Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

New Ultravids coming

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.
Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 16:19   #1
hinnark
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,141
New Ultravids coming

Hi,

according to a catalogue of hunting equipment there are new Ultravids to come soon. It is said they have FL lenses and hydrophobic coatings such as 'Lotutec' or 'Easy to clean'.

Steve
hinnark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 16:29   #2
dipped
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: suffolk
Posts: 1,152
Ooh I wonder if they'll be at the (uk) Birdfair.

Nev
dipped is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 20:39   #3
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,395
Can Swaro EFLs be far behind? Hold on to your wallets folks
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 21:25   #4
hinnark
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,141
As far as I can see there are only the 42 and 50mm Ultravids concerned. They call Ultravid 8x42 BR HD. All other specifications like old Ultravids/Trinovids. Prices are now like Swaro ELs.

Steve
hinnark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 22:32   #5
chartwell99
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: houston, texas, usa
Posts: 621
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Can Swaro EFLs be far behind? Hold on to your wallets folks
If this trend continues, the only reading material of any value to an aspiring birder will be the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal. I have to wonder whether Leica/Swaro and Zeiss haven't put themselves on a path to price themselves out of the birding market altogether.
chartwell99 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 22:57   #6
matt green
Drunken Hearted Man
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 5,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by chartwell99 View Post
I have to wonder whether Leica/Swaro and Zeiss haven't put themselves on a path to price themselves out of the birding market altogether.

Anyone care to hazard a guess as to how much they will cost?

...£1299???

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 2nd August 2007, 23:13   #7
Paul Godolphin
Member

 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 151
Anyone Else Feeling Brave Enough?

Ok, I'll be the first to admit the unthinkable...........

I CAN'T TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN FLOURITE AND 'NORMAL' LENSES!

Phew, there. I said it. That was the birding equivalent of a gay 'coming out'! But seriously, is there anyone else out there brave enough to admit the same thing? Because I'm well known for my ultra critical reviews of the highest-end equipment, and I'm the most fastidious obsessive-compulsive where it comes to optics. So I'd LOVE to spout about the miniscule differences of perceived image quality between the two types of glass. But I just honestly can't find any difference at all, in any light.

I rather agree with all the previous writers, that maybe this is an exercise in rendering the saturated binocular market more 'dynamic' and generating millions of dollars for the manufacturers as we all go crazy selling-off our latest $3000 optics to buy the identical items for $5000 because they are supposedly 'better' glass. Very sorry to hear that this is happening.

Perhaps Leica might consider a permanent repair to their ongoing 'JERKY FOCUS WHEELS FAULT' before they start adding new glass? My new Ultravids are abandoned in disgust in a closet at my house in the UK because they're unusable. I'm now birding in the Pacific Islands with the cheap pair of Zeiss that I had to buy instead. The Ultravids stick and jam, and the juddering from the focus wheel makes them impossible to use because the vibration blurs the image so I can't find the focus point. Leica have known about this fault for several years (see many Birdforum postings), but are happy to continue selling the latest models with the fault still built in. Hooray, now we can pay even more and have an FL Ultravid that we can't see through either!!
'Juddering Flourite'...... I can't wait!

Paul

Last edited by Paul Godolphin : Thursday 2nd August 2007 at 23:15.
Paul Godolphin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 3rd August 2007, 02:10   #8
KorHaan
Forum Member

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilversum, The Netherlands
Posts: 1,235
I'll stick to my 7x Fl's for a while.

I would be far happier if Leica ( or Zeiss, or Swaro ) would come up with a stabilized bin for allround use. The optics are already that good that a fluorite Ultravid won't be a major seller IMHO. Handshake will spoil the very best optics, I even must work hard to hold my 7x steady at higher windspeeds.

Paying a lot of money for slightly better lenses makes no sense. Oh, and for hydrofobic coatings: useless if you wear eyeglasses. I can only keep the rain off my specs by wearing a cap or hat, and then I can't reach the focus wheel.
I'd prefer to see the ergonomics bettered first ( double focus wheel ) than a new generation of optics.

Greetings, Ronald
KorHaan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 3rd August 2007, 02:53   #9
FrankD
Registered User
 
FrankD's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eastern Pennsylvania
Posts: 8,412
Maybe it was just me but I could have sworn that I saw it mentioned where Leica had been using ED style glass in their bins for many years now. If that was the case then this new "addition" would seem like nothing more than advertising what the binoculars always had.

As always though I look forward to taking a look through them to see how much the FL glass improves the image.

A similar situation comes to mind.... Leupold added "FL glass" to their Golden Ring bins but I have yet to hear of one person who has commented on the improvement. In their case I am guessing that without reworking the weight and eyecup size the FL glass just isn't enough of an improvement over the older model to comment on. In the case of the Ultravid I would be willing to wager though that they will be just as impressive as the non-FL Ultravids. If they can keep the vivid "Leica colors" while adding the sharpness of the Zeiss FLs then they should really be something.

I wonder if they are going to just keep the same basic optical package and just use the different glass (aka Trinovid to Ultravid) or if they are actually going to redesign the optical design parameters (eye relief, field of view, etc...) as well.
FrankD is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 3rd August 2007, 03:06   #10
308CAL
Forum Member

 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: not up north
Posts: 315
i thought magnification had to be higher than 7x,8x, or 10x to really benefit from FL glass???
308CAL is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 3rd August 2007, 08:07   #11
Grandad Too
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 7
GrandadToo

Is it HD glass, which does not say anything about the glass type or is it Fluorite, which is CaF2 (which would be too expensive), Is it ED glass, which has similar properties to FL glass, but does not contain fluorine ions.

What is it or just marketing talk.
Grandad Too is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 3rd August 2007, 08:35   #12
hinnark
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,141
Quote:
Originally Posted by KorHaan View Post
I'll stick to my 7x Fl's for a while.

I would be far happier if Leica ( or Zeiss, or Swaro ) would come up with a stabilized bin for allround use. The optics are already that good that a fluorite Ultravid won't be a major seller IMHO. Handshake will spoil the very best optics, I even must work hard to hold my 7x steady at higher windspeeds.
Greetings, Ronald
Ronald,

I very much agree and hope the European makers realize the need of IS before too many birdwatchers realize it. Still they benifit by the prejudices of those who never tried IS binoculars.
If we take a closer look at the Ultravids I would say there are some models that show very small colour fringes and some virtually not. The 50 mm and the 7x42 models have so little CA that in these cases FL is really more of a marketing thing. But the 32 mm and the 8x42 and 10x42 could benefit by ED optics.

Steve
hinnark is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 6th August 2007, 21:33   #13
Swissboy
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
Swissboy's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sempach, Switzerland
Posts: 3,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Godolphin View Post
..... Leica have known about this fault for several years (see many Birdforum postings), but are happy to continue selling the latest models with the fault still built in. Hooray, now we can pay even more and have an FL Ultravid that we can't see through either!!
'Juddering Flourite'...... I can't wait!

Paul
Paul, I don't always agree with your harsh criticism, but this one is so very much to the point! Congratulations.
It's so terrible that I had a good laugh about your fitting wording! But only because I managed to avoid those unsatisfactory models.
__________________
Robert
--PS: That's a Sooty Falcon on the avatar, photo taken near Sharm el Sheik, Egypt. My highest priority raptor at the time.
What's your species on the avatar? I often have no clue
!
Swissboy is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 6th August 2007, 21:41   #14
Swissboy
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
Swissboy's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sempach, Switzerland
Posts: 3,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by hinnark View Post
.. I ...hope the European makers realize the need of IS before too many birdwatchers realize it. Still they benifit by the prejudices of those who never tried IS binoculars.
...Steve

