• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

So, which 10x Trinovid? (1 Viewer)

Mark9473

Well-known member
Belgium
Trinovid 10x40 : 110m/1000m ; 600g ; splash resistant ; € 1180-1350.
Trinovid HD 10x42 : 113m/1000m ; 720g ; waterproof ; € 960.

Apart from the cool look of the new Trinovid that one may like for nostalgic reasons, doesn't the HD have a lot going for it if one doesn't need the very lightest weight?
 
Trinovid 10x40 : 110m/1000m ; 600g ; splash resistant ; € 1180-1350.
Trinovid HD 10x42 : 113m/1000m ; 720g ; waterproof ; € 960.

Apart from the cool look of the new Trinovid that one may like for nostalgic reasons, doesn't the HD have a lot going for it if one doesn't need the very lightest weight?

The FOV on the HD 10x is pretty good and it's cheaper. I say go for the HD or you could wait until some initial user reviews come in for the new Trinovid...if you're not in a rush.
 
Thanks; I'm in no rush at all. Sometime in the next 8 months or so will be fine.

Looking a bit more at the specs in the meantime, the 4m close focus on the new model looks like it could be a deal breaker. It would need to be a pretty miraculous instrument to offset that.
 
Thanks; I'm in no rush at all. Sometime in the next 8 months or so will be fine.

Looking a bit more at the specs in the meantime, the 4m close focus on the new model looks like it could be a deal breaker. It would need to be a pretty miraculous instrument to offset that.

Now you're thinking. Remember you're buying an optical device, not a really nice piece of luggage! ;-)

Aesthetics on binoculars is a fun aspect to appreciate, but it should be more about quality of view and utility, imho. But I do admit that if Nikon released an 8 x30 EII II with enough eye relief for me, I'd probably buy one, even if it isn't waterproof. ;-)

Bill
 
I'd go with the non HD model, I bought them for my sons and they were very impressive.

Are you referrring to the Trinovid that came before the HD model?
This was available from around 2011-2015.
The new "retro" Trinovid was just announced and I don't think there
are any stores with stock yet.
 
The ones I bought my sons where the last model before the HD's. I like the diopter placement/operation better and the build quality seems right up there with ultravids I have owned in the past. When comparing the view they equaled my geovid HD-R's and seemed right on the heels of my swaro SV's, best of all I bought them from cameraland when they were closing them out and I think I paid $879 for them, a lot of bino for the money.
 
The ones I bought my sons where the last model before the HD's. I like the diopter placement/operation better and the build quality seems right up there with ultravids I have owned in the past. When comparing the view they equaled my geovid HD-R's and seemed right on the heels of my swaro SV's, best of all I bought them from cameraland when they were closing them out and I think I paid $879 for them, a lot of bino for the money.

I agree! Really a nice binocular!

Trinovid HD on LEFT, previous Trinovid on the RIGHT
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3194.JPG
    IMG_3194.JPG
    95.7 KB · Views: 319
Trinovid HD on LEFT
Is this pair 8x or 10x?

Could you add a few words about it, please?
Especially I'm interesting about on-axis resolution/sharpness, contrast, CA, glare controls... Are there problems with central hinge tension or dioptre adjuster loosening?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:
The ones I bought my sons where the last model before the HD's. I like the diopter placement/operation better and the build quality seems right up there with ultravids I have owned in the past. When comparing the view they equaled my geovid HD-R's and seemed right on the heels of my swaro SV's, best of all I bought them from cameraland when they were closing them out and I think I paid $879 for them, a lot of bino for the money.

I agree completely, this is an excellent glass that I was very sorry to see Leica stop making -- I expected it to develop into a whole mid-price line, like other top brands have. Just slightly inferior to the UV in specs (FOV, close focus). I love mine. But it could be hard to find one today, given those fire-sale prices. (I don't care for the HD, although it does deliver value for money.)

I don't undestand why Leica can't decide what a Trinovid is today, and keeps doing random 40mm models only. It's even hard to know which one is talking about. This one was the "non-HD Trinovid" until now with the introduction of another, or maybe the "2015 Trinovid" since it was made for only about a year (contrary to an earlier remark). Or the "original new Trinovid"?
 
