When a Leica Ultravid HD+ Replacement? (1 Viewer)

NDhunter · May 7, 2016

Dialyt said:
Interesting comments.

For me, the open bridge design of the Swarovski EL and Zeiss SF is intrinsically displeasing from an aesthetic perspective. Yes, it is comfortable to hold, but it's design is too revolutionary and, quite frankly, odd, and even ugly. I hope Leica doesn't introduce an open bridge design. I think Swarovski took some design cues from the Zeiss Dialyt 7x42, since it had an open bridge design almost, and allowed the wrap around grip for all users. They took the central pin out to form the EL.

The open bridge design is where it's at. Look at the success of Swarovski
and now Zeiss, and the countless clones on the market today.
They are very good and easy to hold, not sure why you don't like that.

Leica makes open frame models, the Geovid Perger porro models.

I am surprised you did not know about these.

Jerry

Dialyt · May 7, 2016

NDhunter said:
The open bridge design is where it's at. Look at the success of Swarovski
and now Zeiss, and the countless clones on the market today.
They are very good and easy to hold, not sure why you don't like that.

Leica makes open frame models, the Geovid Perger porro models.

I am surprised you did not know about these.

Jerry

Yes, I know the entire range of Leica binoculars. But the Geovid are rangefinders, and I have no interest in those. I'm talking about the standard binocular range.

The open design feels good, yes, but it's bulky, and in my opinion, ugly. I actually think the Zeiss SF is almost uglier than the Swarovski. I think Zeiss really need to work on their designs and take a leaf out of Leica's book about how to make a binocular that looks good. Swarovski too, their designs are a bit dull.

Having said that, I did use the Swarovski EL 8x32 and was impressed, apart from the awful hard plastic rachety rain guard with sharp plastic corners.

NDhunter · May 7, 2016

Dialyt said:
Yes, I know the entire range of Leica binoculars. But the Geovid are rangefinders, and I have no interest in those.

The open design feels good, yes, but it's bulky, and in my opinion, ugly. I actually think the Zeiss SF is almost uglier than the Swarovski. I think Zeiss really need to work on their designs and take a leaf out of Leica's book about how to make a binocular that looks good. Swarovski too, their designs are a bit dull.

Having said that, I did use the Swarovski EL 8x32 and was impressed, apart from the awful hard plastic rachety rain guard with sharp plastic corners.

We all have our opinions, but the word ugly does not apply at all.

The new Zeiss SF is very good, I have been enjoying the 10x42, it
has some advantages over the Swarovski that I really like.

Lots of choices, if you prefer Leica, good for you, but don't downgrade
the others because of your lack of experience.

Jerry

dwever · May 7, 2016

Dialyt said:
Yes, I know the entire range of Leica binoculars. But the Geovid are rangefinders, and I have no interest in those. I'm talking about the standard binocular range.

The open design feels good, yes, but it's bulky, and in my opinion, ugly. I actually think the Zeiss SF is almost uglier than the Swarovski. I think Zeiss really need to work on their designs and take a leaf out of Leica's book about how to make a binocular that looks good. Swarovski too, their designs are a bit dull.

Having said that, I did use the Swarovski EL 8x32 and was impressed, apart from the awful hard plastic rachety rain guard with sharp plastic corners.

Yes, it is hard to see how to include range finding binoculars in the discussion. While the Leica's are arguably the premiere rangers money can buy, their optical shortcomings compared to an alpha bin have been well documented (e.g. outdoorlife.com).

NDhunter said:
We all have our opinions, . . . Lots of choices, if you prefer Leica, good for you, but don't downgrade the others because of your lack of experience.
Jerry

Dialyt is not downgrading the others from "lack of experience". He is giving his opinion which is in part what we are here for this forum. As I've said previously, I love Zeiss HT's but am no fan of the SF's even with as much time as I've fiddled with them. Doesn't mean the SF's aren't spectacular binoculars, just not my cup of tea; in the same way, my beloved Leica's may be puking ugly to others. Some find the Leica thumb rests intolerable. Glad the Bino market is fairly broad.

Most people who are fans of the closed industrial compact Leica design are not going to gravitate to the big open designs of the EL's and SF's. So once again:

vive la différence !

NDhunter · May 7, 2016

I now understand, Dialyt likes to purchase an optic based on looks.

That is all I can understand, enough said.

Jerry

Dialyt · May 7, 2016

dwever said:
Dialyt is not downgrading the others from "lack of experience". He is giving his opinion which is in part what we are here for this forum. As I've said previously, I love Zeiss HT's but am no fan of the SF's even with as much time as I've fiddled with them. Doesn't mean the SF's aren't spectacular binoculars, just not my cup of tea; in the same way, my beloved Leica's may be puking ugly to others. Some find the Leica thumb rests intolerable. Glad the Bino market is fairly broad.

Most people who are fans of the closed industrial compact Leica design are not going to gravitate to the big open designs of the EL's and SF's. So once again:

vive la différence !

Exactly.

