Should I sell my Leica Trinovid 10x42 BA and UV 8x42 BR binos to get the SW SLC 8x42 HD? (1 Viewer)

[Szmako81]

I would like to read your opinions on getting the aforementioned bino after selling my Leicas.

Looking forward to your comments!
P.S.: so far have not had the opportunity to try one SW SLC HD.

Szabolcs

 

[Grando]

Hi Szabolcs. I think it's a near-impossible question for us to answer... I think, however, that you should definitely try a pair of the SLCs before you make the decision and see how they compare. While you're at it try out some alternative bins models too, as in my experience the pair that I convince myself on paper will be ideal is often less than perfect when I finally get to look through it!

 

[Zappa]

Pourquoi

 

[Richard D]

It's really personal preference - in terms of central resolution the two 8s are likely to be very close. Colour wise, the SLCs are just slightly on the warm side of neutral which you may or may not prefer. Both are solidly built non-flatfield binoculars. You'll probably see slightly less CA in the SLCs. Some people don't like the Swaro focuser - it's precise rather than super fast and there is a very slight resistance in one direction - personally I find it fine. I think the SLCs are very slightly brighter.

Bear in mind the 8x42s are discontinued (although still available branded Kahles).

If you don't mind the weight maybe consider the excellent 8x56s (current production).

Try before you swap.

 

[tenex]

From my recent experience with the 10x, you would find SLC HD 8x42 an improvement over UV in the following respects: noticeably less CA, closer focus (in the original model only), wider FOV (in the 8x), larger sweet spot, and (I also believe but haven't measured) higher resolution. The general optical character is quite similar, with a bit more yellow warm bias than orange in Leicas. (The focuser is also more normal speed in the original SLC HD which I highly recommend.)

That said, it's risky to sell first especially as it could take some time to find a suitable SLC. See what your friend thinks... 🦊

 

[GrampaTom]

That said, it's risky to sell first especially as it could take some time to find a suitable SLC. See what your friend thinks... 🦊

Indeed!

 

[Foss]

That said, it's risky to sell first especially as it could take some time to find a suitable SLC. See what your friend thinks... 🦊

I'm with tenex and Grampa Tom on this.
That said, I like the idea of exploring whether selling the Trin and UV might finance a single binocular that is clearly an upgrade.

 

[Szmako81]

From my recent experience with the 10x, you would find SLC HD 8x42 an improvement over UV in the following respects: noticeably less CA, closer focus (in the original model only), wider FOV (in the 8x), larger sweet spot, and (I also believe but haven't measured) higher resolution. The general optical character is quite similar, with a bit more yellow warm bias than orange in Leicas. (The focuser is also more normal speed in the original SLC HD which I highly recommend.)

That said, it's risky to sell first especially as it could take some time to find a suitable SLC. See what your friend thinks... 🦊

Found one! It is in mint condition, if that is what you mean.

 

[Peter Leitzman]

Back in 1988 when I first bought a pair of Leitz 10x40 BA/N binoculars, I had the pick of them vs Zeiss and CZ Jena. All three were excellent (despite the CZ Jena being significantly cheaper they weren’t that far behind) and eventually went for the Leitz because of the amazing colour fidelity and neutrality. Since then I’ve owned several other pairs throughout the years with the 8x50 UVHD+ being my most recent acquisition.

Leica/ Leica binoculars have retained that exquisite colour fidelity and neutrality with in my experience particularly vivid reds. I’ve tried Swarovski’s and whilst they’re also superb, nothing has quite matched Leica in this department.

I’m of the opinion that there’s nothing to be gained by switching to Swarovski . And whilst you get a techically brilliant image with Swarovski there’s that ‘something’ for me that only Leica can produce. Swarovski are famed for their lack of distortion and CA which in absolute terms are probably better than Leica. But I’ve found those issues virtually negligible with my latest Leicas in any case.

I wouldn’t swap Leica for Swarovski. That’s just my personal opinion and in no way knocks Swarovski. But the chances are if you’ve owned and are used to Leica then another brand is unlikely to fare as well. And yes I’ve changed my binoculars several times for a variety of reasons but always came back.

If you want to upgrade get either the UVHD+ or Noctivid.

 

[Zappa]

En 1988, lorsque j’ai acheté pour la première fois une paire de jumelles Leitz 10x40 BA / N, j’avais le choix entre Zeiss et CZ Jena. Tous les trois étaient excellents (bien que le CZ Jena soit nettement moins cher, ils n’étaient pas si loin derrière) et ont finalement opté pour le Leitz en raison de la fidélité et de la neutralité étonnantes des couleurs. Depuis lors, j’ai possédé plusieurs autres paires au fil des ans, le 8x50 UVHD+ étant ma plus récente acquisition.

Les jumelles Leica / Leica ont conservé cette fidélité et cette neutralité exquises des couleurs avec, d’après mon expérience, des rouges particulièrement vifs. J’ai essayé Swarovski et bien qu’ils soient également superbes, rien n’a égalé Leica dans ce département.

Je suis d’avis qu’il n’y a rien à gagner à passer à Swarovski. Et bien que vous obteniez une image techniquement brillante avec Swarovski, il y a ce « quelque chose » pour moi que seul Leica peut produire. Swarovski est célèbre pour son manque de distorsion et de CA qui, en termes absolus, est probablement meilleur que Leica. Mais j’ai trouvé ces problèmes pratiquement négligeables avec mes derniers Leicas dans tous les cas.

Je n’échangerais pas Leica contre Swarovski. Ce n’est que mon opinion personnelle et ne frappe en aucun cas Swarovski. Mais il y a de fortes chances que si vous avez possédé et que vous êtes habitué à Leica, il est peu probable qu’une autre marque s’en sorte également. Et oui, j’ai changé mes jumelles plusieurs fois pour diverses raisons, mais je suis toujours revenu.

Si vous souhaitez mettre à niveau, procurez-vous l’UVHD+ ou le Noctivid.

👍

 

[Szmako81]

Back in 1988 when I first bought a pair of Leitz 10x40 BA/N binoculars, I had the pick of them vs Zeiss and CZ Jena. All three were excellent (despite the CZ Jena being significantly cheaper they weren’t that far behind) and eventually went for the Leitz because of the amazing colour fidelity and neutrality. Since then I’ve owned several other pairs throughout the years with the 8x50 UVHD+ being my most recent acquisition.

Leica/ Leica binoculars have retained that exquisite colour fidelity and neutrality with in my experience particularly vivid reds. I’ve tried Swarovski’s and whilst they’re also superb, nothing has quite matched Leica in this department.

I’m of the opinion that there’s nothing to be gained by switching to Swarovski . And whilst you get a techically brilliant image with Swarovski there’s that ‘something’ for me that only Leica can produce. Swarovski are famed for their lack of distortion and CA which in absolute terms are probably better than Leica. But I’ve found those issues virtually negligible with my latest Leicas in any case.

I wouldn’t swap Leica for Swarovski. That’s just my personal opinion and in no way knocks Swarovski. But the chances are if you’ve owned and are used to Leica then another brand is unlikely to fare as well. And yes I’ve changed my binoculars several times for a variety of reasons but always came back.

If you want to upgrade get either the UVHD+ or Noctivid.

Thanks, Peter!
I came to the same conclusion.

Szabolcs