Leica Ultravid 10x32 HD-Plus, yeah baby! (1 Viewer)

Gijs van Ginkel · Dec 28, 2015

Tobias Mennle,
I have read and reread your post 17 and I can not share your opinion at all. The Kite Lynx and the Leica Ultravid are of exactly the same size (I have them here both on my table). I have investigated both and the Kite Lynx performs slightly better as far as light transmission is concerned,.
The "ridiculous FOV"is liked by many users see also the many posts on this forum about FOV.
Some data for comparison:

Leica Ultravid HD: weight 531 g, close focus 2,1 m, field of view 135m/1000m, number of rotations from close focus to infinity approx 1,25, measured exit pupil 3,95 mm, light transmission: 450 nm=79%, 500nm=84,0%, 550 nm=87,4%, eye relief 13,3, mm, price 1749 euro (now 1880 euro), aftersales service 10 years and not always a good reputation from Leica and frequently customers complain about high repair prices.

Kite Lynx 8x30: weight 463 g, close focus 1,3 m, field of view 151m/1000m (95% of it is sharp), number of rotations from close focus to infinity 1,1,,measured exit pupil 3,8 mm, light transmission 450nm=83,5%, 500nm=84,8%, 550 nm=88,3%, eye relief 15 mm, price 520 euro, after sales service 30 years and Kite Optics has an excellent reputation in this matter.

The turning resistance of the focussing wheels of both binoculars are about equal. Both binoculars show some color diffraction, but not much. At low light levels there is hardly any difference in performance.
As far as color reproduction is concerned does the Kite Lynx a slightly better job.

The body of the Kite Lynx is the same body as the Nikon M7 and the Maven B3, but Kite, Nikon and Maven have each asked for their specific optical construction and Kamakura, who knows very well how to make good optics did a fine job for each of these three within the limits of the demands of these three companies.
I have looked for the many aberrations in the Kite Lynx, you mention in your post 17, but I can not find many at all.

Now there may come remarks that the Ultravid plus does a much better job then the Ultravid HD. I hope so, since my investigation of the 7x42 and 8x42 Ultravid HD-plus compared with the now "old"Ultravid HD's do not show a lot of measurable/observable changes.
Gijs van Ginkel

PeterPS · Dec 28, 2015

Gijs:

When I saw the comment by Tobias I was sure that it will touch a cord with all those who like the Kite. While I also found the said comment a bit strong I am sure that Tobias has facts to back it up. Personally I bought a Kite 8x30 about one year ago, but returned it rather quickly. On paper everything looks good for Kite, but the eyecups of my unit did not stay put (in fact that was a known issue, and I got the unit with o-rings fitted under the extended eyecups), the glare was very poorly controlled (likely the price paid for the wide FoV and high light transmission) and the specs for diopter compensation range were wrong---the latter aspect was particularly important to me, and I contacted Kite's owner (I cannot remember his name right now); he confirmed that the said range was -/+4, but when I told him that it cannot be more than -/+3 he backed off and said that perhaps it is only -/+3.5......

Peter.

NDhunter · Dec 29, 2015

Gijs:

You are correct about some of the observations from Tobias. He seems very quick with his
short term evaluation of some optics, and especially his negative tone and opinion.

Another example of this is his post on the Nikon subforum: The phenomenal but "dark" Nikon
EDG 8x42. He proclaims the binocular to be very good, and then uses the word "dark".
The Nikon EDG models are not dark in any way.

It seems he likes to exaggerate.

Tobias lost me with his credibility as a reviewer.
Jerry

Vespobuteo · Dec 29, 2015

Gijs van Ginkel said:
Tobias Mennle,
I have read and reread your post 17 and I can not share your opinion at all. The Kite Lynx and the Leica Ultravid are of exactly the same size (I have them here both on my table). I have investigated both and the Kite Lynx performs slightly better as far as light transmission is concerned,.
The "ridiculous FOV"is liked by many users see also the many posts on this forum about FOV.
Some data for comparison:

Leica Ultravid HD: weight 531 g, close focus 2,1 m, field of view 135m/1000m, number of rotations from close focus to infinity approx 1,25, measured exit pupil 3,95 mm, light transmission: 450 nm=79%, 500nm=84,0%, 550 nm=87,4%, eye relief 13,3, mm, price 1749 euro (now 1880 euro), aftersales service 10 years and not always a good reputation from Leica and frequently customers complain about high repair prices.

Kite Lynx 8x30: weight 463 g, close focus 1,3 m, field of view 151m/1000m (95% of it is sharp), number of rotations from close focus to infinity 1,1,,measured exit pupil 3,8 mm, light transmission 450nm=83,5%, 500nm=84,8%, 550 nm=88,3%, eye relief 15 mm, price 520 euro, after sales service 30 years and Kite Optics has an excellent reputation in this matter.

The turning resistance of the focussing wheels of both binoculars are about equal. Both binoculars show some color diffraction, but not much. At low light levels there is hardly any difference in performance.
As far as color reproduction is concerned does the Kite Lynx a slightly better job.

The body of the Kite Lynx is the same body as the Nikon M7 and the Maven B3, but Kite, Nikon and Maven have each asked for their specific optical construction and Kamakura, who knows very well how to make good optics did a fine job for each of these three within the limits of the demands of these three companies.
I have looked for the many aberrations in the Kite Lynx, you mention in your post 17, but I can not find many at all.

Now there may come remarks that the Ultravid plus does a much better job then the Ultravid HD. I hope so, since my investigation of the 7x42 and 8x42 Ultravid HD-plus compared with the now "old"Ultravid HD's do not show a lot of measurable/observable changes.
Gijs van Ginkel

Interesting observations,
especially the "cliff hanger" in the last sentence...

Do you have any plans in posting transmission measurements
for the new 42mm Leica HD Plus models?

There is "rumors" that the 10x50 HD Plus have 92% transmission.
And also the flat transmission curve/excellent color reproduction is mentioned in Leica:s product videos.

A comparison between Zeiss SF and Leica HD Plus would be very interesting.

Gijs van Ginkel · Dec 29, 2015

Peter, post 22,
I know of the problem with some of the eyecups of the Kite Lynx, the sample I had did not show it, but I have also told Kite Optics abiout it when some users reported it. (Mr. de Putter is the name of the Kite Optics owner). I was told then that the problem would be brought under the attention of mr. Kamakura and that the problem would be solved.

Vespobuteo, yes, I intend to publish the data of my investigation of the new Leica 42 mm-plus models, but that will take a little time still because some other things of a non-binocular matter will have my attention first.
Gijs

Tobias Mennle · Dec 29, 2015

NDhunter said:
Gijs:

You are correct about some of the observations from Tobias. He seems very quick with his
short term evaluation of some optics, and especially his negative tone and opinion.

Another example of this is his post on the Nikon subforum: The phenomenal but "dark" Nikon
EDG 8x42. He proclaims the binocular to be very good, and then uses the word "dark".
The Nikon EDG models are not dark in any way.

It seems he likes to exaggerate.

Tobias lost me with his credibility as a reviewer.
Jerry

Jerry, have you directly compared 42 EDG and Ultravid HD Plus? I did, and have cursed Nikon ever since (on a daily basis) because otherwise the EDG is so perfect. Now, with the 32 models this might be different, and the 8x32 EDG is high on my wishlist. But I know one thing: The moment I buy one I have burnt a lot of money, because resale value in Europe is ridiculous. Needs real commitment, unlike an Ultravid which will always be in demand.

The trouble with Nikon is that they don´t really care about their premium binoculars, very unlike Swarovski Optics who depend on that business and therefore constantly and secretely improve their models. Nikon seems to build big batches which sell slowly, so EDGs and SEs were simply neglected compared to an Ultravid or Swaro Habicht. Suddenly you have a binocular who is 8 years behind the competition in transmission. In case Nikon send me a sample from an outdated batch, it´s entirely their fault.

Would have loved to keep that SE, too, but alas, too dark.

Tobias Mennle · Dec 29, 2015

Gijs van Ginkel said:
Tobias Mennle,
I have read and reread your post 17 and I can not share your opinion at all. The Kite Lynx and the Leica Ultravid are of exactly the same size (I have them here both on my table). I have investigated both and the Kite Lynx performs slightly better as far as light transmission is concerned,.
The "ridiculous FOV"is liked by many users see also the many posts on this forum about FOV.
Some data for comparison:

Leica Ultravid HD: weight 531 g, close focus 2,1 m, field of view 135m/1000m, number of rotations from close focus to infinity approx 1,25, measured exit pupil 3,95 mm, light transmission: 450 nm=79%, 500nm=84,0%, 550 nm=87,4%, eye relief 13,3, mm, price 1749 euro (now 1880 euro), aftersales service 10 years and not always a good reputation from Leica and frequently customers complain about high repair prices.

