• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leica 7x42 Ultravid checks all the boxes (best binoculars) (1 Viewer)

I had no complaints about the focuser on my 7x42 HD+. It was nice and smooth and worked perfect in all temps.

The Trinovid HD focus is even smoother. It’s probably the best focuser I’ve used.
I haven’t used it in very cold temps yet. This winter I’ll see how it works.
I’m not sure if the Trinovid has the greaseless focuser mechanism. Maybe some others can chime in on that, but certainly wants the temperatures drop in a few months you will find out. Either way it really doesn’t make a difference they’re all still usable in cold weather.
 
Basically you don't see anything with 8x that you don't see with 7x, a matter of taste...
👍.
Good news, global warming may come.😁😜
Gets any warmer and more humid I guess Swarovski will be out of business😜. But seriously, there is some science out there that say ice ages come after warming periods. Therefore it would be good to have the Ultravids. Check another box, works well during ice ages .
 
Basically you don't see anything with 8x that you don't see with 7x, a matter of taste...

Good news, global warming may come.😁😜

Andreas
You don't see anything with a 10 you dont with an 8. You don't see anything with an 8 you dont with a 7. I guess then you dont see anything with a 7 you dont with a 6, etc.. If we keep going who needs binos? :)

See, I can do it...
 
Last edited:
Gets any warmer and more humid I guess Swarovski will be out of business😜. But seriously, there is some science out there that say ice ages come after warming periods. Therefore it would be good to have the Ultravids. Check another box, works well during ice ages .
I was more thinking that...
10° to 100°
I cook my pasta at 100° degrees Celsius...
Leica seems to take climate change very seriously...☀️

Andreas
 
All great replies and opinions, great stuff and Thank you all.

I’d like to ad a few things after reading some posts. (with pictures).

As per some of the boxes that I opined would be checked (imo , ok Tom) is the 7x. Of course there are people who prefer 8x, 10x and 12x, I actually prefer 8x myself. But the reason I checked that box is because to most people from 8 to 80 can hold a 7X fairly stable, and the added DOF is a nice benefit, especially more so if what you are doing is more nature or landscape observing, imo, ymmv.

On the merits of the focuser , although there are smoother more fluid focusers like the SF and EDG to name two, the I reason I checked the box on the ultravid focuser , is that it performs the exact same way in temperatures from 10° to 100°, that can’t be said for most of the others.

Chuck , I’m using some of the ones in your reply today and I see you rated the build quality of the EDG last. I was curious as to your thoughts on why? To me these things are beasts , there’s no plastic anywhere, the rubber armor looks like it’ll last a lifetime , it looks a heck of a lot thicker and more robust than the Swarovski‘s or the Zeiss.

I used the word immersive, it has been used here dozens, if not hundreds of times, and probably not a good word to describe what I tried to convey.

“Immersive: is a term used to describe experiences that fully engage the senses and draw the audience into the scene or activity” Not a great description of what some see in certain binoculars. I’ll try to better describe what I see when I look through the Ultravid relating to the box I checked.
I think quite a few binoculars use some kind of field flattener or try to design away the curvature of the lens. To some people it seems to be a two dimensional or a flat image quality. Not really that noticeable until you put it side-by-side with something like an ultravid. Does that make any sense?

I’d also like to add a little disclosure , or a hold harmless affidavit if I may. I made a negative remark possibly touched a few nerves , when I compared a certain Binocular that it looked like the barrels got run over by a motorcycle. This was a flippant, tongue-in-cheek statement derived by multiple people on this forum that don’t like the squeezed barrels on an the NL‘s , I have them, and I actually like them a lot. My comment was that the people who don’t like them can’t complain about the more traditional barrels on Ultravids, nor can they complain about the size, weight and length.

It seems that there are a lot of Leica fans here, and it sure seems possible that they are a bit more passionate about that opinion than some of the Zeiss or Swarovski guys/gals. But I could be wrong there.

🙏🏼✌🏼

Paul
Yea, maybe you shoulda put this in the Leica subgroup. Prolly a better fit there, less chance for controversy. Just sayin...
 
What say you? Well with tongue in cheek and some time to kill before I go birding... I dont own the UVHD+ 742. In fact have never handled or looked through one. That makes me decidedly unqualified to say anything about it. Since that doesn't usually stop folks from commenting on stuff, I guess it's OK if I play. I do though want to talk about the arguments you make, something I feel a little more comfortable with.

Here goes:
Superior build quality. Superior to what? Based on what? Your field use?
Compact for a 7x42? Yup.
Focuser is special. Better than other top binos? 832UVHD I did try was not good
Great balance/feel in the hands. Is this unique?
Material fit and finish is superior. OK
Optics are great. OK, but better than?
Immersive. Will somebody show me what that is? Words not allowed.
Is anything unique/better in para 3?
Eye relief. What about it? Better? Best, Acceptable?
"with the 7x DOF becomes all intoxicating and absolutely delicious." You are kidding.
No huge FOV means no blackouts, or uncomfortable eyebox. Where’d you get that?
No flat field. That a clear market leader features and many/most like.
Contrast and color saturation off the charts. But as good as others in the market.
It doesn’t try to be the brightest with coating trickery that may introduce glare. Huh?!
Superior armor? Sure, OK
Double bridges dont work for some? Not even the Alpha leader for a decade…
A motorcycle drove across my NL barrels? However they did it. Its the best NL feature
Would I trade 3X mag for 7X depth of focus? No.
We can debate 7X? No, sorry. Binoculars exist to magnify.

What say you? Seems a dated, doesn't do anything special that matters, better than other more modern designed binos. Looks are subjective, we each get to choose. Hyperbolically trashing the other guy is not an argument in support. Its not a 10X or even a perfect 10!

I need to go buy one.

Ha ha.
Now this was funny! Subjectively funny of course. Or maybe objectively?
 
You don't see anything with a 10 you dont with an 8. You don't see anything with an 8 you dont with a 7. I guess then you dont see anything with a 7 you dont with a 6, etc.. If we keep going who needs binos? :)

See, I can do it...
I wasn't talking about 10x, was I?

In fact, the "wiggle factor" in the difference between 10x and 7x should be considerable, which in turn costs resolution, of course it's something else on a tripod.
Whether the gain in detail when holding the hand is really that big is left to subjective perception.

Andreas
 
Yea, maybe you shoulda put this in the Leica subgroup. Prolly a better fit there, less chance for controversy. Just sayin...
Whaat? Controversy on Birdforum, I’m shocked. No, I think it does fine right here, because other brands are being brought up and discussed in what I consider a well rounded discussion by members who see other observations, which I find very interesting. If you don’t, you don’t have to participate you know, you could go over to the Swarovski subgroup. I’ll be over there in a little while 😜

Paul
 
I wasn't talking about 10x, was I?

In fact, the "wiggle factor" in the difference between 10x and 7x should be considerable, which in turn costs resolution, of course it's something else on a tripod.
Whether the gain in detail when holding the hand is really that big is left to subjective perception.

Andreas
P1 Does that matter?

P2 Nah!
 
Whaat? Controversy on Birdforum, I’m shocked. No, I think it does fine right here, because other brands are being brought up and discussed in what I consider a well rounded discussion by members who see other observations, which I find very interesting. If you don’t, you don’t have to participate you know, you could go over to the Swarovski subgroup. I’ll be over there in a little while 😜

Paul
Yes I know. Then Zeiss. Then? I dont go below 4. Do you stop in at all 25?
 
Chuck , I’m using some of the ones in your reply today and I see you rated the build quality of the EDG last. I was curious as to your thoughts on why? To me these things are beasts , there’s no plastic anywhere, the rubber armor looks like it’ll last a lifetime , it looks a heck of a lot thicker and more robust than the Swarovski‘s or the Zeiss.

Paul
So it is my understanding that the Gen 1 EDG had armor issues. As in coming off. I have a Gen 1 7X42 and have had no issue so far BUT some have. There was.a time when it seemed like every EDG had a hinge tension issue as in not enough. You could either send it in or fix it yourself. Bruce and I(don't know what happened to him, great guy!) bought the tools and adjusted ours ourselves. Then there's the diopter adjustment. I think the EDG and the CL B have the most non-userfriendly adjustment out there. I'm sure there are others. But still....isn't it a great binocular? Talk about one easy on the eyes...
 
So it is my understanding that the Gen 1 EDG had armor issues. As in coming off. I have a Gen 1 7X42 and have had no issue so far BUT some have. There was.a time when it seemed like every EDG had a hinge tension issue as in not enough. You could either send it in or fix it yourself. Bruce and I(don't know what happened to him, great guy!) bought the tools and adjusted ours ourselves. Then there's the diopter adjustment. I think the EDG and the CL B have the most non-userfriendly adjustment out there. I'm sure there are others. But still....isn't it a great binocular? Talk about one easy on the eyes...
I understand, Thank you. I’m not familiar with the gen 1. I have the gen 2 8x42 late production, everything on it is stellar. No issue with hinge, armor is heavy and thick. Probably could take a fall better than most. I have heard others complain about the unusual diopter design as well as some say it drifts. I set mine when I received it , and haven’t touched it since.

They truly are superlative , the eye box is so comfortable, there’s no searching for position like some of the latest and greatest. The focusers feel is as good as it gets, imho. The image is beautiful as well, and as you say, very easy on the eyes.

Paul
 

Attachments

  • B4FC352D-0D12-4B3D-A3DD-D21EF3113ACD.jpeg
    B4FC352D-0D12-4B3D-A3DD-D21EF3113ACD.jpeg
    2.2 MB · Views: 10
  • C13109EE-4EEA-4356-96A8-F66641F05180.jpeg
    C13109EE-4EEA-4356-96A8-F66641F05180.jpeg
    1.6 MB · Views: 10
It seems like the EDG I was the equivalent of the gray Zeiss SF's...inadvertant "Beta" run.....ooops! Turns out you loyal customers were helping R&D to test the new product....thank you!
 
ALSO....if I had my mind made up for a full sized 7X42, a Meopta B.1 is truly just about as good.

@chill - I was wondering if you had rephrased your original wording in that post? But your observation (though the result of far more hours in the field) definitely chimes with the (much more limited) comparisons I've had myself. I thought the 10x50 Meostar was so close to the 10x50 Ultravid HD+ (much vaunted by some here) that if anyone was interested in the latter they really ought to look very seriously at the latter. But then I also thought the 10x50 UVHD+ to be bettered by Swarovski's EL model in pretty much every respect except handling/size. The Noctivid is certainly a step forward optically from that range IMO.

it is my understanding that the Gen 1 EDG had armor issues.

Wasn't a copyright claim by Swarovski over the open bridge the main reason why the EDG 1 got nixed? Nikon ought to have issued them with a (removable) plastic bar between the two hinges and countered the claim with the contention that the binocular they were riffing off was Zeiss' 7x42 Dialyt!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top