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.

7x42 Ultravid

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Sunday 24th March 2019, 22:10   #51
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by mwhogue View Post
Tom,

Outstanding post and well written. Must admit to being prejudiced as I love the UV HD + in 7x42, 10x32 and 10x50. Panning /scanning with the 7 is especially addictive at middle distance. My guess is this is due in part to the wide FOV and excellent DOF. My 7 may be a mechanical cherry in that its focus knob is better than the others and very nearly as good as EDG. It's a definite factor in making the 7 my favorite between the three.
Well my 7x42HD+ isn't so fortunate as yours. It's focus knob is nowhere near as smooth as my 8x42 Trinovid (2012-15) and not like my 8x32 EDG.
I had a thought about Leica's decision in using a titanium rod on the UV not being a particularly good idea. While titanium is a great material I would think any weight saving would be negligible on this component with no other advantages over stainless steel plus titanium suffers from galling whereby stainless should perform much more smoothly also considering it's a greaseless system.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 25th March 2019, 08:11   #52
Mike F
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Finland
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by F88 View Post
Well my 7x42HD+ isn't so fortunate as yours. It's focus knob is nowhere near as smooth as my 8x42 Trinovid (2012-15) and not like my 8x32 EDG.
I had a thought about Leica's decision in using a titanium rod on the UV not being a particularly good idea. While titanium is a great material I would think any weight saving would be negligible on this component with no other advantages over stainless steel plus titanium suffers from galling whereby stainless should perform much more smoothly also considering it's a greaseless system.
I don't know whether this is an additional reason or not, but I think titanium expands and contracts less with temperature change than steel. That could give a more consistent performance in temperature extremes.

My 7x42 HD+ has a very good focus wheel, but I agree that the 8x42 Trinovid feels better.
Mike F is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 25th March 2019, 08:54   #53
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
I don't know whether this is an additional reason or not, but I think titanium expands and contracts less with temperature change than steel. That could give a more consistent performance in temperature extremes.

My 7x42 HD+ has a very good focus wheel, but I agree that the 8x42 Trinovid feels better.
Who knows? The use of titanium components sounds cool if nothing else.
I'm not sure whether the expansion/contraction thing would come into play at any reasonable operating temps for a pair of binoculars?
I think my 7x42 focus is likely just sample variation more so than the titanium but perhaps a steel rod would run more smoothly given the friction on my sample. It's not a show stopper and is still well usable but the Trinovid is much smoother and requires less force while in comparison to the EDG is a totally different feeling again.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 00:12   #54
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 103
So Leica St Honoré very nicely phoned after 10 days to tell me that after-sales see nothing wrong with my UVHD, I asked them to check the watertightness and nitrogen fill before sending them back, given the number of years they might have been in a display case, and to provide a written note to say that they've been checked. They said they would send the factory an email. Let's see how it goes. On the phone Leica are extremely user-friendly and very interactive.


Edmund
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 09:36   #55
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Edmund,

I hope they return soon and in a nice clean order. The 7x42 is a very nice binocular indeed.
Please let us know how you get on with them upon return.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 13:40   #56
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
I don't know whether this is an additional reason or not, but I think titanium expands and contracts less with temperature change than steel. That could give a more consistent performance in temperature extremes.

My 7x42 HD+ has a very good focus wheel, but I agree that the 8x42 Trinovid feels better.
Better, yes! But marginally so. That's the price one pays for the perfect central diopter adjustment. Personally, I'll take the slightly less smooth focus for a central adjustment that is the easiest in the market to adjust and stays put when set.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 16:16   #57
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,278
That's odd thinking to me - I might use my diopter once a month, if that, while I use my focus hundreds of times a day. I'll take the smooth focus for $100 Alex.

I have 15 bins with all manners of diopters, none of which have any ''movement'' issues, apart from having to make incremental changes once in a blue moon.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 16:36   #58
Gilmore Girl
Beth
 
Gilmore Girl's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 2,660
I have very nice smooth focus on my HD+ and had similar smooth focus action with the 2012 Trinovid I used to own. I haven't had any changes in the 3+ years yet with the HD+ focus thankfully; still working well.

I also got lucky with the Swaro CL I just purchased (old version). It's smoother than the other one I had originally (6 yrs ago). That one had a couple of gritty spots in it.
Gilmore Girl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2013 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 16:51   #59
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by james holdsworth View Post
That's odd thinking to me - I might use my diopter once a month, if that, while I use my focus hundreds of times a day. I'll take the smooth focus for $100 Alex.

I have 15 bins with all manners of diopters, none of which have any ''movement'' issues, apart from having to make incremental changes once in a blue moon.
Matter of taste I suppose. We're NOT talking about a focuser that isn't smooth to start with which an UVHD+ IS which is kind of the implication. The Trinovid HD diopter has a tendency to move. Case closed. The EDG diopter is quirky to set. The HT is harder to set than most central diopter adjustments. A step back from the excellent FL. The FL, UV series, and SV are in a class of their own as far as setting the diopter CORRECTLY and easily.

