• 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.

What if...... (3 Viewers)

Canip said:
Well, I will continue using the name Retrovid, with all due respect.

Three reasons:

1. I invented that name, so of course I am not going to abandon it (that‘s the weakest reason) :-O

2. Pseudovid in the English language sounds almost like Sudoko (if the latter is properly pronounced, with the emphasis on the first syllable), and that creates unwelcome confusion ;)

3. „Pseudo“ has a negative connotation. We would be calling it „Pseudo“ just because the outside looks „real“, but the inside is not what you expect; that seems a bit harsh, does it not, esp. if performance is perhaps (needs to be confirmed!!!) amazingly good?

Let‘s see what Jan comes back with and reconsider then.

juts my 2 ct.
Canip
Click to expand...


Canip: Retrovid is now the established name of this model, thanks to you.

Pseudovid is only one way to describe it.

Lee
 
jan van daalen said:
... the first Retrovid had Uppendahls. These were just to expensive (?) so Higher Command decided to go for SP and exclusive sales.
Click to expand...
Does this logic remain true even when, as you note, the shape of the SP prism has to be specially modified to fit into the Retrovid housing? (Never mind that FOV is also reduced etc.)
 
tenex said:
Does this logic remain true even when, as you note, the shape of the SP prism has to be specially modified to fit into the Retrovid housing? (Never mind that FOV is also reduced etc.)
Click to expand...

Don't forget that the Uppendahl prism is much less robust as an SP, it is more expensive in production and much more difficult to produce. AFAIK 80% of the first Uppendahl batch didn't pass the quality control. Try to find an OEM who can make them within the wished price range - quality.
Leica is the only one who uses it and, as I'm been told, make them in house.
For the Retrovid they outsourced that because (spreadsheet management) it was cheaper. We all know how that turned out, so the überbobo's decided to keep it cheap and went for SP's.
Producing (modified) SP's is an art every OEM knows. Producing Uppendahls turned out to be a different ballgame. No OEM has expertise in that field.

Jan
 
jan van daalen said:
Don't forget that the Uppendahl prism is much less robust as an SP, it is more expensive in production and much more difficult to produce. AFAIK 80% of the first Uppendahl batch didn't pass the quality control.
Click to expand...
Thanks, if that's been said before, I missed it.

Of course I'd like to know where the other 20% will go...!
 
The main attraction of using Canip’s term Retrovid - is not because it’s so apt - but because in practice it’s so precise

As Leitz and then Leica have used the name Trinovid for so many different binocular designs, we are in effect saying:
- the most recent use by Leica for a new series of binoculars dating from late 2019, using Schmidt-Pechan prisms,

- the series has the same basic external design as that of the second version of the Leitz Trinovid series dating from 1963
(the one that used Uppendahl prisms, rather than the earlier limited production series from 1958 using Ludewig prisms),

- not to be confused with the original use by Leica commencing from 1990, for both the BA and then the BN series (with Schmidt-Pechan prisms),

- or the other design from 2012 known as the Trinovid 42 (also with S-P prisms),

- or the revised version of that design dating from 2016 known as the Trinovid HD,

- or finally, the aborted 2017 reintroduction of the original 1963 Leitz Uppendahl prism design


. . . couldn’t be simpler!


John
 
Last edited:
John A Roberts said:
The main attraction of using Canip’s term Retrovid - is not because it’s so apt - but because in practice it’s so precise

As Leitz and then Leica have used the name Trinovid for so many different binocular designs, we are in effect saying:
- the most recent use by Leica for a new series of binoculars dating from late 2019,

- the series that has the same basic external design as that of the second version of the Leitz Trinovid series dating from 1963
(the one that used Uppendahl prisms, rather than the earlier limited production series from 1958 using Ludewig prisms),

- not to be confused with the original use by Leica commencing from 1990, for both the BA and then the BN series (with Schmidt-Pechan prisms),

- or the other design from 2012 known as the Trinovid 42 (also with S-P prisms),

- or the revised version of that design dating from 2016 known as the Trinovid HD,

- or finally, the aborted 2017 reintroduction of the original 1963 Leitz Uppendahl prism design


. . . couldn’t be simpler!


John
Click to expand...

Haha very succinct 😂
 
jan van daalen said:
Don't forget that the Uppendahl prism is much less robust as an SP, it is more expensive in production and much more difficult to produce. AFAIK 80% of the first Uppendahl batch didn't pass the quality control. Try to find an OEM who can make them within the wished price range - quality.
Leica is the only one who uses it and, as I'm been told, make them in house.
For the Retrovid they outsourced that because (spreadsheet management) it was cheaper. We all know how that turned out, so the überbobo's decided to keep it cheap and went for SP's.
Producing (modified) SP's is an art every OEM knows. Producing Uppendahls turned out to be a different ballgame. No OEM has expertise in that field.

Jan
Click to expand...

..... which explains why Uppendahl prisms have basically disappeared in binoculars.
Thanks, Jan, a question answered that I had for quite some time.
Canip
 
jan van daalen said:
Hi Henry,

Sorry, missed this post.
The ocular (seen from the eye lens to the objective): 1 singlet/airspace/1 singlet/airspace/1 cemented doublet.

The objective (seen from objective side to the ocular) 1 cemented doublet/airspace/singlet. After that comes the focus lens.
One could say it is in optical design a 100% clone of the Opticron DBA Oasis (and several others;))

Jan
Click to expand...
Jan. How does the optical design of the Retrovid compare to the Ultravid? Thanks.
 
jan van daalen said:
Hi Henry,

Sorry, missed this post.
The ocular (seen from the eye lens to the objective): 1 singlet/airspace/1 singlet/airspace/1 cemented doublet.

