Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
The Leica 8x32BN is quite a bit darker than the 8x32 Ultravid HD + because of the significant lower light transmission.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel
-
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.
Finally, I found a pair of Leica BN 8x32's on eBay. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter [email protected]
- Start date
If you had half a clue you'd realize you have no idea what your talking about (as usual just a bunch of
bs). It's been noted several times on this very board that the actual FOV of the 8x42 Toric is wider than advertised. Both myself and SteveC actually measured and posted the actual results. It must be an interesting world you live in.
PYRTLE
Old Berkshire Boy
Your answer is a bit aggressive for me, no need. Dennis is discussing what is now deemed by many, a classic and collectable item rather than a modern everyday use binocular, even though his example does not include all the original accessories. I owned both BA and BN which were a joy to use. I doubt a pre owned Tract Toric will attract the same level of interest and value 30 years from its end of production, despite it's impressive stats and reviews.
Last edited:
Dennis is confused. The 8X42 BN has a 390/FOV. The 7X42 BN a 420/FOV.
The BN line is darker than the Ultravid line that replaced it. Silver vs. dielectric prism coatings.
The BN eye cup was flat and closer to the glass than the puffy synthetic eye cup used in the Ultravid. This slight difference gave the BN's more useable eye relief than the Ultravids. I could use the 8X42 BN but not the 8X42 UV. The 7X42 Ultravid had a few mm's of additional eye relief so I bought it. It's a great bin!
All the above is based on multiple direct comparisons in a variety of conditions. The BN's are fantastic bins and were, at one time, extremely popular.
The BN line is darker than the Ultravid line that replaced it. Silver vs. dielectric prism coatings.
The BN eye cup was flat and closer to the glass than the puffy synthetic eye cup used in the Ultravid. This slight difference gave the BN's more useable eye relief than the Ultravids. I could use the 8X42 BN but not the 8X42 UV. The 7X42 Ultravid had a few mm's of additional eye relief so I bought it. It's a great bin!
All the above is based on multiple direct comparisons in a variety of conditions. The BN's are fantastic bins and were, at one time, extremely popular.
I agree with you, Denco, with respect to the advantages of the Noctivid over the UVHD+, in general. However, the UVHD+ scores higher points in two areas: a) the availability of the 7x42 configuration, and b) weight. In longer walks—sometimes also carrying a camera or a scope—weight becomes an issue and I find the UVHD+ a more welcome addition than the superior Noctivid. The more stable plate form offered by the 7x42 is also very pleasant to have as an option. In a nutshell, if possible, it is extremely nice to have both. Enjoy in good health.
*PS. As a side note, the Trinovid 8x32 BN is an amazing pair of binoculars that I enjoyed tremendously for over a decade. Age, however, necessitated it’s replacement with the UVHD+ 8x32 which has a lower weight and, for me, a much appreciated industrial design (i.e., weight, size, performance, ergonomics).
Torview
Well-known member
I mean whites were whiter, blacks deeper, I don`t bother with Albino`s to be honest, but the improvement was plain to see.
I compared a Leica 8x32 BN to a Leica 8x32 UVHD+ side by side and I never saw a beans hill of difference in brightness, especially in the daylight. What did you find the transmission difference was?
I don't know what the Tract Toric's FOV actually measured, but compared to other binoculars, they seemed very tunnel vision to my eyes. That was the reason I sold mine. I bought a Nikon MHG 8x42, and it made the Tract look like a Habicht 7x42.
In other words, it was transmitting higher across the whole light spectrum. That is probably true to a degree, but you have to decide if you like that. That could be the harshness I see in the UVHD+. The BN has a softer, mellower view that I prefer.
Last edited:
You're right. Every place you look has a different FOV listed. It is still a bigger FOV than the Tract. The BN 8x32 has a 405 foot FOV, so it is even bigger yet. The Noctivid says it has about a 407 foot FOV, but to me, it seems bigger than that. The Noctivid 8x42 wows me like an SV 8x32 with its big FOV, sharp edges and sharp on-axis view. It is a big move up from the UVHD+. That Noctivid is a nice binocular. It still impresses me. The Noctivid view reminds of the big sharp to the edge wow view of a Swarovski EL 8.5x42 except with a little more field curvature to negate RB, more 3D, more saturated colors and it is a little sharper on-axis. I think the Noctivid is one of the sharpest binoculars I have seen on-axis.
Last edited:
I would guess the Noctivid has a more complex and heavier eye piece, making the binocular heavier. The Noctivid at 31 oz. is heavy, but man it is built like a tank.
At least on the Leica 8x32 BN the eye cups and eye relief work better for me than the Leica 8x32 UVHD+ but that comes down to your eye socket shape and depth. For me, the Leica UVHD+ 8x32 was a floater, meaning I had to hold it away from my eyes to avoid black-outs. I know the UVHD+ has dielectric prisms, probably updated coatings and Schott HD glass, but I don't see a huge difference in brightness between the two in the daytime. Not enough to pay 4x the price! I think leaded glass helps with transmission in the older Trinovids. The 7x42 BN is a great binocular also. I had one a while back.
Honestly, I doubt Tract will still be around in 30 years, but I bet Leica will.
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Light transmission of the Leica Ultravid HD plus 500-550 nm = 87-89% of the Leica Trinovid 8x32 BN it is 75-77%. That is such a large difference that you certainly will be able to observe.
Gijs van Ginkel
Gijs van Ginkel
Paultricounty
Well-known member
You have to get those eyes checked again Dennis, remember all the issues we discussed about your eyes with glare. BN nice binoculars, I’ve had the pleasure myself of a side by side comparison. UV+ clearly brighter , sharper binoculars which it should be. Maybe you could take a few pictures (maybe of some animals) showing the differences of say the CA or the harshness of the UV’s. Although we all love the allbino reviews, they are stat bias and don’t always relate the what all of see through the oculars.
Will you be selling the BN’s on eBay soon? 😝
If the 8x32 BN fully satisfies you... no need for an 8x32 UVHD+, unless you would like one, perhaps for the lighter weight, greater light transmission, dialectic coatings, form factor/ergonomics, or the optics. Otherwise... sounds like you have your 8x32 binocular need fully and happily met - for a few weeks time, anyway?
Last edited:
No, the 8x32 UVHD+ didn't work for me. I loved the small compact size and the saturated colors, but the eye relief was too long for the eye cups, so they were floaters for me. The BN 8x32 and Noctivid 8x42 strange enough work well for me.If the 8x32 BN fully satisfies you... no need for an 8x32 UVHD+, unless you would like one, perhaps for the lighter weight, greater light transmission, dialectic coatings, form factor/ergonomics, or the optics. Otherwise... sounds like you have your 8x32 binocular need fully and happily met - for a few weeks time, anyway?
I compared the 8x32 BN to the 8x32 UVHD+ and I still don't see a huge difference in brightness, regardless of what you say about getting my eyes checked. In fact, they were just checked, and they are a perfect 20/20 with no astigmatism. I will stand by my opinion that I don't think the UVHD+ is worth 4x the cost of the BN. If you say it is, you need to rationalize the difference in costs based on ergonomics or form factor, not optics. I have had all the UVBR, UVHD and UVHD+ and there is not that much difference between any of them. In fact, when I compare my 8x32 BN to my 8x42 Noctivid the main improvement I see is the flatter field and sharper edges. The Noctivid is the first significant improvement Leica has made in years. That is my point in this thread is to save your self some money and buy the BN for $500 instead of paying $2000 for the UVHD+. Allbinos says the same thing and I agree with them.
"Year 2014 saw another Leica launch, this time of the Ultravid HD-Plus series. Still, if you compare these devices to the Ultravid HD binoculars, you find out all the numbers remained the same. The producer just boasted of using glass of new type produced by the Schott company, with a better transmission.
Why am I writing about it? On our website, you can find tests of all 10x42 models, from the Trinovid BN to the Ultravid HD-Plus. It is easy to check what the customers gained throughout all these years. Firstly, the results show unanimously that, within the margin of measurement error, the HD-Plus model is practically the same as the HD model. Maybe the transmission level varies a bit but even if you compare the measurements taken with a spectrophotometer the differences remain very slight; it is really difficult to say whether they are an effect of measurement errors, natural differences between two specimens or the actual influence of Schott HT glass. If the spectrophotometer doesn’t show any distinct difference, it won’t be visible to the naked eye either. So we have a situation where the Ultravid HD doesn’t differ markedly from the Ultravid BR and the Ultravid BR is an almost identical copy of the Trinovid but closed in a lighter casing. It seems that for almost 25 years, Leica haven’t introduced any innovative optical solutions to its key series of binoculars. Of course, the weight reduction and hydrophobic coatings are appreciated, along with a slight transmission increase or a tad wider field of view. Still, such a reputable company should have done better, especially if you take into account the length of the period of time we are talking about. As a result of such stagnation, Leica devices started to compete with each other: you can still buy a second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus."
Here are some more birders that love the Leica BN/BA!
"These newer HD's feel very plastic and cheap in comparison. For me, I actually preferred the optics of the BN over these HD's, for some reason, I can see CA in these HD's, which was never a problem in my BN's."
"Even though I was glad to get some resolution (New Ultravid) I must say, I actually preferred the view in the original Trinovid's. They were more 'pleasurable' for a better word."
"Greetings. I sold mine only a few weeks ago here in the Forum after 14 years or so of use, and I really miss it. The post serial 145xxx provided me with excellent service, and have preferred it over the superb Zeiss 8x32 FL in terms of color saturation, focusing ease and haptics."
"The 8x32 BNs are a drop-dead classic IMO. Yeah, I know they're not state-of-the-art by today's standards, but they're surprisingly close to my eyes. The minor brightness difference doesn't bother me, the slight CA one might see when looking at Ravens on a wire on a bright overcast day doesn't even reach the level of discussion, again for me. Mine have a 147xxx serial #, FWIW."
"I prize good baffling as much as any other optical quality. I think the Trinovid BA/BN better in this regard than the Ultravid. I perhaps unwisely base this opinion solely on the 50 mm, in which the BA/BN accomplishes the often ignored but seemingly dirt level easy task of hiding the objective mount from the eye's view. The UV fails here, as can be seen in the photos of the exit pupils in the Allbinos review. Every BA/BN so tested on that website shows no internal reflections outside the exit pupil. My experience, owning a 10x50 BR and a 12x50 BN, corroborates those photos. It looks like a mighty thin bright ring in those photos, but it is quite significant in glare inducing circumstances. I gather also from various tests and reviews that no binocular since the BA/BN has been as well baffled, until the appearance of the Zeiss HT and lately the Leica Noctivid."
"I found the 8x32 BN to be superior in glare and ghosting to both the Nikon 8x32 SE and the 8x30 E2, with the SE being more problematic with the eye cups turned down when I wore eyeglasses. As far as I know, the BA and BN had identical baffling."
"No sympathy here. The latest stuff is brighter and shows less CA, but these things give an uncannily easy view somehow. I just love looking through my 8x42 BA Trinovid, and I am taking it birding on a big all day trip tomorrow, instead of my Zeiss FL. Duh, it's just a feeling I get."
Last edited:
