He's opinionated to a fault, but he often makes good points. So his reviews are well worth reading, as long as the rules are understood.
-
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.
New Old Trinovids (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Paskman
- Start date
He's opinionated to a fault, but he often makes good points. So his reviews are well worth reading, as long as the rules are understood.
I think so too. Ken's camera reviews/user guides are very comprehensive and well done and while he may appear opinionated in areas he's generally objective in his assessments.
It seems there's more lining up to speak negatively about the guy, as it appears popular to dislike him, I'll leave people to their own agenda.
I wouldn't consider you or you're comment in that context.
That old Trinovid review is clearly way too enthusiastic or even out of touch. I commented that he'd likely be blown away by modern top binoculars if he was that impressed by the old Trini.
I don't consider myself a supporter of Ken but having read much of his site over the years consider his camera reviews well done and comprehensive.
Last edited:
He had a great free guide for setting up the complex AF of my Nikon. Dumb he ain’t.
Edmund
Boy that Ken Rockwell Report caused a stir! I definitely didn't agree with everything he said but it was an interesting read. He almost had me looking at the old Trinovid's on Ebay but you all brought me back to the reality that the new stuff is with out a doubt superior. I wish somebody else would get the new Retrovid. C'mon it isn't that much money. I feel so lonely.:-C
Ha ha, well Ken seems to have that effect on people. He's likely quite a reasonable, nice person in reality. I'd have a beer with Ken any day.
I'm certainly open to gifts if anyone would like to present me with a Retrovid, I'd be happy to share my thoughts and findings in great detail.
I actually did not even know the guy's name before reading about him here. So I'd say my earlier comment was from a truly neutral point of view. And I have only judged his article about binoculars I know well. So he may well do better with cameras.
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
If you all are happy with Mr Rockwell's take on the world photographic then why should I try and dissuade you.
Reading why a lens' sharpness doesn't matter and why one should always shoot at f8 along with red herrings like you really don't need an $8k camera to make good photos read rather simplistic and pointless to me. His image testing of a camera or lens by photographing his young boy (endlessly) and mundane objects around the house weren't useful to me and gave me a generally distrust of his photographic acumen. He struck me as a guy who needed to write to fill the pages and it didn't really matter if the words were technically accurate or even useful.
Now this is going from memory mind you, as I haven't frequented his site for years for the above reasons and others.
Hey, how 'bout those Mets?
Reading why a lens' sharpness doesn't matter and why one should always shoot at f8 along with red herrings like you really don't need an $8k camera to make good photos read rather simplistic and pointless to me. His image testing of a camera or lens by photographing his young boy (endlessly) and mundane objects around the house weren't useful to me and gave me a generally distrust of his photographic acumen. He struck me as a guy who needed to write to fill the pages and it didn't really matter if the words were technically accurate or even useful.
Now this is going from memory mind you, as I haven't frequented his site for years for the above reasons and others.
Hey, how 'bout those Mets?
I've thought about it of course. I'm sure it's a fine binocular as I would expect. I wonder how the focus wheel would work during some fast and furious moments during spring migration? I sure don't need it with a UVHD+ 7X42. You don't happen to have a picture of the Retrovid and the UVHD together do you?
Mike F
Well-known member
You’re weakening, Chuck! I’m also telling myself that I don’t need it as I have the UVHD+ 7x42........
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Chuck:
You should just buy it from Dennis, he will be soon selling it, he will take
$100. off at least, or he should.
Add on: I think many on here would appreciate more reviews, without a preconceived outcome of marvelous.
Jerry
Last edited:
John A Roberts
Well-known member
Hi Chuck (post #410),
Based on the published spec's:
- Retrovid 7x35, 132 mm high
- Ultravid 7x42, 141 mm high
I cobbled together the following
As I’ve indicated elsewhere, when compared to the profile of a typical roof prism model using a focusing mechanism in the objective cell,
the lack of bulk through the objectives and body of this design is striking!
The 7x35 will also be thinner, though slightly taller, than the 8x32 UV at 116 mm (nominally 16 mm - about 0.6")
So perhaps after all you may see a 7x35 Retrovid in your future?
John
And a related real life comparison:
- 8x32 Leica BN
- 10x40 original Leitz, and
- 8x42 Leica UV
From Jerry at: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3655915&postcount=
Based on the published spec's:
- Retrovid 7x35, 132 mm high
- Ultravid 7x42, 141 mm high
I cobbled together the following
As I’ve indicated elsewhere, when compared to the profile of a typical roof prism model using a focusing mechanism in the objective cell,
the lack of bulk through the objectives and body of this design is striking!
The 7x35 will also be thinner, though slightly taller, than the 8x32 UV at 116 mm (nominally 16 mm - about 0.6")
So perhaps after all you may see a 7x35 Retrovid in your future?
John
And a related real life comparison:
- 8x32 Leica BN
- 10x40 original Leitz, and
- 8x42 Leica UV
From Jerry at: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=3655915&postcount=
Attachments
Last edited:
Photographing a kid who is playing and moving is just about the hardest task possible for an AF system and a good indication of skin tone.
Pointing a camera out the nearest window usually tells you if it will discriminate greens.
Most cameras historically will have issues with both of these mundane tasks, unfortunately. They won’t focus on the kid, if they do they’ll lose skin texture, turn the skin into bright American-conventional orange or Japanese-conventional green, lose definition on greenery, black out shadows under trees, burn out the sky etc.
