Allbinos 10X42 UV HD + review... (1 Viewer)

http://www.allbinos.com/index.php?test=lornetki&test_l=302

Allbinos latest review is up...and it's of the Ultravid HD Plus 10X42. Somewhat disappointed it scored BELOW the previous Ultravid HD. Transmission % actually 1% LESS that the UV HD. Perhaps Leica has reached the limit to what they CAN do with that platform. Transmissions graphs look very similar...slight differences with both reaching 90% above 600nm.

I wonder if the physical design of the Ultravid limits its performance. I think it was Gijs that showed the transmission to not be much improved in the HD Plus as well.

chill6x6 said:

Somewhat disappointed it scored BELOW the previous Ultravid HD. Transmission % actually 1% LESS that the UV HD.

Click to expand...

To be fair, that's your conclusion rather than something stated by Allbinos. They noted:

Firstly the results show unanimously that, within the margin of measurement error, the HD-Plus model is practically the same as the HD model. Maybe the transmission level varies a bit but even if you compare the measurements taken with a spectrophotometer the differences remain very slight; it is really difficult to say whether they are an effect of measurement errors, natural differences between two specimens or the actual influence of Schott HT glass {my emphasis}. If the spectrophotometer doesn’t show any distinct difference, it won’t be visible to the naked eye either.

Click to expand...

I'd say "not greater" rather than "less" would be closer to a fair statement based on what's in the Allbinos report.

...Mike

P.S. It's good to see Allbinos is posting again, after months of absence.

mfunnell said:

To be fair, that's your conclusion rather than something stated by Allbinos. They noted:
I'd say "not greater" rather than "less" would be closer to a fair statement based on what's in the Allbinos report.

...Mike

P.S. It's good to see Allbinos is posting again, after months of absence.

Click to expand...

Actually when I said "scored" I was referring to Allbino's scoring, 142.1 points for the UV HD + and 142.6 for the UV HD...so the UV HD Plus scored less than the UV HD. As far as transmission % goes I was merely going by the data on Allbinos score sheet that list the UV HD at 88%(+/- 1.5%) and the UV HD Plus at 87%(+/- 1%). No conclusion, just stating the facts.
It's nice that Allbino's margin of error is decreasing as testing continues.

Hardly read like the review by greatestbinoculars.com. My favorite quote:

It seems that for almost 25 years Leica haven’t introduced any innovative optical solutions to its key series of binoculars. . . Still such a reputable company should have done better, especially if you take into account the length of the period of time we are talking about. As a result of such stagnation Leica devices started to compete with each other: you can still buy second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus.

If you really want to see Albinos hammer Leica, check out their 2013 8x42 Endurance Test. And I quote again:

"According to the specifications the Leica Ultravid HD series of binoculars is waterproof up to a depth of 5 meters. We don’t hesitate to say Leica simply doesn’t tell the truth. The binoculars we tested didn’t manage to survive a submersion in knee-deep water for half an hour. After such an operation the device was completely drenched and most of its functions stopped working. It is a huge fault for such a renowned manufacturer because it is expected that they are honest and their product perform exceedingly well.

One of the tubes was fogged up, in the other one the water sloshed merrily about…It is not nice to kick the defeated opponent but we must add here that even the window with a scale, positioned on the focus wheel, was completely flooded. A real tragedy and a complete failure!" And that wasn't the worst of their statements regarding Leica's fall from quality.

Leica did later clarify a failed O Ring or something was culprit. Anyway, in balance, Albinos seems to have 'bad luck' with their Leica samples.

Leica could, for a start, try to increase the eye relief for the visually impaired.

chill6x6 said:

http://www.allbinos.com/index.php?test=lornetki&test_l=302

Allbinos latest review is up...and it's of the Ultravid HD Plus 10X42. Somewhat disappointed it scored BELOW the previous Ultravid HD. Transmission % actually 1% LESS that the UV HD. Perhaps Leica has reached the limit to what they CAN do with that platform. Transmissions graphs look very similar...slight differences with both reaching 90% above 600nm.

Click to expand...

So the new model scores below the old model ??? :cat:

Well, .......... this is rather, um, ........ embarrassing ........|:$|

For ......... Allbino's !! :eek!:

I appreciate Allbino's efforts to quantify, but this either says something significant about their testing and scoring procedures, or about Leica's unit to unit variability ....... :brains:
One wonders where the most basic of common sense checks and even moderate editorial rigour is ?? ...... :h?:
Looking closely at each category scored shows enough discrepancies and holes big enough to drive a truck through!

If I was Leica, I'd be feeling pretty ripped off ! :-C

I can easily see an extra 1.5 pts that the UVHD+ was due purely to miscalculation and different scoring of what is meant to be identical spec .......

Without a change in optical formula, the Coma is now supposedly up to 5% worse with a penalty of 0.6pts. Most glaring of these in my book though, is awarding the HD 7.5/10 pts for its claimed 64.4 degree claimed AFov, and then only awarding the HD+ 7/10 pts for its claimed 63.1 degree AFov when they both have the same claimed 112m (6.39 degree) Fov, and the HD+ actually measures a hair wider than the HD ! :eek!: That's just sloppy. What they have attempted to do is somehow incorporate the actual measured magnification, but this is a very clumsy approach given the margin of error on the measurements which seems to somehow have increased this time!

I say that the new UVHD+ really scores about 143.6 /170 pts which is 84.5% and places the Plus in 8th spot still, but at least above the non- plus version. I wouldn't even like to hazard a guess at the Swarovski SLC and where that sits, and how it compares between all those different versions if this is anything to go by!

As far as the transmission curve goes, it is difficult to see how with the only change being the addition of higher transmitting Schott HT glass used in the prism, that the new HD+ returns a lower daytime (or 555nm) value. Certainly the graph now shows for the HD+ nearly ~10% higher value @400nm, a few % higher in the bluish @425- 450nm, stays over 90% all the way to 700nm now, and has a higher peak value of~ 92.5%@675nm vs the ~91%@650nm of the HD. All in all it seems a much better balance to the color rendition, and pretty much line ball (profile and value- wise) with the (accused of darkness) Nikon EDG II, save for a slightly less reddish tint. Hahaha .....

Curiouser and curiouser ....... :cat:


Chosun :gh:

chill6x6 said:

http://www.allbinos.com/index.php?test=lornetki&test_l=302

Allbinos latest review is up...and it's of the Ultravid HD Plus 10X42. Somewhat disappointed it scored BELOW the previous Ultravid HD. Transmission % actually 1% LESS that the UV HD. Perhaps Leica has reached the limit to what they CAN do with that platform. Transmissions graphs look very similar...slight differences with both reaching 90% above 600nm.

Click to expand...

Look at the whole transmission curve, not just the mean,
transmission in the blue/violet spectrum 400nm-495nm is higher, looks like around 2-3% which is what you can expect from using HT glass, Leica as well as Swaro seem to prefer a flatter curve before having the peak in green-yellow like some Zeiss bins.

But I think you are right, Leica have now reached the limit to what they can do with the ultravid 42mm HD:s.

Vespobuteo said:

Look at the whole transmission curve, not just the mean,
transmission in the blue/violet spectrum 400nm-495nm is higher, looks like around 2-3% which is what you can expect from using HT glass, Leica as well as Swaro seem to prefer a flatter curve before having the peak in green-yellow like some Zeiss bins.

But I think you are right, Leica have now reached the limit to what they can do with the ultravid 42mm HD:s.

Click to expand...

The 87% +/- 1% is not the "mean" value, it's the 'daylight' value, ie @ 555nm, or smack bang in the green colour spectrum. Sometimes I don't know why I bother posting :brains: *smacks head, rolls eyes smilie* |^|

So while 87% +/- is not the "mean" value, it is rather 'stingy' ..... ||

When the Swarovski SLC can supposedly get to ~92%, and the Zeiss HT is up just over 95%, then I find it perplexing that the Leica UVHD+ is so 'low' ....... :cat:

While I can fathom maybe a ~2% difference due to the A-K prisms of the HT, the rest of it just doesn't gel, especially considering that the Leica has both HT a-n-d FL glass. :h?:

Curiouser and curiouser indeedy ! ........... :cat: :cat:


Chosun :gh:

Gijs van ginkel reported very similar transmission measurements for the UV HD+ to allbinos in regards to transmission; (8x32) 86.8% @ 500nm and 89.2% @ 550nm and (7x42) 86.8% @500nm and 88.2 @550nm. It is fairly obvious that in terms of transmission the HD+ has not much improved over the HD relative to its competitors. That's not to say it has low transmission or that it isn't a fine pair of binoculars, just that in this particular regard it isn't top of the line and really that the + doesn't have improved transmission. In the link below Gijs has graphed the transmission values of the 8x32 HD and HD+ and you'll notice very little difference. So, before people call out Allbinos for this review, please make note that others are finding similar results when testing.

