[Bascar]

I want to buy a pair of 7x42s. I have tried the Ultravids and loved them, but I do not love the price (£989 at Warehouse Express). I notice that Warehouse Express have the 7x42 BNs (which I understand have been discontinued by Leica) for sale at £799. I have not tried the BNs and am wondering how they compare with the Ultravids and, in short, whether the Ultravids are worth the nearly £200 difference in price.

I would be very grateful for any comments.

[Blincodave]

Originally Posted by Bascar

I want to buy a pair of 7x42s. I have tried the Ultravids and loved them, but I do not love the price (£989 at Warehouse Express). I notice that Warehouse Express have the 7x42 BNs (which I understand have been discontinued by Leica) for sale at £799. I have not tried the BNs and am wondering how they compare with the Ultravids and, in short, whether the Ultravids are worth the nearly £200 difference in price.

I would be very grateful for any comments.

The BNs are excellent but heavy. I use the Zeiss 7x42 FLs and think they are superb. Check out the review on the Alula website. Viking optical in Norwich have brand new pre Locutech (or whatever they are called) coating models available for around £700. They do mail order with a return option if you are not satisfied. WE have the latest model for £820.

Dave

[solentbirder]

I've had the opportunity to try both side by side. They both have their plus points so it's not a clear victory for one over the other. The Ultravid is astoundingly sharp in the centre of the field but the overall area of central sharpness is greater in the BN which to my eyes makes for a more relaxing view. The Ultravid is also very much brighter than the BN (to my eyes at least). Handling is very personal so I couldn't say which you'd prefer. The BN is a lot heavier but if you prefer the ergonomics this can be overlooked. Hope that's some help. I set out to buy the Ultravid myself but I'm being tempted by the BN. Hope that's some help.

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by Bascar

I want to buy a pair of 7x42s. I have tried the Ultravids and loved them, but I do not love the price (£989 at Warehouse Express). I notice that Warehouse Express have the 7x42 BNs (which I understand have been discontinued by Leica) for sale at £799. I have not tried the BNs and am wondering how they compare with the Ultravids and, in short, whether the Ultravids are worth the nearly £200 difference in price.

I would be very grateful for any comments.

Optically, you should love the 7X42 BN. If you can sample them, I suggest you do.

John

[Pileatus]

Originally Posted by solentbirder

I've had the opportunity to try both side by side. They both have their plus points so it's not a clear victory for one over the other. The Ultravid is astoundingly sharp in the centre of the field but the overall area of central sharpness is greater in the BN which to my eyes makes for a more relaxing view. The Ultravid is also very much brighter than the BN (to my eyes at least). Handling is very personal so I couldn't say which you'd prefer. The BN is a lot heavier but if you prefer the ergonomics this can be overlooked. Hope that's some help. I set out to buy the Ultravid myself but I'm being tempted by the BN. Hope that's some help.

Excellent, and accurate analysis of the relative "sweet spots" in these two models. It took me a very long time to stop "looking around" my 7X42 Ultravid's FOV; as soon as I did the view became much more relaxed and pleasing. You are correct...the Ultravid's centerfield is superb.

John

[Vectis Birder]

I have the 8x42BNs. I like the feel of them, the balance of them and can hold them steady for ages, even when looking at astronomical objects. Optically, I think they are superb.

[matt green]

Originally Posted by Vectis Birder

I have the 8x42BNs. I like the feel of them, the balance of them and can hold them steady for ages, even when looking at astronomical objects. Optically, I think they are superb.

I ''had'' a pair of these, wish I still had' em

I purchased them when you could still buy them for £679 - not sure I'd be comfortable paying £829 for a pair now though.Love the idea of the extra field of view of a 7x42, I generally crave for more field of view than for magnification.

If money was no object I'd go with the 7x42 ultravids, they're lighter, brighter and have rubber on the focus wheel!

Matt

[ld74]

I had a pair of Ultravid 8X42s for a couple of weeks before I sold them to a friend for what I paid for them. The image was great, but I just didn't like the handling. Like many other contributors to this forum, I couldn't stand the thumb grooves and found the focusing to be stiff. For the price of the Ultravid, I couldn't justify keeping them if I wasn't 100% happy with them.

I took my money and decided to use it toward a pair of Trinovid 8x32s. When I visited the optics shop, they had a brand new, deadstock pair of Trinovid 7x42 BNs at a heavily discounted price (around $850.) I hadn't even considered 7x42, but when I looked through them on a whim, I had a clear winner in my hands. I dismissed the 8x32 idea entirely and walked out with the 7x42s. I've since used them in the field a couple of times, and I just love them.

I don't think you'd be disappointed with either, but even if money weren't an object, I prefer the Trinovids. True, they are heavier, but I think the image is comparable and I much prefer the handling of the Trinovids. At this level of refinement, personal preference is often subjective and is not entirely rational. If you can try both side by side, then do it and make your own decision. But if cost is a factor, then I don't think you'll be unsatisfied with the Trinovid.

Let me say it this way: the Leica Trinovid 7x42BN is my all-time favorite binocular. If something were to happen to mine, I would take the time to seek one out before replacing it with an Ultravid.

By the way, for 8x32 and 8x20, I think Ultravid is the way to go.

[Bascar]

Thanks very much for the comments - they have all been very helpful and much appreciated. It looks as if the sensible thing to do is to try and track down the BNs and test them alongside the ultravids. I did like the feel of the ultravids when I tried them so the different ergonomics of the BNs is obviously an important factor in the decision. Now to find a dealer who has them in stock!

[angelo225544]

Originally Posted by Bascar

Thanks very much for the comments - they have all been very helpful and much appreciated. It looks as if the sensible thing to do is to try and track down the BNs and test them alongside the ultravids. I did like the feel of the ultravids when I tried them so the different ergonomics of the BNs is obviously an important factor in the decision. Now to find a dealer who has them in stock!

You may also wish to consider the superb Swarovski 7x42 SLC Neu. I find this to be better than both the Trinovid and Ultravid. The Swarovski has much more even illumination accross the field as well as superior edge sharpness. This gives it a slightly wider, but eminently more usable FOV. The Swarovski 7x42 SLC has become my favorite 7x binocular - it has the most relaxed view I have yet seen.

[Alexis Powell]

Originally Posted by solentbirder

The Ultravid is astoundingly sharp in the centre of the field but the overall area of central sharpness is greater in the BN which to my eyes makes for a more relaxing view.

It has been my understanding that the optics of the full and 2/3 sized BN and Ultravid models are identical except for the coatings (which affect brightness, contrast, color balance). Were the 7x an exception or are the differences in sharpness across the field suggested here a matter of individual variation?
--AP

[APSmith]

The extra field of view of the FL (15% more area than others) seems significant. I suspect this was one of the big attractions of the Classic 7x42.

Has anyone noted this difference visually, during direct comparisons?

[solentbirder]

Originally Posted by Alexis Powell

It has been my understanding that the optics of the full and 2/3 sized BN and Ultravid models are identical except for the coatings (which affect brightness, contrast, color balance). Were the 7x an exception or are the differences in sharpness across the field suggested here a matter of individual variation?
--AP

Hi AP
I haven't tried comparing multiple samples but my impression is that the optics are different. Certainly with the 7x the nature of the view is quite different. I've tried several 7x BN's and they always had a large and even 'sweet spot'. The Ultravid 7x seems to be sharper but with a smaller 'sweet spot' and I've seen this mentioned by other observers too. Personally I'd like Leica to produce a simple upgrade to the BN model and change the body to magnesium alloy body instead of aluminium alloy + add the lens and prism costings of the Ultravid. Come on Leica, it can't be that difficult!
Cheers
John

[Alexis Powell]

Originally Posted by APSmith

The extra field of view of the FL (15% more area than others) seems significant. I suspect this was one of the big attractions of the Classic 7x42.

Has anyone noted this difference visually, during direct comparisons?

Yes, I enjoy the wider true and apparent FOV of the Zeiss 7x models over their competitors, but I don't think it is a big issue. I remember that when I bought the Zeiss 7x42 Classic rather than one of the competing models it was because of the wider FOV, but more importantly, it was brighter, much lighter in weight, had better close focus, and had MUCH better ergonomics than the Leica BA and Swarovski SLC. The color of the Zeiss was very close to neutral whereas the SLC of the time had a very noticeable yellow cast. Also of great importance was the completely smooth, quick yet precise focus of the Zeiss Classic (so effortless as to seem automatic and instantaneous). The SLC focus was harder to manipulate due to stiffness, slower ratio, and because it was not as accessible, especially when wearing gloves. At the time, I liked the 7x Classic best, the Swarovski SLC next best, and the Leica BA least (very poor close focus).
--AP

[Bascar]

Originally Posted by angelo225544

You may also wish to consider the superb Swarovski 7x42 SLC Neu. I find this to be better than both the Trinovid and Ultravid.