Ken’s “tests” are about as useful and realistic as dpreviews. When dpreview published a lab test of the Fuji GFX100 they hadnt even managed to focus the lens.
The only tests that seem to really have a measure of informative repeatability seem to be DXO.
Edmund
Pointing a camera out the nearest window usually tells you if it will discriminate greens.
Most cameras historically will have issues with both of these mundane tasks, unfortunately. They won’t focus on the kid, if they do they’ll lose skin texture, turn the skin into bright American-conventional orange or Japanese-conventional green, lose definition on greenery, black out shadows under trees, burn out the sky etc.
Ken’s “tests” are about as useful and realistic as dpreviews. When dpreview published a lab test of the Fuji GFX100 they hadnt even managed to focus the lens.
The only tests that seem to really have a measure of informative repeatability seem to be DXO.
Edmund
Last edited:
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
Sorry dude,
I don't think you are at all familiar with his site.
What you're describing has no relation, in reality, to his reviews, photos, and articles.
Please remember, it's you who are beating the drum.
I thought you were an artist, Edmund. Rockwell is antithetical to art.
Last edited:
You’re weakening, Chuck! I’m also telling myself that I don’t need it as I have the UVHD+ 7x42........
Mike,
I've ALWAYS been weak! LOL! I'm pretty sure it won't compare favorably to the HD+ in any way optically, especially since the FOV has been set straight. But absolute optical quality isn't EVERYTHING to an avid birder. It's a smaller, lighter 7X binocular which I do find intriguing.
Chuck:
You should just buy it from Dennis, he will be soon selling it, he will take
$100. off at least, or he should.
Add on: I think many on here would appreciate more reviews, without a preconceived outcome of marvelous.
Jerry
Jerry,
I'm thinking about it. I wasn't ever crazy about the Habicht's focus wheel, and this looks very similar. I'm sure it's much lighter to adjust but, IDK.
Thanks for that John!
BTW....The only "Leica" store that even lists the new Trinovid's on their website is the one in San Francisco. Of course none are in stock.
:king:
With Chuck's money I would want at least $100.00 more. :king: If the Retrovid wasn't that great optically I would say so. If I would sell one it would be the Ultravid. I like the Retrovid better. I personally would appreciate more reviews so mine wouldn't be the only one.Chuck:
You should just buy it from Dennis, he will be soon selling it, he will take
$100. off at least, or he should.
Add on: I think many on here would appreciate more reviews, without a preconceived outcome of marvelous.
Jerry
Last edited:
The focus wheel is very good on the Retrovid. It is smooth without any stickiness and I find it quite a bit better than the Ultravid. Here is another picture of the Retrovid and the Ultravid HD 8x42. The Retrovid is a lot slimmer and lighter. Notice how the Ultravid has no gap between the tubes and the Retrovid does.
Attachments
Last edited:
"I've ALWAYS been weak! LOL! I'm pretty sure it won't compare favorably to the HD+ in any way optically, especially since the FOV has been set straight. But absolute optical quality isn't EVERYTHING to an avid birder. It's a smaller, lighter 7X binocular which I do find intriguing."
It seems to me the FOV on the Retrovid is just as big if not bigger than the Ultravid. Too my eyes the Retrovid is ever bit as good optically as the Ultravid HD. At least the regular Ultravid HD not plus is what I have.
"I'm thinking about it. I wasn't ever crazy about the Habicht's focus wheel, and this looks very similar. I'm sure it's much lighter to adjust but, IDK."
The Retrovid focus wheel does look like the Habicht's but it does not behave at all like it. It is very smooth and easy to turn without any stickiness like the Ultravid or the Noctivid that I sent back to Holland from the Leica Store on Ebay. It is one of the better focus wheels I have used outside of the Nikon EDG's.
"The only "Leica" store that even lists the new Trinovid's on their website is the one in San Francisco. Of course none are in stock."
I think if you email the Leica store in SF they would have some in stock. They were listed as out of stock when I bought mine. I was very impressed with their customer service. I have never had such a good packing job on the Retrovid's and they arrived in perfect condition just when they said they would.
https://www.leicastoresf.com/
C'mon, Chuck you know you want them! Hermann would trust your opinion.
It seems to me the FOV on the Retrovid is just as big if not bigger than the Ultravid. Too my eyes the Retrovid is ever bit as good optically as the Ultravid HD. At least the regular Ultravid HD not plus is what I have.
"I'm thinking about it. I wasn't ever crazy about the Habicht's focus wheel, and this looks very similar. I'm sure it's much lighter to adjust but, IDK."
The Retrovid focus wheel does look like the Habicht's but it does not behave at all like it. It is very smooth and easy to turn without any stickiness like the Ultravid or the Noctivid that I sent back to Holland from the Leica Store on Ebay. It is one of the better focus wheels I have used outside of the Nikon EDG's.
"The only "Leica" store that even lists the new Trinovid's on their website is the one in San Francisco. Of course none are in stock."
I think if you email the Leica store in SF they would have some in stock. They were listed as out of stock when I bought mine. I was very impressed with their customer service. I have never had such a good packing job on the Retrovid's and they arrived in perfect condition just when they said they would.
https://www.leicastoresf.com/
C'mon, Chuck you know you want them! Hermann would trust your opinion.
Last edited:
Hermann
Well-known member
