrated on the 8x models of Swarovski (EL), Leica (Ultravid) and Zeiss (FL). The Zeiss 8x42 FL was clearly the one that came out on top, both for overall brightness and contrast. It was also clear that the x42 models were brighter than the x32 (including the FL). And the otherwise fine 8x20 Ultravid dropped off considerably. This is actually what one would expect, but as many comparisons are made under conditions of full daylight, one then finds reports that objective diameter is not critical. My test has clearly convinced me that carrying around a certain amount of extra weight is worth it.

I should add that the conditions were such that colors could still be very well seen in all glasses and also with the naked eye. Thus, these were by no means borderline conditions. Rather, conditions were about what you find while birding in the late afternoon in a forest when it is overcast.

[Swissboy]

..... and believe that (for me) the savings in weight and size outweigh the reduced light gathering, even in rainforest habitats.

My own experiences in Peruvian rainforests with my 8x32 Trinovids were at times rather frustrating, mostly when trying to look at birds on the forest floor at dawn. This is why I have now bought a Zeiss 8x42 FL. (However, no chance to put them to the test in a rainforest, so far.)

[Caty on the Bay]

My own experiences in Peruvian rainforests with my 8x32 Trinovids were at times rather frustrating, mostly when trying to look at birds on the forest floor at dawn. This is why I have now bought a Zeiss 8x42 FL. (However, no chance to put them to the test in a rainforest, so far.)

I have been using an inherited 8x30 Nikon, 80's vintage. I encountered times I was dissapointed because I could not make out things is dark shadow so I bought myself a Swift 8x42, Ultralight I think. I don't exaclty remember because it turned out more to be bad lighting that any binocular would do poorly in and so returned them. I now am happy to use the comfortable smaller 8x30.

I liken this to astronomy. I had exected to see book quality views when I ahd the chance to use a big telescope compared to my husbands smaller one. The actual improvement did not live up to what I had in my head as an expectation.

[Swissboy]

I have been using an inherited 8x30 Nikon, 80's vintage. I encountered times I was dissapointed because I could not make out things is dark shadow so I bought myself a Swift 8x42, Ultralight I think. I don't exaclty remember because it turned out more to be bad lighting that any binocular would do poorly in and so returned them. I now am happy to use the comfortable smaller 8x30.

I liken this to astronomy. I had exected to see book quality views when I ahd the chance to use a big telescope compared to my husbands smaller one. The actual improvement did not live up to what I had in my head as an expectation.

I don't know the Swift at all, but from the price range I would expect Nikon optics to be much superior, even a "vintage" model. And I think good optics are particularly important for those bad lighting conditions you are referring to. I must admit, however, that there are limitations. And I have not really had a good chance yet to test my 8x42 FLs under such conditions. On a recent trip to the Iguazú falls in northern Argentina I did not encounter the rainforesty conditions I had expected. It was just too dry and plants drooped their leaves if they still had any.

[scampo]

Giorgio,
if you want 8x, 32mm or 42mm are fine, but if you want 10x, better stick to 42mm. I've looked long at the 10x32's out there, and i was not convinced. I wanted really bad to like the Swarovski EL 10x32, because they felt so god in the hand, but i got a Leica Ultravid 10x42 instead, and i am HAPPY.
My son has the 10x32 Nikon HG and they are superb, Otto. My brother has the 10x42s and there is little to choose.