• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

8x32 UVHD+ vs 7x35 Retrovid (1 Viewer)

Brummie

Well-known member
I think I've made up my mind to keep the 7x35 and sell the 8x32 UVHD+. Not because they're better binoculars, certainly not optically, they just fill a specific gap for me better. Given I already have the SF 10x32 as my primary mid-sized binocular, my interest is for something stylish but discrete to carry while strolling around urban parks, take to events, etc. The looks and slimness of the Retro work better for that purpose.

Anyway, if anyone is looking to buy a brand spanking new 8x32 UVHD+ in the US at a good price (10 year international warranty, never left the house or had straps attached, just handled very gently at home), let me know. COVID gods willing, I'll be in Uganda the next two weeks, but I'll list these for sale when I get home, unless someone jumps in for a direct sale first.
Just to update, I'm now back home, and I've just listed the 8x32 UVHD+ (alongside a 10x35 e2) for sale. Please check them out if you're interested.
 

jafritten

Well-known member
But for my preferences, the 7x42 UV feels more "natural" and "transparent" than anything else I've used and I've concluded it's largely because it feels the most like you're NOT using an optic, because it more closely approximates normal vision.
I'd like to add one more aspect to Eitan's excellent considerations on the UV 7x42s. It is also the steady 7x view that helps approximate normal vision. The jitter and shake of a pair of 10x or higher, for example, are everything but natural. 10s are great for panning (scanning wide areas for distant wildlife) because I see no shake that would impair the view. In every other case, it's gotta be the UV 7x42s.
 

HenRun

Well-known member
Sweden
The Leica 7x35 is slim, and compared to the NL 8x32 a bit smaller.
I threw in a Curio 7x21 for comparison - but I don't have a picture with the Curio 7x21 and Leica 7x35.

As nice as the Curio is, and it is very nice and compact, I prefer having a larger image to immerse myself in and the Leica 7x35 does that better.
Not as good as the NL 8x32, but I really enjoy the 7x35.

I actually bought back the same unit I traded in a few months ago. They had a special so I ended up buying it back for less than I traded it in for!

I was visiting a friend who had the Leica 8x32 UVHD+ and it was for sure a very nice pair and one of the smaller 8x32 options out there. He no longer has it (went with the Pure NL 8x32) so unfortunately I have no comparison pictures with the 7x35 and the 8x32.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5560.jpg
    IMG_5560.jpg
    412 KB · Views: 25
  • IMG_5561.jpg
    IMG_5561.jpg
    213.6 KB · Views: 27
  • IMG_5562.jpg
    IMG_5562.jpg
    197.5 KB · Views: 28
  • Curio_NL_3.jpg
    Curio_NL_3.jpg
    323.6 KB · Views: 29

lmans66

Out Birding....
Supporter
United States
I think the 8x32 is an excellent pair of bins and so is the 7x35.... Not sure if there is a reason to have both, thus the reason I don't have the 8x32 Ultravid. I took a gamble on the 7x35 and fell in love with it, thus taking care of two needs (or at least I thought were needs) , of a 8x32 Ultravid and 7x42. Now with the 7x35, I find it is pretty much midpoint between those two so it takes the place of two pairs and saved me some cash. Yes, not water proof, so I suppose that is where I then pull out my 10x Notivids.
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
I think the 8x32 is an excellent pair of bins and so is the 7x35.... Not sure if there is a reason to have both, thus the reason I don't have the 8x32 Ultravid. I took a gamble on the 7x35 and fell in love with it, thus taking care of two needs (or at least I thought were needs) , of a 8x32 Ultravid and 7x42. Now with the 7x35, I find it is pretty much midpoint between those two so it takes the place of two pairs and saved me some cash. Yes, not water proof, so I suppose that is where I then pull out my 10x Notivids.
Because there really, really nice 😄. The 7x35’s are excellent and unique, but so are the 8x32UV’s, and being water proof gives you that take anywhere confidence. But of course I can’t argue your reasoning on the save some cash front. With the Nocs you do have a very well rounded collection of ALPHAS.

Paul
 

Loddar

Well-known member
@ Paultricounty: there is nothing more to add to your explanation
@HenRun: i have a picture of booth Leicas and a picture of the retrovid with the curio.
loddar
 

Attachments

  • AE8A1282-D8AE-4B0E-81D5-B243A1C0997D.jpeg
    AE8A1282-D8AE-4B0E-81D5-B243A1C0997D.jpeg
    2.2 MB · Views: 51
  • 300528F4-7291-4711-B424-BC337940FC5F.jpeg
    300528F4-7291-4711-B424-BC337940FC5F.jpeg
    2.2 MB · Views: 51

SeldomPerched

Well-known member
Thank you. I’m looking for excuses to buy another binocular. Was hoping you we’re going to say something like’ the sevens are so much more enjoyable to use, and that’s the one you grab most of the time because of how wonderful they are. 😞

paul
Hi Paul, I am as you can see very late with this reply so it is probably no use to you now...but just in case anyway: I have both (as well as an 8x50 since this time yesterday!) and I'd say there is a definite difference. Not in image quality as both are superb but in ease of use. We are nitpicking here, as neither is difficult, but to me and some others I know the 7x42 is just straightforward easy: easy view of the whole image circle, greater brightness, generally very relaxed while remaining compact and comparatively light for the format. Another great 7x42 is the Carl Zeiss Victory 7x42 T*FL but that is now long discontinued and noticeably longer and bigger (AK prisms, which are very good for high transmission). By comparison the 8x32 also has an excellent image, possibly slightly contrastier, but repays careful readjusment of interpupillary distance depending on focusing distance and more experimenting with the eyecups for ideal setting.

In my case I love both and use the intended use as the deciding factor which to take out with me. Basically 7x42 for birding and more single-minded use; 8x32 for informal use, perhaps in company with a friend or two where viewing needs to be simple, convenient and perhaps not the primary task. But it could be these are not the reasons for choice but instead the post-purchase justification! Seriously though, if I had to decide on just two formats and models to keep, these would be the two. The 8x50 would be the third choice as it is just so good and surprisingly easy to manage despite the big eye, glamour bottle format! The smallest and cutest bin I have is the old 8x20 BCA armoured green Trinovid but it is also by far the fiddliest. After using that the 8x32 is ergonomic and viewing paradise!

If you see this post, I'd be very interested to hear what you did in the end and if it worked out to your satisfaction. It's easy to give advice but not so easy to know all the factors playing in someone else's decisions.

Tom
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
Hi Paul, I am as you can see very late with this reply so it is probably no use to you now...but just in case anyway: I have both (as well as an 8x50 since this time yesterday!) and I'd say there is a definite difference. Not in image quality as both are superb but in ease of use. We are nitpicking here, as neither is difficult, but to me and some others I know the 7x42 is just straightforward easy: easy view of the whole image circle, greater brightness, generally very relaxed while remaining compact and comparatively light for the format. Another great 7x42 is the Carl Zeiss Victory 7x42 T*FL but that is now long discontinued and noticeably longer and bigger (AK prisms, which are very good for high transmission). By comparison the 8x32 also has an excellent image, possibly slightly contrastier, but repays careful readjusment of interpupillary distance depending on focusing distance and more experimenting with the eyecups for ideal setting.

In my case I love both and use the intended use as the deciding factor which to take out with me. Basically 7x42 for birding and more single-minded use; 8x32 for informal use, perhaps in company with a friend or two where viewing needs to be simple, convenient and perhaps not the primary task. But it could be these are not the reasons for choice but instead the post-purchase justification! Seriously though, if I had to decide on just two formats and models to keep, these would be the two. The 8x50 would be the third choice as it is just so good and surprisingly easy to manage despite the big eye, glamour bottle format! The smallest and cutest bin I have is the old 8x20 BCA armoured green Trinovid but it is also by far the fiddliest. After using that the 8x32 is ergonomic and viewing paradise!

If you see this post, I'd be very interested to hear what you did in the end and if it worked out to your satisfaction. It's easy to give advice but not so easy to know all the factors playing in someone else's decisions.

Tom
Hi Tom,

Thank you for the reply even though late it sums perfectly my feelings. I got the Leica 7x35 classics and the 7x42 UVHD+. I’m enjoying them both very much. Great glass, breathtaking image quality and extremely immersive. I really like how much of the of the image is in focus, different than 8’s and 10’s.

Paul
 

John M Robinson

Well-known member
This also raises (again) the issue of whether anyone actually looks at things at the field stop (apart from checking that all important 'edge to edge sharpness') or whether, in practice, you actually just move the binocular! :rolleyes: I think some claim that edge sharpness increases apparent FOV but I'm afraid that I don't buy that (or rather, it doesn't work like that for me), and when it comes at the cost of having a relatively two dimensional image instead of an immersive three dimensional image..... well I know which I'd rather have......

Personally I find looking at subjects at the extreme edge of the FOV as easy and natural as looking at something at the periphery of my vision (as opposed to moving my head! ;)
After reading this I started paying more attention to how I use my bins. For the last ten years my main, go-to bins are my 8x42 Ultravid and 8x32 SE. I find that rather than move my eyeball around inside the binoculars, I just shift my whole head slightly. The only time I shift my eye is when I’m testing edge sharpness out of curiosity.
 

John M Robinson

Well-known member
I finally bit the bullet and ordered a pair of the 7x35 Classics just now. I’ve been an outdoorsman my whole life, but I didn’t own a nice pair until the early 80s when I was gifted a pair of 7x35 Leitz Trinovids. I loved them for their size and handiness as much as anything, but they finally wore out in the late 90s. Leica quoted $416.00 to repair them at that time, so I opted for a pair of Pentax DCFs which I used till I upgraded to 8x42 Ultravids. All this time I missed that 7x35 format and the handy size of that old Trinovid design.
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
After reading this I started paying more attention to how I use my bins. For the last ten years my main, go-to bins are my 8x42 Ultravid and 8x32 SE. I find that rather than move my eyeball around inside the binoculars, I just shift my whole head slightly. The only time I shift my eye is when I’m testing edge sharpness out of curiosity.
Interesting that both those binos have almost the same FOV , but have a different sense of that FOV.
 

Paultricounty

Well-known member
United States
I finally bit the bullet and ordered a pair of the 7x35 Classics just now. I’ve been an outdoorsman my whole life, but I didn’t own a nice pair until the early 80s when I was gifted a pair of 7x35 Leitz Trinovids. I loved them for their size and handiness as much as anything, but they finally wore out in the late 90s. Leica quoted $416.00 to repair them at that time, so I opted for a pair of Pentax DCFs which I used till I upgraded to 8x42 Ultravids. All this time I missed that 7x35 format and the handy size of that old Trinovid design.
Your going to love those Retros!! And there going to bring back a lot of memories , but with better images 😁.
 

ZDHart

Registered User
Supporter
United States
I quite appreciate my UVHD+ 7x42. Stable image in the hands, deep depth of focus, somewhat compact, superb build quality and they have that Leica "look" in contrast, color quality, and sharp resolution that so many of us deeply appreciate. ("Delicious", ;).)

I truly do not need ANY more binoculars, but given my love of the UVHD+ 7x42, I can't help but yearn a little bit to check out the 7x35 Retros. And, of course, that would likely result in producing my credit card, once again! :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top