-
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 Ultravid 8x42 HD reviews: please help me (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter daberti
- Start date
etc
Well-known member
The search button is of much help, I've used it a lot in my decision-making process.
I am a Swarovski person these days, but I admit that Leica is the finest optics you can get and their price reflects that. 8x42 is the best configuration you can get, I am a big fan of 8x42.
I am a Swarovski person these days, but I admit that Leica is the finest optics you can get and their price reflects that. 8x42 is the best configuration you can get, I am a big fan of 8x42.
etc
Well-known member
As far as I know, the best thread on "HD" is here:
http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=92865
The consensus is that it constitutes relatively minor upgrade vs. non-HD Ultravid.
I think that HD is so new, there are so few in the country that you won't find many reviews.
http://birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=92865
The consensus is that it constitutes relatively minor upgrade vs. non-HD Ultravid.
I think that HD is so new, there are so few in the country that you won't find many reviews.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
It looks like being 67mm.
My pupil never shrinks less than 3mm, even when sunny at full steam.
And mostly is 4-6mm.
The 8x20 Ultravid simply brought about to me a serious headache, two evenings ago. I managed to fall asleep only at 3am.
Other than this, today on the lakeside, in a high contrasted light environment, I had the chance of performing a side by side comparison of 8x42 Ultravid bins.
Target: Bellagio as seen from Lierna
The results (to my eye and with no instrumental support) pointed out that the HD suffers a bit less from peripherical sharpness degradation and shows real world saturation, contrast and brightness.
CA is there, but to a slightly less extent, with a distinct violet bias.
Hi Daniele,
You say you got a headache after using your 8 x 20 Ultravid. Are you sure it's not a binocular optical problem (like a slight miscollimation) that caused it, rather than your IPD? I have a Leica 8 x 20 Trinovid and an IPD of 68mm, it never gave me a headache or eyestrain for that matter. I'm sure people with even wider IPD's have used both models without problems.
Cordially,
Bob
Last edited:
That 8x20 was perfectly centered and had been double checked by my reference Photo Store, which is and authorized Leica Dealer.
The problem arised at 21:30, in centre square of Lecco city. Plenty of artificial lights, really lotta.
Five minutes looking at a commemorative marble plate 25mt far from me, with no straight light coming into bin, yet with an angle of lets say 30° from outside of each tube.
IPD could have been the issue, but more likely has been my pupils' diameter, which is always beyond 3mm.
Nothing to say about 8x20 Ultravid optical performances, which are astonishing. But my bin experience turns into pretty much trekking in badly enlightened areas, in the Alps as in Tuscany.
So I had to go for bulkier weight.....with no regret though.
I went HD as no plain Ultravid were available, and I debated a decent amount of time wheter going 7x42 or 8x42, having clear in my mind the respective advantages.
I went 8x42 and yesterday at 22, at same place same square same lights I stood 30mins watching every cat and dog without any pain.
elkcub
Silicon Valley, California
Bob,
I would tend to agree with your thought. To be done correctly, collimation must hold at all IPD settings, otherwise it's only provisional at some particular setting like 64mm (which is the population mean). I've had more than one retailer insist that an instrument was collimated properly when it was not. My method is simple—wait and see if a headache develops.
The onset and longevity of optically induced headaches should be a subject of more scientific study. Trouble is, no one is willing to participate.
Ed
I've to edit myself as far as CA is concerned: today in overcast and heavy contrast conditions, I cross compared Ultravid and HD Ultravid (8x42).
This time I paid closer attention at dioptry settings (+1.5 for me) and correct distance of oculars from my eyes.
HD performed noticeable improvements over its predecessor.
CA is very very slight on HD, in the form of a violet bias.
Just my 0.0001c contribute.
