Leica Ultravid 8x20 v. Bushnell Elite Custom 7x26 (1 Viewer)

A few amateurish observations, having spent a little time today comparing these two.
My Bushnell´s are very new, but I had them out in the rain, got condensation in one barrel, and had to send them off to Kay Optical, who did a superb service (I actually think they´re sharper now than when I first got them). The Leicas I got 2nd-hand from Cley Spy, and they´re mint.
I won´t bother with technical specifications like weight, size, etc., that can be had on the relevant sites.
The Bushnells focusser is super-smooth, and being "chunkier", slightly easier to use than the narrow Ultravid one (which is pencil-thin to allow the barrels to fold in very close).
I set each bino on a tripod, using some duct-tape to hold them steady, and pinned a few magazine pages to a shed about 30 feet away, in order to compare them when reading print, and looking at colour photos.
"Resolution" (by which I mean the ability to read print) seemed about equal, with perhaps a small edge going to the Ultravids, probably because of the higher mag. There was no great difference in looking at birds in more distant trees, though.
Contrast and colour intensity seemed about the same. The Ultravids may have had a slightly more "natural" view, the Bushnells may have given a little more contrast.
The above might have been affected by the fact that the Bushnells appeared brighter, especially when looking into shaded areas. As well as the wider FOV, lower mag and larger objectives, this meant that the overall view through the Bushnells was more "relaxed".
There were no great deal-breakers in any of the above, though. Both instruments were top-class in all the respects described, and only an obsessive would notice any difference.
But now the really surprising bit. The sun was bright and low, almost on the horizon, above a hill to the south. When I did the really foolish "how close to the sun before flare/glare gets intense" test, the Bushnells won hands down. In fact, despite the intensity of the sun, it was quite difficult to induce glare in the Bushnells without running the risk of going blind by putting the sun in the FOV. This is not to say that the Ultravids had a problem, they don´t - by any standards their glare-control is superb. I´m just amazed that the Bushnells were so good in this area.
I´ve owned the Ultravids, HGL´s, Zeiss FL, and a particular favourite of mine (for reasons of handling and comfortable view), the Opticron DBA Oasis, all in 8x. I think the Bushnells sit alongside all of these, and are better than most optically, in many respects. The Ultravids are superb overall, and it would be churlish of me to praise them for being tiny, and then complain of the consequently smaller objectives and focusser, and more demanding handling. The deal-breaker for me has to be waterproofing and size, so I´ll be keeping the Ultravids.
Omissions, errors and downright mistruths in the foregoing are all my responsibility.

Sancho,

Reassuring comparison. My own comparisons were on the same afternoon at different vendors, but came away with a virtually identical impression. The Leica and Zeiss had perhaps the edge on sharpness but very close. The Bushnell had better contrast, flare control, and maybe due to the more field curvature a bigger 'picture'. The real winner for me was the less fussy eye positioning and handling ... and price.

Since reading your tale of woe I bought 'my wife' a small pair of roofs as a backup though.

David

Sancho,

I pretty well feel the same way about my 7x26. The only thing the Lieca has going for it is a smaller, more easily pocketable size and maybe better waterproofing if that is a concern.

Agree with about all that has posted above. I recently bought a pair of 8x20 Swarovski's that were only 2 years old (on the big auction site) and did a comparison to them and the 7x26 B&L that were made in "97 and also compared them to a 40 year old pair of 6x25 Bushnell Custom compacts. The short answer to what I thought, was the Swarovski's ended up going up for re-sale and I kept my customs.

Other than the H2O proofness of the Swaro's, that was the only real advantage. The picky eye placement and the relative dimness when compared was a deal breaker for me. I loved how small and compact the true pocket nature of the Swaro's were, but along with that is less than superb optical performance when compared to other bino's in their line or when even compared to much less expensive bino's.

The real eye opener was when comparing the 40 yr old 6x25 Bushnell custom with its 4+ mm ER and 8 deg. FOV- which was really fantastic when compared to the Swaro. The Swarovski being a very small roof bino is probably not a fair comparison to a great reverse porro. Now if they made a H2O proof Alpha in a 6x25 format, I would take another look.

stephen b said:

Now if they made a H2O proof Alpha in a 6x25 format, I would take another look.

Click to expand...

That would be sweet. Because my life is empty and meaningless, I´ve taken a recent interest in low-mag binos. I´d love a pair of "alpha" 6x.
Meanwhile, having checked again from my attic window as evening progressed, I wonder if the Bushnell Elite 7x26 are a tiny shade "yellower" in cast than the Ultravid 8x20? Nothing terribly noticeable, and it was only an impression I got when looking at pale grey clouds, but it might account for my impression earlier that the Bushnells had a slightly more pronounced contrast.

Sancho,

I certainly think they have done something clever with the coatings. No idea what but you have to look pretty high up in the price range to find something comparable. Looking at a white page I can't see a colour cast, but reds and yellows sing in direct sunlight so I don't think you could call it natural. Where it appears to make a useful difference is that little brown birds sitting in the shade seem to appear from nowhere. Neat trick! I wish the makers of reasonably priced roofs knew how to do that.