I own both the Trinovid HD AND a couple of UVHD+s so it's a no-brainer comment for me to make as well as many other binoculars of many different makes. Some diopter adjustments don't say put as well as others.
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 19:02   #60
Mike F
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Finland
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
Better, yes! But marginally so. That's the price one pays for the perfect central diopter adjustment. Personally, I'll take the slightly less smooth focus for a central adjustment that is the easiest in the market to adjust and stays put when set.
Chuck, I was referring to the 2012-15 Trinovid, not the HD. The difference in the focus compared to the UVHD+ is very marginal, but with the nod to the Trinovid (with the stainless steel instead of the titanium rod). However, I totally agree with you that a central locking diopter that doesn't need constant checking is worth trading a little extra smoothness in the focuser for. One gets used to such small differences (given, as you say, that the focuser is very good), but a diopter which moves is a constant PITA!
Mike F is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 26th March 2019, 20:19   #61
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
Chuck, I was referring to the 2012-15 Trinovid, not the HD. The difference in the focus compared to the UVHD+ is very marginal, but with the nod to the Trinovid (with the stainless steel instead of the titanium rod). However, I totally agree with you that a central locking diopter that doesn't need constant checking is worth trading a little extra smoothness in the focuser for. One gets used to such small differences (given, as you say, that the focuser is very good), but a diopter which moves is a constant PITA!
I may have made it sound worse than it is? While the focus on my 2012-15 Trinovid is much smoother and more fluid, the UV isn't terrible but I definitely prefer the Trinovid in that regard.
My first copy of the EDG (single bridge) had a wandering diopter which was terrible.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 00:44   #62
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,278
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
Matter of taste I suppose. We're NOT talking about a focuser that isn't smooth to start with which an UVHD+ IS which is kind of the implication. The Trinovid HD diopter has a tendency to move. Case closed. The EDG diopter is quirky to set. The HT is harder to set than most central diopter adjustments. A step back from the excellent FL. The FL, UV series, and SV are in a class of their own as far as setting the diopter CORRECTLY and easily.

I own both the Trinovid HD AND a couple of UVHD+s so it's a no-brainer comment for me to make as well as many other binoculars of many different makes. Some diopter adjustments don't say put as well as others.
Horses for courses I suppose. All of my bins have smooth focus and non-wandering, easy to set diopters. Just lucky I guess.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 01:17   #63
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by F88 View Post
Well my 7x42HD+ isn't so fortunate as yours. It's focus knob is nowhere near as smooth as my 8x42 Trinovid (2012-15) and not like my 8x32 EDG.
I had a thought about Leica's decision in using a titanium rod on the UV not being a particularly good idea. While titanium is a great material I would think any weight saving would be negligible on this component with no other advantages over stainless steel plus titanium suffers from galling whereby stainless should perform much more smoothly also considering it's a greaseless system.
F88:
I am questioning your use of what metals are used in Leica binoculars.
Your thing about galling between SS and titanium is absurd. Binocular
focus shafts would never suffer galling in this area.

Any difference in focusing has absolutely nothing to do with that.


Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 01:55   #64
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
F88:
I am questioning your use of what metals are used in Leica binoculars.
Your thing about galling between SS and titanium is absurd. Binocular
focus shafts would never suffer galling in this area.

Any difference in focusing has absolutely nothing to do with that.


Jerry
Jerry,

I agree that in this application it would not gall to any alarming degree. However if you've ever played with titanium, I have, you would note that it very much will gall for example on threaded surfaces both of titanium, it's a property of titanium some may or may not know. I've even seen sparks fly off components being mated or unmated and there's always a nasty feel to it that you'd never get with stainless.
Absurd? You come across quite unusual but I'm certain I'm not the first person to tell you this.
There is zero benefit in Leica using titanium in this component and it could be argued against but once again it does sound cool because they use that stuff on jets and space craft right? Exactly how much insignificant weight benefit or otherwise comes from using this material?
My point was, which I thought I made clear, was that my UV has increased friction (which I can hear and feel) in it's focus over my Trinovid. I put this down to sample variation although I do think that if it were using a stainless shaft under the same slight misalignment or what have you that it may very well run more smoothly. Obviously perfect construction would be the best option regardless of material.
Anyway for the most part my UV is perfectly acceptable.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 02:33   #65
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 103
Maybe a drop-in 3d printed nylon bearing -or even a piece of Lego Technics- would be a suitable mate for a titanium rod - just as you can change eyecups the user could replace the bearing if needed.

Edmund
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 11:35   #66
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,362
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
Chuck, I was referring to the 2012-15 Trinovid, not the HD. The difference in the focus compared to the UVHD+ is very marginal, but with the nod to the Trinovid (with the stainless steel instead of the titanium rod). However, I totally agree with you that a central locking diopter that doesn't need constant checking is worth trading a little extra smoothness in the focuser for. One gets used to such small differences (given, as you say, that the focuser is very good), but a diopter which moves is a constant PITA!


At one time I had all three of Leica's latest models, the Trinovid, UVHD+, and the Trinovid HD. I sure couldn't tell much difference in the focus adjustment between the previous Trinovid and the UVHD+. To me they were practically identical. The main difference I had found was weight with the Trinovid at 29.5oz, UVHD+ at 27oz, and the Trinovid HD at 25.5oz(all 8X). The only reason I got rid of the Trinovids(had both 8X and 10X) is I felt like they were duplications of what I had and I like a little weight savings when I can get it.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3183.JPG
Views:	56
Size:	100.3 KB
ID:	690899  
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 18:13   #67
Tringa45
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 252
F88 is absolutely right about the galling potential of Titanium. See 2nd. § of Introduction here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galling. I have even heard of screwed Titanium case backs welding themselves to the Titanium watch case.
Jerry's gut reactions are sometimes a little reminiscent of someone else in his country .

John
Tringa45 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 27th March 2019, 19:32   #68
Mike F
Registered User

 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Finland
Posts: 178
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post


At one time I had all three of Leica's latest models, the Trinovid, UVHD+, and the Trinovid HD. I sure couldn't tell much difference in the focus adjustment between the previous Trinovid and the UVHD+. To me they were practically identical. The main difference I had found was weight with the Trinovid at 29.5oz, UVHD+ at 27oz, and the Trinovid HD at 25.5oz(all 8X). The only reason I got rid of the Trinovids(had both 8X and 10X) is I felt like they were duplications of what I had and I like a little weight savings when I can get it.
Chuck, like I said in my previous post, the difference in the focus adjustment on the Trinovid and the UVHD+ is very marginal. Very probably most people wouldn't notice going from one to the other unless it was pointed out.

I agree with you about the weight issue. I find the difference between the Trinovid 8x and the UVHD+ 7x (which I think is a bit lighter than the 8x) quite noticeable, so I totally understand that someone might prefer the Trinovid HD over the Trinovid purely on those grounds. However, the weight of the Trinovid 8 x 42 is not an issue for me, and in fact I quite like the fact that it feels very substantial. Also, I can happily keep it and enjoy it as it's my only 8x bin!
Mike F is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 02:35   #69
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tringa45 View Post
F88 is absolutely right about the galling potential of Titanium. See 2nd. § of Introduction here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galling. I have even heard of screwed Titanium case backs welding themselves to the Titanium watch case.
Jerry's gut reactions are sometimes a little reminiscent of someone else in his country .

John
John: Don't dismiss my comments, you are way out of line, in commenting
about my country.

For the use in binoculars titanium does offer a benefit in a lower weight,
and any corrosion difference is negligible. As in, there is no difference.
I have a watch with a titanium case, I wonder if you do.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 02:43   #70
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,036
F88:

We are talking about binoculars on this web site, and not about airplanes.

Your deep thoughts about differences in focus because of construction materials in the various
Leica models is pointed out above. I am not sure why you carry on with it.

Leica makes some nice binoculars, and I will leave it at that.

Jerry
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 02:51   #71
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
F88:

We are talking about binoculars on this web site, and not about airplanes.

Your deep thoughts about differences in focus because of construction materials in the various
Leica models is pointed out above. I am not sure why you carry on with it.

Leica makes some nice binoculars, and I will leave it at that.

Jerry
Jerry,

Go and kick the cat.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 02:55   #72
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
John: Don't dismiss my comments, you are way out of line, in commenting
about my country.

For the use in binoculars titanium does offer a benefit in a lower weight,
and any corrosion difference is negligible. As in, there is no difference.
I have a watch with a titanium case, I wonder if you do.

Jerry
Many dismiss your comments and you wonder why?
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 02:55   #73
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,036
Quote:
Originally Posted by F88 View Post
Jerry,

Go and kick the cat.
You are more fun, and deserve it.
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 03:00   #74
F88
Registered User
 
F88's Avatar

 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: East Coast
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by NDhunter View Post
You are more fun, and deserve it.
I'd suggest you'd find yourself biting off more than you can chew.
F88 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 28th March 2019, 03:07   #75
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,036
I will leave it at this, go stick your wing tip where the sun doesn't shine.
NDhunter is offline  
Reply With Quote
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
Leica 7x42 Ultravid HD vs. Zeiss 7x42 BGATP Elmer Fudd Leica 60 Friday 17th June 2016 19:27
7x42 FL vs 7x42 Ultravid Marley Zeiss 0 Sunday 13th May 2007 04:10
7x42 Discoverer vs 7x42 Zeiss FLvs 7x42 Ultravid? maverick Bushnell - Bausch & Lomb 8 Saturday 4th June 2005 21:54
Ultravid 7x42 vs FL 7x42 Jonathan B. Binoculars 8 Tuesday 23rd November 2004 15:30
Leica 7X42 BN versus Ultravid 7X42 Pileatus Leica 10 Monday 6th September 2004 02:24

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.24677205 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31.