BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Vespobuteo" data-source="post: 3589902" data-attributes="member: 120830">I tried the 8x32 (and 10x32) Trinovid HD the other day.Same size and feel as the Zeiss Conquest HD which means they are not especially compact or light for a 8x32, but quite nice to hold.Eye relief is good and is better than on 8x32 Ultravid HD+ that are on the edge for working acceptabel with glasses for me.Optics and IQ of the Trinovid HD is perhaps slightly above the Zeiss CHD but I suspect that sample variation might play a bigger role here...(the 10x32 Conquest HD felt easier to get into focus than the 8x32 CHD).CA level seemed to be about the same as Conquest HD and not perfect by any means. The problem with these midrange bins IMO is that they don't snap into focus like alphas do, and your eyes never feel completely relaxed. Too fast and sensitive focusers might be one reason, and the feel I get is that there is something between you and the scene you are looking at. A lack of transparency, where all small aberrations add up. These glimpses of CA you get for example.Overall I didn't feel any immediate urge to buy the Trinovid HD:s and I wouldn't buy the Conquest HD either, even though they are OK bins for the money, they are not near being alpha replacements, IMO.The 8x32 (and 8x42) Ultravid HD+ was a pleasant surprise though. Contrast, sharpness and transparency is top notch. HT glass matters is my impression and you get that special sparkle/punch. I really like the package, feel and format of the Ultravids. Eye relief is not super on the 8x32 UVHD+ but might be acceptable considering the small format, low weight and great image quality you get. Price difference to the 8x42 UVHD+ is small though (50€).</blockquote>

Verification