What's the view through a 1996 Leica Trinovid BCA 8x20 like in 2022? (2 Viewers)

[yarrellii]

To the best of my understanding the newer Trinovid with Leica in the center has benefited the most in terms of better coatings, and hence, better view.

Yes, that's (in part) my point, the last Trinovid BCA, with Leica logo in the center (still on production/sale) has at least been in production since 1996, so I wonder about the improvements on its performance along the way (the external shape doesn't seem to have changed).

 

[Mike F]

Yes, that's (in part) my point, the last Trinovid BCA, with Leica logo in the center (still on production/sale) has at least been in production since 1996, so I wonder about the improvements on its performance along the way (the external shape doesn't seem to have changed).

Based on my recent comparison of my 90’s 10x25 BCA with the central logo and a new 10x25 UV, I suspect none!

 

[Rotherbirder]

I have a BC (i.e, not armoured) from around the same time. Good, very solid build; double-hinge tension spot on; focuser small & fiddly but you get used to it; narrow FOV quite noticeable in use but the image is excellent, even in 'suboptimal' light - bright & sharp, colours very neutral. Eye cups not the best and better to leave them down - even when not wearing spectacles - to get full FOV. A good, all round 'pocket' binocular IMHO.

RB

 

[yarrellii]

@Mike F This is really interesting. One wonders about the new improvements in such a long standing model, and what I find puzzling is that (as far as I know; I'm happy to stand corrected) there have no been "designation changes" (other than A for rubber armoured or the "speciality" versions say in different colours or the like) in the way a "exact looking model" in the UV range has got the BR, HD and HD+ improvements, even if the exterior looks just the same and you only have the name on the badge to tell the difference (in the case of the Plus, only the red lettering of "HD"). I find surprising that a model that is still on production after +25 years. So... while Leica have been busy incorporating new (albeit sometimes minimal) improvements in the Ultravid rang: 2003 launch, 2007 HD, 2014 HD+, the 8x20 Trinovid BCA has not changed its designation or received any "official" improvement since in launch more than 25 years ago.

@Rotherbirder Really interesting insights (especially about leaving the eyecups down even for non-spectacle wearers like myself). Thank you, it was most helpful.

 

[Rotherbirder]

@Rotherbirder Really interesting insights (especially about leaving the eyecups down even for non-spectacle wearers like myself). Thank you, it was most helpful.

By using the binocular with the eyecups fully retracted, I find that the view becomes a little more immersive, brighter and less 'tunnel'-like than with them extended. It soon becomes second nature to get the eyepieces/exit pupil positioned in the right place relative to your physiognomy.

RB

 

[Mike F]

Yes, I agree. I rather suspect that if Leica had made improvements in the same way they have done in the Ultravid range that they would have made something of it! It’s fairly widely acknowledged that the difference between the original BR’s, HD’s, and HD pluses is not great, but nonetheless Leica understandably wanted people to know that there had been some improvements.

 

[tenex]

In1992 two new compacts were launced especially for the USA: a 7x20B and a 9x25B.

I've never seen or heard of these. How long were they produced? Any specs? A search suggests they were also sold under the Leupold (gold ring) brand.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

tenex, post 27,
Excellent questions certainly worth investigating.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

In addition to my post 28 a quotation from Garry Hawkins book regarding the Leica 7x20B and 9x25B: "these were developed in conjunction with Leupold and were completely watrproof with individual eyepiece focusing. They sold in very limited numbers". End of quotation. That should answer all questions...
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[tenex]

... Indeed. While individual focus (presumably on the objective end) would work well enough at 7x, it would be a serious limitation for 9x... except perhaps hunting, but how many would want 25mm glass for that?

I wonder how the 7x20 would compare to Swaro's new 7x21.

 

[forent]

Yes, that's (in part) my point, the last Trinovid BCA, with Leica logo in the center (still on production/sale) has at least been in production since 1996, so I wonder about the improvements on its performance along the way (the external shape doesn't seem to have changed).

By accident, I have asked Leica Germany the very same question about the Trinovid 10x25 BCA three weeks ago. They answered quickly and clearly: There have not been made any changes since 1996, be it in mechanics, optics or coating.

 

[Trinovid]

By accident, I have asked Leica Germany the very same question about the Trinovid 10x25 BCA three weeks ago. They answered quickly and clearly: There have not been made any changes since 1996, be it in mechanics, optics or coating.

That pretty well answers the original point of the thread. Thanks for posting that.

 

[Mike F]

Now that we've answered that question and there's no reason to worry about derailing the thread, I've often wondered why the 8x20 seems so much more popular than the 10x25? Is it just a/the general preference for 8x over 10x, or is there more to it than that? Yes, the 8x20 is a bit smaller, but the 10x25 is already so small that I find it hard to believe that would be the reason.

Just curious........

 

[mwhogue]

Now that we've answered that question and there's no reason to worry about derailing the thread, I've often wondered why the 8x20 seems so much more popular than the 10x25? Is it just a/the general preference for 8x over 10x, or is there more to it than that? Yes, the 8x20 is a bit smaller, but the 10x25 is already so small that I find it hard to believe that would be the reason.

Just curious........

Mike,

I love the UV 8x20, have only seen very positive reviews for the 10x25 and have often been tempted. But for me the hesitation has been the 270' FOV for the 10x vs 340' for the 8x. ER on both is listed at 15 mm so that can't be the difference. I do think the size difference may influence some people (along with the probably steadier view) because many pocket fans on the forum prefer the smallest possible. Several members have remarked positively on the very slightly smaller size of the 8x20 Trinovid as compared to the UV version.

Mike

 

[yarrellii]

Now that we've answered that question and there's no reason to worry about derailing the thread, I've often wondered why the 8x20 seems so much more popular than the 10x25? Is it just a/the general preference for 8x over 10x, or is there more to it than that? Yes, the 8x20 is a bit smaller, but the 10x25 is already so small that I find it hard to believe that would be the reason.

Just curious........

Not having owned either of those, but actively looking for a nice pocket pair, I'd say that some of the issues you point out might be the reasons for the 8x20 being more popular:

• Size. If you are in the search for a really small device, 10x25 is actually quite a step backwards, because it introduces more length (so I guess many users would think... well then, why not go for an 8x25?).
• Shake. Most users of pocket binoculars report the difference in ease of handling between a full size 8x42 and a diminutive 8x20 or 8x24. Take that inherent vibration potential of pockets and add the increased shake of 10x, doesn't sound like a great combo for many I guess.
• FOV. One of the downsides of pockets is their limited FOV, compared to x32 or 42... so I guess 8x is already constricted enough for many.

Just guessing

 

[SeldomPerched]

@Mike F Yes, I think there was a previous BCA, have a look. Maybe this is the model that was produced up until 1996. I remember reading a list of all the models in a Leica database, the link is in a thread here in BF.

This is the old BCA, while the one I'm referring to (I posted a picture in the OP) is aesthetically the same as the one currently on sale (as per picture on post #6).

I found a thread from last year (I see you were around ) that somehow tries to explain the different timeline of the 8x20 BC/BCA. It's here:

The three Trinovids battle

When we refer about the compact Trinovid series we have to refer to exactly which model we are referring to, because they are very different optically due to the improvements of the anti-reflection layers over the years. It's like some old Swarovski models: with or without Swarodur coating. All...

www.birdforum.net

In fact, this is one of the reasons I'm asking, to inquire specifically about the performance of the earlier models of the current 8x20 BCA incarnation according to "contemporary eyes" (eyes that have used some of the latest offers).

I have this one still. Beautiful and petite but very fiddly to use. Gary Hawkins serviced it a while ago so the hinges hold the barrels still (previously they had gone a bit floppy).

 

[birderspike]

I'm considering the purchase of a used (but in good condition) 1996 Leica Trinovid BCA 8x20. I've read everything I've been able to find here on Birdforum about the 8x20 Trinovid BC/A, but since it's such a long standing model in the Leica range, it seems plausible that there have been improvements in coatings/performance over the years.

As far as I understand a 1996 Trinovid BCA already incorporated phase correction, but I'm not sure about the overall performance compared to current optics. To give a bit of a background, as a "pocket" I'm using a MIC Zeiss Terra ED 8x25, but I'm a bit disappointed by the "pocket" side of the Terra. Performance-wise is a fine instrument, but it's a hair taller than a 8x32 Diamondback HD (which offers a more comfortable view and a brighter image on cloudy days), and it's neither the lightest thing to carry in your pocket at +300 g. Hence my interest in a pocket binocular that is really pocketable but offers good performance.

I've used different Leica models over the years and I've enjoyed the image (UV 8x32 and 10x50, UVHD 8x32, Retro 7x35, BA 7x42), the most likely contemporaneous was a 7x42 Trinovid BA, but since they're drastically different models I'm afraid little useful information can be derived from my experience and recollection of the 7x42.

Any impression, memory or piece of information is much appreciated.


EDIT: Just to avid misunderstandings, the exterior appearance of the binocular is the latest incarnation of the 8x24 BCA: Leica logo in the center and two parallel protruding "fins" along the central body, on both sides of the Logo.
The serial number on these starts by 132XXXX, and according to Leica, dates back to 1996. Other forum members have stated that their untis followed an timeline that seems coherent for this model:
127XXXX,1994
128XXXX, 1995
165XXXX, 2002

Late to the thread, but I have a 10x25 pair with serial numbered 115xxxx. They worked great as a spare for trips and for a small bin to take on kayak trips. I once used them for a whole trip in the tropics when another birder forgot his bins and I lent him my regular pair, since he had huge hands and the little ones were tough for him to use. Didn't miss a bird. I recently had an almost month long kayak trip and the right sight became fogged, but until then I used them all the time with no regrets that I wasn't using the 10x40s. A little bit of light loss at the ends of the day, but otherwise, I didn't feel like I was losing out on anything. Now I have to find someone to give me a quote on repair of the waterlogged side, and I'm trying to decide whether to repair or replace, but I probably won't change to another.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Recommend you talk to Leica... they will quote refurb and in some cases offer attractive discount for exchange ;-)

 

[birderspike]

I'll try. So far I haven't gotten through to their US number to inquire.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I'll try. So far I haven't gotten through to their US number to inquire.

1 (800) 480-5422​

Leica Camera Inc 1 Pearl Ct A.​

Allendale, NJ 07401 USA​