I am planning on going for a pair of high end roofs some time before the end of 06. I am wondering how the older model Leica's and Swarovski's compare with the more recent models because I see they can be a little cheaper. Probably the most important feature to me will be clarity and sharpness of images.-Any feedback on this issue?
-
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.
Leica-older models versus ultravids. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter lvn600
- Start date
The previous models are still excellent optics, in some ways I prefer the trinovids to the ultravids...
One of the the big 'improvements' of the ultravids is the lighter weight, personally I find that in side by side tests they do deliver a slightly brighter and sharper image. I currently use the 7x42 ultravids and have been very impressed with them, lovely wide field of view and excellent in poor light conditions. If you are looking at 42mm bins then I think the ultravids are worth the extra money, though make sure you try the pair you are buying, the focus wheel can be an issue on ultravids.
However if you are looking for 32mm bins then I am not so convince by the ultravids, I find them too small for my hands. The larger ultravids feel great in the hand, but I cannot hold the small ones comfortably. The trinovid 8x32 on the other hand has the best 'in the hand' feel of any binocular I've ever used. Best advice (as always) is to try them for yourself.
One of the the big 'improvements' of the ultravids is the lighter weight, personally I find that in side by side tests they do deliver a slightly brighter and sharper image. I currently use the 7x42 ultravids and have been very impressed with them, lovely wide field of view and excellent in poor light conditions. If you are looking at 42mm bins then I think the ultravids are worth the extra money, though make sure you try the pair you are buying, the focus wheel can be an issue on ultravids.
However if you are looking for 32mm bins then I am not so convince by the ultravids, I find them too small for my hands. The larger ultravids feel great in the hand, but I cannot hold the small ones comfortably. The trinovid 8x32 on the other hand has the best 'in the hand' feel of any binocular I've ever used. Best advice (as always) is to try them for yourself.
James Eaton
Trent Valley Crew
It's all about personal preference unfortunately, everyone has a different point of view on comparing binoculars, especially higher end bins. Personally, I don't see a noticable difference between the ultravids and trinovids in 32mm. From a personal point of view, I find the eye-relief frustrating on ultravids, I must have freak eyes, as they must be too close to each other for ultravids! I also find ultravids too lightweight. when I upgrade my ultravids, if I choose Leica, then I will just get a new pair of ultravids. I do like the Zeiss 8/10x32 FL's though.
xenophobe
Well-known member
With magnification and objective being equal, I still prefer the Leicas to any of the SLCs. In 10x42 Ultravids are noticably nicer than the SLC, which are pretty much on par with the Zeiss 10x40b Classics (a bargain at $799 at Cabelas) in quality of view, though each one has their respectively different fine/weak points which pretty much balance them out, IMO.
The Ultravids do have a very slightly brighter view than the Trinovids I've compared them to, but the most significant factor is that the Ultravids are noticably lighter and feel smaller in hand. Brightness alone, especially at this level of quality viewing, doesn't really mean much to me. I'll take a bin that is slightly sharper or with more contrast over one that is just a little brighter. My night and dusk testing of 7x, 10x, and 12x bins of various objective sizes has shown me that brightness isn't a primary concern, contrast and magnification are.
The fact is really that if any of the previous 'top end' binoculars like the SLC, Trinovid, Classic, etc.. are more in your price range, they still deliver a spectacular view that beats out at least %95 of the currently available binoculars in the market and are far from being justifiably retired.
The Ultravids do have a very slightly brighter view than the Trinovids I've compared them to, but the most significant factor is that the Ultravids are noticably lighter and feel smaller in hand. Brightness alone, especially at this level of quality viewing, doesn't really mean much to me. I'll take a bin that is slightly sharper or with more contrast over one that is just a little brighter. My night and dusk testing of 7x, 10x, and 12x bins of various objective sizes has shown me that brightness isn't a primary concern, contrast and magnification are.
The fact is really that if any of the previous 'top end' binoculars like the SLC, Trinovid, Classic, etc.. are more in your price range, they still deliver a spectacular view that beats out at least %95 of the currently available binoculars in the market and are far from being justifiably retired.
bradshrike
Guest
postcardcv said:
That's a good post (as are the others)...
I currently use an 8x32 BN as I prefer a mid-size bino (just wish they were 7x32's!). In the 8x32 class I don't think the advantages of the Ultravid are worthwile enough to justify their substantially higher price tag. For my hands the 8x32 Ultravid's are fine but I agree there's more to hang on to with the BN's and the weight difference is not more than an ounce or two.
Regarding the larger Ultravid's vs Trinovid's, I'd pay the extra coin! The Ultravid's are less bulky and certainly less heavy. If you could rate the image improvement as a percentage I'd say they're, perhaps, five percent better than the Trinovid's... course that five percent costs dearly, so it's up to your wallet what you can bear.
If I were in the market for a 42mm objective bino I'd get the 7x42 Ultravid... it's hand's down (to my eyes and hands) the finest binocular currently found on the planet. Having one less glass element than the 8x means more light transmission... side by side with the 8x 42 and 10x42 the difference is noticeable. And, of course, the larger exit pupil of the 7x means less eye strain during etended viewing... hard to tell I'm a 7x fan, eh?