That IS should, on the other hand, not add much to the weight! That this is possible can be checked in the amazing Panasonic FZ8 camera. Even if binoculars need that stabilizer for two barrels, it should keep them in their original weight range.
__________________
Robert
--PS: That's a Sooty Falcon on the avatar, photo taken near Sharm el Sheik, Egypt. My highest priority raptor at the time.
What's your species on the avatar? I often have no clue
!
Swissboy is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 6th August 2007, 23:18   #15
medinabrit
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: medina ohio
Posts: 385
Paul i,ll be the second to admit it . I also cannot tell the difference.
I had both the 60 nikon ED scope & the non ED version of the same scope
& i couldn,t tell the difference .Of course it could be my eyes .
But i doupt it.
Wow will i get some flack on this admittance.
Brian.
medinabrit is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th August 2007, 01:41   #16
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,395
I think it's easy to miss the point. Low dispersion glass can, but does not necessarily, improve the view. I can only say from experience that the standard Swift 804ED differs for the better from the standard 804. There are verifiable technical reasons to explain the difference, and they include more than just the presence of ED glass. The whole design was re-optimized to take advantage of it. Based on anecdotal evidence and some physical data, however, it appears that the 820ED is not much of an improvement over the standard 820. This may be because ED glass was simply substituted without other necessary refinements, such as air-spacing, or the differences masked by manufacturing variations.

I can't speak to the Zeiss FL series, since I don't own any, but from what I've heard they have similar properties to the 804ED. You need to know what to look for, but once seen it's hard to forget. The series was designed with the glass as an integral part. Given this way of thinking, the question in my mind is the extent to which Leica redesigned the system to get the most out of the low dispersion glass. Fortunately, it should be possible to compare the old and new models (for the fortunate subset of the population rich enough to own both). I'd be very surprised if it were only introduced for marketing purposes — but then again it wasn't applied to the entire series, which makes me suspicious.

As for the much-maligned, so-called "ratchety," focusing of the Ultravids, it's only a deficiency if you don't like how it feels. Personally, I like it — a lot. Besides, my cousin is a tribologist — and he likes it.

Blue skies,
Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman

Last edited by elkcub : Tuesday 7th August 2007 at 02:37.
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 7th August 2007, 08:12   #17
ThoLa
Forum Member

 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Given this way of thinking, the question in my mind is the extent to which Leica redesigned the system to get the most out of the low dispersion glass. Fortunately, it should be possible to compare the old and new models (for the fortunate subset of the population rich enough to own both). I'd be very surprised if it were only introduced for marketing purposes ....

Blue skies,
Ed

What puzzles me about this discussion is the fact that Leica say they have been using ED glass types in all their models, even in the discontinued Trinovid models.
It's explicitly stated in their catalogue, and it was confirmed by their headquarters when I phoned them up to learn more.

If this has been the case all along, why bang the big drum about a new type of ED glass (flouride-doped glass) now???

Honi soit qui mal y pense ...

Tom
ThoLa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th August 2007, 12:00   #18
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThoLa View Post
What puzzles me about this discussion is the fact that Leica say they have been using ED glass types in all their models, even in the discontinued Trinovid models.
It's explicitly stated in their catalogue, and it was confirmed by their headquarters when I phoned them up to learn more.

If this has been the case all along, why bang the big drum about a new type of ED glass (flouride-doped glass) now???

Honi soit qui mal y pense ...

Tom
Tom,

Zeiss has demonstrated the benefits of "fluoride glass" in controlling CA and I believe all major competitors will soon incorporate the glass in their designs. All other things remaining equal, I'd love to see the CA in my Ultravid reduced to FL levels.

John

Last edited by Pileatus : Tuesday 7th August 2007 at 18:59.
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 7th August 2007, 17:57   #19
ThoLa
Forum Member

 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Traynor View Post
Tom,

Zeiss has demonstrated the benefits of "fluoride glass" in controlling CA and I believe all major competitors will soon incorporate the glass in their designs.
John
Which means that it wasn't very clever of Zeiss to let everybody know the composition of their magic glass.
Or maybe it was an act of charity ....

Tom
ThoLa is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 03:15   #20
Paul Godolphin
Member

 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by medinabrit View Post
Paul i,ll be the second to admit it . I also cannot tell the difference. Wow will i get some flack on this admittance. Brian.
Thanks Brian. At least there's two brave men in the world! Wish I could tell the difference, I feel so inadequate! ha ha! Nice to hear from Medina- used to stay with a pal in Lodi and we used to drop into town from time to time. All the best from a fellow 'blind man'. (I'm now in New Caledonia, maybe the light's better here?)
cheers Paul
Paul Godolphin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 03:24   #21
Paul Godolphin
Member

