John Cantelo
Well-known member
Leica Duovid scope? Bet that got your attention! No, it doesn’t exist and I’ve no reason to suppose that it will, but I can’t see why it shouldn’t! Indeed I really think it should!
What is clear to me is that, in terms of birding binoculars, the Duovids are a flop. The one time I’ve looked at ‘em they seemed as optically brilliant as their older siblings and didn’t appear to lose any image quality at the higher power. However, virtually nobody seems to prefer them over mono-magnification glasses and they certainly haven’t dented the current ‘top dog’ position of Swarovski Els. The fact is that most birders don’t particularly want to bump magnification uop to a non-hand holdable 12x or 15x. (In contrast, I predict that the new Leica Ultravids will usurp Swarovski’s position as most desirable bins; not that they’re optically or ergonomically any better, it’s just that they’re newer, more expensive and carry the exclusivity of the Leica name).
However, there is no such resistance to multiple magnification when it comes to ‘scopes. How many of us have dithered over sacrificing the image quality and field of view of a fixed power eyepiece to gain the flexibility of zooming between x20 and x60? About the same number, I’d guess, that have rued the day they couldn’t zoom up their fixed x25/x30 lens when faced with a distant conundrum! Changing lenses is an option, I suppose, but I don’t want all that airborne crud getting between me and my optics!
Now, as I understand it, the great thing about the Duovid system is that there is no (or very little) loss in image quality unlike zoom eyepieces. I’m not so sure on this, but I also understand that the field of view is better and the ‘tunnel effect’ of zooms is less/absent. Add to this the observable tendency for zoom ‘scopes to be employed at either the lowest (x20/25) or highest (x50/60) usable magnification and the attraction of a ‘Duovid’ scope become clear. Even if we’re stuck with the 1:1.5 ratio a x30/45 would be an interesting proposition, but a 1:2 ratio a x25/50 or x30/60 would be unbeatable! Not only that but the beast could be really sealed against the elements and, arguably, ought to be cheaper than having a prime quality ‘scope with a range of lenses.
Have I entirely lost my reason or do others think this is a lost opportunity for Leica? So if Leica or Steve Dudley (their representative on Earth – well the UK!) is listening, how about it?
John
What is clear to me is that, in terms of birding binoculars, the Duovids are a flop. The one time I’ve looked at ‘em they seemed as optically brilliant as their older siblings and didn’t appear to lose any image quality at the higher power. However, virtually nobody seems to prefer them over mono-magnification glasses and they certainly haven’t dented the current ‘top dog’ position of Swarovski Els. The fact is that most birders don’t particularly want to bump magnification uop to a non-hand holdable 12x or 15x. (In contrast, I predict that the new Leica Ultravids will usurp Swarovski’s position as most desirable bins; not that they’re optically or ergonomically any better, it’s just that they’re newer, more expensive and carry the exclusivity of the Leica name).
However, there is no such resistance to multiple magnification when it comes to ‘scopes. How many of us have dithered over sacrificing the image quality and field of view of a fixed power eyepiece to gain the flexibility of zooming between x20 and x60? About the same number, I’d guess, that have rued the day they couldn’t zoom up their fixed x25/x30 lens when faced with a distant conundrum! Changing lenses is an option, I suppose, but I don’t want all that airborne crud getting between me and my optics!
Now, as I understand it, the great thing about the Duovid system is that there is no (or very little) loss in image quality unlike zoom eyepieces. I’m not so sure on this, but I also understand that the field of view is better and the ‘tunnel effect’ of zooms is less/absent. Add to this the observable tendency for zoom ‘scopes to be employed at either the lowest (x20/25) or highest (x50/60) usable magnification and the attraction of a ‘Duovid’ scope become clear. Even if we’re stuck with the 1:1.5 ratio a x30/45 would be an interesting proposition, but a 1:2 ratio a x25/50 or x30/60 would be unbeatable! Not only that but the beast could be really sealed against the elements and, arguably, ought to be cheaper than having a prime quality ‘scope with a range of lenses.
Have I entirely lost my reason or do others think this is a lost opportunity for Leica? So if Leica or Steve Dudley (their representative on Earth – well the UK!) is listening, how about it?
John