Leica 7x42 Ultravid checks all the boxes (best binoculars) (1 Viewer)

[Paultricounty]

The hinge pin is titanium and the main body made of magnesium.

One of my favorite threads here right now!

Sorry , I meant magnesium .

 

[Paultricounty]

The hinge pin is titanium and the main body made of magnesium.

One of my favorite threads here right now!

Thank you 🙂 🙏🏼👊🏻.

The hinge pin is titanium and the main body made of magnesium.

One of my favorite threads here right now!

 

[Paultricounty]

I agree. All the FLs really needed were new eyepiece designs with lower off-axis aberrations. Zeiss should have left the superior prism and objective designs alone. Instead, in the SFs they gave us all new designs from stem to stern, inferior to the FLs in every way except for off-axis corrections. If the new design team had stuck with the FL objective designs and AK prisms the current Zeiss flagship binoculars would certainly be better than they are and probably better than anything else. It is a shame.

And they still could’ve tweaked it a bit to get a larger FOV, maybe add a field flattener and called it the FL plus.

Paul

 

[Conndomat]

Hmmm, ich ähnele dieser Bemerkung. Sind wir alle Idioten, die ein Fernglas aus einer Magnesiumlegierung einem Fernglas aus verstärktem Fiberglas vorziehen? 😠😡.

It was probably more concerned with the durability and resilience of the FL case and you have to admit that the glass fiber reinforced case has more than proven itself!
In the run-up there were many prophecies of doom because of cheap scrap.

I wouldn't mind if binocular manufacturers used this material again, the discussions about an armor pandemic would be over.

Andreas

 

[temmie]

Strongly seconded. Those critics were utter fools.

Also strongly seconded.

Hermann

Let's write Zeiss about it
I wonder though if the production of those fiber glass bodies was more costly, and I reckon the design also played a role: in the FL, the bridge is a rather large volume and the tubes are tapered but not straight tapered. In the HT, the design is that of 2 straight-tapered tubes (easier to manufacture out of metal) connected with a slimmer metal bridge, so no need for complex shapes involving a monocoque body.

In the end, the market deemed the weight savings not significant, but I really like binoculars that are best in its class (like lowest weight, heighest transmission, largest field of view etc), on the other hand, I can greatly appreciate a balanced, neat package and the 7x42 HD+ is just that. If only for the short distance focus...

ps: I your signature:
I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.
(attributed to George Bernard Shaw)

 

[Elkhornsun]

For use in low light conditions on a boat I much prefer a 7x50 bino as the 50mm elements provide a gain in surface area for light transmission of 41% over 42mm objectives. On the water and looking for a navigation marker or checking for other vessels the 7x is good enough. For normal use on land I use 10x and 12x and 18x binoculars to better differentiate details on small birds. The 18x provide a good substitution for a spotting scope in many situations although I do need to use a tripod or a monopod.

 

[Thotmosis]

Relaxed, I really like that description. I was using the word calm, as some others have. I think you bring out a real good point, its not always about the latest and greatest or how much money invested, it’s what Is most pleasing. I really like Swarovski, and Zeiss but of all the things I own and have tried the Noctivids and that 7x42UV stand out as the ones I want to grab every time.

The 8 or 10 Nocs?

 

[Thotmosis]

For use in low light conditions on a boat I much prefer a 7x50 bino as the 50mm elements provide a gain in surface area for light transmission of 41% over 42mm objectives. On the water and looking for a navigation marker or checking for other vessels the 7x is good enough. For normal use on land I use 10x and 12x and 18x binoculars to better differentiate details on small birds. The 18x provide a good substitution for a spotting scope in many situations although I do need to use a tripod or a monopod.

Just curious, what 18x you use, the Vortex?

 

[CharleyBird]

Paul, over the years there have been some fascinating 'best bins' threads.
Here's a golden oldie from 2004 (years before I joined) just as Zeiss were about to release the FL models. Starts well and just gets better as questions are asked:

best bins ?

hello , can anyone simply tell me which is the best all round binocular , regardless of price ? .

www.birdforum.net

 

[Paultricounty]

The 8 or 10 Nocs?

8x

 

[GrampaTom]

Of all the binoculars I own and have tried over the years, like others who have said there are no perfect binoculars, I feel the 7x42 Ultravid plus checks all the boxes for the perfect binoculars.

First we have the build quality, they are one of the most compact 42mm binoculars available, they’re solid, have a great balance and feel great in the hands, the focuser is excellent even though a little firm , it’s not stiff and they snap right into focus the way a high end alpha should, no focus hunting anywhere anytime. The material fit and finish is elegant, strong and second to none.

The optics are incredibly sharp, bright, with very good edges, and a very immersive image. CA is very well controlled, almost none under most all observing conditions. It has a very good size FOV, perfect outlined black field stop with beautiful image circle, and the contrast and color saturation is off the charts , as good or better than anything else on the market today.

The eye relief is excellent as well , it has a very comfortable eye box, no fiddling around to find the right eye position. All combined with the 7x DOF becomes all intoxicating and absolutely delicious. All these features come together to make an all around close to perfect pair of binoculars.

It doesn’t try to go over board or touch the boundaries of a huge FOV, which then makes the ocular design prone to blackout or a less comfortable eye box. It doesn’t ry to have a perfect flat field edge to edge, that makes for some peculiar panning characteristics. It doesn’t try to be the brightest with coating trickery that may introduce glare under certain lighting conditions. It doesn’t try to use the most modern biodegradable armor ( which we’ll be discussing for this and the next eternity). It doesn’t to redesign the wheel with open bridge (I call double bridges) where some hands don’t fit between the barrels, and it doesn’t have barrels that feel like a motorcycle drove over the binocular tubes.

We can debate the 7x magnification not being optimum for some , but if you go higher you lose that DOF which is part of the package. In summation these 7x42 UVHD+ seem to cover just about all the bases and checks the most boxes to being the best (perfect?) all around binoculars, it does everything well, IMHO 🙏🏼.

What say you?

Paul

What say you? Well with tongue in cheek and some time to kill before I go birding... I dont own the UVHD+ 742. In fact have never handled or looked through one. That makes me decidedly unqualified to say anything about it. Since that doesn't usually stop folks from commenting on stuff, I guess it's OK if I play. I do though want to talk about the arguments you make, something I feel a little more comfortable with.

Here goes:
Superior build quality. Superior to what? Based on what? Your field use?
Compact for a 7x42? Yup.
Focuser is special. Better than other top binos? 832UVHD I did try was not good
Great balance/feel in the hands. Is this unique?
Material fit and finish is superior. OK
Optics are great. OK, but better than?
Immersive. Will somebody show me what that is? Words not allowed.
Is anything unique/better in para 3?
Eye relief. What about it? Better? Best, Acceptable?
"with the 7x DOF becomes all intoxicating and absolutely delicious." You are kidding.
No huge FOV means no blackouts, or uncomfortable eyebox. Where’d you get that?
No flat field. That a clear market leader features and many/most like.
Contrast and color saturation off the charts. But as good as others in the market.
It doesn’t try to be the brightest with coating trickery that may introduce glare. Huh?!
Superior armor? Sure, OK
Double bridges dont work for some? Not even the Alpha leader for a decade…
A motorcycle drove across my NL barrels? However they did it. Its the best NL feature
Would I trade 3X mag for 7X depth of focus? No.
We can debate 7X? No, sorry. Binoculars exist to magnify.

What say you? Seems a dated, doesn't do anything special that matters, better than other more modern designed binos. Looks are subjective, we each get to choose. Hyperbolically trashing the other guy is not an argument in support. Its not a 10X or even a perfect 10!

I need to go buy one.

Ha ha.

 

[Conndomat]

What say you? Well with tongue in cheek and some time to kill before I go birding... I dont own the UVHD+ 742. In fact have never handled or looked through one. That makes me decidedly unqualified to say anything about it. Since that doesn't usually stop folks from commenting on stuff, I guess it's OK if I play. I do though want to talk about the arguments you make, something I feel a little more comfortable with.

Here goes:
Superior build quality. Superior to what? Based on what? Your field use?
Compact for a 7x42? Yup.
Focuser is special. Better than other top binos? 832UVHD I did try was not good
Great balance/feel in the hands. Is this unique?
Material fit and finish is superior. OK
Optics are great. OK, but better than?
Immersive. Will somebody show me what that is? Words not allowed.
Is anything unique/better in para 3?
Eye relief. What about it? Better? Best, Acceptable?
"with the 7x DOF becomes all intoxicating and absolutely delicious." You are kidding.
No huge FOV means no blackouts, or uncomfortable eyebox. Where’d you get that?
No flat field. That a clear market leader features and many/most like.
Contrast and color saturation off the charts. But as good as others in the market.
It doesn’t try to be the brightest with coating trickery that may introduce glare. Huh?!
Superior armor? Sure, OK
Double bridges dont work for some? Not even the Alpha leader for a decade…
A motorcycle drove across my NL barrels? However they did it. Its the best NL feature
Would I trade 3X mag for 7X depth of focus? No.
We can debate 7X? No, sorry. Binoculars exist to magnify.

What say you? Seems a dated, doesn't do anything special that matters, better than other more modern designed binos. Looks are subjective, we each get to choose. Hyperbolically trashing the other guy is not an argument in support. Its not a 10X or even a perfect 10!

I need to go buy one.

Ha ha.

I think this is about the all-round capabilities and not about making individual disciplines better than other binoculars.

The UV 7x42 HD+ maybe not do anything better than comparable binoculars, but everything is good to very good, in my opinion it has practically no weaknesses.

Andreas

 

[GrampaTom]

I think this is about the all-round capabilities and not about making individual disciplines better than other binoculars.

The UV 7x42 HD+ maybe not do anything better than comparable binoculars, but everything is good to very good, in my opinion it has practically no weaknesses.

Andreas

No , you can’t play if you haven’t tried them 🤪✌. If I haven’t tried something it usually stops me.

Ok, I’ll bite.

Yes , my field use, fit , finish and feel comparing to the other high priced options (Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon) I’d ad just about every body I hand an Ultravid or Noctivid is impressed and makes comments about it. One of the first things people say, is how much do these cost.

Ultravids are one of the most compact 42’s. At least in the top three.

Did I say special? Doesn’t have to better than other top binos to be good. Sounds like you had a bad one. Every one I own and have tried , except one , all had very good focusers. I’d ad that some of the other top binoculars that have lighter , less dry focusers don’t have the consistency the UV has when the temps go below 30°, and forget about EL‘s and EDG’s when it gets down into the teens.

Unique, not necessarily just checks another box, and thats what the whole post is about, checking boxes.

Already covered that, your repeating yourself. 😜

One of the best of best in image quality.

Get a flight, I’ll pick you up at JFK, you can spend the weekend by us. I’ll have the little lady rustle up some grub. Of course in the evening we’ll sip the single malts and enjoy a Cuban monticristo #2. During the day I’ll show you what immersive is. 🙏🏼.

Very good on the 7x42UV. Remember the original post is not about being better in every area, just when you ad it all up.

No, not kidding. 7x has very good DOF, allows for much less focusing when observing. can observe objects closer and further within the same focus or position, very nice and calm. Delicious was a phrase coined by my good friend DON , another BF member. I just ran with it. Is that plagiarizing 🤭.

It was more from my experiences that I have with binoculars that have a very large FOV. It seems the wider the FOV the more eye placement is critical not to have blackouts or kidney beans. Not so with the Leica 7x42. That’s where I got that.

True some people do like that, but others who have issues with panning characteristics don’t. I like it too.

Yes, I think many will concur. At least to one degree or another.

On this one to save time , look up a few reviews where some creative coatings are used for purposes to give perceived brighter or sharper images. Tom you do realize the binoculars are in adamant objects, they really can’t try to do anything, it was kind of a metaphor. 😝.

I like it too, but some don’t as you well know. I also like traditional straight tubes. I really don’t think the curved tubes on the NL’s are it’s best feature , I think it’s the optical quality, wide FOV and excellent edge performance. Oh and the focuser, very sweet.

To each his own. Nobody said you can’t have both for different observing desires. Both have their pros and cons. I think you’d agree.

Why can’t we debate that, you just did in your lsat last question. Hmm, 7x is magnification.

That’s what I was looking for , people sharing their opinions. Tom I think it is a modern binocular. It uses the same modern glass as any other of the latest and greatest , it uses the most modern of coatings, with modern hydrophobic qualities. If your definition of a modern binocular has to be a huge field of view (I got binos 60 years old with wider FOV than NL) , field flatners (nothing new there), and funny shaped tubes, then I’m ok with that opinion 😉.

Did somebody here hyperbolically trash anything? Re-read my post.

You should. But if your visiting then you just use my Leica’s for the weekend. I’ll let you choose the ones you want to try. Youall come up and we split apossm. And can we also go shoot some of those Winchester’s I have, bring back some memories.

Always a pleasure Tom.

Paul

Andreas, all around good well done, OK, I get that. Not perfect, not best, see below.