www.houseofoutdoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Test-van-de-Meopta-Meostar-B1-8x32-def-mei-2016.pdf

Jremmons and other readers,
On the WEB-site of House of Outdoor, referred to in post 10, I have also published test of the 7x42 HD-plus and the 8x42 HD-plus.
Gijs van Ginkel

jremmons said:

www.houseofoutdoor.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Test-van-de-Meopta-Meostar-B1-8x32-def-mei-2016.pdf

Click to expand...

Gijs:

Is this the same model/coatings as tested in the allbinos 2011-review?
Do you know when those new coatings were implemented?

http://www.allbinos.com/185-binoculars_review-Meopta_Meostar_B1_8x32.html

dwever said:

Hardly read like the review by greatestbinoculars.com. My favorite quote:

It seems that for almost 25 years Leica haven’t introduced any innovative optical solutions to its key series of binoculars. . . Still such a reputable company should have done better, especially if you take into account the length of the period of time we are talking about. As a result of such stagnation Leica devices started to compete with each other: you can still buy second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus.

Click to expand...

They need to upgrade their pathetic USA warranty as well to remain competitive. They're either out of touch or just clueless. No wonder I seldom see any Leica glass show up in my hunting camps anymore.

Vespobuteo said:

Gijs:

Is this the same model/coatings as tested in the allbinos 2011-review?
Do you know when those new coatings were implemented?

http://www.allbinos.com/185-binoculars_review-Meopta_Meostar_B1_8x32.html

Click to expand...

I wish someone would translate that latest test. I do not know how. I've been using the Cabelas Euro 8x32HD for a few years now and love it.

Vespobuteo, post 12,
Yes it is the same 8x32 model as tested by Albinos, however the binocular we tested was from the most recent production according to the dealer (so from the year 2015 or 2016) and according to Meopta the coatings were recently improved. That will be the reason that we found a transmission increase of about 2% for the latest production (from 87,5% to 89,9% at 550 nm, error +/- 0,5%). You can find our whole report of the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 from May 2016 on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.
Gijs van Ginkel

jgraider said:

I wish someone would translate that latest test. I do not know how. I've been using the Cabelas Euro 8x32HD for a few years now and love it.

Click to expand...

Google translate seem to work ok with PDF:s nowadays.

https://translate.google.com/transl...an-de-Meopta-Meostar-B1-8x32-def-mei-2016.pdf

Gijs van Ginkel said:

Vespobuteo, post 12,
Yes it is the same 8x32 model as tested by Albinos, however the binocular we tested was from the most recent production according to the dealer (so from the year 2015 or 2016) and according to Meopta the coatings were recently improved. That will be the reason that we found a transmission increase of about 2% for the latest production (from 87,5% to 89,9% at 550 nm, error +/- 0,5%). You can find our whole report of the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 from May 2016 on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor.
Gijs van Ginkel

Click to expand...

Ok, thanks, thats interesting.
Really would like to test one of those,
unfortunately Meopta are hard find in stores here.

There is indeed good correlation between the Allbino's daylight result of 87 +/- 1% for the 10×42 UVHD+ and the 87.3% that Gijs found for the 8×42 UVHD+ , incidently some 1.5% higher than the non-plus version ...... As would be expected :t:
https://translate.googleusercontent...-1.pdf&usg=ALkJrhhx0CZo725Y1WvbQwFJGsRWW-VhDg

I am indeed still puzzled as to why it is so 'low' in comparison to the similar concept Swarovski SLC though ........ :cat:

Thoughts from the mavens ???


Chosun :gh:

Vespobuteo, post 10 and Chosun post 18,
In the transmation the measured transmission spectra are lost, so you have to look at the Dutch reports to find them, but you probably have discovered that already. Actually the curves give the best impression of the (small) improvements. Vespobuteo, you can order any Meopta at Jan van Daalen I assume.
Gijs

Vespobuteo said:

Google translate seem to work ok with PDF:s nowadays.

https://translate.google.com/transl...an-de-Meopta-Meostar-B1-8x32-def-mei-2016.pdf

Click to expand...

Thank you very much sir!