Those are the best three arguments for 7x that can be made, and especially while out on choppy water the reduced shake is really ideal.
-
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.
8x32 UVHD+ vs 7x35 Retrovid (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mike F
- Start date
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
I tried 7s on water. But I have found that IF i need binos on water it's because I really need to bring something closer - e.g. to read a number or lettering. That forces me to use a 10, tho yes it is a PIA.
I may go back to experiement with 7 again, but right now I think boats and IS are the way to go.
eitanaltman
Well-known member
The "problem" with the Retrovid isn't the optics, it's the physical design. No rubber armor, not waterproof, old school focus knob, skinny eyecups.
What I am referring to in my post could be optically identical internally to the 7x35 Retrovid, I've heard enough positive feedback from trustworthy folks here to believe it's stellar when you're looking through it. It's the wrapper that's the problem.
But I like the 'wrapper'..... sometimes there are people that wrap a present with the best paper, bows, ribbons etc...while others like me will wrap a gift in a paper bag. Not to say the Retrovid is a Paper bag but yes, it doesn't have the frills that other bins have, granted!
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Gentalman,
I view it from the other side. I actually bought it for the wrapper. Assuming of course that the optics were going to be premium. If it wasn’t, then there would be no reason to buy them, imho. People would just go out and buy an old one for its uniqueness and/or collectibility. A little like buying the old Zeiss jena’s and the older Nikon porros.
If we’re buying optically high quality binoculars and want it for the most utilitarian purposes possible, then a retro is not for you. And possibly nor is any Porro that is not waterproof and has a small focus wheel. My feeling is that the beauty of the Trinovid classics, is the fact that is optically high-quality in a beautifully made old school wrapper. Fit and finish is right up there with the best Leica has to offer. My opinion is Leica builds the best wrappers of all three Alphas.
Considering all the complaints we hear about Swarovski rubber being too slippery, Zeiss rubber too sticky and peeling potential. The retros are a beautiful packaged throwback from decades gone by, with some of the finest optics on the market today. These are just not the binoculars I’m going to grab when I’m hiking up a mountain in a snowstorm. But on a beautiful spring or summer day in the park, they are as classy as can be and they work😃.
Do we really want to call it a wrapper?
Paul
I view it from the other side. I actually bought it for the wrapper. Assuming of course that the optics were going to be premium. If it wasn’t, then there would be no reason to buy them, imho. People would just go out and buy an old one for its uniqueness and/or collectibility. A little like buying the old Zeiss jena’s and the older Nikon porros.
If we’re buying optically high quality binoculars and want it for the most utilitarian purposes possible, then a retro is not for you. And possibly nor is any Porro that is not waterproof and has a small focus wheel. My feeling is that the beauty of the Trinovid classics, is the fact that is optically high-quality in a beautifully made old school wrapper. Fit and finish is right up there with the best Leica has to offer. My opinion is Leica builds the best wrappers of all three Alphas.
Considering all the complaints we hear about Swarovski rubber being too slippery, Zeiss rubber too sticky and peeling potential. The retros are a beautiful packaged throwback from decades gone by, with some of the finest optics on the market today. These are just not the binoculars I’m going to grab when I’m hiking up a mountain in a snowstorm. But on a beautiful spring or summer day in the park, they are as classy as can be and they work😃.
Do we really want to call it a wrapper?
Paul
eitanaltman
Well-known member
Forgive the term "wrapper", but I just wanted to be clear that I'm confident nobody was complaining about the optical quality when clamoring for a 7x35 Ultravid version. You could literally take the 7x35 Retrovid and "wrap it" in an Ultravid exterior (armor, eyecups, focus knob, etc) with zero internal changes and I'd probably love it.
So I totally understand where you're coming from, and I'm not at all implying that the 7x35 Retrovid is a poor design. And it certainly has its place, as you describe. I don't dispute anything you said.
But for ME, there is no way I'm spending $1k+ on a binocular that's not comfortable (for me) to use for extended, hard field use. The skinny eyecups are the real deal-killer for my personal ergonomic requirements; I have bought and sold a number of binoculars I really, really liked but for the eyecups!
So, once we enter hypothetical land and start dreaming of a revised 7x35 Leica with larger / thicker eyecups, then you might as well add on the rubber armor, waterproofing, larger focus knob, etc. for the full, modern ergonomics (and field worthiness) of an Ultravid.
Anyway, the point is that this is very subjective, and desiring a 7x35 Ultravid that's basically a downscaled clone of the 7x42 doesn't in any way mean the 7x35 Retrovid isn't a great binocular in its own right. But the fact remains that the Retrovid is what it is, and it has some limitations that prevent it from being a 7x35 alpha roof for all-purpose field use.
So I totally understand where you're coming from, and I'm not at all implying that the 7x35 Retrovid is a poor design. And it certainly has its place, as you describe. I don't dispute anything you said.
But for ME, there is no way I'm spending $1k+ on a binocular that's not comfortable (for me) to use for extended, hard field use. The skinny eyecups are the real deal-killer for my personal ergonomic requirements; I have bought and sold a number of binoculars I really, really liked but for the eyecups!
So, once we enter hypothetical land and start dreaming of a revised 7x35 Leica with larger / thicker eyecups, then you might as well add on the rubber armor, waterproofing, larger focus knob, etc. for the full, modern ergonomics (and field worthiness) of an Ultravid.
Anyway, the point is that this is very subjective, and desiring a 7x35 Ultravid that's basically a downscaled clone of the 7x42 doesn't in any way mean the 7x35 Retrovid isn't a great binocular in its own right. But the fact remains that the Retrovid is what it is, and it has some limitations that prevent it from being a 7x35 alpha roof for all-purpose field use.
No, wrapper isn't right.... coatings perhaps. I know it is not the same vulcanite as on the cameras (New M11 for instance), but the coating used on the 7x35 looks similar. I believe one report I read listed it as foam-textured blackening, whatever that is. But hey, it works for me and knowing Leica, it will be durable. Is it the same coating they used on the original?
From an optical standpoint, Yesterday I compared the 7x35 to my Meostar B1.1 8x32 and my eyes clearly had the 7x35 as the winner and the Meostar is nothing to laugh at. True, not an Alpha but real close to the Ultravid...
So high quality optics, ....high quality coatings and yes, some might not like the look of either the design nor the coatings but I happen to enjoy it. Also, I was pleasantly surprised that the focus wheel is relatively fast, well...perhaps average. When I owned a Zeiss Dialyt, that thing was slow focus,...the Retro is a good birding bin...
From an optical standpoint, Yesterday I compared the 7x35 to my Meostar B1.1 8x32 and my eyes clearly had the 7x35 as the winner and the Meostar is nothing to laugh at. True, not an Alpha but real close to the Ultravid...
So high quality optics, ....high quality coatings and yes, some might not like the look of either the design nor the coatings but I happen to enjoy it. Also, I was pleasantly surprised that the focus wheel is relatively fast, well...perhaps average. When I owned a Zeiss Dialyt, that thing was slow focus,...the Retro is a good birding bin...
eitanaltman
Well-known member
This is really tilting on the margins since I pulled that word out of thin air lol, but you can't say "coatings" when that term has a very specific, defined use within the optics world. I'm not talking about the glass, I'm talking about the everything else (especially ergonomics).
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
Funny how we are all different - one person's problems are another's qualities
I love the lack of armor (bulk and weight). Fits my hands well, tucks under a light jacket. I'm not a professional guide or biologist so yes, if I was using them every day in nasty conditions, then yes, I guess I'd need the armor. But in 40+ years of carrying cameras and binocs etc. outdoors, I've never had issues. with non-armored gear. Even tho you are supposed to dunk modern binos, I never have. Wipe down with damp towel, yes. Kitchen sink, no. If it's pouring w/out let-up, then frankly, I'm seeking cover. Again, maybe if I was a hunting guide in AK... but for my typical use, no issues.
The focus knob - and the diopter adjustment are perfect. Plenty of friction, well located, convenient to my grip on binos. One minor criticism is focus is a bit slow.
The eyecups just work fine for me (all in since I wear specs).
"Nature loves diversity"... even in binos it seems!
One add'l comment on the vulcanite/leatherette/whatevah covering: I used M-series cameras semi-professionally for years. Carried them in often hostile outdoor conditions. I never had the covering fail. The older M-2 would have been 50's. So that's 50+ years of service. I do have a 1933 model III where the covering dried out and fell off in chunks. I got tired of 'that much' character and finally cleaned it off. For around $20 I bought a laser cut ready-to-adhere actual leather replacement and attached it (fit is perfect). So one appeal of the Retros, is that I suspect they can be recovered. The heavy armoring... what happens if it fails?
YMMV!
Last edited:
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I knew exactly what you were talking about with the wrapper description, I didn’t respond out of disagreement, I was pleasantly amused by it.
I think some miss the forest for the trees with these retros. The whole point of them, is the styling, (wrapper), outer body. I can fully appreciate the lack of comfort or usability of the user in any binocular. I have the same similar gripes (not eyecup size) when it comes to 10x in 32’s. Just +ant get use to the eyebox on most. I’m with you, I wouldn’t spend $100 on binoculars that don’t work for my eyes.
Of course I agree 100% that many things with optics are very subjective. And a 7x35 Ultravid with modern rubber body (wrapper😉) water proof with good turnable eye cups does sound amazing.
But then it wouldn’t be a Retrovid (Trinovid Classic), with the shape , size and leatherette exterior that makes it, the unique and classy (limited use, yes) set of binoculars. It’s kind of you either you like those kinds of things or you don’t.
I remember sometime back that Leica made a water proof rubber version of the classical Trinovid. There was another one that had 7.8 FOV and had silver highlights on near the objectives. That one said water proof as well but wasn’t rubber.
Paul
Attachments
Paultricounty
Well-known member
That was my point exactly, you just said it better 😀. The lack of rubber, if you will is part of the beauty. The thin outer body covering (what ever it is) is one of the nice and unique things of these beauties. I really get a kick out of them. There so different than almost everything on the market today. Different is nice. It seems like everything today is so generic.Funny how we are all different - one person's problems are another's qualities
I love the lack of armor (bulk and weight). Fits my hands well, tucks under a light jacket. I'm not a professional guide or biologist so yes, if I was using them every day in nasty conditions, then yes, I guess I'd need the armor. But in 40+ years of carrying cameras and binocs etc. outdoors, I've never had issues. with non-armored gear. Even tho you are supposed to dunk modern binos, I never have. Wipe down with damp towel, yes. Kitchen sink, no. If it's pouring w/out let-up, then frankly, I'm seeking cover. Again, maybe if I was a hunting guide in AK... but for my typical use, no issues.
The focus knob - and the diopter adjustment are perfect. Plenty of friction, well located, convenient to my grip on binos. One minor criticism is focus is a bit slow.
The eyecups just work fine for me (all in since I wear specs).
"Nature loves diversity"... even in binos it seems!
One add'l comment on the vulcanite/leatherette/whatevah covering: I used M-series cameras semi-professionally for years. Carried them in often hostile outdoor conditions. I never had the covering fail. The older M-2 would have been 50's. So that's 50+ years of service. I do have a 1933 model III where the covering dried out and fell off in chunks. I got tired of 'that much' character and finally cleaned it off. For around $20 I bought a laser cut ready-to-adhere actual leather replacement and attached it (fit is perfect). So one appeal of the Retros, is that I suspect they can be recovered. The heavy armoring... what happens if it fails?
YMMV!
The styling (wrapper) is one of the reasons I have a few old Zeiss and Nikon porros. As I’m sure you enjoy with some of your older lenses.
Good read.
Paul
Mac308
Well-known member
The problem is the majority of users over 50 years old can't effectively use more than a 6mm exit pupil - older eyes typically don't dilate beyond 6mm. So the 7x50's 7mm exit pupil would be wasted on many (most?) of us.
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
Leica Trinovid BA 7x42 SAFARI GREEN Binoculars 140/1000M *EX* | eBay
Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Leica Trinovid BA 7x42 SAFARI GREEN Binoculars 140/1000M *EX* at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!
www.ebay.com
Here ya go!!! Tempting actually!!!
BTW, no affiliation with seller...
eitanaltman
Well-known member
I don't think anyone is missing anything. It's just that what the Retrovid provides is not what everyone wants.
It's not a criticism of the Retrovid, just wishing for something slightly different that fits a different use case. It doesn't have to diminish the enjoyment of those who love their Retrovids nor does anyone have to defend it. And you can speak till you're blue in the face about the charm and style and virtues of the Retrovid, and all of it can be 100% accurate, but I still want a 7x35 Ultravid
Good...than you don't have to buy them, just as I don't have to buy a NL...we all have our reasons 'to buy or not to buy'.
A couple of things: We all try to find the right 'mix' of binoculars, or, we just settle on one and go forward with that and are happy. But if you are in that category of finding that 'mix'....well, in my case, the 7x35 is what I feel to be a great substitute for the 8x32, or 7x42 or even 8x42. With the 7x35, I don't feel like I need to purchase a 8x32 and a 7x42, or any combination of those as I try to find the right mix. Other than a 10x42 and some pocket ones, the 7x35 fulfills that middle objective need.
I also am attracted to the retro style which provides me with that durable leatherette.... I know this sounds strange but one of the reasons I like the Leica retro's is that they 'are not Swaro's'... Be-gone with the 'masses' I say, be-gone I tell you! ... I go down my own trail and the retro 7x35 certainly takes me there.
I was just out yesterday for a few hours and the overall lightness, the feel....the look. Wow....Love em! Part of birding is not only birding, nature etc...but it also means I enjoy the gear I go out with. Heck, I hold that binocular for hours at a time and I want them to fit like a glove and want me to continue to hold them. In fact, I am holding them right now as I type, ....I just can't place them down. jim
Paultricounty
Well-known member
There’s no binocular that everyone wants😛. Everybody defends everything it seems. Post after post🤪. It’s all good stuff. I’d like a 735UV myself, actually even better, 735 Noctivid. Oh and there’s no blue , the retros , they lean more to the red I believe. 😀✌🏼I don't think anyone is missing anything. It's just that what the Retrovid provides is not what everyone wants.
It's not a criticism of the Retrovid, just wishing for something slightly different that fits a different use case. It doesn't have to diminish the enjoyment of those who love their Retrovids nor does anyone have to defend it. And you can speak till you're blue in the face about the charm and style and virtues of the Retrovid, and all of it can be 100% accurate, but I still want a 7x35 Ultravid
Paul
Yes!
The only binoculars I've used on the water have been an old pair of 7x35 porro prisms and my old 8x32 Trinovids and the thing I liked about the 7x35's was the wider field of view. Basically I used them to search for other traffic and at least for me they seemed ideal.
Mike F
Well-known member
Wide FOV is one of the main reasons for 7X on the water. Very often one is searching for markers and you have a vague idea where they should be but not a precise one. That (and stability) is why 10X is no good - you need to be able to find what you're looking for ASAP and 7X will find it quicker every time.
Last edited:
I worked a lot on the water for about 7 years and when I was there I would always look for birds etc... A 10x is not good on the water for stability purposes and the tighter FOV. I used a 8x but would have used a 7 if I had it....
