Ultravid Dilemna (1 Viewer)

I have owned a pair of 8x32 BA Leica Trinovids for about 7 years, and have been pretty happy with them. However, they are starting to show their age. Also, when birding interior forest in the tropics, I have found myself wanting something a little brighter. So I have been looking for something brighter, and of equivalent or better quality for the last couple years. Here's what I have found in the 8 power full size roofs:

(First, for the record, chromatic aberation fortunately does not bother me like it does some folks on here, sharpness is the cross I bear.)

[*]Leica Trinovid 42s: ergonomics suck (big and bulky), a little heavy, don't remember, but assume the optics is equal to the 32s

[*]B&L Elites: Nice ergonomics, brighter, definitely not as sharp, flimsy eyecups, best price

[*]Nikon Venturers: Probably the sharpest roof prism available, fantastic ergonomics, too damn heavy, good price.

[*]Swarovski ELs: sharpness and brightness very good but not as good as all the raves, too over priced, length forces you to hold your hands further from your face, therefore not quite as stable (for me anyway).

[*]Zeiss Victory I&II: Is were optically (sharpness) a big disappointment and well there's the strap attachment gizmo. IIs were better, still not as good optically as the swaros, nikons and leicas. Ok Price.

Then the Ultravids came out. Lighter than the Trinovids, new grippy armor, twist up removable eyecups, shell out for the leather version and get a top of the line bino weighing only 25oz, new High Lux coating system. Well they weren't cheap, but at least a couple hundred lower than the swaros. Not as close focusing as the others, but 10ft is fine with me. Finally the holy grail of full size binos had arrived. Right?

No.

They are not as sharp as my old beat up 8x32 Trinovids with the scratched oculars. They are lighter and brighter, the focus is smoother, they are more slender than the 42 trinos, the armor is nice and grippy. Leica even finally offers a decent (not great) case and strap, and ocular/objective covers.

But they are not as sharp as my old beat up 8x32 Trinovids. Close...very close, but enough to justify US $1,225?

Should I keep them? Should I make another 5 1/2 hour drive to Eagle Optics to take another look at the Nikon 8x32 Venturers? There's good words here about the new Swaro 8x32s. But is that the Swaro cult at work? Plus there's that Swarovski snob appeal price.

Crap.

Maybe I should take up golf.

Bill: I tried the Swaro 8x32 EL today and was disappointed. I doubt they are much brighter than the Leica 8x32 BN. They seemed to lack brightness, contrast and sharpness compared with the Nikon 8x32 SE I use. However, to be fair they are very fine bins with superb ergonomics, and will probably make a lot of people happy, esp. Swarovski's bank manager. I cannot figure out why they are getting rave reviews though.

I am surprised that you think the 8x42 Leicas are less sharp than the Leica 8x32 BA. If you were to use a resolution chart I am 100% sure that you would resolve more with the larger bins. I am sure others on this site will say the same thing.

Did you know that Leica will bring out 8x32 Ultravids? I am not too sure when, but it is on the cards. I have seen a French site with the specs. They might suit you.

Here is a thread in which I comment on the Swaro 8x32 EL and 'dogfish' adds a comment too:

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=118461#post118461

BTW Golf is much more expensive than birding!

Bill, I traded in a pair of 8x32 BN Leicas for 8x42 Ultravids. To my eyes the Ultravids have much better brightness and contrast. I think they're sharper too, but it can be difficult to sort out what's sharpness and what's brightness and contrast in an image, if you know what I mean.

They also seem to have a near perfect blend of faithful colour reproduction and high contrast; a rare thing.

The rainguard is dreadful but the strap is the best I've used

Thanks for the response Leif,

"I am surprised that you think the 8x42 Leicas are less sharp than the Leica 8x32 BA. If you were to use a resolution chart I am 100% sure that you would resolve more with the larger bins. I am sure others on this site will say the same thing.

Did you know that Leica will bring out 8x32 Ultravids? I am not too sure when, but it is on the cards. I have seen a French site with the specs. They might suit you."

I have had the Ultravids for about a week but really haven't played with them much yet. Looking out the kithchen window they seemed a touch softer than the BAs. I will say that the overall view seemed somewhat "easier", possibly due to increased brightness or color (yellow?). I had just finished a quicky resolution test on a dollar bill just before I made my post. The fine print was easier to read with the old BAs. Maybe it was a contrast issue, not sharpness, I'm not sure how they are differentiated. Again it was very close. BUT for $1,225 I expected more. I just have to decide within the next couple weeks whether its a big enough deal to return them.

If Nikon would knock 6-8 oz off the Venturer's (w/o a drastic price increase) I
would snap them up in a heart.

Oops. I meant heartbeat.

dogfish said:

Bill, I traded in a pair of 8x32 BN Leicas for 8x42 Ultravids. To my eyes the Ultravids have much better brightness and contrast. I think they're sharper too, but it can be difficult to sort out what's sharpness and what's brightness and contrast in an image, if you know what I mean.

They also seem to have a near perfect blend of faithful colour reproduction and high contrast; a rare thing.

The rainguard is dreadful but the strap is the best I've used

Click to expand...

I wish I could see the better contrast. Maybe I just have an exceptional 8x32 BA.

Yeah the rain gurad is not the best. I DO like that strap, the shape takes a surprisingly large piece of the load off of your neck. I used to use a harness, but its such a pain taking it on and off, or when wearing a coat. I'm thinking of seeing if Leica has that strap for sale at a decent price.

Bill,

Ironically, I am in the process of replacing my 8X32 BA with an Ultravid.

I used a 42 series BA for a couple of years and disliked the weight and bulk. I won't be going that route this time.

What I wanted was a brighter image without a large increase in weight. I think the Ultravid will be the answer for me.

The Ultravids I've tried were as sharp and much brighter in comparison the the 8X32 BA. I must say, your description of an "easier" overall view is spot on. The color rendition to my eyes was perfect. The armor, if one chooses to go that route, is a huge improvement.

The Swaro EL in either configuration (32 or 42) did not impress me as much as I expected to be.

Regards,
JB

Bill Atwood said:

If Nikon would knock 6-8 oz off the Venturer's (w/o a drastic price increase) I
would snap them up in a heartbeat.

Click to expand...

Trouble with Nikons is once you've looked through them, you're hooked. What about the 8x32 venturer / HGs?

Zeiss 7 x 42 are the ultimate tropical forest bins for me

massive field of view, excellent resolution and I've seen nothing brighter

I've had the 8x42Ultravids for just under3 weeks now.I compared these with Nikon 8x42s and swarovski ELs 8x32 and 8x42 and liked the Ultravids the best. But optically they were all so good there was virtually no difference,so it came down to weight and which felt the most comfortable.

I don't really think there's anything to choose between these optically but to get that extra brightness that is so important when watching a jungle floor skulker you might just have to drop to 7x....

Bill Atwood said:

I have owned a pair of 8x32 BA Leica Trinovids for about 7 years, and have been pretty happy with them. However, they are starting to show their age. Also, when birding interior forest in the tropics, I have found myself wanting something a little brighter. So I have been looking for something brighter, and of equivalent or better quality for the last couple years. Here's what I have found in the 8 power full size roofs....

Crap. Maybe I should take up golf.

Click to expand...

Bill:

Have you adjusted the diopter setting?

I bought Ultravid 7x42 last fall, and after hours of experimentation set the diopter at +1.25, even though my Nikon Superior E and Leica 8x20 Trinovid are both set at 0. When I first used it, I thought something was wrong, or it was fuzzy. Having set the diopter adjustment, it is utterly stupendous, and I think it is the sharpest binocular I have ever used.

On the other hand, you can look for my first post to this forum, which was written just after handling the 7x42 and 8x42 Ultravids at a Leica booth at the Festival of the Cranes, at the Bosque del Apache NWR. My experience that day was that the 7x42 was superb and the 8x42 was not. The rep told me that the 8x42 was a pre-production model, and indeed it had pop-up eyecups, rather than twist-up. So I assumed it was sort of a made-up thing.

If your Ultravid is not sharp you should return it immediately, but first verify that the diopter setting is not radically different than what you are used to.

Jonathan B. said:

Bill:

Have you adjusted the diopter setting?

If your Ultravid is not sharp you should return it immediately, but first verify that the diopter setting is not radically different than what you are used to.

Click to expand...

I've played with the diopter setting without much effect. I guess the question is sharp compared to what? After spending alot of time looking thru bins at Eagle Optics its difficult to judge the high end stuff while handholding them. While EO is a fine outfit, they don't a have a real good set up for in store evaluation. The only 4Xmm roofs I thought were sharper were the Nikons but they just were just too heavy. I had to think hard about that cuz they were $475 less than the Ultravids. The Ultravids seemed as good as anything else and were definitely brighter than my 32 BAs. It was just after using them at home abit I got a bit suspicious they weren't quite up to the 32s. So I did a dollar bill test with both binos resting on a solid surface and confirmed my suspicion. The difference is not great and maybe I'm picking nits, but when you spend over $1k on a newer product from the same company I don't expect a quarter step backwards.

As far as everything else goes with the Ultravids they are a definite improvement over the Trinos.

Bill: You have very good reasons (1k+) to expect Ultravids to perform better. If your Trinovids are sharper in your dollar bill test, the upgrade is probably not worth the effort. OTOH I think you should give Ultravids another try - there is always a chance that your unit has not been perfect. Right now I think there is not a better alternative if Swarovski ELs just don't feel right and Nikon Venturers are too heavy. With Nikon SEs you could gain some sharpness, but not brightness (at least significantly) - and you would lose some durability.

This is just pure speculation, but having seen the top bino-makers' reborn interest in reducing weight, I wouldn't be too surprised if Nikon announced Venturer II weighing 6-8 oz less.

Ilkka

A month ago or so I order the 8x42 BR ultravid and 8x32 eagle optics rangers. With my eyes close together the ultravids did not fit well and the thumb ridges did nothing but get in the way, maybe try the BL sometime. I was suprised and disapointed the little 8x32 where a little sharper, I tested and retested, the little ones resolved more. For the Ultravids to resolve more It had to be very dark.

The overall view with the ultravids was very nice, bright and flat, but was a little shocked the 8x32 rangers were sharper.

Jad

I have an idea that sharpness, per se, is not too difficult for a manufacturer to achieve - but to achieve it edge-to-edge with a completely flat field, with high contrast, neutral colour balance, low colour fringing, etc., is probably a compromise that even the very best manufacturers struggle to achieve.

Steve: Very true.

Ultravid 7x42 vs. 8x42

Jonathan B. said:

Bill:

Have you adjusted the diopter setting?

I bought Ultravid 7x42 last fall, and after hours of experimentation set the diopter at +1.25, even though my Nikon Superior E and Leica 8x20 Trinovid are both set at 0. When I first used it, I thought something was wrong, or it was fuzzy. Having set the diopter adjustment, it is utterly stupendous, and I think it is the sharpest binocular I have ever used.

On the other hand, you can look for my first post to this forum, which was written just after handling the 7x42 and 8x42 Ultravids at a Leica booth at the Festival of the Cranes, at the Bosque del Apache NWR. My experience that day was that the 7x42 was superb and the 8x42 was not. The rep told me that the 8x42 was a pre-production model, and indeed it had pop-up eyecups, rather than twist-up. So I assumed it was sort of a made-up thing.

If your Ultravid is not sharp you should return it immediately, but first verify that the diopter setting is not radically different than what you are used to.

Click to expand...

Jonathan,
I read your entry with great interest. I too had the same reaction when comparing the 7x42 with the 8x42 Ultravid. I felt the 8's were nothing special, and not as good as the 8.5 Swarovski EL's. When I looked through the 7x42 Ultravid's I was very impressed. Beautiful contrast, brightness and sharpness--I even prefered them to the 7x42 Victory FL's.

For me, the real appeal of Leica Trinovids has been their total reliability: no fogging, no loss of collimation, no focussing problems no loose hinges. Optics have always been good enough, but never at the level of, say, the Zeiss Classic 7 x 42. Does anyone have a sense of whether the Ultravids will prove as robust.

BTW - the Nikon 8 x 32 HG(LX) is an astounding binocular, especially for the price.

chartwell99 said:

For me, the real appeal of Leica Trinovids has been their total reliability: no fogging, no loss of collimation, no focussing problems no loose hinges. Optics have always been good enough, but never at the level of, say, the Zeiss Classic 7 x 42. Does anyone have a sense of whether the Ultravids will prove as robust.

BTW - the Nikon 8 x 32 HG(LX) is an astounding binocular, especially for the price.

Click to expand...

Good for Leica, but they've only been available for a couple of years, yet, haven't they? A binocular of that price should see twenty years service without the problems you mention, I would hope.