Never realized I even said that. I am honored that you are studying all my posts. I guess I have the right to change my opinion as I get more experience viewing and using binoculars. I don't think at that time I had tried the Leica 7x42 BN's which are my current binoculars. This configuration has really changed my mind about Leica's. Sometimes I think you find a pair of binoculars that just fits you perfectly and fulfills the majority of your needs closer than any other binoculars you have tried. My search has ended with the Leica 7x42 until something new comes out.
-
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 Is The Best Forget The Rest! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
Pinewood
New York correspondent
Hi Dennis,
Don't fret over your change of mind. There is no perfect binocular and improvements are being introduced often. Then again each of us users age and our needs may change as well.
As Pete Duxon may have written, in the top bracket, it is more a matter of our own needs and desires rather than the superiority of any particular model. After careful consideration, I would agree with your earlier comment. The wider field and colour qualities of Zeiss' FL glass appeal to me. There are rumours that Leica will be incorporating FL glass and Lotutech in upcoming models. This will allow you to have similar characteristics in the Leica package.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:
Don't fret over your change of mind. There is no perfect binocular and improvements are being introduced often. Then again each of us users age and our needs may change as well.
As Pete Duxon may have written, in the top bracket, it is more a matter of our own needs and desires rather than the superiority of any particular model. After careful consideration, I would agree with your earlier comment. The wider field and colour qualities of Zeiss' FL glass appeal to me. There are rumours that Leica will be incorporating FL glass and Lotutech in upcoming models. This will allow you to have similar characteristics in the Leica package.
Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:
Last edited:
Patriot222
Well-known member
Dennis, it's isn't the fact that you changed your mind that is making people ponder and dig up your old threads. Everyone of coarse is entitled to change their mind. It is the "ramrod" way that you go about sharing your opinion that makes people scratch their heads. "Leica is the best forget the rest!" No explanation, no model specific information, no comparitive results. You just toss it out there the way that an 8 year old might proclaim that chocolate chip cookies are best.
Not that long ago Zeiss was the best in your book. Without any additional information, people can pretty much asume that you've looked through maybe a handful of optics in your life and whenever you happen along to the next model that you haven't handled before, suddenly it's the "best". Do you actually believe that a 1988 Leica roof prism is the equivalent and even superior to a EL or FL? If everyone at bird forums could have their choice of free 8.5x42 EL or 8x42BN do you think that the split would show that Leica was best? I doubt it. Most optic enthusiasts who have their head screwed on straight will acknowledge that within a product line there are really great models that stand out and some models that will never win any prizes. This is nothing new. The fact is that nearly every first teir 7x has a spectacular view. When your next favorite bin comes along can I recommend that you share your opinion more objectively? I think most people would take you more seriously.
Last edited:
I have sampled more than a handful of binoculars. More like a carload! Out of all of them my opinion is that for me Leica has the best combination of optics, build quality, and ergonomics. You may have a different opinion but for those people who are just buying that first or second pair of binoculars I feel I owe it to them to render my opinion. In the end it is a personal thing when buying binoculars but I am still going to express my thoughts on what I like. Take it however you want too.
I missed exactly that statement in the title of your first posting. I owned Zeiss 8x42 FL, Leica Ultravid 10x42, Nikon High-Grade 10x32 and now Swaro EL 8,5x42. Leica was the worst item of optics I have ever owned because of their bad focus mechanism, even after Leica changed it into another 10x42 Ultravid - no good for me. Swaro 8,5x42 is absolute the best - but I know, this is only for me. Another guy beside me may have a complete different view. Your initial statement sounds generally acceptet, but it´s nothing less than this. Enjoy your Leica, but it´s really NOT the best and I won´t forget the rest.
Yours,
Peter
Patriot222
Well-known member
Dennis, I think it's already been established and agreed upon by all here that buying binoculars is a personal choice. I also don't believe that you'll run into any arguments about whether or not you're entitled to express your thoughts here. That's not the issue that I'm trying to convey. I am trying to make the argument that your original post was not useful or helpful to anyone.
