Need advice for 10x42 Leica BL, Trinovid, or EDG? (1 Viewer)

I am looking to buy a 10x42 and need advice from members who have tried any these models, Trinovid, Leica BL and the Nikon EDG.

I recently tried the newest Leica Trinovid and was very impressed by it, easy comfortable view and very robust build. I had been watching for used Nikon EDG's for a month or so after reading amazing reviews on Allbinos but have never tried one.

I have also been looking at the Leica BL and can't seem to find any info any how they differ from the Trinovid. I love the classic look of the BL and if they have a similar view to the Trinovid I think I might be very happy with them.

I have tried the Swarovisions and the SLC and I LOVED the SLC but it is just outside my price range. I have also tried all of the Zeiss' and I am always amazed by how much detail they resolve but I cannot stand the cold colors they reproduce. The blue cast kills it for me. If the Conquest HD could come with a more neutral, color rich rendition I would be set.

At Cabelas I tried the Razor Hd and didn't feel like it was resolving nearly as much as the others nor nearly as contrasty, which is a shame because it is one of the nicest balanced binos I have ever tried. The Cabelas branded Meostar HD seemed pretty darn nice, with colors and resolution up there with the best I tried but the focus wheel felt cheap and poorly designed. It also seemed much heavier than the others.

I have also considered the Kowa Genesis 10.5x44 but feel that the Leica would be a better view.

Any help would be appreciated!!

Hi Arielelf,

I have a Leica 8x42 Ultravid BL with Black Leather covering and known as BlackLine. I also own a Nikon 10x32 EDG.

You may be talking about the new Leica Trinovid models rather than the original Leica Trinovid BN binoculars which were were introduced in 2000. These new Trinovid binoculars are Leica's 2nd line. Their FOV in the 10x42 is somewhat smaller than the BL and the Nikon.

The Ultravid 10x42s have been around since 2003 and have a lighter magnesium frame and a titanium focusing rod and a wider FOV than the Trinovids. Their optics were improved with Hi-Lux coatings and later with HD glass and after that with HD+ glass to combat Chromatic Aberration.

There are BR versions with rubber armoring which are heavier and somewhat larger than the BL (Black Leather) version which weighs under 25 ounces, a remarkably light weight for 42mm all metal binoculars. The Trinovid weighs 28 ounces. These BL versions did not receive the later HD glass which controls CA (Chromatic Aberration). I am not susceptible to CA and I am very satisfied with my 8x42 Ultravid BL and enjoy using it very much. They can still be purchased new or as Demo's at Camera Land in New York. The Demo's are a very good buy. I have one!

http://www.cameralandny.com/optics/site.pl?page=40272

The Nikon EDGs are much newer than the Leica BL binoculars you are considering and they have state of the art optics. If you have read the Allbinos review of the 10x42 you will understand why. Optically they can compete evenly or better with the 10x42s that Swarovski, Zeiss and Leica make. They also are in the same price range as the others. That means very expensive.

Are you considering purchasing new or used binoculars? That is important with the Nikons. The current Nikons as shown in Allbinos, are EDG II versions which replaced EDG I binoculars which had double hinges. These EDG I versions had problems with their armoring and their focus wheel.

Bob

Just out of vulgar curiosity, what are you not including Swarovski, or Zeiss in your search?

ceasar
Thank you for the info. I plan on buying either used for the Nikon or a demo for the Leicas. I am assuming that the glass in the Trinovid and Black Line are comparable even though the fov is different? Supposedly the Trinovids also do not have the HD glass of the UltraVid HD but I have read reports of them providing a nearly identical view as the HD Ultravids from a few different sources.

Hi Maljunulo
I mentioned that I tried the Swaros and love them but they are out of my price range. I can not stand the color renditions of all of the Zeiss bios I have tried, FL, Conquest HD, HT. All except the 8x32 Terra HD had cold grey colors. It is a shame because I feel like the resolution from the Zeiss' are fantastic.

I can't tell you anything about the BL, but I can tell you that the EDG II gives you a sharper central image than the Trinovid. Not by a lot, but the difference is there. The EDG's focus wheel is smoother in feel, and requires less pressure to turn (the Trinovid's is very good, but not the level of the EDG II). They feel differently in the hand, but one does not stand out over the other in that regard. The Nikon's case isn't anything to write home about, but the other accessories are very good. I can't tell you about the Trinovid's accessories.

I would not pay normal full retail for an EDG II, but my refurb is indistinguishable from new, and cost a lot less than a new Trinovid. If you are not willing to buy a refurb, then I would say that a new Trinovid will provide more performance for the dollar spent, and is the way I would go if I were to only buy a new example. However, I am hugely pleased with my 10x42 EDG II, and am happy I did not buy the Trinovid.

Arielelf said:

ceasar
Thank you for the info. I plan on buying either used for the Nikon or a demo for the Leicas. I am assuming that the glass in the Trinovid and Black Line are comparable even though the fov is different? Supposedly the Trinovids also do not have the HD glass of the UltraVid HD but I have read reports of them providing a nearly identical view as the HD Ultravids from a few different sources.

Hi Maljunulo
I mentioned that I tried the Swaros and love them but they are out of my price range. I can not stand the color renditions of all of the Zeiss bios I have tried, FL, Conquest HD, HT. All except the 8x32 Terra HD had cold grey colors. It is a shame because I feel like the resolution from the Zeiss' are fantastic.

Click to expand...

According to the information on the Eagle Optics website the Trinovids coatings are similar to the Ultravid BLs if not exactly the same. They have HDC coatings and HLS.

The new 10x42 is now on sale at Eagle Optics with Demos at $1199.00. $150.00 less than the price of BL Demos at Camera Land.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/binoculars/leica/leica-10x42-trinovid-binocular

Bob

Hi Arielelf,

I confess I'm struggling a little to get a mental picture of what you are looking for.

You seem particlar on sharpness but of the list you've mentioned the new Trinovid had the poorest effective resolution of them all by some margin. The Razor HD and the Kowa were an easy match for the top Swarovski or Zeiss models and the Kowa I think has the best contrast and CA control of any of them.

I would agree that the colour vibrancy of the FL is probably not the best but is does appear to have a versatility in tricky light conditions than some of the others lack. I would say the Conquest HD was quite different in that regard. The older Ultravids and Trinovids had a warmer bias to the view than most of the current offerings and some see that as having better contrast, yet you seem to like the SLC which is stronger, sometimes too strong in the blue, for my tastes.

I'm wondering if you looked at some of theses in very different light conditions? The light needs to be very good, not too strong or too dull to spot effective resolution differences. Sunny blue skys can favour a warmer colour balance, yet evening light a cooler one. A hazy view can alter preferences as well.

Going back to the original question, the EDG is a much better binocular to my eyes than the Trinovid, but it wouldn't be my favourite ergonomically. I personally might go back and have a look at another Razor HD. I particularly like the 10x50.

Good luck,

David

typo said:

Hi Arielelf,

I confess I'm struggling a little to get a mental picture of what you are looking for.

You seem particlar on sharpness but of the list you've mentioned the new Trinovid had the poorest effective resolution of them all by some margin. The Razor HD and the Kowa were an easy match for the top Swarovski or Zeiss models and the Kowa I think has the best contrast and CA control of any of them.

I would agree that the colour vibrancy of the FL is probably not the best but is does appear to have a versatility in tricky light conditions than some of the others lack. I would say the Conquest HD was quite different in that regard. The older Ultravids and Trinovids had a warmer bias to the view than most of the current offerings and some see that as having better contrast, yet you seem to like the SLC which is stronger, sometimes too strong in the blue, for my tastes.

I'm wondering if you looked at some of theses in very different light conditions? The light needs to be very good, not too strong or too dull to spot effective resolution differences. Sunny blue skys can favour a warmer colour balance, yet evening light a cooler one. A hazy view can alter preferences as well.

Going back to the original question, the EDG is a much better binocular to my eyes than the Trinovid, but it wouldn't be my favourite ergonomically. I personally might go back and have a look at another Razor HD. I particularly like the 10x50.

Good luck,

David

Click to expand...

I have tried Razors on multiple occasions and in full sunlight once at an optics event at Cape May and was not terribly impressed with them. Most of those were 8x42 and only the last one was a 10x42. I was trying out the razor and others inside a giant Cabelas store in Pennsylvania where I could compare many different binos using a chart nearly a hundred yards away, but like you said it was only in one kind of light. In the store the Trinovid seemed very relaxing to my eyes and I didn't have to strain to see details. Is the 10x50 Razor much better than the 10x42? I imaging that it must feel as light as a regular 10x42. They are so well balanced.
I was stopping in many different outdoor/hunting stores on a long road trip I was taking so I got to try many different models on different days.

The SLC seemed nearly perfect to me, very easy to the eye, sharp, very compact and light for a 10x42. The colors seemed very rich to me and I was able to directly com pair them to a conquest had 10x42 which clearly had significantly less color vibrancy and had a cold cast to the image. However the Conquest was very easy to the eye and extremely detailed.

I have owned a Leica 8x32 BN and found it not as sharp or as contrasty as my wife's 8x32 Conquest HD not my McKinley 8x42 which I have not been able to find a rival for so far out of many binos that I have bought to try and replace it.

I was able to try a 10x42 McKinley on my trip and was surprised at how aweful it performed. I'm not sure if it is due to being a really bad copy or if the 8x is just much better than the 10x?

I might give the 10.5x44 Kowa Genesis a try but I wear glasses and have read reports of glasses wearers having issues with it. Is anyone using it with glasses and happy with it? I tried the 8x33 Genesis and found it not as sharp as my McKinley or the Conquest. Also not really much more color vibrant than the Conquest either.

Obviously I don't know that Cabelas but I personally wouldn't trust indoor testing. Normally the light levels are inadequate for optimum acuity and the spiky spectum on many lamps can give misleading results. I wouldn't fault the Razor HDs I've tried for effective resolution but there was a clarity to the 10x50 view I particularly liked. I found the tapered barrel design and weight relaxing in the hand and steadier than many. I like the colour rendition but the blue levels probably don't match the Swarovskis.

The Kowa Genesis is a big heavy binocular but in some regards, possibly one of the best on the market in my view. On a scorchingly bright summers's day and on a particlarly dull winter's day it seemed to be able to extract a level of detail that the other top marks couldn't. However in normal viewing conditions it does lack the colour vibrancy of some of the other top models. Some seem to to think that a replacement might be iminent, but we've thought that before. I han no problem with either the 8.5 or 10.5 with my close fitting glasses.

I know many here like the Conquest HD but I'd put it on the step below a number of the others mentioned. I've seen a bit of variability on sharpness and not quite a match on other points.

There is a new generation of Japanese made binoclars that are sparking a lot of interest, but I've not seen them yet. In the US it might be worth looking at the Maven models if you can.

David

Hi Arielelf,

If you like the Trinovid have you considered the Ultravid HD? I bought mine from Kauffman Knives and Optics a few weeks back. They have one pair remaining and selling for $1699 which is a bargain IMO and not much more than the price of Trinovid. As you know your optics it won't be news to you that UV HD is slightly better than Trinovid optically and much better in build quality and looks.

PhilR. said:

I would not pay normal full retail for an EDG II, but my refurb is indistinguishable from new, and cost a lot less than a new Trinovid. If you are not willing to buy a refurb, then I would say that a new Trinovid will

Click to expand...

I see some refurbised Edge II's on eBay sold from Japan with no manufacturer warranty. Did you get yours from there? I was looking for a 8X32 EDG II and could't find any.

it's very different binoculars you are looking at, concerning size, shape, weight etc.
and you tell us nothing about what you are going to use them for?
astronomy, birds, events? your needs seem a bit diffuse to me,
I wouldn't say that color rendition is the first thing to look at when buying binoculars,
probably the last IMO, ergonomics, focuser, eye cups, eye relief, weight, price, warranty are things I would look at first, for example, the Kowas are good, but would you really like 940g binoculars hanging round your neck all day?
binoculars are very much like pants or shoes, you better try before buy, and buying them on recommendations from others are rarely successful..

Vespobuteo said:

it's very different binoculars you are looking at, concerning size, shape, weight etc.
and you tell us nothing about what you are going to use them for?
astronomy, birds, events? your needs seem a bit diffuse to me,
I wouldn't say that color rendition is the first thing to look at when buying binoculars,
probably the last IMO, ergonomics, focuser, eye cups, eye relief, weight, price, warranty are things I would look at first, for example, the Kowas are good, but would you really like 940g binoculars hanging round your neck all day?
binoculars are very much like pants or shoes, you better try before buy, and buying them on recommendations from others are rarely successful..

Click to expand...

The binoculars will be for birding.
To me color is next to sharpness in order of importance. I have bought and sold a lot of binoculars searching for one that makes me feel somewhat satisfied and have ended up with the Leupold McKinley 8x42 which I had actually sold early on after deciding that it was too heavy. A few months,and a few binoculars later, I discovered that the weight was not as much of an issue as I thought so I bought one again. The image quality was much better than everything else I had tried within my price range. I Still have one somewhat major issue with it in that I get blackouts sometimes which is annoying and I sometimes have to concentrate to get very fine detail. The color rendition in these though is absolutely fantastic which leads me to look longer and enjoy the view.
I have decided that I would like to try a 10x. I think that the extra reach would be very helpful for identifying birds. You are right though that build quality and weight can be an issue since I did think that the Meostar HD was a great view but just didn't feel right in my hands.
I am somewhat drawn to the robust build of the Trinovid and like the build of an older 8x trinovid BN that I had. I am even more drawn to the vintage look of the Leica Black Leather line. At the end of the day though , if the image quality is lacking I know that I will be unhappy no matter how nice the binocular looks or how well it handles. That's how I have ended up with the very ugly looking giant block of rubber which is the McKinley.

Arielelf said:

The binoculars will be for birding.
To me color is next to sharpness in order of importance. I have bought and sold a lot of binoculars searching for one that makes me feel somewhat satisfied and have ended up with the Leupold McKinley 8x42 which I had actually sold early on after deciding that it was too heavy. A few months,and a few binoculars later, I discovered that the weight was not as much of an issue as I thought so I bought one again. The image quality was much better than everything else I had tried within my price range. I Still have one somewhat major issue with it in that I get blackouts sometimes which is annoying and I sometimes have to concentrate to get very fine detail. The color rendition in these though is absolutely fantastic which leads me to look longer and enjoy the view.
I have decided that I would like to try a 10x. I think that the extra reach would be very helpful for identifying birds. You are right though that build quality and weight can be an issue since I did think that the Meostar HD was a great view but just didn't feel right in my hands.
I am somewhat drawn to the robust build of the Trinovid and like the build of an older 8x trinovid BN that I had. I am even more drawn to the vintage look of the Leica Black Leather line. At the end of the day though , if the image quality is lacking I know that I will be unhappy no matter how nice the binocular looks or how well it handles. That's how I have ended up with the very ugly looking giant block of rubber which is the McKinley.

Click to expand...

you seem to have pretty high quality standards,
and prefer somewhat more vivid colors,
so nikon or leica will probably be a good choice,

if you can accept not having HD glass (slightly more CA), the latest Trinovids are very nice binos, and stylish looking to, close focus might be a bit on the long side at 3.5 meter, but the ergonomics are very good.

the Nikon EDG II, I would say, have the better optics of the two, ED-glass, but not as stylish perhaps,
personally I just don't get by with the EDG II:s, they just don't fit my hands, and they feel heavy holding.
the view with the 10x is not optimal witch glasses either, but I have pretty high demands on ER.

if bought new, I think the EDG II are overpriced in the US,
in Europe the they can be found much cheaper compared to the other alphas, (about 20-25%)

so buying a refurbished pair on Ebay would probably give you better bang for the buck,