Plingplang
Member
I had a Leica 8x32 UVHD+ and a Swarovski 8x30 CL B to test. In several fora I have found comparisons between the Swaro CL and the Leica Trinovid, obviously due to their similar price range. However, for me the main criteria for preselection where size and weight, so the Ultravid seemed to be the better competitor to the CL. Caveat: I have limited experience with optics, so the following has to be taken with a ton of salt, but for what its worth, I will share my impressions.
Optics:
The UVHD appeared slightly brighter than the CL. This difference was small and occurred mostly when looking into tree tops and into open landscape. However, it might well be that the wider FOV of the UVHD only made it appear brighter because there was more sky (and therefore overall more light) in the picture.
CA was present in both bins, to a similar degree, but not bothersome.
The UHVD has more contrast. Unluckily, due to the permanently overcast sky during the two days of comparison I could not properly check colour rendition and glare/flare.
Handling:
The UVHD has a smooth focuser. It is very easy to use due to its big size. I could use the index, the middle finger, or both. The focuser is fast. The CL focuser is equally smooth, can only be used with one finger, and is significantly slower (which I prefer).
Personally I found the CL easier to hold, because of the smaller diameter of the barrels (I have glove size M/8). I would fully trust to carry this bin around holding it by one of the relatively long barrels. With the Leica this is not an option. Talking about gloves, both bins can easily be handled with gloves.
While the CL is 10% lighter than the UVHD, it has the weight more to the front/objective side. The UVHD is short and has the center of the weight closer to the eye. This could compensate the weight difference during longer observations.
Ease of view:
This is one of the reasons why I took the CL into this test. I generally have trouble with ease of view and need very precise positioning of the eyes, even though I do not wear glasses. If ever I found it impossible to find a good view with the UVHD, I thought I take a safe bet with the CL and its eye box. Surprisingly, I found very little difference between the two bins in practice. The CL is only slightly more forgiving when it comes to eye placement.
Accessories:
Objective covers and rain guards work very well on both models. The bags are very different (see pictures), especially with the Urban Jungle bag of the CL. It has a loop for belt attachment, which the UVHD bag doesn't have. That is a pity, because the Leica is extremely short and could be worn in a hip bag comfortably. Of course, everybody can fix this by buying a suitable hip bag separately. The Urban Jungle bag only has padding on the back side i.e. the side towards the wearer's body. That leaves it less protected to external impact than the Leica bag which has some padding on all sides.
Result:
I did this comparison because I wanted to keep one of the glasses. The winner is ... drumroll ... the Leica UVHD+. Despite immediate sympathy for the ergonomics of the CL, the UVHD did deliver the better picture, especially contrast. As I said, I could not really check glare/flare or colours, but from many reviews I gathered that the Leica is doing very well in these areas too.
Kudos to this forum. I have read a lot and took plenty of information and advice that helped me to identify the most suitable candidates for my final comparison. If you are reading this, and you are a more or less active member, chances are that you contributed to my search. Many thanks!
Pling
Optics:
The UVHD appeared slightly brighter than the CL. This difference was small and occurred mostly when looking into tree tops and into open landscape. However, it might well be that the wider FOV of the UVHD only made it appear brighter because there was more sky (and therefore overall more light) in the picture.
CA was present in both bins, to a similar degree, but not bothersome.
The UHVD has more contrast. Unluckily, due to the permanently overcast sky during the two days of comparison I could not properly check colour rendition and glare/flare.
Handling:
The UVHD has a smooth focuser. It is very easy to use due to its big size. I could use the index, the middle finger, or both. The focuser is fast. The CL focuser is equally smooth, can only be used with one finger, and is significantly slower (which I prefer).
Personally I found the CL easier to hold, because of the smaller diameter of the barrels (I have glove size M/8). I would fully trust to carry this bin around holding it by one of the relatively long barrels. With the Leica this is not an option. Talking about gloves, both bins can easily be handled with gloves.
While the CL is 10% lighter than the UVHD, it has the weight more to the front/objective side. The UVHD is short and has the center of the weight closer to the eye. This could compensate the weight difference during longer observations.
Ease of view:
This is one of the reasons why I took the CL into this test. I generally have trouble with ease of view and need very precise positioning of the eyes, even though I do not wear glasses. If ever I found it impossible to find a good view with the UVHD, I thought I take a safe bet with the CL and its eye box. Surprisingly, I found very little difference between the two bins in practice. The CL is only slightly more forgiving when it comes to eye placement.
Accessories:
Objective covers and rain guards work very well on both models. The bags are very different (see pictures), especially with the Urban Jungle bag of the CL. It has a loop for belt attachment, which the UVHD bag doesn't have. That is a pity, because the Leica is extremely short and could be worn in a hip bag comfortably. Of course, everybody can fix this by buying a suitable hip bag separately. The Urban Jungle bag only has padding on the back side i.e. the side towards the wearer's body. That leaves it less protected to external impact than the Leica bag which has some padding on all sides.
Result:
I did this comparison because I wanted to keep one of the glasses. The winner is ... drumroll ... the Leica UVHD+. Despite immediate sympathy for the ergonomics of the CL, the UVHD did deliver the better picture, especially contrast. As I said, I could not really check glare/flare or colours, but from many reviews I gathered that the Leica is doing very well in these areas too.
Kudos to this forum. I have read a lot and took plenty of information and advice that helped me to identify the most suitable candidates for my final comparison. If you are reading this, and you are a more or less active member, chances are that you contributed to my search. Many thanks!
Pling
Attachments
Last edited: