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

[SeldomPerched]

Mike,

Yes, I don't know why (assuming nothing has changed recently) Leica and Zeiss don't take more care over that. The HT I had needed to be set at +2 whereas different Leicas once I got them right mostly have been in the -1 region, give or take about 3/4 of a dioptre. It seems such an obvious thing to put straight, almost like putting the right numbers on the top of a gear lever / shift-stick! That is something that I really like about Swarovski, an attention to detail that inspires confidence that things are done properly. But I know that make has its problems too. To be fair, I know now after finally getting my Leicas sorted out that my setting on them shows in each case at the same place, about -2/3 if I remember correctly without going to have a look.

Glad you got your 12x50 back on track as I remember reading how much you liked them. Sadly I struggle even holding a 10x50 still, which is a bit of a mystery as I am not a physical disaster otherwise.

Tom

 

[Paultricounty]

Hi Paul,

I like your description and analogy!

Addressing your last paragraph: all seemed fine when I first collected the 8x32, alongside the 7x42 — both new, I tried both bins out against a variety of architecture as I was in a busy city for the purchase. Tall buildings, church towers, textured stonework, and also objects on display in the streets; there were no birds around! Before going ahead with the transaction I fine-tuned the dioptre settings and generally played around with viewing at near and far distances on a clear, sunny day. The impression I had of colours, texture etc was exciting and all seemed well defined. These were not the first binoculars I ever had, having used a few Zeiss along the way, all of which have been pre-owned and excellent. Some I still have and I have whittled the keepers down to a very small core selection I hope not to part with. I find the same 8x32 and 7x42 formats in T*FL very fine, in different ways from the Leicas. Each make has its own balance of emphasis on various optical features.

Somehow over the following months I came to think all was not right with the adjustment in either of the two new Leica binoculars. The 7x42 didn't seem to delineate the patterns of foliage as clearly as the Zeiss 7 that I had, that being the sort of viewing that showed the differences at their clearest (Zeiss) and unclearest (Leica), and the 8 was much the same. I was lulled by popular wisdom about 7s that focus would remain sharp without needing pinpoint accuracy. I fiddled with the dioptre control and eventually came to the (incorrect) conclusion I was a square peg with a round hole set of binoculars: for instance perhaps there was something about my eyesight that didn't match the optics of the Leica.

Anyway, to get to the point, I finally found it was to do with the dioptre setting and when I got that absolutely right all was suddenly just as it should be and to my relief has stayed that way (no idea why it eluded me so long; with a Swarovski it takes me about 30 seconds but then they zero the control knob to the correct position for neutral in all their binoculars, so once you know your setting you can apply it without experimentation by using the marks on the dial with almost any of their products - modern ones anyway). So that was the 7x42 taken care of.

With the 8x32 I had become aware when trying to see what the matter was that at very close focusing distances details of objects with texture just would not resolve well enough and that trying a new unit in the shop after messing about for two years on and off with the original item solved that problem immediately. Of course I was very happy to have put the testing period (in both senses of the word: testing me and testing the glass) now finally behind me. In summary the 7x42 was a good unit hindered only by user error; the 8x32 was out of adjustment from new and not user-rectifiable.

Probably of no interest to you but I find that even the slightest mis-setting of the dioptre affects my impression of the image and though I seem to be in a minority here I find even very small differences in focusing also make a noticeable difference, even with a smaller magnification glass such as a 7x.

So to get back to your original question, 'pretended' meant I just couldn't believe that Leica optics could be out of alignment. It is quite rare with their new camera lenses and I have a still excellent lens from fifty years ago that has seen a lot of life and never been serviced. I have since come to see that collimation errors and jolts etc are common with binoculars and that they don't always occur as a result of rough handling.

All the best,

Tom

Hi Tom,

Interesting you mentioned the diopter, I also find on the Ultravids and the Retrovid that it has to be set perfect. There’s no room for error, and I don’t notice that on any other bins I have. Noctivids, no problem.

Depending on where I’m buying, I always ask if someone there with experience in optics, can inspect the binoculars for collimation, dust, focus wheel and hinge tension before shipping. Just today I received a message that dust was observed on a new pair of binoculars, (an unacceptable amount per the vendor ) so they will not send them, and have ordered me another pair. With some places this is difficult to do because they ship from a wear house.

The focusers on all four Ultravids I used , two 8x42’s, 10x42 and a 8x32 were all very nice. I have no real complaints there. They’re nice, and as you said they snap right into focus without any effort at all, very enjoyable. I think IMHO that when we’re using bins like NL’s, SF’s, Noctivids and a few others that skip my mind, there almost perfect focusers, we get spoiled. We’re expecting that level of feel and quality at these ridiculous prices. So good, is not enough anymore, it has to be great. I have to admit I’m like a kid, with new candy when I get a new set of bins and has a superb focuser, I sit on the couch on my iPad, like right now fiddling with the focuser. And occasionally focusing in on my dogs nose, just to work the focuser 🤣

Paul

 

[Brummie]

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.

 

[lmans66]

Hi Tom,

Interesting you mentioned the diopter, I also find on the Ultravids and the Retrovid that it has to be set perfect. There’s no room for error, and I don’t notice that on any other bins I have. Noctivids, no problem.



Paul

Paul...for some reason I too have found that to be true. Noctivid is relatively easy to set the diopter but on the Ultravid it takes a bit. I must admit though I
'don't find that to be true on my Retrovid. jim

 

[Mike F]

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.

You’re tempting me! Ha!

 

[Brummie]

You’re tempting me!

Can’t remember the last time someone said that to me!

 

[Mike F]

Can’t remember the last time someone said that to me!

But seriously, I might consider buying them if the price was right (I'd have to pay import tax......) if you'd consider sending them to Finland?

 

[Trinovid]

All I've ever used is 7x30/8x32 glass. I just don't like the bulk and weight of a 42mm binocular. But I'm not just a birder and wildlife viewer, I also backpack high into our mountain wilderness in pursuit of game (North American elk). I will backpack in the mountains for many days, carrying all my gear, so small, robust, bright bin's w/ exceptional resolution are at a premium for me. I've used the Swaro 7x30 and 8x30 SLC's, the Leica 8x32BN, BR and now HD. I've found the 8x32 all the binocular I need (though would prefer a 7x32 or 35). But if I were considering a 42mm pair to add to my 8x20 and 8x32 Ultravid's, it would more than likely be the 7x42 HD.

Regardless, all binoculars are a compromise weighted in one direction or another. The trick is knowing those compromises you can live with, and those features you can't live without, and that's a very personal thing.

Been meaning to post in reply to this for a bit and it seems that the reason there are so many x32 binoculars is due to the numbers of us out here who just are not interested in carrying around a x42 or larger. I had a set for a very short period and thought they were wonderful for viewing out the window of the house, or sitting on the seat in the car, but not what I was interested in having around my neck. I too wish that I could have my BN or Ultravids in a 7x, but as you already noted, it's in the combination of choices that we eventually find what we can best get along with.

 

[Trinovid]

I don't see the 8x32 and 7x42 in quite the same "class" of binoculars, owing to size and weight. Rather than compare the 7x42 UVHD+ to the 8x32 UVHD+, perhaps a better comparison might be 7x42 UVHD+ to 8x42 Noctivid?

Isn't it interesting in life how people will sometimes point out that a 10 yard dump truck will transport far more goods than your mid-size pickup, all the while never seeing how ludicrous the comparison is! I'd love to get a chance to look through some 7x42 Ultravids, but already know I'd never want to exchange away the combination of positives my 8x32 give me, regardless of any viewing advantages.
Having both sounds great, but if it comes down to only one, then it's got to be the 8x32.

 

[eitanaltman]

Been meaning to post in reply to this for a bit and it seems that the reason there are so many x32 binoculars is due to the numbers of us out here who just are not interested in carrying around a x42 or larger.

Yup. And also the reason many Leica fans are disappointed that the BR version of the 7x35 Retrovid never made it to production.

The 7x42 UV is the upper limit of what I want to carry and use regularly, and it’s only viable because it handles more like a chunky 32mm than a 42mm.

But if Leica came out with a 7x35 Ultravid with rubber armor and proper eyecups, then I’d probably ditch the 42!

 

[Boogieshrew]

Yup. And also the reason many Leica fans are disappointed that the BR version of the 7x35 Retrovid never made it to production.

The 7x42 UV is the upper limit of what I want to carry and use regularly, and it’s only viable because it handles more like a chunky 32mm than a 42mm.

But if Leica came out with a 7x35 Ultravid with rubber armor and proper eyecups, then I’d probably ditch the 42!

A 7x35 UV+ would be my dream come true 👍

 

[Mac308]

A 7x35 UV+ would be my dream come true 👍

I have said since the UV first appeared, a 7x32, or better yet 7x35, would be the finest, be-all, end all binocular for me. Leica could really separate itself from the competition by catering to those of us in love with the “perfect 7x” - 7 is after all the number of divinity…

 

[Paultricounty]

Been meaning to post in reply to this for a bit and it seems that the reason there are so many x32 binoculars is due to the numbers of us out here who just are not interested in carrying around a x42 or larger. I had a set for a very short period and thought they were wonderful for viewing out the window of the house, or sitting on the seat in the car, but not what I was interested in having around my neck. I too wish that I could have my BN or Ultravids in a 7x, but as you already noted, it's in the combination of choices that we eventually find what we can best get along with.

I have said since the UV first appeared, a 7x32, or better yet 7x35, would be the finest, be-all, end all binocular for me. Leica could really separate itself from the competition by catering to those of us in love with the “perfect 7x” - 7 is after all the number of divinity…

I see a lot of 7 fans here, why? I’m partial to 8’s. Are the 7 fans moving from 8’s and 10’s An age issue? I have a few 7’s but have not been bowled over yet.

 

[Mac308]

Isee a lot of 7 fans here, why? I’m partial to 8’s. Are the 7 fans moving from 8’s and 10’s An age issue? I have a few 7’s but have not been bowled over yet.

I can’t speak for others… I’m 60 years old. I got my first 7x35’s in 1973. I got my first good 7x’s in 1997, a Swarovski 7x30 SLC. I’ve used many binoculars since then, but I always find my way back to 7X… it just does everything well for me.

 

[ZDHart]

I see a lot of 7 fans here, why? I’m partial to 8’s. Are the 7 fans moving from 8’s and 10’s An age issue? I have a few 7’s but have not been bowled over yet.

You haven't received your 7x42 UVHD+ yet.

 

[lmans66]

I have said since the UV first appeared, a 7x32, or better yet 7x35, would be the finest, be-all, end all binocular for me. Leica could really separate itself from the competition by catering to those of us in love with the “perfect 7x” - 7 is after all the number of divinity…

I think you need to try the 7x35 Retrovid...you might be surprised at how close it comes to an Ultravid. Not there, but really....immaterial.

 

[Trinovid]

...if Leica came out with a 7x35 Ultravid with rubber armor and proper eyecups, then I’d probably ditch the 42!

A 7x35 UV+ would be my dream come true 👍

I have said since the UV first appeared, a 7x32, or better yet 7x35, would be the finest, be-all, end all binocular for me. Leica could really separate itself from the competition by catering to those of us in love with the “perfect 7x” - 7 is after all the number of divinity…

If only Leica would make such an offering!

 

[Trinovid]

I see a lot of 7 fans here, why?

I can't speak for the others, but I'd rather trade -1x for the slightly larger exit of the 7x, but until they do, I'll be sticking with the middle ground 8x32.

 

[Boogieshrew]

I can't speak for the others, but I'd rather trade -1x for the slightly larger exit of the 7x, but until they do, I'll be sticking with the middle ground 8x32.

I agree. A 5mm exit pupil is so much easier to live with. As is the greater depth of field of 7x.
I can ID and enjoy any bird just as much with 7x as with 8x.
And I nearly forgot to mention the reduced shake that goes with reduced magnification.

 

[Mike F]

I’m probably in a minority of one here, but I would much rather Leica produced a 7x50 UVHD+. Now that would be something! For now though the 7x42 is the best compromise available IMHO (and needs, uses etc).