Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

What’s your favorite 7x42 binoculars

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 2nd August 2019, 22:18   #26
Alexis Powell
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: LY+DG counties, Kansas, USA
Posts: 3,206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexis Powell View Post
I understand what you mean by the continuity from the BA Ultra to the latest Ultravid model, but in criticizing Leica as a whole, I think in you are forgetting their Noctivid.

--AP
Again, how about those Noctivids?

--AP
Alexis Powell is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 3rd August 2019, 00:11   #27
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
you can still buy second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus."
Yes, some some shops still stock some Trinovid 2015, and also there are a lot of new-old-stock UV HD (non plus) floating around, sold at around half the price of a Noct. That's how I got my own 7x42 from a dealer.

Earlier this week, I tried a Trinovid 8x42 in comparison with my UV HD 7x42 and the old glass was super heavy but the view was as good, and on reverse inspection the old glass seemed more transparent. I fail to see any optical upgrade here, exactly as denco says.

Also, my feeling is that the Noct isn't getting as much user love as the UV models, maybe because of ever-increasing price or maybe because the old UVs had a very good view and the Nocts aren't really that much of an upgrade. Faced with sharp competition from the cheaper cased but optically quite interesting Zeiss SF, my impression is the Noct has mainly a very white view and nice compact styling to speak for itself, and the fact that it is sold in Leica Boutiques and airport shops :)

BTW after buying my "cheap" UV HD, I compared it to the SF. Yes, one can see the difference. Would it be worth double the money? Not for me. Would I take it over a Noct? In a heartbeat.

Edmund

Last edited by eronald : Saturday 3rd August 2019 at 00:37.
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 3rd August 2019, 00:22   #28
wdc
Registered User
 
wdc's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Moraga, California
Posts: 405
Well, to start with Alexis (post 26), with respect to the title of the thread, they don't come in 7x42!

That said, I have the 10x42 Noctivid, and I think its an excellent binocular. Ergo is not as good as the Zeiss Victory SF, but focus feel, ease of view, and quality of view for me is as good as anything else I have. I think both Zeiss and Leica, to push their product line forward in performance had to sacrifice size and weight to do so with the Victory and the Noctivid lines. The Victory SF was a real effort to make a larger binocular handle well, and it succeeds. The Noctivid didn't focus on the ergonomics as much, but I use it almost every weekend. Once you put it to work, its not an issue.
Would I be interested in seeing those bins in a smaller format? Yes!

With regard to the oft-mentioned Habit forming 7x42, it is admirable of Swarovski to have kept it in production, as it clearly offers a quality view at an affordable price, but the shortcomings, (quirks, some say) of such a purpose-built design are evident to many. In fact, even the most recent verbose and persistent advocate of this product once had this to say about it:
https://www.birdforum.net/showthread...=286547&page=2, post 34

"I had the Habicht 7x42 and the 8x30. The eyecups are small and hard and it takes a vise-grip to turn the focus and they are short on ER. I got rid of them long ago. Get the SV."

And, of course the SV also got the boot at some point, even though both bins are now regularly touted for all their virtues, and forgiven all their faults, real and imagined, by the same individual.

----------------

With 7x42 in general, I'm on the fence. When there are 8x42 binoculars, like the Nikon Monarch HG 8x42, that offer fields as wide, or wider than the 7x42 Ultravid HD Plus, weigh less, and perform optically well, something tells me I have yet to fully appreciate the virtues of that specific format. I do have a 7x42 BR, but it has never captivated me in field use the way certain 8 and 10x bins have. All this discussion though makes me want to give it another go.

Happy Friday folks. I'm going out early tomorrow to bird! (7x42...?) I'll put 3 bins out on the table and pick one..

-Bill

Last edited by wdc : Saturday 3rd August 2019 at 00:24.
wdc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 3rd August 2019, 00:35   #29
wdc
Registered User
 
wdc's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Moraga, California
Posts: 405
Quote:
Originally Posted by eronald View Post

Also, my feeling is that the Noct isn't getting as much user love as the UV models, maybe because of ever-increasing price or maybe because the old UVs had a very good view and the Nocts aren't really that much of an upgrade. Faced with sharp competition from the cheaper cased but optically effective Zeiss SF, my impression is the Noct has mainly a very white view and nice compact styling to speak for itself, and the fact that it is sold in Leica Boutiques and airport shops :)

Edmund
I'm sure you're right. Tobias Mennie has also pointed out that the Ultravid is a better industrial designed package in terms of size and form than the Noctivid. I tend to agree with him, but the Noctivid has the eye relief I need for a 10x bin.

-Bill
wdc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 3rd August 2019, 01:36   #30
eronald
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Paris
Posts: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdc View Post
I'm sure you're right. Tobias Mennie has also pointed out that the Ultravid is a better industrial designed package in terms of size and form than the Noctivid. I tend to agree with him, but the Noctivid has the eye relief I need for a 10x bin.

-Bill
You need the eye relief of the Noct, and in my case apart from not wanting to spend for a first buy, I encountered the interesting problem that I seem to have an IPD of 54mm, which is apparently not acceptable in Austria :)

It seems most of the makers are producing solid products, and if the buyer gets a model compatible with their eyes then any of the current crop will make the buyer happy.

Even if some regret the slow march of progress, this forum is full of satisfied buyers!

Edmund
eronald is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 4th August 2019, 14:05   #31
chill6x6
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
chill6x6's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Alabama
Posts: 1,472
So yesterday after work I did a little birding myself... I should have waited a little later but I thought a thunderstorm would have cooled it down enough for the birds to come out. As it turned out it cleared up QUICKLY and turned HOT just as quickly. So bird species count was kinda low, 24.

The binocular I picked was the FL 7X42. Such a great binocular. It hard to find fault with it. For a full sized 42mm binocular it's very lightweight. Focus adjustment is really about as good as it gets. Field curvature really isn't much of an issue in actual use. I suppose I use the UVHD+ more because of it's size advantage. But really, there is not good reason to pick one over the other EXCEPT that the UVHD+ 7X42 is the best 7X42 currently available.

Today I did bring along the SLC 7X42 and the UVHD+ 7X42. Not to actually use today, but to take a few photos. I like the SLC just as well as the other two except....it's heavy, even heavier than the Trinovid BN. 33.9 ounces for a 42mm binocular is no joke! LOL! So the SLC like the Trinovid BN, stays home mostly because I prefer a lighter binocular.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	fullsizeoutput_1385.jpeg
Views:	105
Size:	64.6 KB
ID:	701251  
__________________
Chuck
chill6x6 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 4th August 2019, 16:46   #32
tenex
Registered User
 
tenex's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Colorado
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdc View Post
With 7x42 in general, I'm on the fence. When there are 8x42 binoculars, like the Nikon Monarch HG 8x42, that offer fields as wide, or wider than the 7x42 Ultravid HD Plus, weigh less, and perform optically well, something tells me I have yet to fully appreciate the virtues of that specific format. I do have a 7x42 BR, but it has never captivated me in field use the way certain 8 and 10x bins have.
This is where I am also, with 7x (and even 8x -- haven't tried the HG) compared to 10x. I keep wanting to appreciate them but they don't seem to offer enough additional (real) FOV for the sacrifice in magnification, and I have to wonder why. Perhaps this is why 7x is a vanishing species.
tenex is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 4th August 2019, 17:33   #33
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,139
Quote:
Originally Posted by tenex View Post
This is where I am also, with 7x (and even 8x -- haven't tried the HG) compared to 10x. I keep wanting to appreciate them but they don't seem to offer enough additional (real) FOV for the sacrifice in magnification, and I have to wonder why. Perhaps this is why 7x is a vanishing species.
Tenex. I understand where you are coming from. 7x doesn't usually have the big AFOV of an 8x or 10x so they don't have that WOW factor that the bigger AFOV provides. You have to appreciate 7x for the greater DOF with less focusing, comfort and steadiness they provide. Different strokes for different folks.

Last edited by [email protected] : Sunday 4th August 2019 at 17:35.
denco@comcast.n is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 4th August 2019, 20:37   #34
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,679
On the discussion of Leica...with respect to the 7X42 format.
I do not own a Leica 7X42, but I have compared a 10X50 BR and the 10X50 UV HD+, the only obvious difference is that the focus is improved in the HD +; optically the difference is slight CA in the Br, and that is it IMHO. The 10X50 BR is still today, a very good instrument....then again the 10X50 has been heralded as the pinnacle of Leica binoculars starting with the BA 10X50.

I am sure the 7X42 BR is still a very good glass, and if I wanted a 7X42, they would suit me very well.

Andy W.

Last edited by dries1 : Sunday 4th August 2019 at 20:41.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 4th August 2019, 20:55   #35
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
BF Supporter 2019
 
Kevin Conville's Avatar

 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: State of Chaos
Posts: 2,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdc View Post
With 7x42 in general, I'm on the fence. When there are 8x42 binoculars, like the Nikon Monarch HG 8x42, that offer fields as wide, or wider than the 7x42 Ultravid HD Plus, weigh less, and perform optically well, something tells me I have yet to fully appreciate the virtues of that specific format. I do have a 7x42 BR, but it has never captivated me in field use the way certain 8 and 10x bins have. All this discussion though makes me want to give it another go.

-Bill
Agreed.

I had two pair of 7x42 BRs at different times and as much as I regarded them, I usually took my 8x32 BNs when heading out the door. Conceding that the view was a little better through the 7x42s, everything else steered me toward the 8x32s.

These days 8x42 Monarch HGs have their hooks in me. For me they offer it all, sans the depth of field a 7x bin offers. The ergos, light weight, great focus, good eyecups, eye relief that suits me with and without glasses, wide field, great color, and image sharpness make them my current fave.
__________________
my bird pics

Scott's Miracle Grow KILLING Birds, for Years!
read this: http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=226714

Last edited by Kevin Conville : Sunday 4th August 2019 at 21:08.
Kevin Conville is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 5th August 2019, 13:39   #36
NDhunter
Registered User
 
NDhunter's Avatar

 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ND
Posts: 4,111
I noticed on the classifieds, there is a very nice Swarovski Habicht 7x42 for sale.

A dependable seller.

Jerry
NDhunter is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th August 2019, 15:22   #37
Mark9473
Registered User

 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: 51°N 4°E
Posts: 242
These are the two transmission graphs overlaid. Can anybody comment on the difference at long wavelength?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	trans_leica.jpg
Views:	29
Size:	123.1 KB
ID:	701379  
Mark9473 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th August 2019, 16:42   #38
dries1
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
dries1's Avatar

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Delaware
Posts: 1,679
I think my eyes are crossed up after looking at that graph.

Andy W.
dries1 is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 5th August 2019, 18:22   #39
jring
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Germany
Posts: 2,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark9473 View Post
These are the two transmission graphs overlaid. Can anybody comment on the difference at long wavelength?
I can't make out which is which but the one with the slight hump in the red from 650nm on might be a bit warmer... at least at first glance... the eye tends to adapt quicky...

Joachim
jring is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th August 2019, 19:29   #40
marcsantacurz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Posts: 776
Quote:
Originally Posted by chill6x6 View Post
One thing about the Allbinos percent transmission rating. His margin of error gets lower as reviews get newer. So as the BN 10X42 shows 88% the margin of error is +/- 3%. So the actual results could be as low as 85% or as high of 91%. The UVHD+ 10X42 shows 87% with a margin of error of 1.5% so it actually could be as low as 85.5% or as high as 88.5%. I don't think that's whole story as his and Gijs tests show much of the improvement in the indigo-blue light range.
If you look at their testing methodology (see the section on "TRANSMISSION"), they completely changed their testing method. They now use a spectophotometer. Previously, they used a composite of three methods. They estimate the statistical error around 1% nowadays and 3-5% previously. From the same article, it looks like they are using 1-sigma confidence intervals, which means the true value only has a 68% chance of being in the stated bounds. So for the 3-5% interval, there's a 32% chance that the true value lies above or below the interval.

It is not clear if they are using the same estimate all the time, or if they are repeating the experiment for a certain number of trails and calculating the confidence interval each time. Or if the number comes from the spectophotometer, or from some other estimate.

It seems that some other errors they report are true measurement errors, i.e. it is the inherent measurement error on the tool they use.

Marc
__________________
https://tear.com
marcsantacurz is online now  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Benefits of 7x42 binoculars Stanbo Binoculars 30 Sunday 22nd April 2012 14:49
Leica Ultravid 7x42 BL? Also favorite 7x42s? John M Robinson Leica 3 Monday 12th January 2009 16:04
your favorite method of holding binoculars? nyatt Binoculars 2 Wednesday 12th November 2008 15:04
Leica 7x42 Bn's Best Binoculars I Have Ever Used! [email protected] Leica 24 Monday 14th May 2007 17:20

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.15092707 seconds with 30 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:39.