This is not a review per se, just some thoughts. I’m nowhere knowledgeable enough to discuss the optical minutiae and technical points like a lot of folks on the forum.
I bought a pair of Zeiss T8 FL 8 x 42’s in 2005 after retiring a few years earlier, thinking of possibly getting back in birding, which I had drifted away from in the early 90’s. Starting in 2008 I began to become more active in birding. My current plan is to do a trip to a new place outside of the US once a year until I either die, become physically unable to do so, or a group of sociopath billionaires destroy my retirement savings. That’s my primary use for binoculars - I don’t use them often locally, except during migration.
It being winter, a dangerous time in regards to spending money, I began to think about new glass, maybe an upgrade to to HT’s. I didn’t have a particular beef with the FL’s that I could put my finger on, but I don’t think I ever bonded with them. Does that sound crazy? For instance, in 2014 my wife and I did a safari in Tanzania, and I had no qualms about leaving the FL’s at home and taking a pair of Nikon Monarch 7 8x30’s instead, to save weight and space. I didn’t really miss not having the FL’s.
After spending a couple of weeks online, I began to gravitate toward the Leica Ultravid 8 x 42 HD’s, primarily because of the smaller size than the other big boys. They seemed well reviewed, and I wasn’t picking up on consistent mention of a particular flaw. I didn’t consider the Plus model - past my price point. I tend to buy one model behind the latest and greatest.
I’m not unacquainted with Leica products. I had a pair of 8 x 32 Trinovid BA’s which I used when woodchuck hunting. I really liked their small size and heft. Not sure why I got rid of them…
So I pulled the trigger on the UV’s. When I got them, my first thought was, wow, these feel really good in my hands. Smaller, the balance felt different, easier to hold steady, the hold positive with no “plastic” feel like the Zeiss. (No slam on them, but the FL’s are plastic…).
Optically, I had to work to find any difference. The UV’s colors seem to be a bit more saturated. Some sun would help here, but not much of that in NE Ohio in the winter. Also, they seem to have a bit more detail in shadows. I’m not sure how that is, as it should be a function of light gathering power, which is determined by objective diameter, which is the same…right?
The rest is all subjective. The UV’s just feel right for me. They feel solid and balanced. I’m OK with the thumb rests on the bottom that are apparently an issue with some folks. I find my natural grip tends to go asymmetrical - left thumb behind rest, right thumb in front of rest. In this position, as everything is back farther than on the Z’s, my left thumb is touching my nose, which is good. I know that sounds strange, but as both my rotator cuffs are blown out, being able to transfer weight anywhere else is good. If possible, when viewing I try to lock my elbows against my sides. Being able to rest a thumb on my nose actually steadies me when viewing at an upward angle.
I did a rather unscientific test to determine the balance point on each, and came up with: Zeiss, length 6.25, balance point 3.125”, so the weight is balanced equally front and rear, Leica’s: length 5.625', balance point 2.5”, weight distribution favors the rear. A friend of mine who is way better at math than I am told me that that’s a 55% back 45% front weight distribution. I can tell the difference, and it makes for a steadier hold for me.
Bottom line: I really, really like the UV’s. They may be my “perfect” binocular. And it’s based far more on ergonomics than optics. I won’t be leaving these boys behind when I go on a trip!
I bought a pair of Zeiss T8 FL 8 x 42’s in 2005 after retiring a few years earlier, thinking of possibly getting back in birding, which I had drifted away from in the early 90’s. Starting in 2008 I began to become more active in birding. My current plan is to do a trip to a new place outside of the US once a year until I either die, become physically unable to do so, or a group of sociopath billionaires destroy my retirement savings. That’s my primary use for binoculars - I don’t use them often locally, except during migration.
It being winter, a dangerous time in regards to spending money, I began to think about new glass, maybe an upgrade to to HT’s. I didn’t have a particular beef with the FL’s that I could put my finger on, but I don’t think I ever bonded with them. Does that sound crazy? For instance, in 2014 my wife and I did a safari in Tanzania, and I had no qualms about leaving the FL’s at home and taking a pair of Nikon Monarch 7 8x30’s instead, to save weight and space. I didn’t really miss not having the FL’s.
After spending a couple of weeks online, I began to gravitate toward the Leica Ultravid 8 x 42 HD’s, primarily because of the smaller size than the other big boys. They seemed well reviewed, and I wasn’t picking up on consistent mention of a particular flaw. I didn’t consider the Plus model - past my price point. I tend to buy one model behind the latest and greatest.
I’m not unacquainted with Leica products. I had a pair of 8 x 32 Trinovid BA’s which I used when woodchuck hunting. I really liked their small size and heft. Not sure why I got rid of them…
So I pulled the trigger on the UV’s. When I got them, my first thought was, wow, these feel really good in my hands. Smaller, the balance felt different, easier to hold steady, the hold positive with no “plastic” feel like the Zeiss. (No slam on them, but the FL’s are plastic…).
Optically, I had to work to find any difference. The UV’s colors seem to be a bit more saturated. Some sun would help here, but not much of that in NE Ohio in the winter. Also, they seem to have a bit more detail in shadows. I’m not sure how that is, as it should be a function of light gathering power, which is determined by objective diameter, which is the same…right?
The rest is all subjective. The UV’s just feel right for me. They feel solid and balanced. I’m OK with the thumb rests on the bottom that are apparently an issue with some folks. I find my natural grip tends to go asymmetrical - left thumb behind rest, right thumb in front of rest. In this position, as everything is back farther than on the Z’s, my left thumb is touching my nose, which is good. I know that sounds strange, but as both my rotator cuffs are blown out, being able to transfer weight anywhere else is good. If possible, when viewing I try to lock my elbows against my sides. Being able to rest a thumb on my nose actually steadies me when viewing at an upward angle.
I did a rather unscientific test to determine the balance point on each, and came up with: Zeiss, length 6.25, balance point 3.125”, so the weight is balanced equally front and rear, Leica’s: length 5.625', balance point 2.5”, weight distribution favors the rear. A friend of mine who is way better at math than I am told me that that’s a 55% back 45% front weight distribution. I can tell the difference, and it makes for a steadier hold for me.
Bottom line: I really, really like the UV’s. They may be my “perfect” binocular. And it’s based far more on ergonomics than optics. I won’t be leaving these boys behind when I go on a trip!
