Leica’s design sense… (1 Viewer)

[tenex]

Am I alone in preferring the black armour over the green editions?

Have you seen a green BN? I saw my first ever "hunting" 10x42 in the field recently and had to walk deliberately by in order not to drool and start a conversation about rare bins instead of birds. (The wife had a matching black 8x32.) Black bins are OK, but it's not really my favorite color for anything except tires.

 

[Bentley03]

Have you tried the Retrovids? Optically and ergonomically I like them as much as my Ultravids, even better in my hand. They aren’t submergable, though rain and splash proof whatever that means. To me it means I can carry them in the rain without worry, especially with their aquadura lens coating.

I recently acquired some 4 year old 8x40 Retrovid's and I'm really struggling to leave them at home. They appear to have become my 'go to' daily binoculars. I have the 7x35 too, and 8x32 UVHD+, but these 8x40's have a 'something' about them I can't quite put my finger on. The fov is not the widest and focus movement is a little slow (more obviously so than the 7x35), but there's something about the view, the sharpness, contrast, resolution and rendering of colour, which I've become totally addicted to, over and above my other binoculars, and I'm really not sure why.

They are yet another Leica treasure, in my opinion.

 

[Rg548]

Have you seen a green BN? I saw my first ever "hunting" 10x42 in the field recently and had to walk deliberately by in order not to drool and start a conversation about rare bins instead of birds. (The wife had a matching black 8x32.) Black bins are OK, but it's not really my favorite color for anything except tires.

You should have started that conversation. I have found people are quite happy to talk optics, if they have something nice.
I've engaged people a few times and had some nice chats.

 

[Rg548]

Too bad the trini is so heavy or seemingly so I should say

Some like that, the Meostar is heavy but the most stable 10x I've used due to it feeling 'dense'.
If you're not carrying a camera, it's no big deal.
I've carried 900g no problem.
My Zeiss FL 56's at over 1200g were a bit more noticeable to be fair, but they were huge as well, which added to the perceived weight!!

 

[lmans66]

Some like that, the Meostar is heavy but the most stable 10x I've used due to it feeling 'dense'.
If you're not carrying a camera, it's no big deal.
I've carried 900g no problem.
My Zeiss FL 56's at over 1200g were a bit more noticeable to be fair, but they were huge as well, which added to the perceived weight!!

I love the Meostar 10x and yes…. Same weight if not more than Trini. I hvnt seen the 10x Trini to knock it down…. I can only speak to the 8x Trini and in my case, got a bit of bias as I compared it to the ultra light MHG…

 

[Kevin Conville]

Here's a little vintage eye candy. I still have them and always will.
8x32 BNs

 

[Rg548]

Here's a little vintage eye candy. I still have them and always will.
8x32 BNs

Amazing bins....

Got myself a late pair
They won't be going anywhere
Looks like i'm a poet
And I didn't even know it

 

[A2GG]

Perhaps the MHG 8x30 is just fine...? I know I bird 90% of the time with my 7x35 Leica and unless I am on a hawk watch or perhaps at the ocean shore I take out the 10x42.... So, use the 8x30...it is 90% of your bird watching I bet... jim

It is just fine. I’m not replacing it. It’s 100% of my birding. I’ve been using only this binocular for over 2 years now. I don’t have anything else. I want (and need) a second binocular. The rubber separated from the focus wheel and I eventually need to send my HG to Nikon for repair. I’ve been using it with no rubber grip on the focuser. It’s just smooth plastic. It’s pretty annoying after a while.

 

[Paultricounty]

Here’s a few classics. The whole line up of the Audubon 8.5x44 804R‘s to the last 820ED.

 

[Scott98]

Here’s a few classics. The whole line up of the Audubon 8.5x44 804R‘s to the last 820ED.

beautiful collection! perhaps intended for this thread???

Show us your "vintage" and classic binos

Those 8x50's look new! Another great size - 8x50 - we don't see anymore. Lots of IPD scales and graduated focuser knobs :) :)

www.birdforum.net

 

[Paultricounty]

Hi

beautiful collection! perhaps intended for this thread???

Show us your "vintage" and classic binos

Those 8x50's look new! Another great size - 8x50 - we don't see anymore. Lots of IPD scales and graduated focuser knobs :) :)

www.birdforum.net

agreed , sorry. Maybe Lee can switch it over 🙏

Paul

 

[lmans66]

Here’s a few classics. The whole line up of the Audubon 8.5x44 804R‘s to the last 820ED.

Audubons like this were my main birding bin in the 80’s thru 90’s… had 3 pair. Great. Photo!

 

[Trinovid]

Am I alone in preferring the black armour over the green editions?

I've never owned a Leica, but if I do treat myself, it might be an Ultravid 10x25 (that's if the Zeiss Victory Pocket doesn't suit me better.

The black just looks better and the one colored version that looks really good is the incredibly scarce blue ones.

At least one of the members here has both the 10x25 Ultravid and 8x25 Zeiss, and just as importantly, likes them both too.

 

[Trinovid]

I have a 10x42 BA Trinovid…It is hard for me to imagine better image optics.
But what is the difference, do you know? Will what I see be 2-3 times better?
…I do not feel I'd need anything else -- certainly for the time being.

I have both the 8x32 BN and Ultravid HD+, and in side by side comparisons the latter is slightly better, but on its own my eyes thoroughly enjoy both and it takes A/B usage for me to immediately appreciate the difference. There are users here who spend enough time with their binoculars that they easily see the advantages, but for me, the 8x32 HD+ is going, even though I’m not selling my 7x42 or 10x32 versions.

 

[Pinewood]

Hello,

I enjoyed using my 1938 Leica IIIA with more modern lenses, in the 1960's. The Leica M cameras of the 1950-1960's were very robust cameras which had extremely good optics. In 35mm cameras, Leitz truly ate Zeiss' lunch. Nevertheless, with film photography, I was enticed by cameras which used larger film.
In about 2002, I bought an 8x32 BN, close to the end of the line. In eye relief, FOV, and weight it was outclassed by the Zeiss 8x32FL, which became my standard glass in 2005. During the same period, I decided on a 7x42 Dialyt Classic over a 7x42BA. In the case of the 8x32, the Zeiss was a more recent model, In the case of the 7x42, they might both have been considered obsolescent.

Stay safe,
Arthur

 

[42za]

I have a Leica 10 x 32 UVHD+ and like it a lot.
But am I the only person who does not like the rubber "armour" , I much prefer the old "traditional" way of making binoculars , I think they look so much nicer , and they "wear" so much better.

 

[Scott98]

But am I the only person who does not like the rubber "armour" , I much prefer the old "traditional" way of making binoculars , I think they look so much nicer , and they "wear" so much better.

No, you're not alone there! See my post in vintage binos about preferring the old Nikon E's because they have no rubber on them.

 

[lmans66]

I have a Leica 10 x 32 UVHD+ and like it a lot.
But am I the only person who does not like the rubber "armour" , I much prefer the old "traditional" way of making binoculars , I think they look so much nicer , and they "wear" so much better.

Interesting…. Do you mean the armor on the Trini? If so, while I notice a difference, I hvnt a preference

 

[MiddleRiver]

Hello,

I enjoyed using my 1938 Leica IIIA with more modern lenses, in the 1960's. The Leica M cameras of the 1950-1960's were very robust cameras which had extremely good optics. In 35mm cameras, Leitz truly ate Zeiss' lunch. Nevertheless, with film photography, I was enticed by cameras which used larger film.
In about 2002, I bought an 8x32 BN, close to the end of the line. In eye relief, FOV, and weight it was outclassed by the Zeiss 8x32FL, which became my standard glass in 2005. During the same period, I decided on a 7x42 Dialyt Classic over a 7x42BA. In the case of the 8x32, the Zeiss was a more recent model, In the case of the 7x42, they might both have been considered obsolescent.

Stay safe,
Arthur

For me, this is a very good analogy (camera design). BITD I also had a 1935 Leica III (no, I'm not quite that old - bought it used), then a series of M3 and finally M6. I also owned Nikon, Zeiss, Voigtlander etc. RF's (arguably alpha cameras of their type as well). They were leagues distant from the Leicas in terms of ergos and specially build/haptics. None of them could touch an M3.
I don't think the gap is a large now since all binos are basically a rubber armored pair of tubes with little really to distinguish themselves other than ergos (placement of focus wheel, number of turns, diopter adjustment, eye cups) and IQ. Really the only 'internal mechanics' are the focus mechanism - not much compared to RF, wind mechanism, shutter relase, timers, etc. But I do think that Leica places a premium on industrial design/aethetics.

 

[Trinovid]

I have a Leica 10 x 32 UVHD+ and like it a lot.
But am I the only person who does not like the rubber "armour" , I much prefer the old "traditional" way of making binoculars , I think they look so much nicer , and they "wear" so much better.

I really like my 10x32 HD+ and glad to have found one here on the forum when I hadn't even been looking.
Regarding the rubber armoured Leicas, I wouldn't have my BN any other way, but I like both version enough that I've got two BR and two BL 8x20 Ultravids and like them all. For very cold weather I'd much rather carry the BR but the BL is the one always in my pocket otherwise.