The objective (seen from objective side to the ocular) 1 cemented doublet/airspace/singlet. After that comes the focus lens.
One could say it is in optical design a 100% clone of the Opticron DBA Oasis (and several others;))

Jan
Click to expand...

Thanks Jan,

Yes, that basic objective layout is ubiquitous in contemporary roof prism binoculars from the cheapest to the most expensive, although I would have expected ED glass at the Retrovid's price point. Some exceptions to that layout include the Zeiss SF, the first Swarovski EL, most of the old SLCs and some Chinese clones. Those use an objective consisting of a fixed cemented doublet followed by a positive focusing singlet.

The eyepiece layout is less common. It appears to belong to the Bertele family (patented in 1925), but reversed from the way it is usually shown. I've seen that in a few binoculars including the original Swaro EL, most of the old SLCs and some very cheap Chinese Porros.

It's clear from this last bit of information from Jan that there is not one piece of glass in the Retrovid that resembles the original Trinovid design. I don't see why they won't be decent binoculars. After all they're an assemblage of design features that have been used successfully in other binoculars for decades. They're just not the same design features that made the original Trinovid optics so elegant.

Henry

Dennis, the Ultravid objective's basic layout is the same as the Retrovid. It hasn't changed since the Leica Trinovid BA. The Ultravid eyepieces (depending on the model) are 4 or 5 element variations on the Konig design, except for the 12x50 (and maybe the 10x32) which adds a 2 element Barlow type field group for a total of 7 elements.
 
Last edited:
Hi Dennis (post #213),

To add to Henry’s points . . .

For Leica’s basic tech data on the Retrovids and also the x42 HD+ Ultravids, see the attached copies

For more data and images about the Ultravid optical construction, including cross-sections of the 7x42 and 8x42 models,
see posts #19 and #21 at: https://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=379534


And to summarise what we know so far about the 7x35 Retrovid verses the 7x42 Ultravid optics

A) As Jan indicated in post #208, the basic optical pattern of the 7x35 Retrovid is 8 lenses in 6 groups:
Objective of 4 lenses in 3 groups (2, 1 + 1 focusing), and; Eyepiece of 4 lenses in 3 groups (2, 1, 1)

B) And the 7x42 Ultravid also has 8 lenses in 6 groups, though with a different eyepiece pattern:
Objective of 4 lenses in 3 groups (2, 1 + 1 focusing), and; Eyepiece of 4 lenses in 3 groups (1, 2, 1)

Of course the usual caveat applies: the details of the individual lenses - curvature, thickness, composition and spacing - will differ


John
 

Attachments

  • 'Retrovid' Oct 19 .pdf
    351.4 KB · Views: 49
  • UV HD+ x42 Nov 14.pdf
    69.7 KB · Views: 37
Last edited:
etudiant said:
It may only be me, but I consider outsourcing the production as borderline consumer fraud.
I recognize that it is pervasive, that airlines 'code share' and that even brand name pharmaceuticals are made in India or China by low cost producers, but it seems totally destructive of any consumer brand loyalty. Why pay a premium for a label unless that label has real meaning?
Click to expand...

I fully agree.
 
I think what is important here is that the original small and slender size of the original Leitz
has been achieved, and that was a very nice thing about the original.

So, there are some changes in the design and prism type, but I think most serious buyers can easily live with that.

The reviews we have seen so far from members here seem very positive.

So lets all look on the bright side. ;)

Totally new binocular models do not come along very often.

Jerry
 
NDhunter said:
I think what is important here is that the original small and slender size of the original Leitz
has been achieved, and that was a very nice thing about the original.

So, there are some changes in the design and prism type, but I think most serious buyers can easily live with that.

The reviews we have seen so far from members here seem very positive.

So lets all look on the bright side. ;)

Totally new binocular models do not come along very often.

Jerry
Click to expand...

Well said. I’ve wanted a really decent 7x35 since I discovered the joy of 7x42s over a decade ago.

I look forward to reading more about them and, when funds permit, trying and hopefully owning a pair.

Bring......... it............ on.
 
Whilst this article is about the luxury watch retail situation, I think there are some parallels to the "Leica boutiques only" stance that Leica is taking with the Retrovid - and it's quite an interesting read...
https://www.watchpro.com/direct-to-consumer-retail-undermines-lifetime-customer-value-for-watch-brands/?utm_source=Email+Campaign&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=42384-321074-WatchPro+DNA+-+2020-01-11

For what it's worth, I think the Retrovid name is a good one. From what I've read here, the viewing experience from the new 'vids is anything but Pseudo...;)
 
And Swarovski dabbles in the luxury goods segment too. See their Atelier Swarovski and Chamilia businesses.

Lee
 
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.

Similar threads

O
Passport Warranty - what are the rules?
Replies
3
Views
781
Wilbr
W
K
Duovid 10/15 x 50 coatings question
Replies
6
Views
919
ticl2184
ticl2184
etc
New Leica Ultravid HD Plus 12x50 - compared with Swarovski EL 12x50 and Zeiss 10x54 HT
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
ReinierB
R
S
Leica view comparison idea...
2
Replies
25
Views
3K
LucaPCP
L
G
Leica Demo Shipment Just Arrived
Replies
0
Views
507
gr8fuldoug
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 4 (members: 0, guests: 4)
Back
Top