Kite Lynx 8x30: weight 463 g, close focus 1,3 m, field of view 151m/1000m (95% of it is sharp), number of rotations from close focus to infinity 1,1,,measured exit pupil 3,8 mm, light transmission 450nm=83,5%, 500nm=84,8%, 550 nm=88,3%, eye relief 15 mm, price 520 euro, after sales service 30 years and Kite Optics has an excellent reputation in this matter.

The turning resistance of the focussing wheels of both binoculars are about equal. Both binoculars show some color diffraction, but not much. At low light levels there is hardly any difference in performance.
As far as color reproduction is concerned does the Kite Lynx a slightly better job.

The body of the Kite Lynx is the same body as the Nikon M7 and the Maven B3, but Kite, Nikon and Maven have each asked for their specific optical construction and Kamakura, who knows very well how to make good optics did a fine job for each of these three within the limits of the demands of these three companies.
I have looked for the many aberrations in the Kite Lynx, you mention in your post 17, but I can not find many at all.

Now there may come remarks that the Ultravid plus does a much better job then the Ultravid HD. I hope so, since my investigation of the 7x42 and 8x42 Ultravid HD-plus compared with the now "old"Ultravid HD's do not show a lot of measurable/observable changes.
Gijs van Ginkel

Dear Gijs, would love to see transmission measurements of the Ultravids.

About the Kite (DDOptics in my case), for me they are a waste of time and the comparison with the Leica is nonsensical to me. The Kite is the best example why guys like Henry Link still lug around an 8x56 to get the filet piece of the optics even in daylight. I like classic curved fields, but the edge performance of the Kite is just rotten.

Then again, maybe my sample was worse than average.

Gijs van Ginkel · Dec 29, 2015

Dear Tobias,
The Kite Lynx went together with a Swarovski CL with me on a trip through South Africa and it did not disappoint me and the females in our company loved the Lynxes because of their compactness and easy handling. What may be more important is that quite a few people can not afford the price of the Leica Ultravids and for them the Kite Lynx, Maven B3 and Nikon m7 30 mm's are a good alternative. Looking at the sales figures of the Lynxes at the Dutch Bird Protection Asssociation many people are satisfied by them.
With respect to pincushion in the Lynxes, that is in my samples not stronger than in the Leica Utravids.
The tranmsission curves will be published soon on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor, but I want to check the measurements and that is in this time of the year when the laboratory is closed, not possible.
I wish you a Happy New Year and many excellent views through excellent and a little less excellent binoculars,
Gijs

Hermann · Jan 1, 2016

NDhunter said:
You are correct about some of the observations from Tobias. He seems very quick with his short term evaluation of some optics, and especially his negative tone and opinion.

Another example of this is his post on the Nikon subforum: The phenomenal but "dark" Nikon EDG 8x42. He proclaims the binocular to be very good, and then uses the word "dark". The Nikon EDG models are not dark in any way.

You did actually look at Tobias' website, right? Then you should know that his observations are based on rather lengthy comparisons of the binoculars in question.

As to the EDG: Compare the EDG 8x42 to any of the other recent top-class 8x42s or the Swarovski 8.5x42. Compared to what's possible nowadays the EDG are dark.

NDhunter said:
Tobias lost me with his credibility as a reviewer.

In other words: You don't like what he says about certain binoculars, so he "lost his credibility"?

Goodness me.

Hermann

NDhunter · Jan 2, 2016

Hermann said:
You did actually look at Tobias' website, right? Then you should know that his observations are based on rather lengthy comparisons of the binoculars in question.

As to the EDG: Compare the EDG 8x42 to any of the other recent top-class 8x42s or the Swarovski 8.5x42. Compared to what's possible nowadays the EDG are dark.

In other words: You don't like what he says about certain binoculars, so he "lost his credibility"?

Goodness me.

Hermann

Hermann:

Have you had any experience with the Nikon EDG ?

Jerry

ceasar · Jan 2, 2016

http://www.allbinos.com/upload2/66072_nikon_8x42_edg.jpg

Allbinos Transmission Graph of the Nikon 8x42 EDG. Flat and high at the red end of the spectrum.