Iceberg slim
Fly by night
It is all in the eye of the beholder,although i must admit the new ultravids are in my opinion superior in optical clarity to the old Ba's and BN's, and the weight save is a real plus,i have upgraded over the years and have also used swaro 10x42 slc'c and 8.5x42 El's.. but couldn't get on with that brand,funny that but i don't get on with leica scopes either
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
lvn600 said:
I think you already have plenty of comments on Ultravid vs. Trinovid. Trinovid still provides a great view, but weight and handling are extremely different.
Though some might disagree, look at the SLC, which is a great binocular, and whose handling you might prefer to the Trinovid. The most recent model with the older body style has the same optics as the newly released "SLC New" version. It provides an image that is practically indistinguishable from Leica. I came very close to buying 7x42 SLC two years ago and still consider it one of the best binoculars out there.
chartwell99
Well-known member
Gosh - I thought this thread was about older Leica models vs. Ultravids. At the risk of inviting another epithet, I think the older Trinovid Ultras (Leica and not Leitz) are still fully competitive, and by no means relegated to the status of collectors' pieces.
John Finnan
Active member
postcardcv said:
I prefer the 42mm and 50mm Ultravids to the Trinovids. However, I completely agree with you on the 32mm size. The Ultravids are too small for me to comfortably hand hold them whereas the 32mm Trinovids were great.
Sc0tty
Well-known member
I initially thought the 8x32 ultravids were way too small, but you get used to them. Another thing to consider when choosing between trinovids and ultravids is the eyecups. On the Trinovids they are firm and are the pull/push variety and the ultravid eyecups are screw-in/out and soft.
Rich.
Rich.
Richard Scott said:
Unfortunately, Leica has not improved on the close focus with the Ultravids. So if close focussing is important to you, I suggest you give the Zeiss FLs a very serious consideration as well. There was an improvement in close focus, however, within the Trinovids some years back when they changed from the BA to the BN designation. Thus, if you are planning to take the cheaper option, make sure you get a Trinovid BN.
I have used Trinovid 10x50's for over ten years but had a problem last year with the hinge (the plastic cover broke) and the focus wheel which became very "rough". Sent them off to Leica (under the 30 year warranty) and they came back almost like new. The hinge cover, focussing mechanism and the complete outer covering were replaced - the only obvious "old" components (apart from the lenses) are the eye-cups. All done free, gratis, for nothing!! While they were away for repair I was using my wife's Swarovski 10x42 EL's and was so impressed by the light weight compared to my Trinovids that I decided to buy an Ultravid 10x42. Originally intended trading in the Trinovids but they looked so good after the repair that I decided to keep them. I now find that I use the Trinovids for casual birding and the Ultravids for serious day-long stuff when I have the 'scope with me as well. The lighter weight and smaller size mean they don't get in the way so much when I am digiscoping.
Having read every review on "top end" bins I must say that it is very difficult to make any meaningfull comparison between brands or between different models within brands. At this level of optical excellence the differences between our own optics (aka eyesight) in terms of sharpness, colour cast, etc. are greater than the differences between the optical performance of the products.
Optically I still prefer my Trinovids but physically I prefer the lighter weight and better balance of the Ultravids. Unfortunately the focussing wheel on my Ultravids has now developed a rough spot (after one year of use) so they may be going back to Leica for a "makeover".
Anyone else experienced mechanical problems with Leicas?
Having read every review on "top end" bins I must say that it is very difficult to make any meaningfull comparison between brands or between different models within brands. At this level of optical excellence the differences between our own optics (aka eyesight) in terms of sharpness, colour cast, etc. are greater than the differences between the optical performance of the products.
Optically I still prefer my Trinovids but physically I prefer the lighter weight and better balance of the Ultravids. Unfortunately the focussing wheel on my Ultravids has now developed a rough spot (after one year of use) so they may be going back to Leica for a "makeover".
Anyone else experienced mechanical problems with Leicas?
Colin Key said:
If you have really read ALL the contributions on the top end optics as you claim, you should have encountered plenty of posts complaining about rough focus on Leica Ultravids. Though, usually that is there from the beginning (according to those who posted).
I have had some problems with my Trinovids in the past. The focus started to develop more and more play. After having it fixed, it is now gradually getting worse again. Though these binoculars have since been relegated mostly to back-up duty. So it's less critical this time around.
Jonathan B.
Well-known member
Just to add my two cents' worth....
I own Ultravid, and the focus was a little rough when I purchased it. I used two opposing fingers to adjust focus for about the first six months. As of this month I have had the binocular two years, and the focus is silky smooth.
Keep in mind that Leica's focus mechanism is entirely metal-on-metal. There are no lubricants. The focus is equally smooth and easy over a 100 degree range (fahrenheit) of outdoor temperature--and I have used them over the entire range.
I own Ultravid, and the focus was a little rough when I purchased it. I used two opposing fingers to adjust focus for about the first six months. As of this month I have had the binocular two years, and the focus is silky smooth.
Keep in mind that Leica's focus mechanism is entirely metal-on-metal. There are no lubricants. The focus is equally smooth and easy over a 100 degree range (fahrenheit) of outdoor temperature--and I have used them over the entire range.
Similar threads
