Comments please on Leica 8x40 trinovids, AKA "retrovids" (1 Viewer)

[orapple]

I have on order a pair of Leica 8x40 Trinovid binoculars. These are the so-called "retro" version with leather and old styling. Online reviews say they are top quality and good optically.

Does anyone have these and do you recommend them?

They aren't like some of the other Leica models that have waterproofness to several meters and fogproof coatings. I am wondering if these are a mistake compared to the regular Trinovids or Ultravids? They also come in 7 and 10 power versions. These "retros" appeal to me because of their light weight and the retro features (leather etc.). I have a pair of 8x42 TrinovidBAs which are optically great but just too too heavy. I probably will sell them and I hope this is a reasonable replacement.

 

[orapple]

Oops, I didnt realize i was posting in the Hello section.
To introduce myself:
I have always loved optics and photography. I have three pairs of Leica binoculars and a 1970s vIintage Questar.

 

[MiddleRiver]

I currently own 7x35 and owned 8x40 in past. Both lovely 'Leica' view, construction, haptics, etc. For birding (small flitty birds in big canopy), I thought the 7x35 were better (FOV etc), but others may prefer 8x. I don't use them as my travel/rainforest/trekking binos, so the lack of armor is not a negative. In fact the leatherette is a big plus as they feel great in-hand.

I think it really depends on personal preference. ARe you a specification chaser (FOV, flat-field, etc.) or do you appreciate fine build-quality (and image quality), etc.

 

[Scott98]

The Leica 8x40 sounds like a good purchase to me. I like light weight, over time it's the one feature you appreciate every time you use them. Only 22.5 ounces for a 40mm binocular? You get a full 40mm aperture for about the same weight as 32's.

 

[delia todd]

Hi orapple and a warm welcome to you from all the Staff and Moderators. I've moved your post to the Leica forum.

I'm sure you will enjoy it here and I look forward to hearing your news.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi orapple,

Firstly, welcome to the forum.

Of the three Retrovids, a lot more attention and discussion has been paid to the 7x35 than the 8x40,
and in turn much more to the 8x40 than the 10x40.
(For an idea of how the three are technically related, see posts #138 and 139 at: Retrovid 7X35 a viable birding binocular? )


For a thread specifically on the 8x40, see: Retrovid 8x40: A brief review

And the always informative Roger Vine has a detailed review at: Binocular Reviews
See 'Leica 8x40 Trinovid Classic'.


John

 

[John M Robinson]

Welcome to the forum!

I’m anxious to hear your report after you receive them. I own the 7x35 Retrovids and 8x42 Ultravid BRs. If it tells you anything, my Ultravids are up on a closet shelf, while my Retrovids see daily use. Regarding the Trinovid HD, I certain the Retrovids are superior optically and much handier.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Welcome to the forum!

I’m anxious to hear your report after you receive them. I own the 7x35 Retrovids and 8x42 Ultravid BRs. If it tells you anything, my Ultravids are up on a closet shelf, while my Retrovids see daily use. Regarding the Trinovid HD, I certain the Retrovids are superior optically and much handier.

I have owned Trinovid HD's (both 8x and 10x) and UV 8x42BL and now own 7x35 and UVHD 8x42. I would rank them 'best to worst':
UVHD8x42
UV8X42BL, 7x35 Retro
Trinovid HD

The differences are relatively minor, and particularly the top 3 are very close. The jump from Trinovid to UV's was notable.

I miss the BL 'just because'. The UVHD I'm going to be listing soon, only because I also have NV's now, and two 8x is redundant. Plus I'm tempted to go 8x30 (UV or SFL?) for travel... yikes!

 

[John M Robinson]

The OP’s post begs the question of why aren’t the Trinovid Classics more popular than they seem to be. Especially the 8x40 and 10x40 sizes. People seem to view the Retrovids as almost a novelty binocular, aimed at nostalgic viewers like me. I owned the original Leitz Trinovid, early 80s model. I loved that binocular for the awesome image (compared to the Bushnells I was used to, coupled with a very sleek, sexy design that was so easy to carry and comfortable in my hand.

So I get it, the Retrovid seemed to be aimed at a tiny segment of the market, old guys who had a fond memory of the old Trinovid. I think another problem is the Trinovid name. Since the introduction of the Ultravid series, the Trinovid line has taken on a second tier status. I the beginning, comparing BA-BNs to the new Ultravids, they were close optically, Ultravids a little brighter but both had that sweet Leica image, the main difference was the package, the Ultravid harkened back to the old Leitz by putting these wonderful optics in a small, sleek, lighter body. The Ultravid BL in particular was reminiscent of that old Leitz.

I wish Leica had designed a 7x35 Ultravid BL, or if that was impractical, a 7x42. That would have given us a waterproof, lighter, sleeker, leather covered Ultravid, with the latest Ultravid optics. But since they didn’t do that, introducing the Trinovid Classic instead, I wish they would market it better. Not as a second tier Ultravid, but as Ultravid optics in a smaller, handier package. It’s actually a screaming deal at $1,500. It’s plenty water resistant enough for my uses, I use my equipment with care and hopefully won’t be submerging any of my binoculars in a lake or stream.

Back to the original question, why aren’t the 8x40-10x40 Trinovid Classics getting more love? Lighter, sleeker better feeling in hand than their Ultravid brothers. They would seem to be an attractive, less expensive option for someone like me who doesn’t need a submersible binocular. I wish my local shop stocked them.

 

[MiddleRiver]

The OP’s post begs the question of why aren’t the Trinovid Classics more popular than they seem to be. Especially the 8x40 and 10x40 sizes. People seem to view the Retrovids as almost a novelty binocular, aimed at nostalgic viewers like me. I owned the original Leitz Trinovid, early 80s model. I loved that binocular for the awesome image (compared to the Bushnells I was used to, coupled with a very sleek, sexy design that was so easy to carry and comfortable in my hand.

So I get it, the Retrovid seemed to be aimed at a tiny segment of the market, old guys who had a fond memory of the old Trinovid. I think another problem is the Trinovid name. Since the introduction of the Ultravid series, the Trinovid line has taken on a second tier status. I the beginning, comparing BA-BNs to the new Ultravids, they were close optically, Ultravids a little brighter but both had that sweet Leica image, the main difference was the package, the Ultravid harkened back to the old Leitz by putting these wonderful optics in a small, sleek, lighter body. The Ultravid BL in particular was reminiscent of that old Leitz.

I wish Leica had designed a 7x35 Ultravid BL, or if that was impractical, a 7x42. That would have given us a waterproof, lighter, sleeker, leather covered Ultravid, with the latest Ultravid optics. But since they didn’t do that, introducing the Trinovid Classic instead, I wish they would market it better. Not as a second tier Ultravid, but as Ultravid optics in a smaller, handier package. It’s actually a screaming deal at $1,500. It’s plenty water resistant enough for my uses, I use my equipment with care and hopefully won’t be submerging any of my binoculars in a lake or stream.

Back to the original question, why aren’t the 8x40-10x40 Trinovid Classics getting more love? Lighter, sleeker better feeling in hand than their Ultravid brothers. They would seem to be an attractive, less expensive option for someone like me who doesn’t need a submersible binocular. I wish my local shop stocked them.

Good question. Because we read too many 'how many fairies can dance on top of a pin' reviews?

 

[Alaska4me]

I have on order a pair of Leica 8x40 Trinovid binoculars. These are the so-called "retro" version with leather and old styling. Online reviews say they are top quality and good optically.

Does anyone have these and do you recommend them?

They aren't like some of the other Leica models that have waterproofness to several meters and fogproof coatings. I am wondering if these are a mistake compared to the regular Trinovids or Ultravids? They also come in 7 and 10 power versions. These "retros" appeal to me because of their light weight and the retro features (leather etc.). I have a pair of 8x42 TrinovidBAs which are optically great but just too too heavy. I probably will sell them and I hope this is a reasonable replacement.

Granted, not a Retrovid, yet when I look at my Leitz I can't help thinking of Sophia. I think I am in love...

 

[Canip]

Sophia is your girlfriend? Wow 😮
And she likes binoculars? WOW 😮 😮

 

[Trinovid]

...the Retrovid seemed to be aimed at a tiny segment of the market, old guys who had a fond memory of the old Trinovid.

There's been a strong push in recent years for anything retro and it's not only older users who remember when binoculars looked like the Retrovid, but also younger buyers who like the uniqueness of an older styling with modern perfection of view, not to mention others who will like how sleek and light they are.

Leica Retrovid - they're for everyone who appreciate classic styling, lighter weight, world class views, all for considerably less cash than their Ultravid and Noctivid cousins.

 

[Alaska4me]

There's been a strong push in recent years for anything retro and it's not only older users who remember when binoculars looked like the Retrovid, but also younger buyers who like the uniqueness of an older styling with modern perfection of view, not to mention others who will like how sleek and light they are.

Leica Retrovid - they're for everyone who appreciate classic styling, lighter weight, world class views, all for considerably less cash than their Ultravid and Noctivid cousins.

You just nudged me one step closer to ordering a new 7x35 Retro

 

[Trinovid]

You just nudged me one step closer to ordering a new 7x35 Retro

Yeah I kind of keep doing the same thing to myself! I really like my 7x35 Leitz and the thought of having the same crisp view I get from my Ultravids has them firmly on my radar.

 

[John M Robinson]

Yeah I kind of keep doing the same thing to myself! I really like my 7x35 Leitz and the thought of having the same crisp view I get from my Ultravids has them firmly on my radar.

I joined this forum back in 2009 when I bought my 8x42 BRs. I was lamenting and gaining over my old Leitz 7x35 Bs that were beyond repair, and wondering why Leica and everybody else had given up on the 7x35 format. This led to lengthy discussions by Henry Link, Pinewood and others about the construction and lack of coatings in those old Trinovids. As I recall there was a general appreciation of the Uppendahl prism concept, but a consensus that the lack of modern coatings would hold them back from matching modern optics.

 

[John M Robinson]

Yeah I kind of keep doing the same thing to myself! I really like my 7x35 Leitz and the thought of having the same crisp view I get from my Ultravids has them firmly on my radar.

Sent a PM…

 

[MiddleRiver]

I joined this forum back in 2009 when I bought my 8x42 BRs. I was lamenting and gaining over my old Leitz 7x35 Bs that were beyond repair, and wondering why Leica and everybody else had given up on the 7x35 format. This led to lengthy discussions by Henry Link, Pinewood and others about the construction and lack of coatings in those old Trinovids. As I recall there was a general appreciation of the Uppendahl prism concept, but a consensus that the lack of modern coatings would hold them back from matching modern optics.

To be clear, I assume your comments are not including the retrovids? They are modern in every way except lack of armor.
A while back I owned original 70’s 7x35. Totally different IQ but indeed same build quality and feel as Retros…. Which is why they’re a keeper for me!

 

[John M Robinson]

Did you read my post? I thought I was clear in stating the Retrovids are optically equal to my Ultravids, but in a much nicer package. I was speculating and wondering why they aren’t as popular. I think the Trinovid name holds them back. People hear Trinovid and think second tier binoculars.

 

[MiddleRiver]

Did you read my post? I thought I was clear in stating the Retrovids are optically equal to my Ultravids, but in a much nicer package. I was speculating and wondering why they aren’t as popular. I think the Trinovid name holds them back. People hear Trinovid and think second tier binoculars.

I did but the last post confused me.
Regardless, we agree ;-)