If I'm going to spend well over £1000 on binoculars, I want to enjoy the full product experience. I love my Leica Ultravid 8x32 BR. I love the feel of them in my hands, I love the smell of the rubber armour, I love the design. I don't get that with the Swarovski EL. Yes, they work very well and the optics are excellent, but for me, they have no soul. Its not shallow to think and feel these things, to have preferences, particularly when, let's face it, this is a luxury good.

I can hardly be accused of anti-Zeissism, but I do feel that Zeiss have lost their way with the design of their binoculars. Case in point: cheap Terra range and higher Conquest range share practically the same design, and the top range HT have design echos from these cheaper models. I quite liked the Design Selection style many years ago, and I loved the Dialyt. Swarovski have been stuck on the green wellie and hawk theme for too long. I'm bored. They really need some new ideas.

When I select my binocular, I base my decision on the optical performance, the feel in the hand, the ease and comfort in use, and the aesthetics. All are important to me. If Jerry actually read my posts, there would be no need for little insults!

And one final question: why did Zeiss put the word Zeiss on the objective end hinge cover instead of that classic Zeiss logo that you can see on my avatar? I don't understand. A missed opportunity. And yes, I still HATE the thumb horns on the 42 and 50mm Leica Ultravids!

fazalmajid · May 7, 2016

Dialyt said:
If I'm going to spend well over £1000 on binoculars, I want to enjoy the full product experience. I love my Leica Ultravid 8x32 BR. I love the feel of them in my hands

So do I, mostly the small size and weight, compared to the much larger competitor 8x32s.

I love the smell of the rubber armour

I can't stand it and wish they made them in leather. Other than the ludicrously priced Edition Hermès, I mean.

On the other hand, the textured rubber Swarovski uses feels much less objectionable. I also find the rubber on the Zeiss HTs preferable to the one on the rubber-armored Leicas.

dwever · May 8, 2016

Was at the University of Alabama this weekend visiting kids an couldn't resist a trip to Woods and Water which carries the full Swaro and Zeiss alpha lines. My 90 minutes there basically reinforced existing impressions.

Both SF's armor were not uniformly attached to the bins - is it design intentional that you can press in on that armor where it is not attached to the cylinders? The HT's remain premiere in image with perhaps not quite the saturation and therefore contrast of the Leica's. HT's had good build quality, and nice focus. The Swaro EL's were second to the HT's but ahead of the SF's due to their industrial design and build. HT's and Swaros and Leica's feel much higher quality in the hand.

Interestingly, the Woods and Water guy felt the SF's were "about $1,000 overpriced" due to build issues. He said they've had at least six 10x samples and one 8x. He also said the 8x54 and 10x54 HT's were their big sellers as their customers are not typically birders but hunters, and their stock was impressive. He mentioned most of his 54mm customers were too old to take advantage of the big exit pupil in very low light, but that they buy 'them anyway. Finally he said the banana Geovids are for the moment the best rangers you can buy and they stay sold out. Nice retail safari.

UPDATE - Cabela's Huntsville, EL's in 10x50 and 12x50, the former on sale for like $2,300, the later the new strap connector at $2,800. Each very very nice, and would have to be serious contenders for long glass.

Hermann · May 8, 2016

Dialyt said:
If I'm going to spend well over £1000 on binoculars, I want to enjoy the full product experience. I love my Leica Ultravid 8x32 BR. I love the feel of them in my hands, I love the smell of the rubber armour, I love the design. I don't get that with the Swarovski EL. Yes, they work very well and the optics are excellent, but for me, they have no soul. Its not shallow to think and feel these things, to have preferences, particularly when, let's face it, this is a luxury good.

I can hardly be accused of anti-Zeissism, but I do feel that Zeiss have lost their way with the design of their binoculars. Case in point: cheap Terra range and higher Conquest range share practically the same design, and the top range HT have design echos from these cheaper models. I quite liked the Design Selection style many years ago, and I loved the Dialyt. Swarovski have been stuck on the green wellie and hawk theme for too long. I'm bored. They really need some new ideas.

When I select my binocular, I base my decision on the optical performance, the feel in the hand, the ease and comfort in use, and the aesthetics. All are important to me. If Jerry actually read my posts, there would be no need for little insults!

And one final question: why did Zeiss put the word Zeiss on the objective end hinge cover instead of that classic Zeiss logo that you can see on my avatar? I don't understand. A missed opportunity. And yes, I still HATE the thumb horns on the 42 and 50mm Leica Ultravids!

It might be easiest if you asked Zeiss, Leica or Swarovski to make a binocular to your specifications.

Hermann

Dialyt · May 8, 2016

Hermann said:
It might be easiest if you asked Zeiss, Leica or Swarovski to make a binocular to your specifications.

Hermann

Of course, if I was a millionaire!

CloseFocus · May 10, 2016

Dialyt said:
So, does anyone who owns a 42mm Leica Ultravid actually dislike the thumb placement ridges?

I recall my Ultravid 8x42 BR in green which I sold on here back in 2007/08. Optically, they were fantastic, but I grew to HATE those thumb ridges and had to get rid of them. The 32mm models don't have them and I don't see why the 42mm models need them.

This is a current fixation for me because I want a 42mm alpha binocular but can't buy one because the Zeiss SF are not appealing to me from a design and cost perspective, and the Swarovski EL now have that fiddly strap fixing method. That leaves only the Leica with their thumb ridges. I'd wait for the Ultravid replacement, but who knows when that will be?

I had a problem with my thumbs bumping into one another while testing my new 7x42 UVs, then I realized that one thumb had to be in front of and the other behind the ridges in order to work. I like the ridges myself, but I can see how other hands might not find them useful.

Dialyt · May 10, 2016

CloseFocus said:
I had a problem with my thumbs bumping into one another while testing my new 7x42 UVs, then I realized that one thumb had to be in front of and the other behind the ridges in order to work. I like the ridges myself, but I can see how other hands might not find them useful.

I tried everything. The only grip that would work for me would be a fingertip grip but sometimes I want to wrap my hands attend them, and I can do that with the 8x32. My IPD is small, so only the 8x32 allows my thumbs between the barrels.

MagisterM · May 19, 2016

I was at B&H a couple of weeks ago, taking a peek through the Ultravids and comparing them with the Swarovision. I must say that the Leicas Ultravids HD Plus were shamed by the Swaros.

Well, maybe I'm embellishing, they were both good, but even my wife noticed the slight hint of Chromatic Abberation on the Ultravid and she's not even an optic buff. Decided to get the Swaros, rolling ball be damned.

dwever · May 19, 2016

MagisterM said:
I was at B&H a couple of weeks ago, taking a peek through the Ultravids and comparing them with the Swarovision. I must say that the Leicas Ultravids HD Plus were shamed by the Swaros.

Well, maybe I'm embellishing, they were both good, but even my wife noticed the slight hint of Chromatic Abberation on the Ultravid and she's not even an optic buff. Decided to get the Swaros, rolling ball be damned.

*yawn*

MagisterM · May 19, 2016

You're welcome.

dwever said:
*yawn*

CloseFocus · May 19, 2016

MagisterM said:
I was at B&H a couple of weeks ago, taking a peek through the Ultravids and comparing them with the Swarovision. I must say that the Leicas Ultravids HD Plus were shamed by the Swaros.

Well, maybe I'm embellishing, they were both good, but even my wife noticed the slight hint of Chromatic Abberation on the Ultravid and she's not even an optic buff. Decided to get the Swaros, rolling ball be damned.

Comparing a slight hint of chromatic aberration which may or may not exist, to optics that severely distort the balance of the field at the slightest movement, is probably not something most Leica buyers would care about. Thus the yawn.

sako · May 23, 2016

Dialyt said:
.... and the Swarovski EL now have that fiddly strap fixing method....

Actually, the strap fixing in the Field Pro EL's have proven to be superior (to me) to the earlier lug system. You can always attach the optional flat strap lugs to the Field Pro's anyway.

Like you, I've never been a fan of thumb indentations on binoculars.

Troubador · May 23, 2016

CloseFocus said:
Comparing a slight hint of chromatic aberration which may or may not exist, to optics that severely distort the balance of the field at the slightest movement, is probably not something most Leica buyers would care about. Thus the yawn.

I must say I have some sympathy with that yawn.

Both the Leica and Swaro are fine instruments and it is hard to imagine that outside of a fairy tale either could actually 'shame' the other.

Hints of CA are hardly evidence supporting capital punishment: were the bins critically focused, was the dioptre critically adjusted, were the observers eyes critically on-axis, are we talking in the centre field or at the edge, etc etc.

By all means buy bins because they appeal to you in a way that another model doesn't but 'shame', seriously? I mean, seriously?

Lee

Steve O4B · Jul 23, 2016

Dialyt said:
So what would people like to see in the next Leica dream Binocular?

No novelty strap fitting gadgets such as can be found on the current Swarovski EL. Strap design novelties, if they are good, should be found built into the strap itself, not forced on the binocular body itself. I want to choose my own strap and want options not proprietary systems. This is a deal breaker and puts me right off the current Swarovski models.

What would you like to see in the next Leica dream binoculars?

There is no problem with the new Swarovski strap connectors. The binoculars come with a spacer that has a standard strap loop. You can use any strap or harness you want.

My preference for Leica improvement would be to get the close focus down near 5 feet (1.5m). It is impossible to study butterflies or dragonflies with an 11 foot close focus.

BTW, the price drop in the US was virtually the entire Leica line - Geovids, riflescopes, etc. - due to a drop in the Euro vs. the dollar. Only the Trinovid HD models were kept at the same price because they were initially priced anticipating the drop on the rest of the line.

breydon · Jul 23, 2016

dwever said:
*yawn*

Brilliant my friend

When a Leica Ultravid HD+ Replacement? (1 Viewer)

Experienced observer

Attachments

The Definitive Binocular

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Experienced observer

The Definitive Binocular

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

The Definitive Binocular

Well-known member

The Definitive Binocular

Member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Optics4Birding.com

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread