etc
Well-known member
I rejoined the Leica club after a long departure. These are the initial impressions of the 12x50 Ultravid HD Plus versus Swaro 12x50 (latest gen) and Zeiss HT 10x54.
The picture quality, out of the 3 goes to Leica. As good as Swaro EL is, Leica is at least equal to it and maybe exceeds it. I think the Ultravid HD+ has the finest image quality in the world although I only have a sample of one and the margin of victory is tiniest. The main factor is Leica has a huge and comfortable eye relief, I think more than the stated 13mm. The problem with Leica is that the eyecups are too short, do not raise high enough to accommodate the eye relief. I have had that exact problem with an older Swaro EL 8.5x42 and had to get a deeper eyecups from another model. I have the 3-position eyecup and I hope the 5-setting eyecup is taller, it only needs a few mils to be comfortable.
The focus of Leica is very nice although not as nice as that of Zeiss. The build quality is equal to Zeiss if not better.
Swaro dropped the ball in two major areas, one is poor focus, worst I've ever seen even though I realize I have a sample of one and maybe I just got a poor sample. My old 8.5 EL was fine. The other area it dropped the ball in is apparent in the pic and has been adequately commented on elsewhere. I think I am most likely going to sell/trade the 12x50 EL for the older 8.5x42 EL of 2008 vintage that was bulletproof and looked like new after 10 years. Or maybe an 8x50 of some persuasion. Leica 12x50 is a better 12x50 than EL 12x50 and I don't need two 12x. Maybe do something crazy like get 7x50 for max light gathering and the most stable image with best DOF.
Although the 10x54, while last is by no means least - it wins in 1. focus wheel quality, 2. brightness, especially after sunset. It's a fine device and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the HT, although it has been observed the picture is not as sharp edge-to-edge as the other two. But I never found that to be an issue. It's just irrelevant mostly as whatever it is one is looking at, is at least as sharp as Leica or Swaro. All 3 have beautiful color rendition. I never checked CA anomalies. 10x54 shakes less than the other two and has a bigger depth of field, which is completely expected, of course it does. Then there is the FOV which is lesser in 12x. I think 10x54 is a great primary device despite the size (I got used to it) and the other two 50mm feel like compacts in comparison. Leica 12x50 feels surprisingly compact. My primary purpose of the 12x50 Ultravid is extraterrestrial viewing (I tried 10x vs 12x and there is a huge difference) although Leica 12x50 excels in birding or whatever just as well - and you can absolutely hand-hold it. Any 12x50 has to be steadied for astronomical purposes but this doesn't imply 10x doesn't have to, or even 8x. They all benefit from a steady view.
Back to Leica, it came with a pleasant surprise. The over-focus past infinity is greater than the stated 4 Diopters. Actually Leica does not state their focus past infinity values anywhere, I got this elsewhere. I am at 5D and since I use optics without eyewear, it's critical that it can adjust the focus overdrive past infinity to at least 5D. Both my Swaro and Zeiss go to 6D and 7D, respectively. These values play a key role in my decision-making process. I was able to use the Ultravid without eyewear although I had to crank it to the very limit of the focus wheel. I estimate that the Ultravid HD+ is at 5D of overdrive. Leica said they can add some diopters to the focus past infinity at the expense of close-up distance and I may still end up doing it anyway so I have some room for error. An extra 1D would be great for an estimated 6D of overdrive.
Aside from the Leica eyecups, its other minor issue was that it did not come with a cool Leica microfiber cleaning cloth like Zeiss and Swaro did. Not a big deal. I was really tempted to get the 10x50 Ultravid but only reason I didn't was because I already had 10x54 HT and a 10x50 would have been largely redundant. I do not need two 10x.
In reality, I wish Zeiss made a 12x54 HT then 10x50 Ultravid would make a lot more sense. 12x rhymes better with a 54 or 56mm objective than 50mm. I also wish Leica would expand into 56mm objectives for max light gathering.
The Ultravid HD+ is a fabulous optic with a delicious view. If you want to have just one alpha device, it's a strong contender for the role.
The picture quality, out of the 3 goes to Leica. As good as Swaro EL is, Leica is at least equal to it and maybe exceeds it. I think the Ultravid HD+ has the finest image quality in the world although I only have a sample of one and the margin of victory is tiniest. The main factor is Leica has a huge and comfortable eye relief, I think more than the stated 13mm. The problem with Leica is that the eyecups are too short, do not raise high enough to accommodate the eye relief. I have had that exact problem with an older Swaro EL 8.5x42 and had to get a deeper eyecups from another model. I have the 3-position eyecup and I hope the 5-setting eyecup is taller, it only needs a few mils to be comfortable.
The focus of Leica is very nice although not as nice as that of Zeiss. The build quality is equal to Zeiss if not better.
Swaro dropped the ball in two major areas, one is poor focus, worst I've ever seen even though I realize I have a sample of one and maybe I just got a poor sample. My old 8.5 EL was fine. The other area it dropped the ball in is apparent in the pic and has been adequately commented on elsewhere. I think I am most likely going to sell/trade the 12x50 EL for the older 8.5x42 EL of 2008 vintage that was bulletproof and looked like new after 10 years. Or maybe an 8x50 of some persuasion. Leica 12x50 is a better 12x50 than EL 12x50 and I don't need two 12x. Maybe do something crazy like get 7x50 for max light gathering and the most stable image with best DOF.
Although the 10x54, while last is by no means least - it wins in 1. focus wheel quality, 2. brightness, especially after sunset. It's a fine device and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the HT, although it has been observed the picture is not as sharp edge-to-edge as the other two. But I never found that to be an issue. It's just irrelevant mostly as whatever it is one is looking at, is at least as sharp as Leica or Swaro. All 3 have beautiful color rendition. I never checked CA anomalies. 10x54 shakes less than the other two and has a bigger depth of field, which is completely expected, of course it does. Then there is the FOV which is lesser in 12x. I think 10x54 is a great primary device despite the size (I got used to it) and the other two 50mm feel like compacts in comparison. Leica 12x50 feels surprisingly compact. My primary purpose of the 12x50 Ultravid is extraterrestrial viewing (I tried 10x vs 12x and there is a huge difference) although Leica 12x50 excels in birding or whatever just as well - and you can absolutely hand-hold it. Any 12x50 has to be steadied for astronomical purposes but this doesn't imply 10x doesn't have to, or even 8x. They all benefit from a steady view.
Back to Leica, it came with a pleasant surprise. The over-focus past infinity is greater than the stated 4 Diopters. Actually Leica does not state their focus past infinity values anywhere, I got this elsewhere. I am at 5D and since I use optics without eyewear, it's critical that it can adjust the focus overdrive past infinity to at least 5D. Both my Swaro and Zeiss go to 6D and 7D, respectively. These values play a key role in my decision-making process. I was able to use the Ultravid without eyewear although I had to crank it to the very limit of the focus wheel. I estimate that the Ultravid HD+ is at 5D of overdrive. Leica said they can add some diopters to the focus past infinity at the expense of close-up distance and I may still end up doing it anyway so I have some room for error. An extra 1D would be great for an estimated 6D of overdrive.
Aside from the Leica eyecups, its other minor issue was that it did not come with a cool Leica microfiber cleaning cloth like Zeiss and Swaro did. Not a big deal. I was really tempted to get the 10x50 Ultravid but only reason I didn't was because I already had 10x54 HT and a 10x50 would have been largely redundant. I do not need two 10x.
In reality, I wish Zeiss made a 12x54 HT then 10x50 Ultravid would make a lot more sense. 12x rhymes better with a 54 or 56mm objective than 50mm. I also wish Leica would expand into 56mm objectives for max light gathering.
The Ultravid HD+ is a fabulous optic with a delicious view. If you want to have just one alpha device, it's a strong contender for the role.
Last edited:
