Leica Ultravid 7X42 (1 Viewer)

I now own 2 exceptional birding glasses: my tried and true SE 8X32 and a new Ultravid 7X42. A few comments about the Ultravid seem appropriate.

I've used the Ultravid for several hours in rather gloomy conditions and the first thing I noticed was its wonderful brightness. Trust me, the Ultravid 7X42 is bright enough to cover any dawn to dusk situation you'll encounter.

The 6mm exit pupil of a 7X42 is addictively easy on the eyes. All debate over "exit pupil this and exit pupil that" becomes moot when your eyes comfortably fall within the expansive window provided by a larger than average exit pupil.

Sharpness, contrast, clarity, resolution, etc. Whatever you call it, this glass delivers an image as clear and as lively as the SE. The SE wins on DOF at close range and the SE's overall image may be a gnat’s hair better...given ideal viewing conditions. The differences, however, are so insignificant I heartily recommend the Ultravid 7X42 to any SE 8X32 fan looking for an all-weather roof prism. I don’t think you’ll be unhappy.

Eye relief (ER) is more than adequate and I'm picky about ER. The 8X42 Ultravid did not give me enough ER and, in general, I preferred the 7X42 for many reasons.

My personal opinion is that the overall image quality of the 8X Ultravid is no different than the 7X. Eye relief, exit pupil, FOV, and magnification are the basic differences. There are, however, 8 lens elements in the 7X42 versus 9 lens elements in the 8X42 and this difference probably skews brightness in favor of the 7X42. Maybe a more learned reader could shed some light on my observation!

The diopter mechanism is the best I've seen. Leica definitely pays attention to detail because, except for one abused demo, I've always been able to set a Leica Trinovid/Ultravid diopter to 0 and get on with using the bin. I've seen the same level of diopter consistency in SE's. The bottom line is there's no fiddling with the diopter and it's extremely easy to accurately adjust for individual preferences.

Handling is always a personal thing and, for me, the Ultravid 7X feels as good in my hand as it's going to get. I like holding this bin! Enough said on that issue.

The Ultravid build quality appears on par with other premium bins and the Passport warranty covers repairs under a No-Fault agreement.

The objective eyecups are supposed to be tethered, but I soon broke one of the tethers while attempting to adjust it. When uncovered, the covers flop down in a semi-stiff position and simply got in the way of my hand. It’s not the best design I’ve seen. I now have two objective covers with tethers removed and they work just fine.

In conclusion, the Ultravid 7X42 seems to be everything I was looking for in a roof prism binocular. It is a worthy complement to my SE 8X32.

John

John,

Thank you for the excellent review and information.

I've been planning to purchase a pair of Zeiss FL 7x42 by fall of next year, possibly sooner if business is good. However... I've also considered the Ultravid 7x42 as an alternate possibility, but have not been able to find a pair locally to evaluate.

Have you done any comparisons between the FL 7x42 and the Ultravid 7x42? If so, what were your conclusions?

Thanks in advance, and best wishes!
Bawko

John,

You have put a great deal of effort into this purchase, as I have followed your research over many months. I hope that you may get many good years of use from the Ultravid.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Atomic Chicken said:

John,

Thank you for the excellent review and information.

I've been planning to purchase a pair of Zeiss FL 7x42 by fall of next year, possibly sooner if business is good. However... I've also considered the Ultravid 7x42 as an alternate possibility, but have not been able to find a pair locally to evaluate.

Have you done any comparisons between the FL 7x42 and the Ultravid 7x42? If so, what were your conclusions?

Thanks in advance, and best wishes!
Bawko

Click to expand...

Bawko,

I have seen both glasses, but never side-by-side. I preferred the Leica for several reasons.

John

John,

Why the Leicas over the Zeiss? Point me to a thread if you already covered it.

The thumb ridges and rough focus of my Ultravid 8x42s are really getting to me. I do believe they have the best quality eyecups, although they could use a couple more stops.

Bill Atwood said:

John,

Why the Leicas over the Zeiss? Point me to a thread if you already covered it.

The thumb ridges and rough focus of my Ultravid 8x42s are really getting to me. I do believe they have the best quality eyecups, although they could use a couple more stops.

