• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leica and chromatic aberration (1 Viewer)

Love the Trinovid 8x42 (second most recent with centre diopter) but in challenging conditions CA is evident, not a big deal but would be better if not there. Apart from that the view is really nice.
It seems the UV HD+ 7x42 has a bit of a cult following and is said to control CA much better.
So tell me, how much more would I love the 7x42? Hmmmm depth of field, low CA, brighter and so on.
 
Testing and returning: "Where I am it is nearly impossible to look for binoculars, getting one (from abroad) is a long process, returning is complicated if possible at all, and selling here is uncertain (finding takers for a model, even if the unit is in perfect order), and will be at a much lower price. (I have gone through that n times!)"

Where do you live?
:)
 
Love the Trinovid 8x42 (second most recent with centre diopter) but in challenging conditions CA is evident, not a big deal but would be better if not there. Apart from that the view is really nice.
It seems the UV HD+ 7x42 has a bit of a cult following and is said to control CA much better.
So tell me, how much more would I love the 7x42? Hmmmm depth of field, low CA, brighter and so on.

Hi F88,

I had the same Trinivid model and agree CA is controlled much better in the 7x42 Plus. I like my 7x42 + quite a bit more than that model Trinovid. You may not have the same experience, but thought I'd share my 2 cents.
 
Where do you live?
:)
Copying from my post after the second post above in that same thread:

"I have to apologize for still wishing to remain anonymous, which is the reason I assumed a forum name, and for still wishing to reveal the minimum about me otherwise, which is why I also prefer not to state my location! Please see how far you can tolerate weirdos: maybe you can stretch it a bit more!"
 
Love the Trinovid 8x42 (second most recent with centre diopter) but in challenging conditions CA is evident, not a big deal but would be better if not there. Apart from that the view is really nice.
It seems the UV HD+ 7x42 has a bit of a cult following and is said to control CA much better.
So tell me, how much more would I love the 7x42? Hmmmm depth of field, low CA, brighter and so on.

Hi F88,

I had the same Trinovid model and agree CA is controlled much better in the 7x42 Plus. I like my 7x42 + quite a bit more than that model Trinovid. You may not have the same experience, but thought I'd share my 2 cents.

I own both, and agree with GG about the CA. Personally though I still really appreciate the Trinovid 8x42 in it's own right. However, you are correct about the things that you would expect to be better in the 7x42 UVHD+ (add FOV and noticeably lighter weight to that list), and if I could only own one of the two it would definitely be the 7x42.
 
I own both, and agree with GG about the CA. Personally though I still really appreciate the Trinovid 8x42 in it's own right. However, you are correct about the things that you would expect to be better in the 7x42 UVHD+ (add FOV and noticeably lighter weight to that list), and if I could only own one of the two it would definitely be the 7x42.

Yes, the FOV was another thing I was aware of and that's a bonus.
I find it interesting that you still appreciate the Trinovid. Tech specs aside, is this due to aspects of it's view and how it renders?
 
Hi F88,

I had the same Trinivid model and agree CA is controlled much better in the 7x42 Plus. I like my 7x42 + quite a bit more than that model Trinovid. You may not have the same experience, but thought I'd share my 2 cents.

I can partially blame you for my interest in the UV 7x42 ;)
I've read the glowing reports from you and others.
Recently found a really good deal on a new set, which I can't really afford but plan on thinning the collection to off set.
 
Where do you live?
:)

I think Lightbender might have asked this question partly in jest; but given how individual purchasing binoculars is, if you're unable to try out binoculars yourself, you're operating under a considerable handicap. Your vision and individual facial "fit" is your own, and reviews and online commentary can, in the final analysis, only get you so far. If you feel you can disclose the city/region or country of residence I'm sure some of us will be able to recommend an optics store where binoculars can be tried out, or offer their own binoculars for you to look through (you're welcome to try any of mine if you are in/near London).
 
Last edited:
I think Lightbender might have asked this question partly in jest; but given how individual purchasing binoculars is, if you're unable to try out binoculars yourself, you're operating under a considerable handicap. Your vision and individual facial "fit" is your own, and reviews and online commentary can, in the final analysis, only get you so far. If you feel you can disclose the city/region or country of residence I'm sure some of us will be able to recommend an optics store where binoculars can be tried out, or offer their own binoculars for you to look through (you're welcome to try any of mine if you are in/near London).

I'm in a similar unfortunate situation where it's either difficult or impossible to try binoculars out before buying them as there's simply no stores to just drop into and try them.
I will however be testing the UV HD+ 7x42 soon and comparing them to my benchmark Fujinon 7x50, not apples with apples and quite unfair to many binoculars as they are just so good, obviously the Leica would be more versatile image quality aside.
 
Yes, the FOV was another thing I was aware of and that's a bonus.
I find it interesting that you still appreciate the Trinovid. Tech specs aside, is this due to aspects of it's view and how it renders?

To fully understand why I bought the 8x42 Trinovid when I already had the 7x42 UVHD+ I'd have to bore you with the whole story of how I came to buy them, but suffice to say that I paid only a third of what a new 7x42 costs (they were an ex-dem item). However, the fact is that 8x is 8x, and not 7x(!), and whilst I'd happily give up a little detail retrieval for the benefits of the 7x42 it's nice to have an 8x format bin as well. In addition I like the ergonomics of the Trinovid. I have no problem with the extra weight and the armouring feels slightly nicer to me. The UV's armour has a slightly 'sticky' feel which offers more grip, but I just like the feel of the Triny a bit more. I also slightly prefer the focusing mechanism which, because it has a stainless steel mechanism instead of titanium, feels a bit smoother. At the end of the day the view from the 7x42 is better in every way, but the 8x42 Trinovid still has that lovely Leica view, comparable by all accounts to the original UV, and I simply couldn't pass up the opportunity to own the best iteration of the Trinovid in a format (8x) that I wouldn't otherwise have.
 
To fully understand why I bought the 8x42 Trinovid when I already had the 7x42 UVHD+ I'd have to bore you with the whole story of how I came to buy them, but suffice to say that I paid only a third of what a new 7x42 costs (they were an ex-dem item). However, the fact is that 8x is 8x, and not 7x(!), and whilst I'd happily give up a little detail retrieval for the benefits of the 7x42 it's nice to have an 8x format bin as well. In addition I like the ergonomics of the Trinovid. I have no problem with the extra weight and the armouring feels slightly nicer to me. The UV's armour has a slightly 'sticky' feel which offers more grip, but I just like the feel of the Triny a bit more. I also slightly prefer the focusing mechanism which, because it has a stainless steel mechanism instead of titanium, feels a bit smoother. At the end of the day the view from the 7x42 is better in every way, but the 8x42 Trinovid still has that lovely Leica view, comparable by all accounts to the original UV, and I simply couldn't pass up the opportunity to own the best iteration of the Trinovid in a format (8x) that I wouldn't otherwise have.

Thanks for your story Mike, I like it.
I bought my Trinovid new and I'll be paying about that plus a bit over a third more for the UV, a really good deal considering they are also new.
Looking forward to comparing them.
 
Patudo, I hope that no resentment can be read into my reply to Lightbender!

Thank you for offering to suggest a shop/s I could reach to try a range of good binoculars. But, for my location, as for much of the world, that is simply impossible.

Thank you very much for the kind offer to a stranger (a weird one at that!) to test the view through your binoculars. But it looks like I will decide about the Ultravid 7x and if buying it do so before I am next in the UK!
 
I can partially blame you for my interest in the UV 7x42 ;)
I've read the glowing reports from you and others.
Recently found a really good deal on a new set, which I can't really afford but plan on thinning the collection to off set.

Oh no ... I'm a bad influence:) I paid full price when the Plus came out and now they're a bit cheaper. I really paid too much, but I'm happy with it. I think in Jan it will be 3 years with it. If you really like your Trinovid then it stands to reason you'll be very happy with the ultravid+ I remember my Trinovid having very nice smooth focus and ease of view with glasses despite shorter ER (15.5 I think).
The 7x42 has 17mm ER and the 6mm EP makes it great(!) with my eyeglasses.
I had the Trinovid for about a year I believe. I found it too heavy after awhile.
Previously I was using 30/32mm bins so the weight increase was a bit too much for me.
The 7x42 is slightly lighter than the 8x42 Plus according to the specs I recall.
I think it was Chuck who weighed his 7x42 at about 26.5 oz with no caps/rainguard. At this weight it's manageable for me, but of course I wouldn't mind it being lighter. Let us know how you like it if you get it someday.
 
I'm 55 and have very good acuity AFAIK. At least opticians always talk about the fact that I have very good 'correctability' by which they mean that I have almost 20/20 vision which the right prescription............

I appreciate your comments regarding 20/20. I have to admit that I mistakenly thought when I posted my acuity as 20/20 that it was perfect vision...........

I've been given some pointers by a member here on how to ascertain what my actual acuity is, and I'm going to look into that (excuse the pun) when I get the chance.

So, as I previously stated my acuity, I feel that I should give an update. Typo, (David) has very kindly given me some advise and guidance on the subject of acuity and how to properly establish what mine is with the Snellen eye test chart.

https://www.allaboutvision.com/eye-test/snellen-chart.pdf

The chart is designed to be used from 10 feet with the bottom line corresponding to 20/20, so I did the test from 20 feet and halved the second number accordingly. The bottom line would then be 20/10. I found that I could read all of the letters on the second from bottom line (line 8, or 20/25 at 10 feet) with my left eye with no problem and even a few on the bottom line. I made one mistake on line 8 with my right eye (mistook an E for a Z). Both eyes together was no problem at all on that line and I could read about half of the letters on the bottom line with both eyes together.

So my actual acuity is around or a bit better than 20/12.5. Just for the record! ;)
 
To fully understand why I bought the 8x42 Trinovid when I already had the 7x42 UVHD+ I'd have to bore you with the whole story of how I came to buy them, but suffice to say that I paid only a third of what a new 7x42 costs (they were an ex-dem item). However, the fact is that 8x is 8x, and not 7x(!), and whilst I'd happily give up a little detail retrieval for the benefits of the 7x42 it's nice to have an 8x format bin as well. In addition I like the ergonomics of the Trinovid. I have no problem with the extra weight and the armouring feels slightly nicer to me. The UV's armour has a slightly 'sticky' feel which offers more grip, but I just like the feel of the Triny a bit more. I also slightly prefer the focusing mechanism which, because it has a stainless steel mechanism instead of titanium, feels a bit smoother. At the end of the day the view from the 7x42 is better in every way, but the 8x42 Trinovid still has that lovely Leica view, comparable by all accounts to the original UV, and I simply couldn't pass up the opportunity to own the best iteration of the Trinovid in a format (8x) that I wouldn't otherwise have.

I can really relate regarding the Trinovid now, I actually like it even more now....

So I've had the 7x42 HD+ for a few days now.
Here's some initial thoughts compared to the 8x42 Trinovid (second most recent, centre diopter).
It's a bit brighter, has less CA but still can be seen, is noticeably wider in FOV and a bit more DOF. Regarding the Trinovid it has a much smoother focusing wheel, feels better in my hands and handles better, while being a touch less bright I can actually see more detail with it even in shadows or low light due to the higher mag (did some flying fox watching in low light late evening).
So what's to gain... well nothing really, on that note I can see why they dropped this particular Trinovid so soon as it's excellent and must be extremely similar to the 8x42 UV. I had intended to sell my Trinovid in as new condition but I can't do it and actually like it even more after the 7x42HD+ comparison.
In summary, 7x42HD+ gives a bit of extra FOV, DOF and less CA, mildly brighter.
8x42 Trinovid feels much better in my hands, focuses much more smoothly and feels more precise accordingly, shows more detail with the extra mag (quite noticeable between the 7 and 8x, this is also a bit of a toss up as it's basically a matter of a bit brighter and a bit more steady vs closer view with the higher mag), can show CA more readily but likely only when searching for it particularly in difficult lighting.
They are both good but surprisingly I can't say the 7x42HD+ is better, just different. Without comparing I'd hazard a guess that the 8x42HD+ would be very similar to the Trinovid if not identical to the HD or BR.
I'll go as far, at this point which may change in time, that I'd even favour the 8x42 Trinovid over the 7x42HD+ but they are different enough to hang on to both.
 
Last edited:
I can really relate regarding the Trinovid now, I actually like it even more now....

So I've had the 7x42 HD+ for a few days now.
Here's some initial thoughts compared to the 8x42 Trinovid (second most recent, centre diopter).
It's a bit brighter, has less CA but still can be seen, is noticeably wider in FOV and a bit more DOF. Regarding the Trinovid it has a much smoother focusing wheel, feels better in my hands and handles better, while being a touch less bright I can actually see more detail with it even in shadows or low light due to the higher mag (did some flying fox watching in low light late evening).
So what's to gain... well nothing really, on that note I can see why they dropped this particular Trinovid so soon as it's excellent and must be extremely similar to the 8x42 UV. I had intended to sell my Trinovid in as new condition but I can't do it and actually like it even more after the 7x42HD+ comparison.
In summary, 7x42HD+ gives a bit of extra FOV, DOF and less CA, mildly brighter.
8x42 Trinovid feels much better in my hands, focuses much more smoothly and feels more precise accordingly, shows more detail with the extra mag (quite noticeable between the 7 and 8x, this is also a bit of a toss up as it's basically a matter of a bit brighter and a bit more steady vs closer view with the higher mag), can show CA more readily but likely only when searching for it particularly in difficult lighting.
They are both good but surprisingly I can't say the 7x42HD+ is better, just different. Without comparing I'd hazard a guess that the 8x42HD+ would be very similar to the Trinovid if not identical to the HD or BR.
I'll go as far, at this point which may change in time, that I'd even favour the 8x42 Trinovid over the 7x42HD+ but they are different enough to hang on to both.

Interesting that you also still like the Trinovid 8x42 when you have the UVHD+ 7x42. I agree with all your findings with regard to how they compare. In my opinion the 7x42 has the better view (clarity, brightness, DOF, FOV) and only loses to the Trinovid in terms of magnification. Handling and ergonomics are another matter with the UV only bettering there Trinovid in terms of weight. However, the general view from the Trinovid isn't far behind the UVHD+ and is definitely more alike than dissimilar, even compared to the Noctivid. Great to have both! :t: B :)
 
I can really relate regarding the Trinovid now, I actually like it even more now....

So I've had the 7x42 HD+ for a few days now.
Here's some initial thoughts compared to the 8x42 Trinovid (second most recent, centre diopter).
It's a bit brighter, has less CA but still can be seen, is noticeably wider in FOV and a bit more DOF. Regarding the Trinovid it has a much smoother focusing wheel, feels better in my hands and handles better, while being a touch less bright I can actually see more detail with it even in shadows or low light due to the higher mag (did some flying fox watching in low light late evening).
So what's to gain... well nothing really, on that note I can see why they dropped this particular Trinovid so soon as it's excellent and must be extremely similar to the 8x42 UV. I had intended to sell my Trinovid in as new condition but I can't do it and actually like it even more after the 7x42HD+ comparison.
In summary, 7x42HD+ gives a bit of extra FOV, DOF and less CA, mildly brighter.
8x42 Trinovid feels much better in my hands, focuses much more smoothly and feels more precise accordingly, shows more detail with the extra mag (quite noticeable between the 7 and 8x, this is also a bit of a toss up as it's basically a matter of a bit brighter and a bit more steady vs closer view with the higher mag), can show CA more readily but likely only when searching for it particularly in difficult lighting.
They are both good but surprisingly I can't say the 7x42HD+ is better, just different. Without comparing I'd hazard a guess that the 8x42HD+ would be very similar to the Trinovid if not identical to the HD or BR.
I'll go as far, at this point which may change in time, that I'd even favour the 8x42 Trinovid over the 7x42HD+ but they are different enough to hang on to both.

It just goes to show how our preferences can differ so much and how subjective it all is in general regarding choosing binoculars. I realized I preferred the Uvid's feel in my hands shortly after purchasing it. It felt more refined to me, but build quality of both top notch. After a week or more with the 7x42 I felt it was the best bino purchase I ever made and, even though I did like the Trinovid when I had it, I never had that same feeling. I did like the view on the Trinnie, but I do recall CA being pretty bad right outside of center and don't experience this with the 7x42 Uvid+. I do see CA if searching for it, but it seems to be controlled well to me.
Also, I think the colors are a little more towards neutral and overall I always thought the image is a noticeable step up in the Plus. However, I never had them side by side and it's all based on memory. Perhaps I would change my mind with a side by side comparison. I think I got lucky with focus on my bin...it feels quite smooth with even tension throughout and no stiffness (I hate that). I do remember the same nice focus action on the Trinovid too. If you prefer handling of the Trinovid and feel the image quality is close enough then perhaps save a ton of cash and stick with the Trinovid. It really is a very nice binocular. I would say use the Ultravid+ for a couple more weeks in all conditions and see if your mind has changed about it. Sometimes it takes a while with a binocular to discover all of its nice qualities. I hope you don't mind my suggestions.
 
Beth and Mike,

I can't say that I disagree with your thoughts and suggestions either and appreciate the feedback and enjoy reading of them.

Regarding CA, yes the Trinovid shows it more readily but it's out of centre and generally away from the main point of attention while viewing. While not desirable, I don't feel that it's a massive issue however goes to mention that the HD+ does a much better job making the issue basically irrelevant.
The focus wheel on my HD+ isn't uneven or particularly stiff, it does have a hint of friction though but it's not buttery smooth and flowing like the Trinovid. I prefer the Trinovid here.
Handling wise, the shape and form of the Trinovid and texture of the rubber just feel so much better. It's rounded ridges and so on make an ergonomic fit while the UV is like two pipes. I must say that both are an excellent design and handle and feel great. I just prefer the Trinovid here.
The clarity and brightness (FOV and DOF obviously also) is a nod to the 7x42. I have to say though that it often comes down to the viewing environment (distances, terrain, foliage cover and density and so on) which makes me prefer the 7 or 8x. Overall I think I prefer 8x however like with all preliminary assessments this may change.
Then there's other comparisons to be made within my current binocular flock. Like the 8x32 EDG which is a spectacular binocular that I can't really fault as it does everything so well. That said I really like these Leica 42's. The Trinovid may not be perfect, and technically it may well fall short of the others but short comings aside I really enjoy the view from it. Things don't always have to be perfect to be desirable I guess?
Anyway I'll quit the rambling and tangents for now.
 
Last edited:
Beth and Mike,

I can't say that I disagree with your thoughts and suggestions either and appreciate the feedback and enjoy reading of them.

Regarding CA, yes the Trinovid shows it more readily but it's out of centre and generally away from the main point of attention while viewing. While not desirable, I don't feel that it's a massive issue however goes to mention that the HD+ does a much better job making the issue basically irrelevant.
The focus wheel on my HD+ isn't uneven or particularly stiff, it does have a hint of friction though but it's not buttery smooth and flowing like the Trinovid. I prefer the Trinovid here.
Handling wise, the shape and form of the Trinovid and texture of the rubber just feel so much better. It's rounded ridges and so on make an ergonomic fit while the UV is like two pipes. I must say that both are an excellent design and handle and feel great. I just prefer the Trinovid here.
The clarity and brightness (FOV and DOF obviously also) is a nod to the 7x42. I have to say though that it often comes down to the viewing environment (distances, terrain, foliage cover and density and so on) which makes me prefer the 7 or 8x. Overall I think I prefer 8x however like with all preliminary assessments this may change.
Then there's other comparisons to be made within my current binocular flock. Like the 8x32 EDG which is a spectacular binocular that I can't really fault as it does everything so well. That said I really like these Leica 42's. The Trinovid may not be perfect, and technically it may well fall short of the others but short comings aside I really enjoy the view from it. Things don't always have to be perfect to be desirable I guess?
Anyway I'll quit the rambling and tangents for now.

Agree that things don't need to be perfect and really there isn't a perfect binocular out there.

I remember the Trinovid sort of flattening out at the tops of the tubes and thought that was a nice ergonomic design. The Noctivids look like they have this as well.

Yep, I remember CA being controlled very well in the center in the Trinovid and that's really the important thing. I'm not looking at edges anyway.

One think I liked about the focus of the Trinnie was the texture on the focus wheels. I think I like this texture better than the Ultravid. It seems the same on the Noctivid, so they definitely borrowed from the previous Trinovid in their new Trinovid HD and Noctivid exterior designs.

Let us know if anything changes after another week or so about your perceptions of the 7x42 vs the others. I looked through a 7x42 EDG once briefly and was very impressed.
 
Agree that things don't need to be perfect and really there isn't a perfect binocular out there.

I remember the Trinovid sort of flattening out at the tops of the tubes and thought that was a nice ergonomic design. The Noctivids look like they have this as well.

Yep, I remember CA being controlled very well in the center in the Trinovid and that's really the important thing. I'm not looking at edges anyway.

One think I liked about the focus of the Trinnie was the texture on the focus wheels. I think I like this texture better than the Ultravid. It seems the same on the Noctivid, so they definitely borrowed from the previous Trinovid in their new Trinovid HD and Noctivid exterior designs.

Let us know if anything changes after another week or so about your perceptions of the 7x42 vs the others. I looked through a 7x42 EDG once briefly and was very impressed.

I also prefer the texture/molding of the Trinovid focus wheel over the UV. The UV also seems to have a rubber inlay, I prefer the molded form on Trinovid wheel.
I've gone a bit silly with this hobby, I can't afford what I've got but hey I don't drink or smoke. Any one binocular would be enough, I was aiming currently for a compact (8x25, got that one sorted out) and a 42 but now I don't want to let go of the UV or the Trinovid and then there's the EDG 8x32 which is probably better than all of them but doesn't fit in with my strategy either.
Anyway I'm having fun, I'm currently selling off some and no doubt more will go and some will stay.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 5 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top