Paul I get enough grief for too long posts, not going through all that again. Think if I were you I might go back and reread what I wrote, then you, and think about it. Meanwhile you did write in #1:

" In summation these 7x42 UVHD+ seem to cover just about all the bases and checks the most boxes to being the best (perfect?) all around binoculars, it does everything well, IMHO 🙏🏼. "

A whole bunch of "goods" does not yield perfect, best all around. I dig your enthusiasm. Now if you'd just go birding. Hope to head east after labor day, though prolly not NJ. Thanks tho.

 

[chill6x6]

Here goescomparing to EDG, SLC, UVHD+, FL, B.1)
Superior build quality- SLC, FL, UVHD+, B.1 about a tie...EDG #2
Compact for a 7x42?- All I have are pretty compact but UVHD+ is #!. The rest about equal especially considering weight
Focuser is special- EDG #1, B.1-#2, SLC-#3, FL-#4, UVHD+ #5
Great balance/feel in the hands- Yes...prob #1, FL #2, SLC #3, B.1 #4(heavy)
Material fit and finish is superior. - All about equal except EDG
Optics are great- All are excellent
Immersive. Will somebody show me what that is? Word not allowed.- that's hilarious right there! But I know what he means!
Eye relief- excellent ER but again not much different than the others
"with the 7x DOF becomes all intoxicating and absolutely delicious."- can't disagree! Everyone needs a 7X42
No huge FOV means no blackouts, or uncomfortable eyebox.-all ARE really a no-brainer to use
No flat field- not always a disadvantage!
Contrast and color saturation off the charts- all ARE top of the line binoculars
It doesn’t try to be the brightest with coating trickery that may introduce glare- no real glare with any of these
Superior armor- B.1 may be the winner here....all are great except EDG.
Double bridges dont work for some?- I have to admit I like the classic look.
A motorcycle drove across my NL barrels? -can't compete!
Would I trade 3X mag for 7X depth of focus? No.- no comment.
We can debate 7X? 7X is awesome

 

[Bentley03]

So you enjoy 8x32UV's while wearing glasses? I'm curious because I've typically read that's a no-go.

You're curious, I was astounded!

They are not only usable, but a complete joy for me to use. They handle beautifully, and positioning them perfectly is very easy.

I assumed, like you, that they were a no go, but while chatting with the glasses wearing manager of one of our retailers here in the UK, she suggested I try them, because she had no problem using them herself.

Eye relief may be tight, but I see the full field of view. They have a fraction more eye relief than the Kowa 8x33 Genesis, which I was surprised to find that I can also use.

None of this makes much sense, because I have rejected several instruments with more usable eye relief, due to their lack of eye relief.

 

[Thotmosis]

It's only after comparing them side by side for a while that you may want the Zeiss.
It feels slightly bigger, the ribbed armour gives a more secure grip, and though both have excellent fitting rubber caps, the Zeiss remove more easily than the deeper Ultravid.
Optically the Zeiss appears a smidgeon 'better to me', but you only notice switching from one to the other. A tad brighter, a tad wider, a tad less CA, a tad more neutral. To my 60 year old eyes.

If you pushed me to a single adjective, the Leica has richness, the Zeiss has luminescence.

I agree with you on brightnes, i own BN, UVHD(not +) and FL. The FL is a the brightest and i always take her with me when i go walking in the woods. It’s like it’s build for that purpose. With my specimens also the FL has the best (for me) focus.

 

[CharleyBird]

Just checked the price of a new ultravid+ and am actually shocked.
UK Leica, RRP £2150, in dealers from £1935.
🤔

 

[William Lewis]

Just checked the price of a new ultravid+ and am actually shocked.
UK Leica, RRP £2150, in dealers from £1935.
🤔

I know, they went up soon after swaro increased their prices. They were around the £1700 mark earlier in the year.

For me they are a very good workaday binocular- I've used them quite a few times and always liked the resolution and stability as well as the fact c.a isn't as prominent as in some other leica's - I can see the appeal.

The fact I don't own one is mainly due to the lack of sparkle when compared to higher transmission models - and I'm not sure they represent value for money when compared to something like a kahles helia s (slc 42) which is similar in many ways to look through although not necessarily to look at - if that's important to you...

Will

 

[CharleyBird]

Will, I suddenly had the feeling we here are part of a millionaires binocular club 😄

 

[William Lewis]

I know right! I work for a few multi millionaires with my gardening business. It's good to have a few fiscally buoyant members on here - not everyone can own the range of high end bino's oft displayed so it's really nice to see the long term comparisons being shared for the more financially mortal to contemplate.