Click to expand...

Bill,

Things I preferred, in short version are:

Larger sweet spot resulting in 0 distractions for me.
Easier diopter.
A slower and less fidgety focus (the Nikon LX's also displeased me on this point).
Better feel and subsequent balance in my hand resulting in a very stable image.
Overall image seemed more uniform and pleasing to my eye.

John

Thanks John,

I do like their relative compactness. As mentioned I'm learning to hate the ridges.

After recently handling some other bins I realize how ratchety the focus is, especially when "fine tuning".

If I feel like making a long drive this weekend I hope to compare to the new LXs and FLs.

I agree entirely with the assessment of the benefits of 7 powers glasees. Unfortunately, most feel quite differently. I have owned a Leica 7 x 42 BA for years and like it a lot. When I subsequently acquired a Zeiss 7 x 42 Dialyt Classic for its brighter image and wider field, I decided I couldn't justify the redundancy of the two bins and listed my Leicas on eBay and Astromart - absolutely no interest whatsover, dispite a giveaway asking price. Needless to say, I'm now delighted that i still own both 7 power bins, chiefly use the Leica for wet weather and rough duty service, but am still amazed at the total lackof interest. It is not surprising, therefore, that Leica dropped the 7 x 42 BN while keeping the 8 and 10 power glasses in the line.

A few random comments to the above messages.

The top brands, Leica, Nikon Swarovski and Zeiss (in alphabetical order), all have their own preferred eyepiece designs. Consequently, their view "feels" different to the eye, and it seems to be highly subjective which "feel" suits which viewer. This is one of the reasons why it is pretty impossible to reach unanimous conclusions about which binocular is best - you simply have to decide for yourself. The situation is complicated, however, by the eye-brain system's tendency to accommodate and become used to - even learning to prefer - what one uses for a while (providing it is pretty good to begin with).

Whenever I use them, I see more CA in Leica and almost none in the FL's central image. I'm pretty sensitive to CA, so for me this is an important issue.

The knobbies in Ultravid's armouring annoyed me as well, and if I owned a pair, I would seriously consider surgically removing them even if it left them looking slightly battered. They are, after all, only in the armouring (as attested by the sleek shape of the leather-covered BL version, which is a really classy looking design.

As far as focus and diopter adjustments go, I like the Leica diopter but not the roughness. I have a preference for systems where you can adjust both focus and diopter simultaneously. Focus speed is another one of those issues which cannot be decided for good. Fast focus (like in Nikon LX/HG, less so in Zeiss) is great when birding in the bush or woods, but it tends to give the impression of reduced depth of field. My guess is that this is because with quick focus we easily focus slightly past the optimum (to the far side of it) and with slow focus we either focus more precisely or tend to leave it just slightly on the close side of perfect focus. As we know, the eye is strained when it tries to look closer than where the optics are focused, whereas it relaxes when it tries to look farther. I think this partially explains why older people tend to prefer slower focus. It helps their eye keep up with the focus.

Kimmo

Update:

My birding day started out gloomy and ended up sunny with scattered cloud cover. I split my time between the deciduous forest bordering my property and the heavily vegetated areas provided by the wide right of way afforded to the electrical utility. The trail from my house to the power line leads me to one of the grand vistas in the area where I can see for many miles in several directions. I have never seen another birder or hiker and I only rarely encounter hunters.

This was the first day I used the Ultravid 7X42 in good light and they were marvelous; they are as sharp and pleasing to the eye as my SE’s…for most of the FOV. The SE’s perfect circle is, in a word, unbeatable. Getting on target, however, is easier with the Ultravid due to the larger exit pupil and the wider FOV. Additional field-based observations follow.

The Leica focus mechanism may not be glassy smooth, however, it is the easiest system I’ve used to obtain an immediately exceptional picture. I pick it up, look, perform a quick focus, and bang I’m seeing a superb image. I can further improve the image using fine focus, and I’m always amazed that what appears to be a perfect image has room for improvement AND that the Ultravid enables you to do it. Someone mentioned this in reference to the FL, and I’m beginning to think these new bins are so good in delivering detail that we may not see much improvement in the future. It is also further proof that there is a fundamental difference in image quality between the top models and everything else. The difference may be subtle, but once you’ve seen the picture I’m talking about nothing else will satisfy. I also know that fiddling with fine focus is not only a waste of time, but also a serious mistake when used excessively. Someone reported the US Navy researched this very topic and found excessive fine focusing induced eyestrain, which in turn degraded the image. Based on personal observation, it makes sense to me.

The 7X42 has incredible depth of field in both confined and long distance viewing situations. People who own 7X42 Zeiss Classics frequently comment on great DOF, so maybe it’s one of the benefits of owning a 7X42. This additional “ease of use” feature certainly enhances the overall enjoyment of the bin. For example, I followed a Red Bellied woodpecker through the dense forest, barely touching the focus wheel whenever he landed. Earlier, while engrossed with a distant soaring Red Tail, a Black Vulture suddenly crossed my FOV at close range…I quickly picked him/her up with a mere touch of the focus wheel. I believe a wide FOV coupled with great DOF is a winning combination for the type of birding I engage in most often.

When looking in the direction of the sun I've been distracted by flaring. Conditions have to be just right for it to be a problem and I’ve learned to control it. Though present, the flaring doesn't destroy the image and it can be ignored. A slight tilt one way or the other often solves the problem. I plan to make a direct comparison with my SE and report the results.

I find handling to be exceptional. The knobs on the tubes aren’t a problem for me and I find the balance to be just perfect. I don’t hold any bin the way the designers intended and I’m certain handling is solely a matter of personal preference. One thing I will attest to is the ability to hold the 7X42 dead steady. Nothing annoys me more than a shaky picture, and I’m certain a lot of people choose higher power bins because they believe “bigger is better”. When it comes to a 7X42, the “less is more” argument wins the day. You get effective image stabilization, a more relaxing view, more time on the bird, more FOV, and more DOF. The price is magnification and, in most instances, it’s not much of a price at all.

The Leica strap is excellent and I experienced no neck strain after several hours of use on a bare neck (the weather was exceptionally mild today).

Minimum focusing is perfect. I have an IPD of 57mm and the Leica goes down to 56mm (maybe lower). As many know, the trick to close focusing is to reduce the IPD until you find your personal comfort level. Forget about your perfect IPD setting for normal viewing and just close the bins until the image looks good. I originally did NOT do this with my SE because I wanted to maintain my “perfect” IPD setting to avoid blackouts. However, once I mastered the SE, I started reducing the IPD for close-ups and was pleasantly surprised by the wonderful picture. I also felt stupid for not trying it sooner! In a typical birding day I change the IPD several times and it is easier to set on the Leica than it is with my SE.

I am extremely pleased with the Ultravid and find it to be a worthy complement to the SE 8X32.

John

John,

Glad to hear, but not surprised, that you are happy with the 7x42 Ultravids. There is certainly a lot to be said for 7x42s, and I continue to be extremely happy with my 7x42 SLCs. I am particularly fond of the focus - fast and very smooth.

I'm going to have to work the other way - and get a pair of 8x32s to go with my 7x42s.

We are fortunate in having so many fine binoculars to choose from!

Clear skies, Alan

John Traynor said:

I now own 2 exceptional birding glasses: my tried and true SE 8X32 and a new Ultravid 7X42. A few comments about the Ultravid seem appropriate.

I've used the Ultravid for several hours in rather gloomy conditions and the first thing I noticed was its wonderful brightness. Trust me, the Ultravid 7X42 is bright enough to cover any dawn to dusk situation you'll encounter.

The 6mm exit pupil of a 7X42 is addictively easy on the eyes. All debate over "exit pupil this and exit pupil that" becomes moot when your eyes comfortably fall within the expansive window provided by a larger than average exit pupil.

Sharpness, contrast, clarity, resolution, etc. Whatever you call it, this glass delivers an image as clear and as lively as the SE. The SE wins on DOF at close range and the SE's overall image may be a gnat’s hair better...given ideal viewing conditions. The differences, however, are so insignificant I heartily recommend the Ultravid 7X42 to any SE 8X32 fan looking for an all-weather roof prism. I don’t think you’ll be unhappy.

Eye relief (ER) is more than adequate and I'm picky about ER. The 8X42 Ultravid did not give me enough ER and, in general, I preferred the 7X42 for many reasons.

My personal opinion is that the overall image quality of the 8X Ultravid is no different than the 7X. Eye relief, exit pupil, FOV, and magnification are the basic differences. There are, however, 8 lens elements in the 7X42 versus 9 lens elements in the 8X42 and this difference probably skews brightness in favor of the 7X42. Maybe a more learned reader could shed some light on my observation!

The diopter mechanism is the best I've seen. Leica definitely pays attention to detail because, except for one abused demo, I've always been able to set a Leica Trinovid/Ultravid diopter to 0 and get on with using the bin. I've seen the same level of diopter consistency in SE's. The bottom line is there's no fiddling with the diopter and it's extremely easy to accurately adjust for individual preferences.

Handling is always a personal thing and, for me, the Ultravid 7X feels as good in my hand as it's going to get. I like holding this bin! Enough said on that issue.

The Ultravid build quality appears on par with other premium bins and the Passport warranty covers repairs under a No-Fault agreement.

The objective eyecups are supposed to be tethered, but I soon broke one of the tethers while attempting to adjust it. When uncovered, the covers flop down in a semi-stiff position and simply got in the way of my hand. It’s not the best design I’ve seen. I now have two objective covers with tethers removed and they work just fine.

In conclusion, the Ultravid 7X42 seems to be everything I was looking for in a roof prism binocular. It is a worthy complement to my SE 8X32.

John

Click to expand...

I'm revisiting this thread (almost three years old!) to counter some of the recent negative commentary.

Updates:

The Ultravid 7X42 was clearly designed for low-light use. I'm 56, wear eyeglasses, and suffer from very poor accommodation in one eye. Thankfully, my acuity is excellent and colors are as vibrant as one can imagine. In low light, the 7X42 Ultravid is extremely sharp and colorful with a very high WOW factor.

Flare control is so good I don't even think about flare when I'm using the Ultravid.

Color? As good as my SE and any other binocular I've examined.

Centerfield sharpness? As good as it gets...equivalent to my SE.

Edge sharpness? Not as good as my SE, but I've learned to focus on the center and move the binocular. Precisely setting the IPD to my eye spacing has a dramatic affect on perceived edge sharpness. If you need a 7X42 with better edge sharpness, buy the SLC 7X42.

CA? Originally, and for nearly three years, I saw a bit too much CA in my Ultravid and it was my only real concern. I could write a paper on this but suffice it to say; after I reduced the IPD to MY personal measurements, most of this problem disappeared. A 6mm exit might seem forgiving, but it also allows for a lot of error in establishing correct optical alignment. Once I addressed the optical alignment issue, perceived CA in the Ultravid diminished dramatically. I look forward to seeing an Ultravid with FL glass, but I'm not certain I'll need one!

Handling? Perfect for my tastes.

Diopter? Superb design that's never been a problem.

Bridge? My bridge froze, making it nearly impossible to set the IPD. I satisfactorily addressed the issue myself and it's now very firm and silky smooth.

Eyecups? They’re always in the down position.

Contoured Strap? Will someone please clone this strap and sell it for $20 USD?

Case? It does the job it was designed for.

Focusing? Yes, my Ultravid focus mechanism is stiffer than a lot of models. The only thing I can say is that I never lose a bird due to focusing issues.

Summary:
A truly excellent binocular that has afforded me many hours of enjoyment. I can afford to buy any binocular and, so far, I can't find a waterproof, fog proof model that I'd choose over the Ultravid. Believe it or not, there are important differences between $300 models and models in the $2000 range. If you can't see the differences, count your blessings. My eyes aren't as good as they once were (mostly accommodation issues) and I can perceive subtle differences in a heartbeat.

If I didn't cover something you're interested in, please ask!

John

does magnification effect flare? i regret not buying the 7x42 ultravid

Enjoyable Review

Brill John
I've never even seen through a 7x42 binocular. Now I'm gonna try some out next chance I get!
Infectiously enthusiastic review, mate. A bloke only gets that excited about a piece of equipment when it's really good and enhances his senses, making him happy. I want some of that please!
This is the best of what a forum can do for us: open our eyes to something we didn't know. Great piece of writing John, hope you continue to be so enthralled with them for a long time to come.
Paul

I bought my Ultravid 7X42 in November of 2004 following two trips to the store and a few hours of comparative testing. I purchased the store demo with a red label on the outside of the box for $1150 plus tax.

Problems encountered during four years of use:

1. After a few months, the bridge seized to the point where I could barely set the IPD. Since I did not want to part with the binocular, I addressed the issue myself and it's been fine ever since.

2. There are two tiny hairline cracks emanating part way out from the center of the plastic window on the diopter control. They don't affect a thing.

3. Stiff focus wheel. This is well documented, but I've never missed a thing because I couldn't focus fast enough or with enough precision. In cold weather, it's superb.

Good things...
1. While scrambling, I've banged it against granite more than once, resulting in at least one ding (beauty mark) in the bridge. No problem.

2. I average one lens cleaning a week which adds up to > 200 cleanings. My method is sound and all glass surfaces look good as new...except for a sliver of a scratch near the edge of one objective. I'm fastidious about cleaning, but I must say Leica put excellent glass in the Ultravid.

3. Focus is extremely precise, balanced, and uniform across distance. My right eye has almost zero accommodation so I appreciate a precise focus. Sloppy focus mechanisms are a major problem with mid-priced bins and one of the reasons high-end bins are so attractive to older birders. In short, the Leica snaps to focus each and every time. If it didn’t I wouldn’t own it.

4. The tethered objective covers work fine as long as you cut the tethers and remove them for use. Otherwise, the view is pretty dark.

5. I bird in the rain and my Ultravid (with clean lenses) has always been a joy to use. A few of my best birding days have been rainy, Ultravid days.

6. I learned to minimize CA by adjusting the IPD based on lighting conditions. A 6mm exit pupil may appear forgiving, but there’s no substitute for proper optical alignment. Under most lighting conditions, I set the IPD to my absolute minimum; at other times I set it much wider.

7. Last, but certainly not least, is the all-important view. After fours years, I still find myself saying “Wow” on a regular basis, which is enough technical analysis for me. One early morning last week, as I came over the hill a few hundred meters from our property, I heard my Pileateds calling from the suet poles. I stopped, raised the Leica and saw the blackest blacks and reddest reds I’ve seen in a bird.

John

John,

Great thread. I do not know how I missed it after so many years/hours of visiting this forum. If you do not mind, you and I have been comparing the FL and Ultravid in the 7x42 configuration in the field for at least two years now. In our most recent comparison it surprised me a bit to hear you give the FLs some praise in regards to the sweet spot in particular. Any chance you want to share your further thoughts on them in comparison to the Ultravids here? I know they have some flaws but your opinion is always one I respect.

...oh, and I may be heading up to the knob tomorrow for a time. I have the day off and the wife and kids will be at work/school respectively.

FrankD said:

John,

Great thread. I do not know how I missed it after so many years/hours of visiting this forum. If you do not mind, you and I have been comparing the FL and Ultravid in the 7x42 configuration in the field for at least two years now. In our most recent comparison it surprised me a bit to hear you give the FLs some praise in regards to the sweet spot in particular. Any chance you want to share your further thoughts on them in comparison to the Ultravids here? I know they have some flaws but your opinion is always one I respect.

...oh, and I may be heading up to the knob tomorrow for a time. I have the day off and the wife and kids will be at work/school respectively.

Click to expand...

Frank,

I've always said the FL centerfield is as good as it gets and that the 7X42 is, to my eye, the best of the FL line. I could see a difference between the relative sweet spots (FL versus Ultravid), but I don't think the difference would bother most people. Poor accommodation in my right eye makes me a rather critical judge of optics.

FWIW, I could see no difference between your two FL's. The centerfield image in both is superb.

John

contemplating going from 8x42 Trinovid to 7x42 ... not sure which. Probably SLC, but Trinovid and T*FL are an option.