leica ultravid 10X42 V Swarovski EL 10X42 V Zeiss FL 10 X42 (1 Viewer)

I looked at all those also

Florence said:

I am leaning towards the Leica but as a novice would appreciate others' views.

Click to expand...

And was leaning towards the Leica's since I own a pair of 12x50, BN's. Then I tried a pair iof Nikon 8x42 LXL's. I had bought my wife a pair of LX's a year ago and ended up using them quite often. After trying them all I decided the extra $400(USD) I could save and have the same level of quality, Nikon was the way to go. Yes they are not German (Portuguese) or Austrian by they are wonderful...

NIKON 10x32 LX issue

XtreemLee said:

And was leaning towards the Leica's since I own a pair of 12x50, BN's. Then I tried a pair iof Nikon 8x42 LXL's. I had bought my wife a pair of LX's a year ago and ended up using them quite often. After trying them all I decided the extra $400(USD) I could save and have the same level of quality, Nikon was the way to go. Yes they are not German (Portuguese) or Austrian by they are wonderful...

Click to expand...

I bought a NIKON 10x32 LX at a discount of US$600 and I do not have any complaint in its sharpness and contrast. However I may buy other brand if I pay in full price. I use the LX for bird watching and find that white feather looks yellow. My LEICA BL and SWAROVSKI EL do show accurate color of feather in white.

I'm leaning toward Zeiss, but...

Florence said:

I am leaning towards the Leica but as a novice would appreciate others' views.

Click to expand...

...you'll be happy with any of them. I've been shopping around myself.

This weekend I had a chance to do a side-by-side comparison of the Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski, and Nikon 10x42's. I felt the Zeiss were the brightest and had the best resolution, but the Leica's and Swarovski's were really close, and I suspect that with a little finer fiddling with the diopter adjustment or eye relief that I could have made all three of those models equally sharp. The Nikons were also very good, but just didn't seem to be quite as bright or sharp as the other three. Also, they seemed heavy compared to the others. The Leica's and Swarovski's were the lightest, with Zeiss in between them and the Nikons.

I liked the Swarovski optics but that thumb rest just didn't fit my hands, so they were out just based on feel. But that's just me...if they fit your hands I'm sure you'll be very happy with them.

The Leica's were excellent, but they are a bit more expensive than the Zeiss and I still felt the Zeiss were the best of the group. But once again, I don't think you'll go wrong with those.

The Nikon's are also very good. I've been using a Nikon 10x42 (predecessor of the Monarch line) for 10 years now and I've been very happy with them. Nikon service was also great. After about 5 years I somehow damaged one barrel (never knew what happened, but they were misaligned one day). I sent them to Nikon and got them back about 3 weeks later fully repaired, cleaned, and better than new...all for something like $17 in shipping costs!

The Zeiss were the best in my opinion. I liked the feel of them and the image was great. The binocular fit nicely in my hand and I liked the focus wheel, although the demo unit I tried seemed strangely loose. I'm not sure if new models are like this, but even a little looser than I'm used to it was easy to focus.

So overall, try them out and figure out what fits your hands, eyes, and budget. You pretty much can't go wrong within this group.