 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 151
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swissboy View Post
Paul, I don't always agree with your harsh criticism, but this one is so very much to the point! Congratulations.
It's so terrible that I had a good laugh about your fitting wording! But only because I managed to avoid those unsatisfactory models.
Thanks Robert, good to hear from you. Yes, it's sad when a company can make such a brilliant product, but spoil it with an unneccessary small fault like this. The Ultravids are great glasses, but for the sake of a 5 cent teflon washer, they're no good. I guess it is MORE upsetting when a really good product has a fault - just because it is potentially so very good. If a rotten pair of $50 chinese binocs were faulty, I wouldn't care. It's rather like seeing a beautiful woman with a big wart on her face, it seems more tragic than if she'd been ugly anyhow! That's life.....
good luck Paul
Paul Godolphin is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 12:26   #22
Pileatus
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 2,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Godolphin View Post
Thanks Robert, good to hear from you. Yes, it's sad when a company can make such a brilliant product, but spoil it with an unneccessary small fault like this. The Ultravids are great glasses, but for the sake of a 5 cent teflon washer, they're no good. I guess it is MORE upsetting when a really good product has a fault - just because it is potentially so very good. If a rotten pair of $50 chinese binocs were faulty, I wouldn't care. It's rather like seeing a beautiful woman with a big wart on her face, it seems more tragic than if she'd been ugly anyhow! That's life.....
good luck Paul
Paul,

I own an Ultravid 7X42 and your conclusion that "they're no good" because Leica omitted a 5 cent washer is simply ridiculous. The focus mechanism on mine is not “silky smooth”, but it’s good enough to use the binocular one-handed…including adjusting the focus.

I’ve said this before, but it’s worth repeating: The centerfield view through my Ultravid 7X42 is as good as it gets and the binocular is obviously designed to withstand extreme hardship.

John
Pileatus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 15:33   #23
PYRTLE
Registered User
 
PYRTLE's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: North Norfolk
Posts: 2,307
It's rather like seeing a beautiful woman with a big wart on her face, it seems more tragic than if she'd been ugly anyhow! That's life.....

Yeah....I get your point in a sort of way that the blemish spoils something from being perfect to the eye of the beholder. vALID POINT portrayed in an odd sort of way...LOLs.
However, beauty should be more than skin deep and with most of us we love our beloveds because of who and what they are not if they look like Angelina Jolie! I wish.

I love my girlfriend almost as much as my FLs.
PYRTLE is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 16:05   #24
Pinewood
New York correspondent
 
Pinewood's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York, USA
Posts: 3,725
The first time I used a Zeiss FL, I thought that the colour was spectacular, extraordinarily vibrant. I am not one to notice Chromatic Aberration but I still think that the FL glass added to the resolution of the image and may have reduced color bleeding. Many users find that the FL increases the gradations of colour. The contrast was high and shadow detail was second to none, in my experience. I should add that the 8x32 FL has replaced my Leica BN, even though the Leica's slightly narrower field had a little less edge fall off.

Regarding the durability of Leicas vs. Zeiss, please see the following thread:
http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=89950&page=2 posts 42-45.

Finally, Leica's alleged jerky focussing may be either sample variation or a product of the users' accustomed focussing. I know fully well how particular bird watchers are in their own proclivities but my Leica BN caused me no concern in focussing.

In sum, should Leica add FL and Lotutech, there may be many who will see the difference.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood

Last edited by Pinewood : Wednesday 8th August 2007 at 21:46.
Pinewood is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 8th August 2007, 21:14   #25
matt green
Drunken Hearted Man
 
matt green's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 5,268
Tried a few ultravids since they first came out and never handled a dudd yet, last one was an absolute gem and I want a pair badly!!

Am tempted to whore myself to secure an 8x42!!!

Matt
matt green is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone using 10x25 Ultravids? Sancho Leica 37 Monday 18th December 2006 22:48
Leather Ultravids Swissboy Leica 14 Tuesday 11th October 2005 22:15
Ultravids on the way hotroach Leica 8 Thursday 25th August 2005 15:07
ultravids - odd question postcardcv Leica 17 Monday 15th August 2005 12:27
Anyone using the 10x50 Ultravids? Marley Leica 6 Friday 20th May 2005 02:42

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.21130610 seconds with 37 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:37.