Ranked 2nd in Allbinos rankings of 8x42 binoculars.

And here is the graph of the 1st ranked 8.5x42 Swarovski SV. Lots of similarities.

http://www.allbinos.com/upload2/75559_swarovski.jpg

Bob

SuperDuty · Jan 2, 2016

Am I missing something, or does the EDG maintain the same transmission values over a broader range than the SV ?

ceasar said:
http://www.allbinos.com/upload2/66072_nikon_8x42_edg.jpg

Allbinos Transmission Graph of the Nikon 8x42 EDG. Flat and high at the red end of the spectrum.

Ranked 2nd in Allbinos rankings of 8x42 binoculars.

And here is the graph of the 1st ranked 8.5x42 Swarovski SV. Lots of similarities.

http://www.allbinos.com/upload2/75559_swarovski.jpg

Bob

SuperDuty · Jan 2, 2016

Tobias

Do you feel that the glass and or coatings in the 8.5X42 SV evolved for the better from 2009 until present ?

Tobias Mennle said:
unlike Swarovski Optics who depend on that business and therefore constantly and secretely improve their models.

Hermann · Jan 2, 2016

NDhunter said:
Hermann:

Have you had any experience with the Nikon EDG ?

Tried it for a day last summer.

Hermann

ceasar · Jan 2, 2016

SuperDuty said:
Am I missing something, or does the EDG maintain the same transmission values over a broader range than the SV ?

Somewhat; approaching the far ends of the spectrum, but in practical use there probably isn't much difference that can be seen.

Bob

Vespobuteo · Jan 2, 2016

ceasar said:
Somewhat; approaching the far ends of the spectrum, but in practical use there probably isn't much difference that can be seen.

Bob

it's probably more about color balance,
the swaros might look a bit brighter due to a cooler color bias,
I got the same impression when comparing them several years ago though (in low light)

Tobias Mennle · Jan 3, 2016

SuperDuty said:
Tobias

Do you feel that the glass and or coatings in the 8.5X42 SV evolved for the better from 2009 until present ?

I have no evidence as I only tested only one - quite recent - sample.

Tobias Mennle · Jan 3, 2016

Gijs van Ginkel said:
Dear Tobias,
The Kite Lynx went together with a Swarovski CL with me on a trip through South Africa and it did not disappoint me and the females in our company loved the Lynxes because of their compactness and easy handling. What may be more important is that quite a few people can not afford the price of the Leica Ultravids and for them the Kite Lynx, Maven B3 and Nikon m7 30 mm's are a good alternative. Looking at the sales figures of the Lynxes at the Dutch Bird Protection Asssociation many people are satisfied by them.
With respect to pincushion in the Lynxes, that is in my samples not stronger than in the Leica Utravids.
The tranmsission curves will be published soon on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor, but I want to check the measurements and that is in this time of the year when the laboratory is closed, not possible.
I wish you a Happy New Year and many excellent views through excellent and a little less excellent binoculars,
Gijs

Thanks Gijs, happy new year, too, looking forward to your publications.

The Swaros CL are one interesting comparison with the Lynx, as they have a MUCH smaller field of view which should help with ease of view. My main issue with the Lynx (DDOptics version) was not pincushion distortion, but flare and the extreme edge fall of which I interpreted not a usual curved field, but a whole bunch of aberrations straining my eyes. Anyway, no need to quarrel about these glasses (which I have done in the German forums already)... I am happy to forget about them, while others seem to love them.

Alaska4me · Jan 11, 2016

cycleguy said:
Alaska4me,Allbinos reports the distortion on the 8x32 HD at 36%. Do you think this changed/remained the same for the HD+ model? Where would you say the distortion shows up on the 8x32 HD+.

cycleguy, sorry the late reply.

I really can't answer your question, I am not that much of a spec and numbers guy - but I can tell you this: the 8x32 UV HD+ "will blow you away", this thing is the most brilliant binocular I ever laid my hands on.

I am lovn' it.

Dialyt · Apr 1, 2016

Quick question: what are folks' experience with the 10x32? I'm attracted to the small size and 10x, but worth about a shaky or dull image.

Leica Ultravid 10x32 HD-Plus, yeah baby! (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-Known Member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

The Definitive Binocular

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread