Leica Ultravids (thread contains a variety of topics, optic reviews & other binos) (2 Viewers)

Clive,

I have a pair of 8x30 Nikons which are very good optically. But, although I've had them for only 6 months, the rubber grips have completely come off. They started by bubbling where my fingers rested and eventually flapped about until I pulled them off. Unfortunately, I bought them in Saudi Arabia, cheaply (£150ish) so there isn't a proper guarantee. Does anyone else have any experience of this sort of thing? Any suggestions as to what glue to use to try to repair them?

Steve

I'd definitely send them back to Nikon UK - the fact they are Nikon is your guarantee of quality not the fact of their being bought in Saudi, I hope. It would be interesting to hear what Nikon UK have to say.

If you do try to repair them you'll definitely invalidate any warranty, though. If you are tempted, rubber and metal stick magically well together with cyanoacrylate adhesive ("super glue") so far as I remember, but the bond is not too flexible.

I thought of superglue but it makes an instant bond which means you have to line the rubber up accurately as you only have one chance. I think I'll write to Nikon, but I don't hold out much hope of am early answer.

Steve

steverowe said:

Clive,

I have a pair of 8x30 Nikons which are very good optically. But, although I've had them for only 6 months, the rubber grips have completely come off. They started by bubbling where my fingers rested and eventually flapped about until I pulled them off. Unfortunately, I bought them in Saudi Arabia, cheaply (£150ish) so there isn't a proper guarantee. Does anyone else have any experience of this sort of thing? Any suggestions as to what glue to use to try to repair them?

Steve

Click to expand...

Steve, I agree with Scampo, send them to Nikon UK and hopefully they will cure the problem. Let us know how you got on.

Was at Dowrog Common in Pembrokeshire last week to see the Hen Harriers coming in to roost and had an opportunity to try Leica Duovids. They were very impressive even in poor light at 12x, as it grew dark. I was surprised to find that they were so hand holdable at 12x, as I do not have the steadiest hands. The weight and ergonomics may contribute to this. If these binoculars had indents at 9, 10 and 11x they might be the ultimate all-round bins.


Clive

steverowe said:

Clive,

I have a pair of 8x30 Nikons which are very good optically. But, although I've had them for only 6 months, the rubber grips have completely come off. They started by bubbling where my fingers rested and eventually flapped about until I pulled them off. Unfortunately, I bought them in Saudi Arabia, cheaply (£150ish) so there isn't a proper guarantee. Does anyone else have any experience of this sort of thing? Any suggestions as to what glue to use to try to repair them?

Steve

Click to expand...

Steve: I have a pair of Nikon 8x32 SE - bought used - and I doubt the grips would come off. Are you referring to the cheaper Nikon 8x30 E binoculars? I might try superglue if I were in your place but I would be very wary about causing further damage.

william j clive said:

Was at Dowrog Common in Pembrokeshire last week to see the Hen Harriers coming in to roost and had an opportunity to try Leica Duovids. They were very impressive even in poor light at 12x, as it grew dark. I was surprised to find that they were so hand holdable at 12x, as I do not have the steadiest hands. The weight and ergonomics may contribute to this. If these binoculars had indents at 9, 10 and 11x they might be the ultimate all-round bins.


Clive

Click to expand...

Don't you find them heavy if used without a rest of any kind?

pduxon said:

Leif and anyone else

why don't the likes of Zeiss, Swaro, Leica make porro prism bins?

Click to expand...

I am told that Leica do not make them because of the difficulty of making them waterproof. Roof prism binoculars use internal focussing. This means that the internal volume does not change, and hence they can be sealed against water ingress. The second reason is the poor close focus. Because the optical assemblies are further apart they tend not to focus so close. I cannot focus close - i.e. 3m - with the Nikon 8x32 SE without closing one eye! The third reason is the shape. Porro prism binoculars tend to be bigger, with the odd dog leg barrel shape. Most people find this less comfortable to hold than an inline roof prism bin.

I presume Zeiss and Swaro have similar reasons, though as noted above Swaro do have some porros, but they are old designs, and the 8x40 have poor FOV and poor close focus.

I have just looked at the latest issue of Bird Watching magazine and the review seems rather good. I think the presence of multiple testers is essential. The 7.5 given to the Nikon 8x32 SE was for design as well as handling. No doubt the lack of waterproofing cost them at least 1 point, which seems reasonable to me. They also have rubber eye tubes which are a pain compared to the push-pull or twist up- twist down one. That would have cost another point. So overall 7.5 is fair.

Leif,

Yes they are the cheaper EII bins. I decided to leave the rubber off and put it down to experience. I didn't want to be without them for long. I tried to remove the stuck on glue with a brand name glue remover but most of it wouldn't come off. So then I tried to scrape it off with a sharp knife but scraped a bit of paint off . Then I found that my wife's nail polish remover took the glue off easily. Managed to hide the scraped off paint with a permanent marker. I'm telling you all this to show that impatience gets you nowhere.

Steve

pduxon said:

Leif and anyone else

why don't the likes of Zeiss, Swaro, Leica make porro prism bins?

Click to expand...

Pete,

I own a pair of the Swarovski porro-prism 10x40 W glasses, which I bought on eBay secondhand but in virtually new condition for a great price. I really don't like 10x binoculars much for birding, but thought I would try them at regional Hawkwatch sites. I used a pair of 8x30 Swarovski porros briefly once and was impressed, so thought I would give the 10x40s a try.

The build quality and finish is high. Swarovski claims their porros are the only nitrogen purged and truly fogproof porros on the market. They are very sharp, but their contrast is less than the Nikon SE, the new Ultravid, and some other great binoculars, so the apparent resolution is diminished slightly. Color fidelity is exceptional. Chromatic aberration is sometimes obvious and appears as a dull red fringe around contrasty subjects. Despite the dated design (the original Swarovski porro in this style, a 7x40, was released in the late 1940s) ergonomics are good, at least for my relatively small hands. FOV is the same as many 10x binos on the market--330 feet @ 1,000 yds.

One helpful feature is that the objective lenses are deeply recessed--about a half inch--which protects them effectively. Eye relief is shallow, making them undesirable for use with eyeglasses. It also causes eyelashes to touch the oculars, which makes cleaning a necessity more often. The folding eyecups are easily removed/replaced.

The seals that make these waterproof are between the ocular barrels and the barrels behind the prism housing. When a glass is new, these are very tight, making focusing difficult. Mine has loosened quite a bit. However the focusing wheel is small, metal, and finely grooved, and focusing in cold weather, either with cold fingers or a gloved hand, is not as easy as on other premium binoculars.

Altogether these are very good and underrated/overlooked.

Leif mentioned some drawbacks of Nikon SE. I personally consider the ergonomics exceptional. But aside from lack of waterproofing and the dated rubber eyecups, Nikon might at least have made the eyecups removeable for cleaning and replacement, like Swarovski and Zeiss have done.

As Clive (sorry about getting your name wrong) has obviously much greater experience of the old 78mm Nikon scope than me. I’m happy to concede that I was probably looking through a ‘lemon’ and his experience is more typical. The one I looked at was obviously less sharp and no brighter than the 60mm model. As I think he pointed out earlier individual instruments do vary quite a bit. In contrast, the new Nikon 82mm is a clear improvement (or at least the one I looked through was!).

As for the bias against porros, I ‘m afraid it extends well beyond magazine pages. I recall having a conversation a few years back with a sales person, responsible for selling an awful lot of bins to birders, which went something like this:-

Me: - Well, of course, technically the porro design is optically superior to the roof prism one.
Sales person: - No they’re not. The roof prism design is technically better.
Me: - No, I think you’re wrong there. Roofs are perhaps more ergonomic and have improved a lot, but technically the optics aren’t as good.
S/P:- No they’re not. I sell a lot more roof binoculars than porros which proves they’re better.
Me:- Why do only roofs, but not porros, have ‘phase coating”?
S/P:- It isn’t worth spending the extra money on porros because they’re not so good as roofs.
Me:- No, actually, it’s because “phase coating” corrects a defect in roof prism binoculars that porros don’t suffer from.
S/P:- No it isn’t. Porros aren’t as good optically as roofs. It just your opinion.
Me:- No, it’s not a matter of opinion it’s actually fact – something to do with the path of the light through the instrument. (Since I’d been reading up on this at the time my response was more technical at the time!)
S/P: - Well, that’s just your opinion. I sell lots of binoculars you don’t, so I know what I’m talking about.
Me:- Well no wonder you sell fewer porro bins as you’re clearly biased about them.
S/P:- (Heatedly) I give unbiased advice! Roof bins are technically better. You don’t sell binoculars so don’t know anything about them, I do.
Me:- Well, lets agree to disagree.
S/P:- No, you’re wrong.
Exit one birder sans new binoculars!

…. this from someone working at an outlet that must be in the top handful in the UK for sales of birding optics!
(PS – last 3-4 times I was there I saw no sign of the person concerned & got much more balanced advice so it’d be unfair to name names!)

As for good porro bins, as I’m concerned the latest Audubons represent stunning value for money – far better than equally priced roofs. However, in the latest 8x42 Ultravids, Leica now has an instrument that is as comfortable to hold and marginally better optically than my Nikon 8x32 SEs. I doubt, though, that this would be the case if a similar amount of money were spent on developing a porro instrument of similar quality. One of the best binoculars I’ve ever looked through was an old pair of west German porro Zeiss 10x50s – superb.

John

John Cantelo said:

I do think ‘Birdwatch’ could do better is in being more up front with regard to the close link between one of their reviewers and Leica,
John Cantelo

Click to expand...

Surely you mean 'Birdwatching' magazine's chief optics man? Birdwatch has very close ties with Swarovski and to a lesser degree, Nikon.

Chat to normal birders you meet and use your own eyes, don't be too taken with those who may have advertising revenue (or direct ££) in the back of their minds when reviewing a product.

Sandy

Hello this is the first time I'am writing in this forum. First of all I'am not a birder,but a hunter with interests in optics.
From 1990 to 2003 i had Swarovskis 7x42GA.It had to take a lot of hard use,but served me very well for all these years.This year i wanted to have some more magnification so i ordered at Swarovski 8.5x42 EL and sold the 7x42 .I didn't like the focusing at all so i sold it and ordered a Leica Utravid 10x42BR.Sadly i have wait until near Christmas to get it!! In the meanwhile i needed a good binocular so i ordered a Fujinon 7x50 FMTR-SX2. This porro marinebinocular is of course too heavy for birding and also perhaps for hunting. anyway I'am very satisfied with the optic,very bright and very sharp out to the edge. I rate this Fuji higher than the 8.5x42 EL. Focusing is individual,not a birdes dream,but I'am sure that makes the Fuji even more waterproof than my old 7x42Swarovski. And for the price of a Swarovski 8.5x42 EL i can get 2,5 Fuji's.!!

50mm ultravids

Well this thread is bouncing along pretty good now, so have any of you had a chance to look through the 10x 50 mm ultravids? Every thing i have read about the ultravids(in 3 or 4 other forums) only refer to the 42 mm models. I have a 10x50 ultravid on order with Adorama since early October,they received the 42mm models in last week, still waiting for the 50s! thanks Chas Zoss

laika said:

Hello this is the first time I'am writing in this forum. First of all I'am not a birder,but a hunter with interests in optics.
From 1990 to 2003 i had Swarovskis 7x42GA.It had to take a lot of hard use,but served me very well for all these years.This year i wanted to have some more magnification so i ordered at Swarovski 8.5x42 EL and sold the 7x42 .I didn't like the focusing at all so i sold it and ordered a Leica Utravid 10x42BR.Sadly i have wait until near Christmas to get it!! In the meanwhile i needed a good binocular so i ordered a Fujinon 7x50 FMTR-SX2. This porro marinebinocular is of course too heavy for birding and also perhaps for hunting. anyway I'am very satisfied with the optic,very bright and very sharp out to the edge. I rate this Fuji higher than the 8.5x42 EL. Focusing is individual,not a birdes dream,but I'am sure that makes the Fuji even more waterproof than my old 7x42Swarovski. And for the price of a Swarovski 8.5x42 EL i can get 2,5 Fuji's.!!

Click to expand...

I'd suggest you find an Optics or Hunting website,as not being a birder would naturally render you unsuitable for Bird Forum.

Grousemore said:

I'd suggest you find an Optics or Hunting website,as not being a birder would naturally render you unsuitable for Bird Forum.

Click to expand...

Aye, quite right, Grousemoor.

Thanks for the correction, Sandy. I do, of course, mean "Birdwatching" not "Birdwatch". (A bit like field guides it's getting a struggle to coin a distinctive name for any birds orientated magazine.) Whatever bias the noted expert with links to Leica may have, is still think by-and-large he offers sound advice on optics
John

Zeiss do make a Porro binocular, 7x50BGAT* and I believe that it is used by the Royal Navy. Possibly a factor why there are not more Porros is purely commercial, certainly in Europe I would have thought that roof prisms sales were much higher, especially in the mid - high price range.
I agree with John regarding his comments on optics, unfortunately I think that comment's like "well we sell more, so they must be best" is common. I would have thought that a good Porro prism has a number of optical advantages against a roof prism, but as with optics there are always trade off's.

Maybe this should not be here as this is a thread for Leica Ultravids, but surely because someone with an interest in hunting makes a post about optics and Ultravids, why tell them that they should find a hunting web site? This is a bird forum and a brilliant one, but the other day on Radio 5 there was talk about the RSPB and the need to cull a number of deer because the numbers of deer in Scotland were destroying the habitat of Capercaille, especially reducing the amount of insects, which the Capercaille feed on.

Here, here. And neither politeness nor kindness ever caused a conflict either. Many Norwegians hunt, and although I could never do that myself, I am not a Norwegian and cannot think like one.

Hope you don't shoot trolls though - they're an endangered species.

Blimey. The comments above directed at laika were a bit rude. Am I alone in welcoming interesting comments relevant to the current thread? FYI My main interest is fungi, birding being something that I took up to kill the boredom of the Winter months. If the head designer at Leica were to post here, would you scare him off if he did not bird?

Paradoxically birders and bunny huggers owe a dept to hunters. In the UK especially there is very little land that is of real value to wildlife, most having been 'improved' for intensive farming. Hunters are one of the many groups of people that give economic value to unimproved land, and hence help it to survive for future generations.

Or are you objecting to the fact that he is a hunter? Well do you eat meat? If so then such an objection smacks of hypocrisy. Factory farmed animals often endure a horrific and short life. Far better to be a grouse living a natural life on a moorland and to be blasted out of the sky, than a battery hen.

Anyway, back on topic, one surprise in the Bird Watching survey is the absence of the Zeiss 7x42 BGAT. This offers top grade optical quality for a bargain price. They are light and comfortable to hold but the rubber eye tubes are a pain and they are not fully water proofed.