• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Leica Ultravid 7х42 (HD/BR) vs Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA/BN (1 Viewer)

master5

Well-known member
Hello! Please tell me, did someone compare the optics and the picture of Leica Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR) vs Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA/BN?

Does it make sense to change the old Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA to Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR)?

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • x42 BN vs x42 UV HD.jpg
    x42 BN vs x42 UV HD.jpg
    194.8 KB · Views: 60
Hello! Please tell me, did someone compare the optics and the picture of Leica Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR) vs Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA/BN?

Does it make sense to change the old Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA to Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR)?

Thanks!
As far as optics, and I have had them both, and I don't think there is a lot of difference, or at least not enough to upgrade. You may prefer the ergonomics of the UVHD, but I personally liked the BA better ergonomically. Allbinos says, and many other people have said Leica hasn't made a lot of changes optically in their binoculars.


"Why am I writing about it? On our website, you can find tests of all 10x42 models, from the Trinovid BN to the Ultravid HD-Plus. It is easy to check what the customers gained throughout all these years. Firstly, the results show unanimously that, within the margin of measurement error, the HD-Plus model is practically the same as the HD model. Maybe the transmission level varies a bit but even if you compare the measurements taken with a spectrophotometer the differences remain very slight; it is really difficult to say whether they are an effect of measurement errors, natural differences between two specimens or the actual influence of Schott HT glass. If the spectrophotometer doesn’t show any distinct difference, it won’t be visible to the naked eye either.
163769_trans_leica.jpg


So we have a situation where the Ultravid HD doesn’t differ markedly from the Ultravid BR and the Ultravid BR is an almost identical copy of the Trinovid but closed in a lighter casing. It seems that for almost 25 years, Leica haven’t introduced any innovative optical solutions to its key series of binoculars. Of course, the weight reduction and hydrophobic coatings are appreciated, along with a slight transmission increase or a tad wider field of view. Still, such a reputable company should have done better, especially if you take into account the length of the period of time we are talking about. As a result of such stagnation, Leica devices started to compete with each other: you can still buy a second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus."
 
The lighter weight is easily appreciated in UV 42s and they will focus closer than BA, but otherwise the differences are rather subtle, so you really need to try for yourself. With 32s where the weight hardly matters, there are some here who prefer UV and others who don't. We can't know what would make sense for you. Do you have any actual dissatisfaction with your BA? Perhaps you'd like to try a Zeiss FL if you can find one, that would be more different.
 
Go back in the Leica subforum and read all about the changes when the Ultravid and UV HD models
were introduced. This is very educational and will be useful to you.
Jerry
 
I think what you will find is the basic optics have not changed much, if at all, that means FOV, optic
design and more. The main changes are a change to di-electric (Hi-Lux) prism coatings, ED glass in
the HD and improved coatings along the way. The improvement in brightness is apparent.
The Leica BA/BN models are very solid performers, and the newer models are steady improvements.
You will be satisfied with any of them.
Remember these are Leica optics, high quality and made to last for decades.
Jerry
 
Hello! Please tell me, did someone compare the optics and the picture of Leica Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR) vs Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA/BN?

Does it make sense to change the old Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA to Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR)?

Thanks!
The trouble with all 7x power binoculars is they have too small of an AFOV. The Leica Trinovid 7x42, Leica UVHD+ 7x42, Leica Retrovid 7x35, and even the Nikon EDG 7x42 have an 8 degree FOV which is fine with a 8x magnification because it gives you a 64 degree AFOV but with a 7x it is only a puny 56 degree AFOV. I am not sure why that is that way, but it is. The only 7x binoculars I know of that have bigger than an 8 degree FOV is the Zeiss FL 7x42 which has an 8.6 degree FOV which works out to a 60.2 degree AFOV and the Nikon WX 7x50 which has a 10.7 degree FOV which works out to a 74.9 AFOV.

I always like at least a 60 AFOV or more in my birding binoculars. The WX 7x50 weighs 5 pounds and is huge and too big for the normal birder, so the ONLY choice you really have in a 7x42 with a decent size AFOV is the Zeiss FL 7x42, and they are harder to come by than hens teeth. The 7x42 FL is great because it has a greater DOF than 8x, it is easier to hold steady than 8x, it has a huge FOV of 450 feet, they are brighter than most 8x42's having a bigger 6mm EP. They also have more 3D and higher transmission than most 8x binoculars because of the AK prisms. For those reasons, the only 7x I like for birding is the Zeiss FL 7x42.

 
Last edited:
Thank you for your opinion! Do you think that FL 7x42 is better than Ultravid 7x42?
Yes, because the Ultravid 7x42 only has an 8 degree FOV and the FL 7x42 has 8.6 degree FOV which makes a big difference, the Zeiss controls CA better because it has higher fluorite content glass, the Zeiss FL is lighter because of the composite body and the Zeiss has AK prisms which increase light transmission by about 2% and gives you a little more 3D effect because the objectives are spaced further apart. Leica's in general will have edge CA, and the Zeiss FL doesn't. The FL 7x42 is the best 7x42 you can buy if you can find one. This one on eBay looks nice, but the seller is a little high. I would offer him about $1700 maybe $1600. He has had it listed for a long time, he will be itching to sell it. He is an honest seller though. I have bought from him before. I have had all the 7x42's so my opinion is coming from actual experience with all of them. I never liked a 7x42 until I found the Zeiss FL 7x42.

FOV of Various 7x Binoculars
1) Zeiss FL 7x42 8.6 degree
2) Leica UVHD+ 7x42 8.0 degree

3) Leica Retrovid 7x42 8.0 degree
4) Pentax UD 7x32 HD 7.8 degree
5) Curio 7x21 7.7 degree
6) Maven C2 7x28 6.5 degree
7) Habicht 7x42 6.4 degree


 
Last edited:
Yes, because the Ultravid 7x42 only has an 8 degree FOV and the FL 7x42 has 8.6 degree FOV which makes a big difference, the Zeiss controls CA better because it has higher fluorite content glass, the Zeiss FL is lighter because of the composite body and the Zeiss has AK prisms which increase light transmission by about 2% and gives you a little more 3D effect because the objectives are spaced further apart. Leica's in general will have edge CA, and the Zeiss FL doesn't. The FL 7x42 is the best 7x42 you can buy if you can find one. This one on eBay looks nice, but the seller is a little high. I would offer him about $1700 maybe $1600. He has had it listed for a long time, he will be itching to sell it. He is an honest seller though. I have bought from him before.

FOV of Various 7x Binoculars
1) Zeiss FL 7x42 8.6 degree
2) Leica UVHD+ 7x42 8.0 degree

3) Leica Retrovid 7x42 8.0 degree
4) Pentax UD 7x32 HD 7.8 degree
5) Curio 7x21 7.7 degree
6) Maven C2 7x28 6.5 degree
7) Habicht 7x42 6.4 degree


Dennis, I understand that the FL 7x42 may seem to be better to you now that you own a pair

(also I'm surprised you're not selling them and buying that ebay version which is pre lotutec and won't have, if my memory serves, the greenish tint that yours have 😉).

You are incorrect that the FL is lighter than the UV+. It isn't, it's heavier by a few grams. Not that I notice the difference. (you might want to do your usual edit of your post above).

But let's not get carried away. Let me not be too pernickety or obsessed with any one minor negligible aspect of a complex instrument with many facets.

The Leica UV is noticeably & undeniably more compact.
It will fit into a large jacket pocket. It seems easier to carry.
Haptically the UV wins against the FL in my opinion because of the tactile armour, though both are easy on the eyes, both have large easy focus.

The Leica UV also 'wins' in that it's available brand new, it's not a 10-20 years old & used FL.

As for their views, both work well and have their plusses; there are days, overcast days for example, when the slightly richer Leica colours are preferable. On other days the very slightly washed out view of the FL is preferable.
Which minor edge imperfections annoy you? Both can be examined and found to have CA & distortion; but the bird in the centre of either image is (for me) not affected, other than by colour.
(to understand 'slightly richer' and 'slightly washed out', compare them side by side with the latest NL, or SF)
Brighter? I've tried them side by side in low lighting to trees lit by street lights at midnight. Nothing in it.

My 2c (and then some!) for the day.
 
Dennis, I understand that the FL 7x42 may seem to be better to you now that you own a pair

(also I'm surprised you're not selling them and buying that ebay version which is pre lotutec and won't have, if my memory serves, the greenish tint that yours have 😉).

You are incorrect that the FL is lighter than the UV+. It isn't, it's heavier by a few grams. Not that I notice the difference. (you might want to do your usual edit of your post above).

But let's not get carried away. Let me not be too pernickety or obsessed with any one minor negligible aspect of a complex instrument with many facets.

The Leica UV is noticeably & undeniably more compact.
It will fit into a large jacket pocket. It seems easier to carry.
Haptically the UV wins against the FL in my opinion because of the tactile armour, though both are easy on the eyes, both have large easy focus.

The Leica UV also 'wins' in that it's available brand new, it's not a 10-20 years old & used FL.

As for their views, both work well and have their plusses; there are days, overcast days for example, when the slightly richer Leica colours are preferable. On other days the very slightly washed out view of the FL is preferable.
Which minor edge imperfections annoy you? Both can be examined and found to have CA & distortion; but the bird in the centre of either image is (for me) not affected, other than by colour.
(to understand 'slightly richer' and 'slightly washed out', compare them side by side with the latest NL, or SF)
Brighter? I've tried them side by side in low lighting to trees lit by street lights at midnight. Nothing in it.

My 2c (and then some!) for the day.
The big win for the Zeiss FL 7x42 is the 8.6 degree FOV compared to the 8.0 degree FOV of the UV, which only gives you a 56 degree AFOV. A 56 degree AFOV is small, especially for a 7x, when a lot of the newer alpha 8x binoculars have an AFOV approaching 70 degrees.

The Zeiss FL 7x42 has an AFOV of 60.2 degrees or almost 450 feet compared to the rather puny FOV of 420 feet of the UV 7x42, which isn't much bigger than an average 8x binocular.

I don't need to do any editing of my post. The Zeiss FL 7x42 weighs 740 grams and the Leica UVHD 7x42 weighs 770 grams, which is 30 grams heavier.

The transmission of the Zeiss FL 7x42 is 93% and the Leica UVHD+ 7x42 is 88% which is a 5% difference in transmission and almost anybody will notice a big difference in brightness. A 5% difference in transmission is huge and makes a difference in the daytime and at night. High transmission is what gives the binocular the sparkle everybody likes.

The Zeiss FL 7x42 isn't really washed out it, it is just more neutral, whereas, the UV 7x42 is more saturated and enhances colors. It just depends upon your preference which type of view you prefer.

CA on the edge definitely affects the view, and often times there is even a ring of color around the FOV in some Leica's dues to edge CA. You definitely don't want a lot of edge CA or any CA for that matter for bird watching. The Zeiss FL's control CA about the best of any binoculars.

The Zeiss FL 7x42 may be older than the Leica UV 7x42, but it doesn't make the Leica anymore advanced because Leica really hasn't made any significant changes in their binoculars in 25 years since the first Trinovid BN.

"So we have a situation where the Ultravid HD doesn’t differ markedly from the Ultravid BR and the Ultravid BR is an almost identical copy of the Trinovid but closed in a lighter casing. It seems that for almost 25 years, Leica haven’t introduced any innovative optical solutions to its key series of binoculars. Of course, the weight reduction and hydrophobic coatings are appreciated, along with a slight transmission increase or a tad wider field of view. Still, such a reputable company should have done better, especially if you take into account the length of the period of time we are talking about. As a result of such stagnation, Leica devices started to compete with each other: you can still buy a second-hand specimen of Trinovids in mint condition for half the price of the new Ultravids HD-Plus."

 
Last edited:
Dennis, I understand that the FL 7x42 may seem to be better to you now that you own a pair

(also I'm surprised you're not selling them and buying that ebay version which is pre lotutec and won't have, if my memory serves, the greenish tint that yours have 😉).

You are incorrect that the FL is lighter than the UV+. It isn't, it's heavier by a few grams. Not that I notice the difference. (you might want to do your usual edit of your post above).

But let's not get carried away. Let me not be too pernickety or obsessed with any one minor negligible aspect of a complex instrument with many facets.

The Leica UV is noticeably & undeniably more compact.
It will fit into a large jacket pocket. It seems easier to carry.
Haptically the UV wins against the FL in my opinion because of the tactile armour, though both are easy on the eyes, both have large easy focus.

The Leica UV also 'wins' in that it's available brand new, it's not a 10-20 years old & used FL.

As for their views, both work well and have their plusses; there are days, overcast days for example, when the slightly richer Leica colours are preferable. On other days the very slightly washed out view of the FL is preferable.
Which minor edge imperfections annoy you? Both can be examined and found to have CA & distortion; but the bird in the centre of either image is (for me) not affected, other than by colour.
(to understand 'slightly richer' and 'slightly washed out', compare them side by side with the latest NL, or SF)
Brighter? I've tried them side by side in low lighting to trees lit by street lights at midnight. Nothing in it.

My 2c (and then some!) for the day.
Good points very accurate, and almost exactly my experience. I rarely ever give much wait to any reviews or opinions when the optics are not compared side by side, unless of course there are objective measurements.
 
Does it make sense to change the old Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA to Ultravid 7x42 (HD/BR)?
I have both an 8x32 BN in addition to 8x32 Ultravid HD+ and initially thought I would sell one or the other, but after doing more comparisons started to see the stronger color saturation and contrast in the newer binocular.
I decided to keep both.
 
You can't compare a binocular's weight with different straps, rain guards and objective covers! Zeiss accessories are always heavier and better made than Leica's, especially the rain guard. Look at that flimsy rain guard on the Leica. Take all the accessories off and weigh them again. The Zeiss FL will be lighter. Use your head!
 
You can't compare a binocular's weight with different straps, rain guards and objective covers! Zeiss accessories are always heavier and better made than Leica's, especially the rain guard. Look at that flimsy rain guard on the Leica. Take all the accessories off and weigh them again. The Zeiss FL will be lighter. Use your head!
Dennis, are we really going to debate Post after Post over an ounce or two so you could be right on your point? Now I remember you arguing with someone else not long ago, when they said an optic was lighter, and you know what your reaction was? You had said, we have to go by the weight of the binocular with its accessories, like how we would use them in the field. Use you memory 😜l

Now, of course, if our intention is to be selling them in short order, then whatever positive feature we can throw out there would be beneficial. 😉✌🏼
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top