10x42 Trinovid HDs (1 Viewer)

[Kevin Conville]

My 8x32 Trinovid BNs are at Leica getting repaired. As of today they have estimated it'll be 7-9 weeks. Since I don't have any other bins currently that I can stand using, I'm thinking of buying another pair of bins to get me through the winter birding season here is SoCal.

So, I'm strongly considering the 10x42 Trinovid HDs. I used to have 10x42 BAs and could find no fault with them other than their brick-ish weight and form. The new Trins don't suffer that problem.

I thought 10x42s would compliment the 8x32s when a little more horse power is desired. The other bins I'm interested in are the new (old) Trinovid 7x35s but they're not available yet and are a bit more money. Frankly, the "slash proof" designation isn't thrilling as well. Other than those issues, they look great.

So, to those of you with experience with the various versions of Leica 10x42s, including the Trinovid HDs, would you offer up your opinions of how they stack up?

Thanks,
Kevin

 

[tenex]

Just a word of caution, as one who's been well served by good small binos for decades. I've been surprised how much bigger and heavier a 42 feels, even as relatively compact as Leica's, and put off by the generally narrower FoV, smaller sweet spot etc. You can even get 10x without stepping up in size, unless you really need the bigger EP. Have you tried the 10x32 UVHD+?

 

[Kevin Conville]

That's good to keep in mind, tenex. I have had a number of 42mm bins and have settled on 8x32s as my preferred birding size.

I don't want to buy another premier 32mm bin as I am happy with my 8x32 BNs and don't really need two sets of similar type, with the possible exception of the new Swaro CLs in 8x30. Besides offering the more modern coatings and such that one would expect in 2017, they would be a considerable weight and size savings compared to the BNs. The new CLs, like the Trinovid 7x35s, aren't available yet.

Regarding 10x32s, I never really cozied up to that configuration.

A side note:
I've considered buying a decent pair of low-mid range 8x32s as back ups but I'm finding I don't tolerate lesser quality bins well these days. I think I've lost visual accommodation (at 62) and what used to be OK as secondary glasses now aren't working well for me. In other words, I only see well with very good optics anymore.

 

[14Goudvink]

Buy a set of 8x32 Ultravid (new or used) and sell the BN when it comes back? The 8x32 Ultravid has better coatings than the BN and is as small and almost as light as the 8x30 CL with better build quality, more close focus and a wider FOV.

Just a thought

George

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

Kevin Conville, post 3,
I have now investigated the new Swarovski CL Companions, both the 8x30 as well as the 10x30 and they are very much different from the old ones and perform in many aspects much better. I hope to offer the test soon for publication on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor. For me it would be a hard choice between the Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD+ (that would probably have to go in this contest because of its price only in comparison between the other two), the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 and the new Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 (nothing wrong with any of the 10x30's but I am not a 10x person). The new Companions are here abundantly available by the way.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[chill6x6]

I don't have a Trinovid HD 10X42....but do have a 8X42 HD....nice binocular. Saying that....if I were to go buy a $800-$1000 10X42 it would be a Zeiss Conquest HD all day long. It's hard to beat in this range. My example has been without fault. The only negative is it's about 3 ounces heavier than the Trinovid HD and maybe a little bulkier. I'd also look at a Monarch HG....which I have the 8X42 model of this....A little lighter and a little more FOV.

 

[Alexis Powell]

My 8x32 Trinovid BNs are at Leica getting repaired...

If you don't mind sharing, what went wrong w/the 8x32 BN?

--AP

 

[Kevin Conville]

If you don't mind sharing, what went wrong w/the 8x32 BN?

--AP

The shroud that cover the hinge inadvertantly cracked. They're 15 years old and Leica's covering the repair. Kind of a strange failure though, eh?

 

[Kevin Conville]

I don't have a Trinovid HD 10X42....but do have a 8X42 HD....nice binocular. Saying that....if I were to go buy a $800-$1000 10X42 it would be a Zeiss Conquest HD all day long. It's hard to beat in this range. My example has been without fault. The only negative is it's about 3 ounces heavier than the Trinovid HD and maybe a little bulkier. I'd also look at a Monarch HG....which I have the 8X42 model of this....A little lighter and a little more FOV.

So physical size and weight aside, you haven't encountered loose eyecups or gritty focusing? I have to confess to being a bit prejudice towards Leica, somewhat for their mechanicals.

When you say the Conquests are hard to beat in this range, are you talking strictly about the view?

 

[Kevin Conville]

Buy a set of 8x32 Ultravid (new or used) and sell the BN when it comes back? The 8x32 Ultravid has better coatings than the BN and is as small and almost as light as the 8x30 CL with better build quality, more close focus and a wider FOV.

Just a thought

George

Well that is a thought. It is hard for me to imagine the very minor difference in the view is worth the $1500. it would cost. Selling off the BN would feel like selling off a friend as well.

If I bought a CL, for instance, I'd still keep the BNs.

 

[Kevin Conville]

Kevin Conville, post 3,
I have now investigated the new Swarovski CL Companions, both the 8x30 as well as the 10x30 and they are very much different from the old ones and perform in many aspects much better. I hope to offer the test soon for publication on the WEB-site of House of Outdoor. For me it would be a hard choice between the Leica Ultravid 8x32 HD+ (that would probably have to go in this contest because of its price only in comparison between the other two), the Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 and the new Swarovski CL Companion 8x30 (nothing wrong with any of the 10x30's but I am not a 10x person). The new Companions are here abundantly available by the way.
Gijs van Ginkel

I look forward to reading more about the CLs as well as the new (original) Trinovids in 7x35.

 

[NDhunter]

Kevin:

Lots of good advice on here, so far. Back on topic, I think the Leica HD 10x42 would be a nice
choice for you or anyone. There is a nice Leica thread comparing the Trinovid models the previous newer
Trinovid compared to the new HD. You could read through that one. I directly compared the 8x42 models,
and I find the HD to be well made, lighter, brighter, wider sweet spot, etc. This fits the mold similar to the
current mid-range models, mentioned already, Zeiss Conquest HD and Nikon MHG. All very nice binoculars,
have their pluses and minuses, so flip a coin.

The important thing is if you like Leica, this would be a very nice choice. Good luck with your pick, and let
us know how things turn out.

Jerry

 

[14Goudvink]

Well that is a thought. It is hard for me to imagine the very minor difference in the view is worth the $1500. it would cost. Selling off the BN would feel like selling off a friend as well.

If I bought a CL, for instance, I'd still keep the BNs.

I can imagine you wouldn't want to sell an old friend. It should be possilbe to buy a used Ultravid 8x32 HD (non plus) for less than a new 8x30 CL though.

Trinovid 7x35 sounds very nice and a 10x42 would nicely complement your 8x32 BN. Good luck with your decision.

George

 

[Alexis Powell]

The shroud that cover the hinge inadvertantly cracked. They're 15 years old and Leica's covering the repair. Kind of a strange failure though, eh?

Yes, that's strange. Otherwise, they appear to be holding up nicely. One of my favorite birding bins of all time. My similar 8x32 BA are neglected only because I so often want closer focus for butterflies along w/my birding.

--AP

 

[Kevin Conville]

Yes, that's strange. Otherwise, they appear to be holding up nicely. One of my favorite birding bins of all time. My similar 8x32 BA are neglected only because I so often want closer focus for butterflies along w/my birding.

--AP

Yeah, the 8x32s are keepers.
The view, to my eyes, is very nearly as good as the latest stuff and sharpness-wise as good as any. The ergos though, is what endears them to me. The eye relief and cup distance and size are bingo perfect for me. I immediately see the full field with no effort or thought. The shape of the bins make them easy and steady to hold and the focuser is smooth and perfectly damped.

They have been my primary binoculars for 15 years and are well traveled.
Every time I use them I feel glad to own them.

The remake of the Uppendahl Trinovids promises to be very cool, but a 2018 Dielectric HT Aqua-Dura- Frappuccino 8x32 Trinovid BN would be also be a hot item I think.

 

[josika]

I too have 8x32 BA but for a light 10x42 I would seriously look at the Nikon Monarch HG

 

[chill6x6]

So physical size and weight aside, you haven't encountered loose eyecups or gritty focusing? I have to confess to being a bit prejudice towards Leica, somewhat for their mechanicals.

When you say the Conquests are hard to beat in this range, are you talking strictly about the view?

Absolutely no loose eyecups and IMO the focus adjustment is actually really smooth. Really talking about the complete binocular....image, FOV, focus adjustment, warranty, price....

Is there a Cabela's near you? You might very well be able to see a Monarch HG, Trinovid HD, and a Conquest HD at one place. I can't imagine one of those three not fitting the bill.

In the meantime....I snapped a couple of quick pics before heading to work today. Just had a chance to post... The Conquest HD is a 10X42 the other two 8X42s...don't have a 10X in those...

 

[Kevin Conville]

Absolutely no loose eyecups and IMO the focus adjustment is actually really smooth. Really talking about the complete binocular....image, FOV, focus adjustment, warranty, price....

Is there a Cabela's near you? You might very well be able to see a Monarch HG, Trinovid HD, and a Conquest HD at one place. I can't imagine one of those three not fitting the bill.

In the meantime....I snapped a couple of quick pics before heading to work today. Just had a chance to post... The Conquest HD is a 10X42 the other two 8X42s...don't have a 10X in those...

There are no Cabela's stores in California. Bass Pro Shop (about 60 mi away) has the Zeiss Conquest HDs and the Nikon Monarch HGs. I'll try to get out there to try them.

The eyecups on the Nikons look exactly like the eyecups on my $110. 8x25 Pro Staffs, and that's not a good sign. They have to function better. Nikon seems to have odd quality control issues at times and their product lines seem short lived making resale confusing. But hey, I'm keeping an open mind.

I'd really like to A-B the Leicas and the Zeiss

 

[ceasar]

There are no Cabela's stores in California. Bass Pro Shop (about 60 mi away) has the Zeiss Conquest HDs and the Nikon Monarch HGs. I'll try to get out there to try them.

The eyecups on the Nikons look exactly like the eyecups on my $110. 8x25 Pro Staffs, and that's not a good sign. They have to function better. Nikon seems to have odd quality control issues at times and their product lines seem short lived making resale confusing. But hey, I'm keeping an open mind.

I'd really like to A-B the Leicas and the Zeiss

There is nothing wrong with the eye cups on the Monarch HG. They work just like the ones on my discontinued Nikon 8x32 and 10x32 LXL binoculars. They even look like the LXL eye cups except they are not as long. And like them they are not removable.

They certainly do not have the mushy feeling in operation that the ones on my Monarch 7 8x30 binocular has.

By the way, there is no 8x25 ProStaff binocular. Did you mean the Pro Staff 5 8x42? There also is a Pro Staff 3S 8x42 and a Prostaff 7S 8x42. All of them are "economically priced" binoculars between $100.00 and $200.00.


Bob

 

[Kevin Conville]

There is nothing wrong with the eye cups on the Monarch HG. They work just like the ones on my discontinued Nikon 8x32 and 10x32 LXL binoculars. They even look like the LXL eye cups except they are not as long. And like them they are not removable.

They certainly do not have the mushy feeling in operation that the ones on my Monarch 7 8x30 binocular has.

By the way, there is no 8x25 ProStaff binocular. Did you mean the Pro Staff 5 8x42? There also is a Pro Staff 3S 8x42 and a Prostaff 7S 8x42. All of them are "economically priced" binoculars between $100.00 and $200.00.


Bob

Thanks for the feedback Bob. It is odd to me that Nikon makes different eyecups that look identical to each other. Again, Nikon can be a confusing company.

The ones on my nonexistent 8x25 ProStaffs (see photo) have no stops along the way and are not smooth at all. They are also prone to getting funky easily with dust which doesn't help the gritty feeling. I accept that in a cheap binocular, not a $1000. one, but seemingly that is not the case with the MHGs.