Last edited:
Two or three years ago at the Winter Wings festival, Leica was there with a pretty large display. I spent a fair bit of time with the Trinovids handwerk references and the Ultravid. My immediate reaction to the two binoculars was that the Trinovid was the superior binocular. I kept coming back to look at various times and had a few long chats with the Leica rep at the booth. I think the reason I preferred the Trinovid was purely ergonomic. One thing that has always held me back from the Ultravid was the fact that they do not offer enough eye cup extension for me. The Trinovid had no such issue. At the end of the time I had I'd have to say the Ultravid might have been a tiny (did I say tiny?) bit better image, maybe a touch brighter in centerfield apparent resolution.

Over the course of my time with binoculars I have had but two or three WOW moments. The first was when I was a student in the late 60's-early 70's with the Leitz Trinovid 7x35. That was kind of a double whammy. Wow these things are really neat, a combination of a really nice size and the optics I thought were really great way back then. The second whammy was finding out what they cost. :eek!: Beyond my college student budget. The next was a Leica Trinovid 8x32 in 1992 or 93, that was a pure WOW these things are good. So I guess in my heart of hearts I have always looked toward Leica and to this day the 2011-15 Trinovid or the HD are on my list. So is the new 7x35 revamped original Trinovid. I hope Leica will be at the show this year.
 
Trinovid 10x40 : 110m/1000m ; 600g ; splash resistant ; € 1180-1350.
Trinovid HD 10x42 : 113m/1000m ; 720g ; waterproof ; € 960.

Apart from the cool look of the new Trinovid that one may like for nostalgic reasons, doesn't the HD have a lot going for it if one doesn't need the very lightest weight?

Mark:

This is an interesting thread, and it brings up several models of the Trinovid,
and they are mentioned.
The new 10x40 retro model is not out yet, so we have to wait a bit to see
how it is.
I have a nice example of the late Leitz 10x40 Trinovid, and it is well regarded,
very nice optics.

I have also had both of the Leica versions of the latest Trinovids, the 2011-2015, and the new Trinovid HD. I also have the Leica 8x42 Ultravid HD, so
have examples of several of the ones talked about.

When comparing these, the older 2011 Trinovid is high quality, but is a
bit behind the HD, and the Ultravid HD, as far as brightness goes.

The current Leica Trinovid 10x42 HD is very good, and would compare well
to the Zeiss Conquest HD, and the many newer midrange models out there.

There is a nice thread, you could look back at, last post on the Leica subforum,
from 3-14-17, for more on these.

If I were you I would wait a while before deciding on which one to get.

Jerry
 
Could anyone please explain/offer a guess, thanks.
Why is the new "retro" Trinovid much higher priced than the Trinovid "HD"?
At a leading US online retailer (rounded up by $1)
"Retro" (Rubber armor. Leather, "Silverline" more pricey)
- 10x40 $1500
- 08x40 $1450
- 07x35 $1350
Trinovid HD
- 10x42 $1000
- 08x42 $0950.
PS. The idea behind the question is:
Can it be expected to be optically better in some way/s
(costlier due to lens system/lens material/precision in manufacture)?
 
Last edited:
I agree completely, this is an excellent glass that I was very sorry to see Leica stop making -- I expected it to develop into a whole mid-price line, like other top brands have. Just slightly inferior to the UV in specs (FOV, close focus). I love mine. But it could be hard to find one today, given those fire-sale prices. (I don't care for the HD, although it does deliver value for money.)

I don't undestand why Leica can't decide what a Trinovid is today, and keeps doing random 40mm models only. It's even hard to know which one is talking about. This one was the "non-HD Trinovid" until now with the introduction of another, or maybe the "2015 Trinovid" since it was made for only about a year (contrary to an earlier remark). Or the "original new Trinovid"?

I've got a 2015 Trinovid 10x42. They were on the market for almost 4 years. Made in Leica's Portugal plant with traditional low dispersion glass types. As a consequence of that it's not the brightest in low light and CA is quite easy to find. Feels very robust build wise which has always been a Trinovid strong point in the past.

Spec. sheet pdf
 

Attachments

  • leica-trinovid-10x42--897.jpg
    leica-trinovid-10x42--897.jpg
    41.8 KB · Views: 113
  • Trinovid+42_e_2.pdf
    61.7 KB · Views: 58
Last edited:
I spent a fair bit of time with the Trinovids handwerk references and the Ultravid. My immediate reaction to the two binoculars was that the Trinovid was the superior binocular. I kept coming back to look at various times and had a few long chats with the Leica rep at the booth. I think the reason I preferred the Trinovid was purely ergonomic. One thing that has always held me back from the Ultravid was the fact that they do not offer enough eye cup extension for me. The Trinovid had no such issue.

I had exactly the same issue with 42mm Ultravids, and see it on ever more binos lately: way too high eye relief and the eye cups don't compensate. With this Trinovid I can just get by, but I have to max out the cup, pulling it out past the last click stop -- any further would remove it. Otherwise I'd have to hold it away from my face. I honestly don't think that making binos a little easier for eyeglass wearers (who won't take them off) is worth making them impossible for the rest of us to use.

The other thing I really like about this previous Trinovid is that it seems to me to have a somewhat flatter field, definitely a larger sweet spot than the Ultravid. Not as flat as Swarovski but a compromise that doesn't make panning too odd. That suits me, and I thought other manufacturerers might go in that direction also but gather Leica decided not to after all.

I'm noticing different descriptions of when this glass was made... Some say "2011-15 Trinovid", others just "2015", which is when I first saw it and got mine, thinking it was new and excited about that, and surprised to see it discontinued the following year. Had it really been made since 2011, and I just wasn't looking yet?
 
Could anyone please explain/offer a guess, thanks.
Why is the new "retro" Trinovid much higher priced than the Trinovid "HD"?
At a leading US online retailer (rounded up by $1)
"Retro" (Rubber armor. Leather, "Silverline" more pricey)
- 10x40 $1500
- 08x40 $1450
- 07x35 $1350
Trinovid HD
- 10x42 $1000
- 08x42 $0950.
PS. The idea behind the question is:
Can it be expected to be optically better in some way/s
(costlier due to lens system/lens material/precision in manufacture)?


I will "offer a guess" that Leica must have incurred new costs involved in setting up and re-manufacturing the Uppendahl prisms and bodies for their new "retro" Trinovid binoculars.

Leica would not have had these kinds costs to recover when they made their Trinovid HD binoculars which probably use the same Schmidt/Pechan prisms as the Ultravids and have bodies not unlike the Ultravids.

Whether or not they will be optically better in some ways than the Ultravids remains to be seen. The 7x35 version likely will be using more costly wide field eye pieces. And we can't forget that the new 8X and 10X retros have 40mm objectives which are now regarded as new and unique as opposed to the 42mm objectives used on the Trinovid HDs which are today's standard for the industry.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bob. I do not know how much these are like the old (i.e. original of retro)) Trinovids. I wonder whether some part/s of the body, some lenses/compound lenses/lens assemblies, are identical hence the old machinery might possibly be re-used. Pl. excuse my ignorance in both matters. (BTW, it seems that in your last paragraph Ultravids is a typo for Trinovids?)
 
Thanks Bob. I do not know how much these are like the old (i.e. original of retro)) Trinovids. I wonder whether some part/s of the body, some lenses/compound lenses/lens assemblies, are identical hence the old machinery might possibly be re-used. Pl. excuse my ignorance in both matters. (BTW, it seems that in your last paragraph Ultravids is a typo for Trinovids?)

Adhoc,

I think that the Retro Trinovids should be better than the Trinovid HDs but I was questioning whether they would be better "in some ways" than the Ultravids.

Having two completely different binoculars named Trinovids is pretty confusing!

Bob
 
Warning! This thread is more than 6 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top