I'm not suggesting that you shouldn't share your opinion, just the opposite. I'm suggesting that you should share more of your opinion by elaborating a bit in your original posts. If you don't tell us up front why you feel it's the best, then it comes across as having no merit. When you say "forget the rest" and then nothing else, it comes across as more of a 'flavor of the week' opinion instead of a person wanting to share and trade ideas objectively. When you don't elaborate you sabotage your own efforts to help the very people you spoke of helping....those first and second time buyers that you mentioned and feel that you owe. For you next product review (if that's what this thread was about) maybe try telling everyone which Leica is best...tell them why you like it....compare it to your previous favorite....weigh the advantages vs. the disadvantages, if any....explain why at first you were not impressed with the Leica, but now you are...etc. <This is the kind of input that is useful to people. Since you now have experience with "carloads" of different types of optics, I can't think of a better person to expound upon the characteristics of all the ones that you have knowledge of.
Last edited:
You must admit though catchy threads like "Leica is the best forget the Rest" sure gets people to read and respond albeit sometimes emotionally to the thread. It may seem like a shallow title but it gets people to respond and makes for interesting posts. After all you can not argue with over 3500 reads and alot of interesting posts with alot of good information.
You sound like an old stuffed shirt! You are entitled to you opinion but let's keep the subject on binoculars and not go into what you think of me personally. After all this a binocular forum! Nobody on this forum cares what you think of me including myself. They want to discuss binoculars. OK!
Dennis
...but it also can make you look flaky.
Thanks alot ! Your personal attack on me has effectively killed the thread because everybody else is afraid to post. Keep your comments about what you think of somebody to yourself. I would appreciate it or don't post.
Dennis
Thanks alot ! Your personal attack on me has effectively killed the thread because everybody else is afraid to post. Keep your comments about what you think of somebody to yourself. I would appreciate it or don't post.
Dennis
I have no idea why Leica chose Titanium, but my belief is that it mostly for a sound engineering reason. The metal is difficult to machine and expensive so it is surely not used for marketing reasons alone, though that might be a partial reason, as using exotic materials fits with the image of high tech equipment.
black lark
Registered User
But how much does the central focussing axis (I think this is the only mechanical element) contribute to the total mass?
It's a few grams only.
The bulk of the body is magnesium alloy.
And the bulk of the mass is coming from the glass anyway.
The mass saved by switching to a metal that is very expensive is eaten up several times in the rubberized version vs. the leather-covered version by the mass (weight) of the rubber coating.
Still not convinced I'd "need" Ti,
To
black lark
Registered User
Its also a marketing strategy, because every brand has reach the point that the viewing can not be better, the human eye can not see the coatings that are being used and also the improvements not so they are sitting on a level there ! so looking for something else they came up with Ti, better waterproof coatings and ....
As ThoLa has indicated, the weight saving cannot be huge.
The density of steel is 7.85 g/cm3. Let's assume the axle is 5 cm3. Therefore the total weight is roughly 40g. (I'm not going to be too far out with this estimate.) So the most they could save is less than 40g. It's not a lot. However, you could argue that lot's of small savings add up.
The other reason I can think of is mechanical. It might be that Titanium has the correct behaviour when acting as a bearing surface against the other materials given a particular lubricant.
That's probably the reason.
We all know that Leica is so ambitous of trimming the weight of their products they don't provide a strap for the bags of their most luxurious products. Renders the containers useless but it's another 8,346 g saved. |;|
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
Not likely. Titanium is a notoriously bad metal for bushing type applications--it is not slippery at all and actually tends to gall and grab against itself and other metals. I've always suspected that the use of titanium is what explains the tendency of the Ultravid focus to be more sticky than the Ultra/Trinovid focus. I think the use of titanium is only explainable in terms of very modest weight savings and much marketing toutability.
--AP
