• 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.

Trinovids (1 Viewer)

4

42za

Well-known member
Hello All,

Something that has struck me on reading through these forums , (although I have not read everything yet).

It seems to appear that the forum members do not really like the NEWER Leica Trinovids , but owners of the OLDER Trinovids seem to really love and prize theirs.

Is there any reason for this ?.

Cheers.
 
Perhaps a bit of reminiscence. Just kidding. I have not really read many about the Trinovids, however I am sure you will get some more responses.

Andy W.
 
Me and Troubadoris bought 2 Trinovid HD 8x32s for their close focus of 1.0 metre. In fact both of our units focus down to 0.9m and are great when viewing stuff in rock pools, ponds, lichens, mosses and also insects, amphibians and reptiles.

My wife used an old model Trinovid from the 1970s for many years but it has been retired now due to its close focus being inadequate for her needs now.

Lee
 
Personally I would buy the new Trinovid HD over the Ultravid HD. Even if I had the $$ in hand for the Utravid. I like the form factor and the eye cup extension matches my eyes a lot better than the Ultravid. Images are too close to make a difference.
 
I have a pair of the 8x32 Trinovid HDs and think its quite a good bin. For one, it has enough eye relief (17mm) for my eyeglasses, which many 8x32 bins do not. FOV is a bit narrow for an 8x32 (372'@1000 yards) but, as a result, remains fairly well corrected towards the edge, with a bit of field curvature that can be focussed out. Close focus is great for flowers, insects, and viewing art in crowded museums. I like the little wetsuit it comes in, and it is easy to haul around all day on a jaunt, slung over the shoulder. A compact and versatile bin, excellent for travel.

They are considered 2nd tier, perhaps now 3rd tier bins, in the Leica lineup. A gateway drug of sorts...

Consensus from the learned on the forum is that it is an import from Japan, built to Leica specs, partially assembled in Europe to justify the 'made in Germany' label. The older style Trinovids are considered superior in materials and manufacture by those in the know, however the older models don't have enough eye relief, so its a moot point for the likes of me.

-Bill
 
I had high hopes for the new 32mm Trinovid HD's, but 23 ounces for 32mm binocular is going backwards IMO. I'm sure optics and build quality are very good though. Also, the rather narrow FOV of the 8x32 is disappointing. It's the same FOV as my 1st gen Swaro CL 8x30, but the CL is 6 ounces lighter and is an older model. It seems newer binoculars are going in the direction of wider FOV and lower weight and Leica is a bit regressive here.

I say this as a Leica fan, but when I think about it I'm really only a fan of the Ultravid model. I have no interest in the new Trinovid HD or Noctivid.
 
Gilmore Girl said:
I had high hopes for the new 32mm Trinovid HD's, but 23 ounces for 32mm binocular is going backwards IMO. I'm sure optics and build quality are very good though. Also, the rather narrow FOV of the 8x32 is disappointing. It's the same FOV as my 1st gen Swaro CL 8x30, but the CL is 6 ounces lighter and is an older model. It seems newer binoculars are going in the direction of wider FOV and lower weight and Leica is a bit regressive here.

I say this as a Leica fan, but when I think about it I'm really only a fan of the Ultravid model. I have no interest in the new Trinovid HD or Noctivid.
Click to expand...

All good points!
Price and weight-wise, the closest competitors in my mind are the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32, and the Nikon MHG 8x42, both of which have a substantially better FOV. However, the 8x32 Conquest has less eye relief, and the Nikon is physically larger, even though it is only a few ounces more.

I agree the Ultravid is a great design, especially the 8x32, but can you see the whole FOV with glasses? ;-( To me, that is the catch.

I do believe Leica intentionally limited FOV on the new Trinovid so as to not compete with their upper tier lines.

All that said, I tried it, it fit, the focuser is excellent, the eyecups have numerous stops, for those that need them. Though its found a useful place in my toolbox, I can see why it might not meet your needs.

