• 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.

Leica 77mm UV filter (1 Viewer)

Leif

Well-known member
I recently ordered a Leica UV filter from Warehouse Express, and after a four week wait it has finally arrived. (Leica's fault, not WE.) I want to protect the objective against damage, and in the manual Leica recommend use of this filter for just that purpose. Anyway, imagine my surprise this morning when the filter arrived and it turned out a) to be covered in dirt (dust?) on both surfaces and b) it is an obvious mid-brown colour. It looks to me as if the filter gives everything a horrible brown cast, and absorbs a substantial amount of the incident light (~30% ?).

My immediate reaction is "Yuck". I've spent a small fortune on a big scope with plenty of light gathering and a neutral image (to my eyes anyway) only to buy something that significantly degrades the image!

Does anyone have experience of this filter? Comments?
 
Jim Archer said:
You have the wrong filter. Someone has blundered.

Anyway a Jessops 77mm is just as good and 1/3rd the price

Thanks. Yes it looks like the filter and the retaining ring were from different products as it was clearly marked 77 UV. Sigh. At least Leica were very quick to respond to an email and have asked me to send it to them.
 
But you don't want a UV filter, do you, Leif? You need a skylight or haze as these are much more neutral (just sl. pink, if I recall).
 
scampo said:
But you don't want a UV filter, do you, Leif? You need a skylight or haze as these are much more neutral (just sl. pink, if I recall).

A UV filter should be clear according to Leica. Anyway, that's what they recommend. Bahhhhh. (That was a sheep noise.)

Incidentally you asked about what to look at in the night sky. I recommend the planets: Jupiter, Saturn and Venus are all prominent. Look for bright 'stars' on the plane travelled through the sky by the sun and moon, and if a 'star' has a disk, it's a planet.

Jupiter: very bright, look ~SE, elevation ~45 degrees. At least 2 bands should be seen and 4 moons at 60x.

Saturn: fairly bright, look S, elevation ~50 degress. Rings wide open. Gap between rings and planet easy at 60x. Cassini division in ring visible?

Venus: very bright, W elevation ~30 degrees and setting not long after the sun. Looks like a half moon.

We should have a clear sky sometime this decade.

I think the planets would be a wonderful comparison for your scopes, and my Televid! I wonder how your little Swaro 65 would do?
 
I've used the Swaro, although not seriously, but it was very good. I did notice a very bright object near to the moon the other evening - I guess it was Venus as it was majestically bright. Sadly, there wasn't time to use the scope to view it.
 
Leif said:
A UV filter should be clear according to Leica. Anyway, that's what they recommend. Bahhhhh. (That was a sheep noise.)

Incidentally you asked about what to look at in the night sky. I recommend the planets: Jupiter, Saturn and Venus are all prominent. Look for bright 'stars' on the plane travelled through the sky by the sun and moon, and if a 'star' has a disk, it's a planet.

Jupiter: very bright, look ~SE, elevation ~45 degrees. At least 2 bands should be seen and 4 moons at 60x.

Saturn: fairly bright, look S, elevation ~50 degress. Rings wide open. Gap between rings and planet easy at 60x. Cassini division in ring visible?

Venus: very bright, W elevation ~30 degrees and setting not long after the sun. Looks like a half moon.

We should have a clear sky sometime this decade.

I think the planets would be a wonderful comparison for your scopes, and my Televid! I wonder how your little Swaro 65 would do?
I believe that a "Skylight"-filter is the same as a UV-filter, it's just a different name.

As to using the planets as a scope test: Good idea!
I have the Nikon Spotting Sope 80A (Sky&Earth in the US) on trial, and I have used it to look at the planets. I can borrow a Swaro AT80HD to compare to a really good scope (and I have done so, but not with the nightsky as the target).

Here's what I can see with the Nikon:

Jupiter:
The four moons can be seen throughout the zoom range all the way from 20x to 60x. It is possible to barely discern that the planet has bands (at 60x), but it is quite difficult. I suspect a better scope would show bands with ease.

Saturn:
Can see the gap between rings and planet itself at 60x, but it is plain impossible to discern the Cassini division with this scope.

Venus:
This planet is so bright that some color fringing will show, no matter where in the view the planet is. Center will be best, naturally. It is easy to se the disc and the half-moon shape of the planet at 60x.

Moon:
The moon is a thankful object to look at, since it is quite big, and almost fills the view at 60x with this scope. Details at the moon surface is easy to see, and the brightness is not causing much trouble with color fringing, although some will be visible at the moon edges.

I'm still trying to decide whether I will keep this scope or step up to a more expensive scope. The color fringing is annoying me slightly in high-contrast situations, and details are a bit muddy at 60x and at large distances, but I have only compared it to the Swaro that I mentioned, and this is a top-class scope compared to the low-end Nikon.

What I can say is that I don't think the price difference matches the quality difference. I'd say the Nikon offers good value for money.

Best regards
-Øyvind
 
mroek said:
What I can say is that I don't think the price difference matches the quality difference. I'd say the Nikon offers good value for money.

Best regards
-Øyvind
I find that the situation is the same no matter what the hobby,
Eventually you get to the stage of ever diminishing returns,
the decision depends on you as a person & your of course ultimately your financial position If you strive for perfection then quality is everything, even at high cost,

Personally i would rather not have a spotting scope at all if it meant putting up with colour fringing,
I find it very distracting,
Rgds
Ian
 
I have the Leica 77mm uV filter and am happy with it - it is brown, and it does change the image slightly, but not as much as you are experiencing. I have had good results digiscoping with it on. Tried a Jessops Skylight and it was absolute crap - the image was distorted, had a yellow cast and basically you could not focus on the subject at any magnification. Guess it was a bad one too. I do use a cheapo Jessops skylight on my Apo 62 and it is great. Makes no sense to me I am afraid - just go on how it looks to you.
 
"What I can say is that I don't think the price difference matches the quality difference. I'd say the Nikon offers good value for money."

I recall reading a comment in another forum to the effect that, "nobody ever complained after buying a top-end scope." I moved up from a Nikon "Sky and Earth" to a Leica and the difference was, obviously, phenomenal. I sold the Nikon on Ebay and used the money to part pay for the Lecia. It took a while but I found a great deal and didn't have to pay full price for the new Leica. Just an observation ...
 
Last edited:
mroek said:
What I can say is that I don't think the price difference matches the quality difference. I'd say the Nikon offers good value for money.

Best regards
-Øyvind
I don't know whether you could buy it from the UK, but the now just discontinued Nikon ED78 is available at a very low price indeed from www.warehouseexpress.com - and this would, according to most tests and opinions I have seen, equal the best scopes available for contrast, sharpness, brightness and clarity - as well as being quite free from any fringing.
 
Lindsay Cargill said:
Checked my Leica uV 77 - it is not Brown as stated above - it is clear and is really good ! You must have a dud Leif.

Thanks. I am not too happy given that it took 4 weeks to arrive from first ordering it.

Regarding the planets, through my scope they are as described earlier, except that Jupiter at 60x shows as a bright orb with two obvious dark bands - NEB & SEB - plus a hint of other bands and further detail too. That is with poor skies, and a wobbly tripod! There is almost no colour fringing, and stars are pin holes in a black background, some being coloured and some white.
 
Just in case anyone read through this thread, Leica were useless. It took them over two weeks to return the filter with a note saying that it was to spec. Hohum.

Warehouse Express were fantastic, and exchanged the filter for a Canon 77mm Protect at ~£50. This is a clear multi-coated filter whose sole purpose is to protect the objective. Nikon do the same thing, and it's referred to as a Nikon 77mm NC filter.
 
Ah well - 0/10 for Leica then, Leif. I've heard nothing from Nikon yet either about my lens hood! These scope manufacturers, I don't know - once they've got your money!

;)
So far I would have to give Zeiss my vote - 10/10 for speed and courtesy of service!
 
Last edited:
Leif said:
I recently ordered a Leica UV filter from Warehouse Express, and after a four week wait it has finally arrived. (Leica's fault, not WE.) I want to protect the objective against damage, and in the manual Leica recommend use of this filter for just that purpose. Anyway, imagine my surprise this morning when the filter arrived and it turned out a) to be covered in dirt (dust?) on both surfaces and b) it is an obvious mid-brown colour. It looks to me as if the filter gives everything a horrible brown cast, and absorbs a substantial amount of the incident light (~30% ?).

My immediate reaction is "Yuck". I've spent a small fortune on a big scope with plenty of light gathering and a neutral image (to my eyes anyway) only to buy something that significantly degrades the image!

Does anyone have experience of this filter? Comments?

Leif..I have th 77m Leica Skylight and its fine,,u may have a faulty one..
 
robertfuge said:
Leif..I have th 77m Leica Skylight and its fine,,u may have a faulty one..

Robertfuge: to be honest I've had enough of dealing with Leica. After they returned the filter, I sent an email expressing annoyance at the various problems experienced. They then rang me to apologise and suggested that it was in fact a dud, and offered to provide a new one at a slight discount. It seems they can't even make up their minds as to whether or not it was a dud. Anyway I've spent £15 sending the thing back and forth. Warehouse Express were superb, didn't even charge P&P on the Canon replacement, and just credited my debit card with the difference!

What I did learn is that the UK Leica Service Dept does not have many staff.

I'll deal with Warehouse Express again, but not Leica thankyou.

Incidentally, when I placed the UV filter I had on a piece of white paper, the colour looked obviously yellow brown - not dark, but very obviously coloured. Rather like an 81A filter.
 
scampo said:
Ah well - 0/10 for Leica then, Leif. I've heard nothing from Nikon yet either about my lens hood! These scope manufacturers, I don't know - once they've got your money!

;)
So far I would have to give Zeiss my vote - 10/10 for speed and courtesy of service!

I've dealt with Nikon service for a camera and lens. They were very slow and expensive.

I hope you are enjoying your new toy!

I must say that our local patch - 200m away - is fantastic. An Avocet and Black Tailed Redstart are recent sightings, not that I've seen them.

BTW Isn't there something odd about calling something a Black Tailed Redstart given that Redstart means literally "Red Tail" ?
 
I only wish I could see one, Leif - it's one of the birds I've wanted to see since a lad.

Another of those birds that stirred my childhood imagination was the ring ouzel. Another bird I just love looking at - and I saw one today for the first time in many years. Wonderful.

And yes - the new toy is a pretty darn decent bit of kit. I've said it before but I'll say it again - once you look through the Zeiss zoom, all others look tube like.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 20 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