David

Thanks David! I´ve just tried another totally unscientific test. Indoors, in electric light, I stood at the back of the house, and looked through both Ultras and Bushnells at the front door. About 60 feet. The difference in view, looking at the wood-grain, etc., of the door, was impressive - the Bushnells were way ahead. This being in low-light, I imagine the extra 6mm of objective gave the Bushnells the advantage.

Sancho said:

Thanks David! I´ve just tried another totally unscientific test. Indoors, in electric light, I stood at the back of the house, and looked through both Ultras and Bushnells at the front door. About 60 feet. The difference in view, looking at the wood-grain, etc., of the door, was impressive - the Bushnells were way ahead. This being in low-light, I imagine the extra 6mm of objective gave the Bushnells the advantage.

Click to expand...

I have had them both and I disagree. I found the Bushnells way inferior to the Ultravids optically. I just didn't like the view through the Bushnells. Took mine back to Sportman's Warehouse the next day. IMO they are way below alpha optical quality. So anybody buying them should definitely try before you buy! Don't take the majority of the peoples opinion. Try them your self. Bushnell's really don't have the reputation of being a top quality binocular and that's just what I found with the Legend's.

[email protected] said:

I have had them both and I disagree. I found the Bushnells way inferior to the Ultravids optically. I just didn't like the view through the Bushnells. Took mine back to Sportman's Warehouse the next day. IMO they are way below alpha optical quality. So anybody buying them should definitely try before you buy! Don't take the majority of the peoples opinion. Try them your self. Bushnell's really don't have the reputation of being a top quality binocular and that's just what I found with the Legend's.

Click to expand...

Good advice. My opinion is only one among many, and I´ve been known to change my mind. Test what you can first, if possible. The Bushnells, as well as being less sharp at the edges, certainly make a better weapon, book-end or door-stop, being chunkier and heavier.

I have a 20 year old Bushnell Custom Compact 7x26, is the "Elite" acually an upgraded version optically? Thanks.

I haven't done a side by side, but I own the new one and have only looked at the previous version separately. I would say the glass is the same, but there is a noticeable improvement in contrast in my opinion.

David

They could keep the same optical design (layout and glass) but changes in AR coatings over 20 years will make a big difference in brightness.

Are your Custom Compacts single AR layer coated (MgF2 ... a blue color) or some more interesting color (purple or green?).

Under artificial light my Elites have quite a deep purple and some bluish green highlights. I'm sure I've seen other tints in daylight.

David

I have both a pair of B&L 7x26 Customs (pre 2004) and a pair of the newer Bushnell 7x26 Custom Elites, and notice almost no optical difference at all between the 2. The older B&L's are fully multicoated with green reflections. Because I do not wear glasses, I actually prefer the older B&L's with the rubber eyecups over the newer Elites with the twist up eyecups, as they are a little more compact, and I can just throw them up to my eyes with no fussing around with the eyecups which don't seem to want to stay up on the newer Elites. When Bushnell was forced to stop using the Bausch & Lomb name in 2004 they rebranded the Customs as Bushnell with the model 12-0726, which is strange since the 12-xxxx series is the older Legacy series. When I spoke with Bushnell about the model # and the difference between the older green fully multicoated Customs and the newer Elite series, they advised that an additional coating was added to the Elites.

Lilcrazy,

I've looked at quite few binos recently and only just become aware that, as a rule of thumb, I prefer the ones with that plum colour plus other tints in the coatings. I associate it with better contrast on a totally unscientific basis. Seems to me though that other users simply can't see the difference. I tried discussing two very popular, well regard pairs here that to me were chalk and cheese with a very experienced user. He couldn't see that difference at all. The human eye is a very variable instrument. It's great that there are a rich variety of options out there. Just adds to the argument that you need to test for yourself.

David

typo said:

Lilcrazy,

I've looked at quite few binos recently and only just become aware that, as a rule of thumb, I prefer the ones with that plum colour plus other tints in the coatings. I associate it with better contrast on a totally unscientific basis. Seems to me though that other users simply can't see the difference. I tried discussing two very popular, well regard pairs here that to me were chalk and cheese with a very experienced user. He couldn't see that difference at all. The human eye is a very variable instrument. It's great that there are a rich variety of options out there. Just adds to the argument that you need to test for yourself.

David

Click to expand...

David
Bino wisdom has it that extra AR coatings are supposed to increase brightness and contrast. If you look at the Bushnell lineup you will see binos advertised in 3 different coating levels (fully multicoated, SHR coated, and XTR coated) with XTR touted as being the best, and this is the coating on the latest 7x26 Custom Elite E2. They don't tell you what they consist of, but they do advertise the XTR as having 60 layers. To my tired 62 year old eyes, I just can't see much difference beyween my older fully multicoated greenish 7x26's and my newest "purplish" XTR coated 7x26's. While I am sure there is a difference between 98% and 99.73% light transmission, I just don't notice it.

And you are 100% correct that everyone needs to test them for themselves. Anymore, I just use the reviews as a general guide to zero in on things I may want to buy and test. If I say that I like my 8x36 Legend Ultra HD better than my Nikon 7x35 or 8x30E's, then I can be sure there will be other members turning over in their graves.

tom

Tom,

Very interesting. Sadly I've never encountered an EII or SE, but I have tried an Ultra HD. I don't remember the coating colour, but I know I wasn't enthusiastic about the view. Fantastic that Bushnell are catering for both of us!

David