henry link
Well-known member
Laser filter perhaps? I bought the military version of the Leica/Kern 8x30 with a laser filter. It had a very dim image with a strong blue bias.
-
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.
New Leica September 4 2017 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Boris Flaccus
- Start date
Laser filter perhaps? I bought the military version of the Leica/Kern 8x30 with a laser filter. It had a very dim image with a strong blue bias.
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Holger in addition to my former post,
I have looked into our data and the Leitz Trinovid 6x24 from 1965 we measured was a special edition for the Olympic games in LA if I remember well (it is written on the binocular, but I have to dig the binocular up to check it). That could mean, that Leitz gave it a special treatment, but I do not know that. The Leitza Amplivid 6x24 from 1956, predecessor of the 6x24 Trinovid from 1965 had a light transmission of 60%, but the construction was quite different with a combination of prism and mirror, while the Trinovid from 1965 had Uppendahl prisms (which were patented as you undoubtedly know in 1907 according to the data I have).
Gijs van Ginkel
I have looked into our data and the Leitz Trinovid 6x24 from 1965 we measured was a special edition for the Olympic games in LA if I remember well (it is written on the binocular, but I have to dig the binocular up to check it). That could mean, that Leitz gave it a special treatment, but I do not know that. The Leitza Amplivid 6x24 from 1956, predecessor of the 6x24 Trinovid from 1965 had a light transmission of 60%, but the construction was quite different with a combination of prism and mirror, while the Trinovid from 1965 had Uppendahl prisms (which were patented as you undoubtedly know in 1907 according to the data I have).
Gijs van Ginkel
One problem may be that over the years the transmission of the glass elements has changed with older binoculars.
The Amplivid mirror coatings probably reflect less light as they age.
Also the weathering of glass over time even for internal elements.
And balsam can yellow.
I am surprised that the Holland binoculars have low transmission with no prisms.
The difference in resolution and detail seen between the 8x42 MHG and the WA Trinovid 10x40 looking at a marbled glass window in shadow in the morning light was startling.
Yet at night on the stars I think that the 10x40 WA Trinovid and indeed the c. 1955? 16x56 Hensoldt split close double stars very well indeed.
The detail on the gibbous Moon with the WA 10x40 Trinovid was very good also. It may be that the lower transmission actually helped here to reduce the Moon's brightness.
Similarly it sometimes helps with double stars to use a ND filter.
I often could separate Mizar with either 12x45 Russian or 10x30 Canon IS through variable thin cloud but not in a clear sky. 14.4 arcseconds unequal double star.
P.S.
Much 1940s material was mislaid or lost.
The Imperial War Museum has vast amounts of material that I have never seen elsewhere. Some on Zeiss.
The Amplivid mirror coatings probably reflect less light as they age.
Also the weathering of glass over time even for internal elements.
And balsam can yellow.
I am surprised that the Holland binoculars have low transmission with no prisms.
The difference in resolution and detail seen between the 8x42 MHG and the WA Trinovid 10x40 looking at a marbled glass window in shadow in the morning light was startling.
Yet at night on the stars I think that the 10x40 WA Trinovid and indeed the c. 1955? 16x56 Hensoldt split close double stars very well indeed.
The detail on the gibbous Moon with the WA 10x40 Trinovid was very good also. It may be that the lower transmission actually helped here to reduce the Moon's brightness.
Similarly it sometimes helps with double stars to use a ND filter.
I often could separate Mizar with either 12x45 Russian or 10x30 Canon IS through variable thin cloud but not in a clear sky. 14.4 arcseconds unequal double star.
P.S.
Much 1940s material was mislaid or lost.
The Imperial War Museum has vast amounts of material that I have never seen elsewhere. Some on Zeiss.
Last edited:
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Henry, post 221,
A laser filter in the Leica-Kern 8x30 may be possible, but I have to check that (it is not mentioned in the notes I have at home and I do not have the binocular at home. I will be in the lab next week to check it, so that takes a few days).
Gijs van Ginkel
A laser filter in the Leica-Kern 8x30 may be possible, but I have to check that (it is not mentioned in the notes I have at home and I do not have the binocular at home. I will be in the lab next week to check it, so that takes a few days).
Gijs van Ginkel
dalat
...
That is a bit in the past though. They indeed almost missed the step into the digital age and were making big losses still about 10 years ago, but they have managed the turn around since then. According to this recent article, they are now worth 700 million € and made 70 million of profit this year. Blackstone, wo payed 140 million € for their 45 % shares in 2012 will now be able to sell their shares with a very decent profit. Leica is now doing very well and growing, and this in midst of an imploding market, where all major camera makers are having huge troubles at the moment. They manage this by focusing on a luxury niche, offering a mix of retro-styled but modern-inside cameras, and very stylish modern ones (and their legendary lenses of course).
In sport optics, which is a rather small part of their business, Leica is much less in a luxury niche as in cameras (binoculars and scopes have just less of a luxury appeal than cameras I guess) and Leica competes with other top brands on a similar price level. Still, people who rave about the amazing deal offered by Tract Toric and the like are probably not the main customers targeted by Leica.
So Leica may be very well be irrelevant to you, they seem to do very well regardless.
Very well compared to what/who? I own Swaros BTW, as well as Tract, Meopta, Leupold, and a few others. I never see Leicas in any of our camps anymore, except for the occasional Geovid.
A2GG
Beth
I see Leicas being used by birders in my area. Today I saw a guy with
a Noctivid...and there was me with my UVid. Leicas aren't the most popular, but
I see birders using them.
Interestingly, at the same spot today there were 3 of us with 7x42 (1 Leica, 2 Zeiss). I'd say I see more older model Trinovids and a good amount of Uvids in general. Today was the first Noctivid I've ever seen. I could've asked him if I could have a look, but I felt a bit shy about that and he was talking with others.
Last weekend I chatted with a woman with a new GPO bin...it's real nice looking in person.
p.s.
The bin tally at this one spot today:
4 Zeiss (2 Dialyt, 1 SF, 1 HT)
2 Swaro SV
2 Leica (UVid , Nvid)
1 Swift Porro
2 Nikon (Monarch, SE Porro)
Last edited:
Just for the record... I have purchased and still have a 7x42 EDG, a 7x42 UVHD+, and a 7x36 Opticron BGA Classic. Have sold two pair of Swift Eaglet 7x36. 7 power seems to be selling well in this household. Likely would buy an alpha level 7x30/32/36 and then would part with the BGA.
CG
CG
Inexpensive Nikons are the most common binocular I see around here (when out hunting on public lands and hiking in our national parks). I have only seen three people with alphas - me, my five year old daughter with my EL10x32 WB when I owned them, and the DOW officer that checks me annually to see if I am legal. I think the hunting crowd in my area actually looks down on expensive binoculars...
CG
CG
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
Dear Gijs,
During the 1960s, double-layer coatings were already implemented in some of the highest quality camera lenses. Leica certainly had the technical know how to make such binoculars with improved coatings, too, but I would bet that they would have mentioned that innovation in their marketing.
So, it is an interesting puzzle indeed.
There seems to exist a patent (DE-195467 , 7.2.1907) by Uppendahl, though I don't know any further details.
Cheers,
Holger
JG
Like any observer, you JG, base your opinion on what you see. And if you don't see many Leicas then it stands to reason they are going down the tubes doesn't it?
Except the majority of the binos sold in the USA are priced at $500-600 or less, so the brands you are most likely to see are those that compete in this area. The brands that dominate and often achieve 20% of binos sold are Nikon, Bushnell, Vortex and Leupold.
How many bino models does Leica offer in this price bracket? None, although the introduction of the Trinovid HD (not the vintage reissue Trinovid) is a step into a more accessibly priced market. So it isn't surprising that you see other brands more often. GiGi spotted some Leicas on her last outing and on the ferry over to North Uist where I am now, there were 3 Leicas, 5 Zeisses, 2 Swaros and more Opticrons than I could count.
You asked if they are up for sale and the answer last time I checked was no, not quite. An investment house owns 45% and it seems they would like to cash this in, probably because they want to buy something else. There is absolutely no sign that the majority shareholder who runs the business wants to sell any of their shareholding.
The future for Leica looks interesting just now. They have introduced the Noctivid that has been well received and Ultravid should increase their market share.
After the release of Nvid and Trinnie HD, will a new scope be next?
Lee
Re. Post 230.
Balzers Liechtenstein, founded 1946, were producing multicoating from 1955 or even 1950. I cannot remember the first date.
I think they coated or multicoated some binoculars also for the makers.
Taylor Hobson had 3 layer tunable coating patents about 1955. Used from about 1960.
There was a British government backed facility producing early multicoatings also, maybe before 1950. I cannot remember the name of the place.
Minolta achromatic coatings 1960s, but a 50mm f/1.8 lens I used on a Minolta rangefinder camera from about 1958 was amazingly good, even at full aperture, No sure if single or double coated.
Minolta Super A camera?
Yes. Minolta Super A with amazing interchangeable 5cm f/1.8 Super Rokkor.
Introduced 1957.
Balzers Liechtenstein, founded 1946, were producing multicoating from 1955 or even 1950. I cannot remember the first date.
I think they coated or multicoated some binoculars also for the makers.
Taylor Hobson had 3 layer tunable coating patents about 1955. Used from about 1960.
There was a British government backed facility producing early multicoatings also, maybe before 1950. I cannot remember the name of the place.
Minolta achromatic coatings 1960s, but a 50mm f/1.8 lens I used on a Minolta rangefinder camera from about 1958 was amazingly good, even at full aperture, No sure if single or double coated.
Minolta Super A camera?
Yes. Minolta Super A with amazing interchangeable 5cm f/1.8 Super Rokkor.
Introduced 1957.
Last edited:
In the mid-2000s Leica almost went bankrupt because they didn't have a viable digital camera. The Kaufmann family took over, the M8 was released and their fortunes turned around. Leica is now a luxury lifestyle brand to a large extent, and the private equity firm Blackstone was sold a large minority stake to fund the international expansion of Leica boutiques.
Clearly there is a disagreement between the Kaufmanns and Blackstone, whether on strategy or because Blackstone had unrealistic expectations of financial returns no one is saying, but that's why they want to offload their 45% holdings. The Kaufmanns are still very much in control, though.
As for sport optics, they have been somewhat neglected over the last decade. The release of the Noctivid is a good sign, but I don't know if it portends a refresh of the Televid. Spotting scopes are a much smaller market than binoculars and can't be flaunted as neck jewelry. Previous generations of the Televid weren't even made in-house but rebadged Meoptas.
I should have been more clear. The vast majority of hunters that come into our camps wear a Swaro of some sort, then come the Nikon's, Zeiss, etc.
dalat
...
Ok, that means that Leica is not very popular with you and your friends/clients. But it means just that, and not necessarily that Leica is doing bad business (as you could read now in several posts, they actually are in a good shape).
I never ever see Steiner binoculars used by people, but still Steiner seems to sell a lot of binoculars. Must be people other than those I meet then, who are buying all those Steiner bins.
A2GG
Beth
That's a good point about the Steiners. I don't believe I've ever seen a birder with one, but they are used a lot by military and police apparently.
I went to 2 different spots today and here's the bins tally for today (last one):
3 Zeiss (Dialyt, HT, SF)
3 Swaro (2 SV, 1 older SLC)
3 Leica (ultravids, 1 a pocket size)
1 Vortex Razor (previous model)
1 Eagle Optics brand (Vortex)
2 Nikon Monarch
From what I can gather the figure of 122m field of view is only for the non-B version of the Trinovid 10x40, which is not eyeglasses friendly. The B version which allows the use of spectacles had 110m, the same as the reissue. 110m seems to be the standard for 10x40Bs of that generation, the various variants of the famous Dialyt 10x40B had exactly the same. The Zeiss HT 10x42's field of view is the same today and other current binoculars like the Noctivid 10x42, Swarovski EL 10x42, Nikon EDG 10x42 and Conquest 10x42 don't better that by much (112m for the Noctivid and EL, 114m and 115m at 1000m).
dalat
...
I think they are quite popular with German (and other European?) hunters, but I rarely see hunters in the field, and thus no Steiners either...
