Hello all
Today's ramble is category 2.
I have decided category 2 will be a comparison of the build quality and mechanical operation / build materials and how practical each binocular is when in use. I suppose this category will be more interesting to a potential buyer than category 1.
Category 3 (the most important category in my view) will be another separate report another day and will be a comparison of the view.
Here is todays category, Category 2: Build / mechanics / materials and user friendliness
First of all when you look at both binoculars side by side on the table you can tell right away that they are ‘birds of a feather’ pardon the pun, i.e. they are both high quality well thought out objects that you instinctively want to pick up. For practical comparison they are essentially the same size albeit that the Zeiss is slightly taller in the vertical plane viewed from behind given its prominent focus wheel, the Leicas focus wheel sits into the bulk of the body more. In a nutshell I suppose you could say overall that the Leica has a more curvaceous overall profile than the more angular Zeiss. This observation extends to the rain guards which on the Leica sit flush with the general slope of the barrels while on the Zeiss the rain guards sit up proud of the barrels giving a more ‘stuck on the end’ feeling. I suppose from this you could argue that the Zeiss is more likely to catch on items of clothing while in use, but in reality while I have been using it there is no difference. Both binoculars are so small they don’t really get in the way of anything, (I guess thats what I like so much about the 8x32 format in general).
The objective covers tethers stay tight and snug on the barrels and the cover sections are easy to pop on and off when in use, these also stay put when 'employed'. If you removed these objective covers you would obviously get a lighter and sleeker outfit. It's Important to note here that the Zeiss come with objective covers as standard & there are none for the Leica unless you purchase aftermarket non Leica ones (the Swarovski covers here in this comparison are a much softer rubber than the Zeiss but perform just as well on the Trinovid). For my money the rubber from which the Zeiss objective covers are made is a little harder than that covering the chassis. Looks winner: for me I prefer the looks of the Leica, the lower profile focus wheel, the in-line rain guard and the curves. They float my boat, may be a bit dated to most but I like them.
The Leica is a little heavier 687g as opposed to 609g for the Zeiss. This measurement was obtained on my digital kitchen scales with all the covers on and the neoprene straps resting on the table so it is a fairly accurate weight for the bins minus the straps. Hefting them in both hands and around the neck it is pretty hard to percieve this weight difference although it is there. If you put on the original Trinovid strap they feel noticeably heavier. The Trinovid Chassis is Aluminium I believe and the Zeiss is a Glass Fibre reinforced resin / plastic and I guess this is where most of the weight difference lies. For a grown adult and for practical purposes there is almost no difference. Winner: Zeiss
The dioptre adjustment designs are also somewhat different, this will need a paragraph each.
1. On the Zeiss you look through the optic and close your right eye, then use the focus wheel until you get a sharp picture with the left. If you then open your right eye and everything is still pin sharp then your dioptre doesn’t need adjusting. If however your right eye is getting a blurred image then you need to use the dioptre adjuster. This is performed by pulling the focus wheel towards your face to reveal a small graduated scale, the focus wheel can then be rotated to set the dioptre value that suits. When you get a pin sharp picture pop the focus wheel back forward to reengage normal focus for both barrels. It works as it should and when set everything stays sharp. The focus wheel is made of rubber and has raised wide ribs for grip, there is a longer rib on the wheel and when this is aligned with an arrow at the hinge of the right barrel you have infinity focus. A good practical system. The actual movement of the focus wheel is smooth and precise as you could hope and cannot be faulted at all.
2. On the Leicas dioptre is adjusted thus: when you pull the focus wheel toward you the upper part (closest to your nose) disengages from the lower part (closest to the objectives) revealing a red ring. The red ring lets you know that you are now in dioptre setting mode. The upper part controls the focus for your right eye and the lower part the left eye. So to focus the right eye you simply close your left eye and focus as normal using the upper part of the focus wheel until you get a pin sharp picture then to get a good view with the left eye close the right eye and focus as normal using the lower part. When that is sharp reengage the upper and lower parts by pushing them together again so the red ring is hidden and voila! The focus is now combined. Looking at the rear of the focus wheel there is a clear scale in a white window so different users can remember their setting. When the dot on the rear of the focus wheel is aligned with an arrow at the rear of the left barrel that represents a focus to infinity. The Leicas focus wheel is made of hard plastic and has narrow triangular ridges for grip, like the Zeiss I cannot fault the smooth and perfect operation of this focus mechanism. I will say that the Leica was purchased in 2004 and the focus is as smooth as new.
Focus speed and quality wise I rate them the same. Both sublime and effortless, they really make the whole birding experience far more pleasant. For ease of use, design and practicality for dioptre setting the Leica for me is the clear winner. It takes longer to get your view right with the Zeiss for me.
Lets now have a look at the coverings, the armour if you like. Both are black rubber, the Leica having 14 thinner, low profile ribs all on each barrel extending all the way around the barrels to the hinge underneath, the Zeiss having 4 wider more prominently raised ribs on each barrel extending just over halfway around each barrel. The Leica rubber has a harder texture and while not slick it is not as grippy or tactile as the Zeiss rubber. As the Leica has an Aluminium chassis the armour is wrapped around each barrel like a jacket i.e. I do not think it is actually physically bonded to the chassis. I may be wrong here but I say this because on the underside of the Leica barrels there is a slight bit of give between the armour and the chassis i.e. you can push the armour and it rebounds upward slightly as if there is an air space below. This is minor and does not apply to the top of the barrels. I used to own a 10x32BN Trinovid and do not recall this particular phenomenon. Can it be that there was variation in production quality at the factory? Or is it just the age of the binocular and effects of UV etc on the rubber? Has anyone else encountered this? The Zeiss however has no such issue. I think that as the Chassis is a resin the Zeiss rubber is actually physically bonded onto the chassis. Thats how it feels to me anyway. It is tight all the way around the barrels / hinge and the only ‘give’ is in the actual softness of the rubber itself. Armour winner: I like the Zeiss better. For me it’s the clear winner here. It is grippy and feels more organic to the fingers and it warms up to your skin temp quickly. It feels more expensive and better applied.
Next we have the main hinges. Zeiss hinge is smaller diameter, 3 sections and the end cap with the Zeiss prism motif. Not too stiff and works perfectly, positive and smooth. Plastic coated but underneath you can see two (brass?) rings, I don’t know if these are washers or what but they are visible. I think it cheapens the look but thats just me. Another gripe I have here about the Zeiss is that from the underside of the binocular, between where the hinge joins the focus wheel there is a tapering piece of plastic but on my example it moves from side to side a good 5mm or so. It is very cheap looking on an otherwise quality binocular and when you shake the binocular it can sometimes produce a small rattle. This is a bad bit of design I think. Does anyone else have this issue or just me? Other than this issue it is a good solid hinge. The Leica is a larger diameter hinge and looks the more solid. It is in two halves with an unmarked end cap. All black and plastic covered, looks neater and more businesslike than the Zeiss. It is also smooth and not too stiff even after 9 years or so. Winner: Leica, it looks much better and has no cheap wobbly bits. (Tip...if you want to tell whether a Victory has Lotutec coatings look at the hinge area. If you see a curve like an umbrella above the objective size number it has Lotutec. It also says Victory FL on the left barrel armour instead of just Victory F, and the pre Lotutec Victories came in a black box as opposed to the blue / white.)
The last things I can think of are the lugs where the neck strap attaches. On the Zeiss they are rectangular, angular and set right back as far as you can go on the barrels. I guess this gives the hands more room on the binocular. I think they are made of a black coated metal and seem very solid and dependable. The Leicas lugs (in Scotland we call the ears on your head ‘lugs’ ha ha) are set into the barrels a little further in, are rectangular but of rounded shiny metal (Aluminium?). I can see the merits in what Zeiss was trying to do by setting them so far back on the barrels but in practical use I can’t consciously tell any difference, none of the two designs hinders my use of the binocular. Winner: Draw.
I apologize to all readers who wear spectacles. I do not and so cannot be of assistance when discussing eye relief etc. It makes no difference to me. But in a nutshell you have more options with the Zeiss as they pull out further giving the greatest eye relief.
I will ramble on a bit about the eyepieces themselves. Both good quality rubber that is comfortable when pressed to the skin. I can’t really separate the textures it may even be the same rubber. Leica approx 3.8mm Zeiss approx 4mm diameter across the whole eyepiece not just the lens. Actual lenses approx 2mm each so the same here. I always use binoculars with the eyepieces pulled right out. With the Zeiss you have 4 definite options, fully in, fully out or two steps in between. With the Leica you only have two, fully in or fully out. You could argue that on the leica you could pull it in or out as far you like thus giving numerous positions but there is no positive click until you pull them right out so they would probably move or be pushed back inwards when you look through them. Both models have good positive clicks at the different positions and will not move once set even when applying rain guards. Both are excellent and to me both get the same rating although for spectacle wearers I guess the Zeiss would be a clear winner. Who knows, I’m in my mid 30’s but my eyes might get bad soon so the Zeiss may have the longer term appeal. Winner: Zeiss for the 4 positions instead of 2.
Well that concludes category 2.
If I have to put my neck on the line and pick a winner overall I would have to go for the Zeiss. Why? Well it is the tactile grippy warm feel of the rubber in my hand that does it. I really like the feel of the Zeiss. I have to say though that I think build quality is much the same, the Zeiss has the wobbly plastic bit but the Trinovids armour is not as chassis hugging (on this sample anyway). I find them equally as easy to use in the field, i.e. superb.
Based on categary 2 in my opinion there is absolutely nothing to suggest why the Zeiss is almost 2x the price of the Leica!
Next category will be a comparison of the view and coatings etc...will this reveal the reason for the gulf in price?? We shall see...
