• 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.

New Old Trinovids (1 Viewer)

Chuck, I get the impression that the Retrovid won't be the BEST tool for the job, but it surely will work fine within its spec. However, if you miss a few birds due to close focus limitations, or the speed of the focuser doesn't get you there on time, then you might wish you had something else in hand. (which in your case will probably be in the trunk in the parking lot..) ;-)

Of course no matter what the result, the binoculars will look good! My guess is that an experienced birder such as yourself will be able to put them to use just fine, but they are not purpose built, the way other products are, to provide real world advantages specific to that activity.

I think they dropped the ball on close focus, as a mixed-use travel bin can do a great job in a crowded museum.

Maybe its more like the Morgan you see someone driving on a weekend. Enjoy it for what it is.

-Bill

That's all true. I DO ride a Harley and not a Ducati and do own a Jeep Wrangler so I'm all ready pretty Retro! The Retrovid would provably fit right in!

Chuck (post #455),

I concur with Bill. As you have an UV HD+ 7x42 and an SV 8x32, I can assure you that you absolutely DON’T NEED a Retrovid, you have all the tools it takes (the same will be true for many birders).

And so do I.

So it will be interesting to see how many will nevertheless acquire a Retrovid .... the looks, handling, haptics are one thing, but the optics also impressed me quite a bit, more than I had anticipated. Still fighting with myself .... stay away from the Leica Stores!

The good news is there's really no Leica stores anywhere CLOSE to me. Email IS alive and well though. I got an email from Leica of San Francisco...they got in a black, leathered 7X35. I went ahead and told them I'd take it. That was probably pretty predictable!
 
.....
.....
.....
...they got in a black, leathered 7X35. I went ahead and told them I'd take it. That was probably pretty predictable!


:eek!::eek!: another soul lost to the "Retrovirus" :-(

((when I wrote "stay away from Leica Stores", I of course meant both physically and virtually/electronically.))

Just wondering how much fighting power my immune system still has .... although after going over my notes from the two store visits a few more times, the 8x40 (which impressed me even more) and not the 7x35 poses the biggest risk to my health ;)
 
Last edited:
Chuck,

Yours is the task to write a detailed review about the 7x35 for all of us once you get it (Dennis will be so happy he is not alone any more with his Retrovid) ;)

Canip
 
That's all true. I DO ride a Harley and not a Ducati and do own a Jeep Wrangler so I'm all ready pretty Retro! The Retrovid would provably fit right in!



The good news is there's really no Leica stores anywhere CLOSE to me. Email IS alive and well though. I got an email from Leica of San Francisco...they got in a black, leathered 7X35. I went ahead and told them I'd take it. That was probably pretty predictable!

Chuck,

With a Harley and a Wrangler you don't WANT a Leica store CLOSE to you.

Jan
 
Bob:

Your points are well stated, but this is all explained above. The Trinovid model has been Leica's most
significant model ever produced, easily the largest volume seller for over 40 years.

So you do need to know about Leica sports optics history. This retro model of an older Trinovid is
just a welcome addition to the Trinovid lineup. Retro means bringing back something from the past.

If some on the site are excited about calling this model "Retrovid", be a good sport and play along.

I welcome the new model, there is no confusion at all here.

Jerry

Jerry,

Happy to play along and I see how the Retrovid idea on this forum is a neat way to separate the new Trinovids from previous ones. Outside the forum despite the literal meaning of 'retro' being just as you say it can also carry connotations of being backward in other ways i.e. a retrograde step, so I can see that 'Retrovid' would be unlikely as a serious name though personally I think it's a clever one.

Tom
 
:eek!::eek!: another soul lost to the "Retrovirus" :-(

((when I wrote "stay away from Leica Stores", I of course meant both physically and virtually/electronically.))

Just wondering how much fighting power my immune system still has .... although after going over my notes from the two store visits a few more times, the 8x40 (which impressed me even more) and not the 7x35 poses the biggest risk to my health ;)
Canip. I wish you would get the Retrovid 8x40. I would love to read a review on that one. It looks pretty interesting. I am thinking very close to Ultravid HD 8x42 + optics in a much more compact package with a smoother focuser ,better aesthetics and a lower price point. I will be curious to see how Chuck likes the Retrovid 7x35. I bet it will surprise him how good it is. It might just replace his 7x42 Ultravid HD+.
 
Last edited:
Jerry,

Happy to play along and I see how the Retrovid idea on this forum is a neat way to separate the new Trinovids from previous ones. Outside the forum despite the literal meaning of 'retro' being just as you say it can also carry connotations of being backward in other ways i.e. a retrograde step, so I can see that 'Retrovid' would be unlikely as a serious name though personally I think it's a clever one.

Tom

Yes, we can understand that the name Retrovid conjures an image of the owner bending over and pointing their rear-mounted binoculars at the sky. It is indeed an image which might not delight Leica, especially since they might wish to reserve that name for a proctological endoscope. 3:)


Edmund
 
Last edited:
Yes, we can understand that the name Retrovid conjures an image of the owner bending over and pointing their rear-mounted binoculars at the sky. It is indeed an image which might not delight Leica, especially since they might wish to reserve that name for a proctological endoscope. 3:)


Edmund

Proctological: you get serious house points for that one! :)
 
Chuck,

Yours is the task to write a detailed review about the 7x35 for all of us once you get it (Dennis will be so happy he is not alone any more with his Retrovid) ;)

Canip

Certainly will do!

Chuck,

With a Harley and a Wrangler you don't WANT a Leica store CLOSE to you.

Jan

You're right! I actually go a far away as possible!

:eek!::eek!: another soul lost to the "Retrovirus" :-(

((when I wrote "stay away from Leica Stores", I of course meant both physically and virtually/electronically.))

Just wondering how much fighting power my immune system still has .... although after going over my notes from the two store visits a few more times, the 8x40 (which impressed me even more) and not the 7x35 poses the biggest risk to my health ;)

I think your immune system will eventually cave in!

Hi Chuck,

Good to hear. And when you report on it, please start a new thread!


John

Will do for sure!
 
Retrovid impressions

Drizzly blowy grey day two weeks ago (much like today). I decided going birding wasn't worth bothering with, put my bino-geek's hat on, and trotted down to Leica Mayfair to have a look at the Retrovids.

No other customers were there when I showed up at around 10.35am, and the immaculately dressed rep was quite happy to let me try the 7x35, 8x40 and 10x40 in the street outside. As a yardstick I brought two Zeiss Dialyts, both of which I was very familiar with - the 10x40 (P model) which I had been using almost every day for the last few weeks, and the 7x42 (P).

I looked through them in this sequence: 7x35, 7x42, 8x40, 10x40 Dialyt, 10x40 Retrovid.

Detail at distance is my favourite test for binoculars, but there were no really distant subjects to look at. The fine details of twigs etc on trees at Manchester Square, 310m or so to the north, and Grosvenor Square about 200m to the south, as well as street signs and all the other text you can find in the city made for a reasonable test of sharpness/detail. Brightness I could compare with the Dialyts, and there was enough colour around in shop displays etc to get a sense of colour rendition under those conditions.

Ergonomics and mechanicals were very similar across all three, so I'll deal with them at the end and address what they were like to look through individually:

7x35: I thought (and was a little surprised to find) its overall performance very competitive with the 7x42 Dialyt, at least under those conditions. Sharpness and detail seemed very similar, and brightness, frankly, also seemed very similar, although you would expect the 7x42 to be superior in the early morning and late evening. Maybe the 7x42 was a tad brighter, but if so, it was very hard to tell. I couldn't really tell much of a difference in contrast or colour rendition either, although dull grey days like these seem to leach out all colour - it might have been different on a bright sunny day. The greater field of view of the 7x42 was apparent when I changed over to it, but good edge performance, and being able to get the binocular close enough to my eyes that the field stop was a long way out from the centre of view, helped the 7x35 make up for it. Steady view, as you would expect from a 7x, and excellent depth of field (should have compared this more intensively vs the 7x42 but didn't). With eyecups fully down I got slight blackouts, but winding them up slightly eliminated that. The overall impression I got was that it was very similar to the 7x42, but much smaller.

8x40: I was given this by mistake instead of the 10x40. Very similar view to the 7x35. I didn't have anything to compare it with but I'd say the 8x32 and 8x42 FL are both a little sharper in the center and the 8x42 a little brighter (as you would expect). That's not to say the Retrovid lacks in sharpness, they are definitely sharp enough.

10x40: Sharpness comparable to the 10x40 Dialyt at the distances I tried it over, sharpness to the edge possibly a little better, but I would need to have them side by side to be sure. Brightness I think is slightly better - not by a lot but I think enough to be noticed. (The Dialyt is certainly bright enough for general birding though). Colour rendition seemed similar, however...

I did notice, when comparing this Dialyt alongside the Canon/Meopta/Conquest 10x42s at Birdfair, in bright sunny conditions, that the colour rendition of the more modern binoculars seemed more natural. There's a slight yellow, or warm, cast to the Dialyt (also noticeable in the 8x30 SLC mark II I used to own), apparently due to the silver rather than dielectric mirror coatings on the prisms, that I don't notice when using it but does become apparent when used alongside these more modern binoculars. Under grey conditions I think that yellow cast manifests itself to me as a little darker image (I thought the same when comparing this 10x40 with a 10x42 FL some years back on a similar dull grey day). This is probably why I thought colour rendition was similar between the two 10x40s under those conditions.

That's about as much as I can comment on about the view. Ideally I would have liked to have done a side by side comparison, but I didn't want to test the goodwill of the staff too much. It would also have been interesting to look through them under sunny conditions, which I might be able to do in a couple months' time...

(to be continued...)
 
Last edited:
"The overall impression I got was that it was very similar to the 7x42, but much smaller."

That is the same conclusion I came to when comparing the Retrovid's 7x35 to my Leica Ultravid's HD 7x42.



"There's a slight yellow, or warm, cast to the Dialyt (also noticeable in the 8x30 SLC mark II I used to own), apparently due to the silver rather than dielectric mirror coatings on the prisms, that I don't notice when using it but does become apparent when used alongside these more modern binoculars. Under grey conditions I think that yellow cast manifests itself to me as a little darker image (I thought the same when comparing this 10x40 with a 10x42 FL some years back on a similar dull grey day)."

That is why I never cared for the Dialyt. I didn't like the yellow cast which IMO manifests itself as a darker image.


Nice Review!
 
The 7x42 Dialyt's AK prisms don't need mirror coating, silver or otherwise. If your pair appears yellow that probably reflects the particular generation of the T* coating used on yours, which changed over the years.
 
Controls are identical across all three, as one expects (but worth noting that their great contemporary rival, Zeiss's Dialyt series, weren't uniform in the same way). Diopter is in front of the bridge, same as the 10x40 and 8x30 Dialyts. I actually prefer this setup, or the conventional diopter on the right barrel, to the more modern integrated focus wheel and diopter as used in the FL, EL and others. Diopter tension is adequate - ideally I'd have liked it stiffer, but it's OK. Focus feel is quite light (I would have preferred a little more weight/resistance), but precise.

Eyecups are now the twist up type (god I wish these were retrofittable to Dialyts) and have three set positions. They needed a little more pressure to start turning than I expected, but once familiar with their operation, everything was fine. I found I needed to twist the eyecups of all three up just a little to eliminate blackouts. At this intermediate setting I was wondering if the eyecup position would hold, as it didn't seem to take much pressure to turn them out once they got started, but - at least during the short time I was using them - I had no issues. The main stops are very solid.

Hinge tension: again I'd like to be a bit stiffer, but in use seemed fine, although you would need a longer trial to really confirm the IPD stays where it is.

Eye placement of all three I found pretty easy and undemanding, more than I'd expected as one expects such small binoculars to be a bit finicky. The 7x35 isn't as effortless in this respect as the 7x42 Dialyt, but its 5mm exit pupil is more than adequate. Eye placement of the 10x40 seems similar to the 10x40 Dialyt, which when looking at distant targets and for long periods, does need careful setting up - but is easy enough over shorter distances such as those I tried it over (I find the same with the 8x32 FL). Ease of eye placement for the 10x40 Retrovid really needs to be assessed over a longer trial of say a couple hours, and over different distances.

Focus speed is slower than most modern binoculars like the 8x32 FL, but I personally prefer a slower focus speed and would rather spin the wheel quicker than overshoot and have to recorrect. I had a pretty good chance to test how quickly I could get on a bird with the 10x40 when a feral pigeon landed on the pavement close to me when I was looking the other way at the furthest twigs I could find. Spun round to get a look at it (iridescent neck feathers would have been a good test subject for colour rendition) but must have startled it as it flapped up. It was gone in a couple seconds, but before it did, I was able to get a good lock on its white rump. It's quick enough for me.

One of the most immediately noticeable things about all three Retrovids is how extremely small they are compared to most modern binoculars of comparable format. The 10x40 Retrovid looks and feels about 85%-90% smaller than the rubber armoured 10x40 Dialyt, and the 7x35 feels smaller than the 8x32 FL. They feel quite weighty for their size, which combined with the small package, I think helps in holding them steady. The Retrovids are actually so small that, having gotten accustomed to larger binoculars, they feel somewhat odd in the hand. The 7x35 in particular feels almost too small for my hands, but I could see it being a perfect fit for someone like my mother (who is 71 years old and loves everything about the 7x42 T*P Dialyt other than its weight/size). Leatherette covering helps make them very slim, but feels less friendly on ungloved hands in January than rubber.

------------------------------------

In summation... I can't say the Retrovids are the best birding binoculars I've ever used, but to be fair to them, they aren't being advertised as such. Back in the 1960s no binoculars were really designed specifically for birding, whereas now they are. The Retrovids are in a somewhat different corner of the market where users want/need compactness and handiness more than ultimate optical performance or weatherproofing. As mentioned earlier, they feel a bit odd at first as they are so small in the hand, but once you get used to it they are wonderfully compact and beautifully pointable. They feel and handle (focus feel, eyecups etc) like a well made product, although only time will tell if they retain that quality feel for as long as the original Leitzes. I must confess I love how they look. They don't, at least to my eyes, look old fashioned in the way that something like a Binuxit does - although I love how the latter looks, too. The downside of that timeless classic styling is you would need to be more careful with these than something rubber armoured. Quite a few of the old Leitzes show wear at the objective ends.

Optically, although I'm not familiar with the whole range of modern 7x, 8x and 10x available today, they strike me as being pretty decent. The 7x35 gives the impression of being like a downsized 7x42 Dialyt, and the 10x40 I'd have to rate as a little better optically than my 10x40 - if I were offered an exchange between the two, I almost certainly would - and definitely (as only to be expected, mind you...) better than the old Leitz 10x40 I tried at Birdfair. They are probably maybe only a tad less good than the Meopta/Conquest HD/Monarch HG class, whose optical performance, objectively, is extremely good. So there.

A lot of commentators here have said that if classic binoculars were made with modern coatings they'd buy them. Now that someone has, it'll be interesting to see if any do. I can't say I would, not for myself anyway, but I'm a cheapskate who has never bought a new pair of binoculars. If all binocular buyers were like me, we'd probably still be using P model Dialyts (or worse), and amazing creations like the SV and SF would exist only in the fantasies of folks like Chosun.

I'm hoping that all the negativity on Birdforum - lack of Uppendahl prisms, not having retained the original optical train etc - really, really hurts secondhand values. I've always thought the leatherette version of my 10x40 looked great, but P models are very hard to find, and the 10x40 Retrovid offers that along with, in all likelihood, more neutral colour rendition. I'm not sure whether to ask my mother to try the 7x35 as I'm pretty certain she would like them...probably a little too much!
 
Thank you very much for that nicely written, quite detailed and instructive review, Patudo!
Having finally given in to temptation, I will follow up shortly with my own impressions, which will confirm most of what you have said.
Canip
 
A lot of commentators here have said that if classic binoculars were made with modern coatings they'd buy them. Now that someone has, it'll be interesting to see if any do.

Thanks for the fine review Patudo. Unfortunately, as you noted the optical design of Retrovids is completely modern, with no resemblance to the original Trinovid design, so we still don't know what the originals would be like with modern coatings and apparently never will.

Henry
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the fine review Patudo. Unfortunately, as you noted the optical design of Retrovids is completely modern, with no resemblance to the original Trinovid design, so we still don't know what the originals would be like with modern coatings and apparently never will.

Henry
Do you really think the originals with modern coatings would have been better than new Retrovid?
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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