I did, thanks, Angelo, but was put off by the extra weight despite the lower price. I agree about the excellence of the SLC's optics though and would probably have gone for them if they had been that bit lighter in weight. I already have the 8.5x42 ELs and I found the weight difference noticeable, and my wife, who will be using the new bins a lot, just found them too heavy for comfortable prolonged viewing.

[bodromarsh]

Hey Guys,

I have a pair of Trinovid 8x42 BN, brand-new-in-the-box, I wish to sell. I don't want to break etiquette, so is this an appropriate place to state this? If not, where on this site is there such a thing?

[etc]

ebay dot com

The key to a successful sale on there (or anywhere actually) is lots of pics. If your digital camera has a "Macro" mode, use it.

Post a link to the auction.

[John Finnan]

Originally Posted by ld74

I had a pair of Ultravid 8X42s for a couple of weeks before I sold them to a friend for what I paid for them. The image was great, but I just didn't like the handling.

I dismissed the 8x32 idea entirely and walked out with the 7x42s. I've since used them in the field a couple of times, and I just love them.

I don't think you'd be disappointed with either, but even if money weren't an object, I prefer the Trinovids. True, they are heavier, but I think the image is comparable and I much prefer the handling of the Trinovids. At this level of refinement, personal preference is often subjective and is not entirely rational.

By the way, for 8x32 and 8x20, I think Ultravid is the way to go.

I agree wtih you that personal preference plays an important role in determining which model is "the best". I prefer the 32mm BA & BN models over the Ultravids because they fit more comfortably in my hands and they're still light enough to be very comfortable to hand hold. However, in the 42 & 50mm sizes I prefer the Ultravids to the Trinovids because they're significantly lighter. As for the thumb ribs on the Ultravids, I like them (although I prefer the thumb indentations that you get with the Swarovski SLC & EL binoculars).

[Atomic Chicken]

Greetings!

When I bought my Leica 7x42's, I had an opportunity to buy either the Trinovid BN 7x42's, or the Leica Ultravid 7x42's. I found that I actually preferred the handling and image quality of the Trinovids. The Ultravids are undeniably brighter, but not by enough to set them apart as the clear "across-the-board" winner. The Trinovids, on the otherhand, were sharper over a larger area of the FOV, and seemed to have more "vibrant" color rendition. The view through the Trinovid BN's just seemed "livelier", more "electric", and more "vivid" to me, so they're the ones I ended up buying.

Aside from the image quality, the Trinovid BN's just seem more rugged and solidly built than the Ultravids, and I absolutely HATE thumb indents on binoculars which really soured me on the Ultravid body. I personally don't mind that the Trinovids weigh a little more - their body construction really inspires confidence that they are binoculars that will LAST... something the Ultravid construction fails to do for me.

Even if the Ultravids had been the same or lower cost, I still would have chosen the Trinovid BN's.

Best wishes,
Bawko

[Art Thorn]

Not that this adds much to the comparison discussion, but I bought the 7x42 BNs a while back, as well as some classic Zeiss 8x30's with the latest coatings. Both were brand new, but deals I thought. I'm not sure why I did it, other than I had some money in my Paypal account, because I thought I would always love my Nikon HGs (8x32 and 10x32). After about a month, I have to say that I now find the Nikon focus just too fast to handle comfortably, and the CA just too visible. I always pick the BNs first, unless I want a light pair. Then I take the Zeiss. I can't say how much better the newer versions would be, but I have no care to try them out. I am now perfectly happy, especialy with the money I saved. Binocs where ever I want them - even the Nikons have their place in the cars.

[ceasar]

I have the Nikon 10 x 42 SE and the Leica 7 x 42 BN Trinovid. I use both of them alot. To my eyes, the Nikons have much less CA than the Leica's, but that may be because the Nikons are Porros. In any case, the CA doesn't bother me with either binocular.
Bob