Maybe its time for you take the plunge on the new Kowa 6.5 x32! Or buy Dennis or Gwen's, if and when they sell them... ;-)

-Bill
 
Last edited:
wdc said:
All good points!
Price and weight-wise, the closest competitors in my mind are the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x32, and the Nikon MHG 8x42, both of which have a substantially better FOV. However, the 8x32 Conquest has less eye relief, and the Nikon is physically larger, even though it is only a few ounces more.

I agree the Ultravid is a great design, especially the 8x32, but can you see the whole FOV with glasses? ;-( To me, that is the catch.

I do believe Leica intentionally limited FOV on the new Trinovid so as to not compete with their upper tier lines.

All that said, I tried it, it fit, the focuser is excellent, the eyecups have numerous stops, for those that need them. Though its found a useful place in my toolbox. I can see why it might not meet your needs.

Maybe its time for you take the plunge on the new Kowa 6.5 x32! Or buy Dennis or Gwen's, if and when they sell them... ;-)

-Bill
Click to expand...

There's a pretty long line of people on the forum who were disappointed with the original Swarovski CL 8x30, but I really like it ... it fits me.
So, I get it when you say your Trinovid HD fits you.

I've read reviews that it's quite sharp, has a smooth focus (as you confirmed) and the feel and build quality are Leica (excellent).

Now that I have super thin eyeglass frames I'm going to give the Ultravid 8x32 plus another chance and I'm hoping it works. it may not, but I need to try it first. If it doesn't work then I'll check out a couple others on my very short list of considerations. Yeah ... the 32mm Ultravids have short ER and doesn't work for a lot of folks who wear glasses.
 
I recently, briefly owned a Trinovid BN and also have tested the new Trinovid HD. at a local optics shop....

The BN is a good, quality binocular. I was somewhat unimpressed with the newer Trinovid HDs I tested. I would say they're Leica's version of the Conquest in some respects.

If I had to choose between the Old and new Trinovid, I'd pick the old. It seems to have a slightly better, sharper view and a slightly higher quality feel.

I notice here that many mention the older Trinovids didn't have good eye relief, but I actually felt they had VERY good relief. Even thinking that they appeared to have more eye relief than the stated specs....

To each his own though.
 
Last edited:
Hello,
I had an old trinovid (7x42) which was replaced by a new trinovid HD 8x42. I might speak for a minority here (?) but I really like(d) both. Most binoculars are uncomfortable to me, including expensive models by other top brands, but for some reason these leicas and an ultravid 7x42 (absolute favorite) are a joy to use. One reason is the good eye relief, which is critical for me because I wear glasses, but I'm sure there are other elements to the comfortable view and handling they provide. Regards, FL
 
I recently, briefly owned a Trinovid BN and also have tested the new Trinovid HD. at a local optics shop....

The BN is a good, quality binocular. I was somewhat unimpressed with the newer Trinovid HDs I tested. I would say they're Leica's version of the Conquest in some respects. I tested them directly against some nice older Leitz 8x32b Trinovids (1980s?) as well, and while the colors were a slight bit more flat, I actually found the old Leitz more comfortable than the new Trinovid HD.

Anyway, If I had to choose between the Old Trinovid BN, and new Trinovid HD, I'd pick the old. It seems to have a slightly better, sharper view and a slightly higher quality feel. The new HD Trinovid reminds me a great deal of a Pentax.

I see many mention the old Trinovids don't have good eye relief? I find the relief to be quite nice, actually felt like it may be more relief than stated in the specs...

To each his own though.
 
I wasn't impressed with the newer Trinovid HD's either, and found that they would/could do nothing that a number of $500 glass cannot do as well or better, from companies with much better warranty and service. As GG said, the performance gap is decreasing, and will only continue to do so.
 
42za,

Take a look at Allbinos regarding the specs on the Leica BA/BNs - major difference is the close focus in the BN is better. These are a heavy glass by todays standards, esp the larger 42 and 50mm objective glass.
All the Trinovids are good glass, but as stated in the previous posts, ergonomic factors are a major factor, of those, lower weight seems to be high priority along with eye relief.

Now cost - if you can get a used BA/BN for say 650-700 which is in very good condition and you do not mind the weight, they are still a good performer by today's standards. Leica still performs service/repair on them, as long as the glass (prisms/lens) is in good shape.

Andy W.
 
About newer Trinovids -- don't forget the 42 BR model (8 or 10x) made from about 2011-15. We still have one and like it. It seems to have been an experiment with a somewhat flatter field, as well as a price point -- which may have seemed a bit steep at $1500, despite sharing the excellent UV body, but came down to under $1k when it was sold off.
 
Yes Tenex. I have both the 8 and 10X42 - and you are correct the view is as you described, and to my eyes different from the UV 8X42 HD.

Andy W.
 
tenex said:
About newer Trinovids -- don't forget the 42 BR model (8 or 10x) made from about 2011-15. We still have one and like it. It seems to have been an experiment with a somewhat flatter field, as well as a price point -- which may have seemed a bit steep at $1500, despite sharing the excellent UV body, but came down to under $1k when it was sold off.
Click to expand...

I have this model in 8x42 and really like it.
 
tenex said:
About newer Trinovids -- don't forget the 42 BR model (8 or 10x) made from about 2011-15. We still have one and like it. It seems to have been an experiment with a somewhat flatter field, as well as a price point -- which may have seemed a bit steep at $1500, despite sharing the excellent UV body, but came down to under $1k when it was sold off.
Click to expand...

There are many posts about the Trinovids like the revised one you mention if you go back and do a search.

I have had both, the revised one and the newer Trinovid HD, all 8x42 and in my comparison, and from other reviewers, the revised one, was simply another Ultravid, from the past, not HD and it did lack the brightness and better optics of the Ultravid HD, as I have that and was able to compare.

The current Trinovid HD is a nice mid-range binocular, nothing special, as there are other better options.
I rank it better than the Trinovid 2011-2015, in optics.

If you want to go back and get an older Trinovid, go ahead, they are also very good.

The Leica red emblem does carry a special panache, it does make the view better than it really is...;)

Jerry
 
dries1 said:
Yeah Jerry, like the blue shield and the silver hawk.

Andy W.
Click to expand...


Andy:

That is true and many users can see the differences they like, I am one that
does not like to play favorites. My optics hobby has led me to try many of the
top optics, and I call them like I see them.

I also like and respect many lower priced optics, and there are many out there that are very good choices, and so the price range is large.

Jerry
 
The Trinovid HD seems to be another model that divides opinions.

I first tried a Trinovid HD 8x32 as an afterthought after spending some time comparing the Monarch HG, and new Swaro CL compared to the likes of the Razor HD, Kowa Genesis, Kite Bonelli and Conquest HD as well as a few cheaper models form Opticron, Vortex, and Kowa. I was really surprised how poorly they compared in terms of colour, contrast, resolution and sharpness to any on that list. Since then I've only managed to compare the x42s against the Ultravid HD and Noctivid but saw no reason to doubt my first impressions. Of course, other opinions will differ..... they always do on the forum. ;)

David
 
Warning! This thread is more than 5 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

A2GG
Impressed with Trinovid HD
Replies
13
Views
3K
A2GG
A2GG
mgp13
Leica Trinovid HD appreciation thread
Replies
12
Views
2K
Rg548
R
dorubird
Trinovid 8x20 BCA vs Ultravid 8x20 BR
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
ReinierB
R
T
Beginning to acquire more vintage Leitz glasses, a long-time goal
Replies
11
Views
1K
Tristram
T
A
Leica Trinovid BN diopter problem
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
Binastro
B

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top