eitanaltman
Well-known member
I recently purchased Andy's (dries1) extra pair of 2012-2015 vintage Trinovid 10x42.
I've been on a bit of a 10x42 bender recently, having been an 8x user traditionally. That said, I also don't have an alpha budget, so I've been playing in the midrange space (starting with a Tract Toric UHD) trying to find a high value optic. This was a model that I'd always been curious about, having read many times that it was essentially an Ultravid BR in a slightly cheaper wrapper, so I couldn't resist the opportunity to try these.
Now, I'm not going to say anything that hasn't been observed by others, but having used them heavily as my primary optics for the past 2+ weeks, my bottom line conclusion is that these are one of the all-time great "hidden gem" optics, and at the prices they run used these days (if you can find one!) they are one of the very best optical values around. They fully deserve their cult status as a "secret Ultravid".
Make no mistake, the quality of the view is unequivocally, 100% alpha in terms of center field sharpness, contrast, color saturation, and that elusive "clarity" or "sparkle" that only the best glass provides. These are not "almost alphas" like the Conquest HD or Razor HD, they are ALPHA optically, full stop. They give up precious little to my wife's 8x32 Ultravid HD, which nobody would dispute is alpha quality. No, it's not an ultra-wide, field flattened view that's sharp to the edges like the latest and greatest top dogs, but the general impression in the field is of a gloriously clean, transparent, razor sharp image with that classic "Leica feel" of vibrant, saturated, contrasty colors that "pop".
More than anything, the "micro-contrast" or "perceived sharpness" they provide is just jaw dropping; I cannot imagine a 10x optic being sharper than these. It does not surprise me at all that these had equal tested resolution with the $2K alphas in the well known 2012 Birdwatching review that declared them indistinguishable from the Ultravid HD. The other day I was at a local lake, scanning the gulls perched on the dam almost 1/2 mile away; I could not believe the clarity and detail I could see at that extreme distance hand-held, the white breasts and head of the Western Gulls just popped against their dark gray backs.
Glare control is very good; not the best, but plenty good enough for it not to impinge on the view in the center. Interestingly, when reading Tobias' review of the Ultravid 8x42 HD, he mentioned "peripheral crescent flaring... looking against the sun" yet it "manages to keep very low veiling glare levels in the image center under most conditions". This is *exactly* what I've observed on these Trinnies: when looking in the direction of the sun, there are some bright crescent flares, yet somehow it never intrudes into the center of the image. Holding the binoculars out and tilting them around in the direction of the sun, it shows like a bright "rim" right at the edge of the exit pupil, and I can usually eliminate it by adjusting my eye position slightly to avoid the offending exit pupil edge. In nearly any other lighting situation they show basically zero glare / flare.
Also not an original observation, but the build quality is top notch. These have the proverbial "built like a tank" feel and exude solidity and engineering excellence. I seem to always like Leica eyecups and these may be the best I've ever used -- they are rock solid in operation and have just the right texture of soft rubber covering to be comfortable, and they have a nice taper which fits my eye sockets perfectly (unlike some bigger non-tapered eyecups which are too wide). The eyecup mechanism is as solid and robust as anything I've ever used, and there are 5 regulated stops which *LOCK* in place with a firm click; once a position is set they cannot be moved accidentally, which is a common problem with intermediate stops on most binoculars.
The stops are also smartly placed. Want to jam them deep into your eye sockets? The fully extended position is just right for the eye relief, I can see the full FOV with zero blackouts. Prefer to rest them on your brow a bit, so they aren't fully jammed into the eye socket? There's a stop just a small click in from fully extended that is perfect. Wear glasses but have really thin lenses so you get blackouts? There's a position that's a small click out from fully retracted. And one extra that's basically in the middle, just in case. PLUS, it you still can't find the sweet spot, the friction of the rotation and the rigidity of the detents allows for intermediate positions between stops by twisting down and "resting" the eyecups at a semi-stop just before it slides in and locks into the detent. Tobias also notes this in his review of the Ultravid HD, "you can not only fix the cups into the stops going upwards, but lock them also against the stops going downwards".
So, with all the glowing positives out of the way, there are a few nitpicks. Nothing is perfect after all:
- First, the FOV could be a bit wider; it's not narrow at all, but it feels fairly pedestrian compared to the two other 10x42's that I've been playing with (Tract Toric UHD and Minox HG MiG) which both have ~6.5 degree FOV that gives a really relaxing, walk-in feel.
- Second, the chromatic aberration control is below average for the (original) price point. It's clean enough in the center to not be an issue in real world viewing in normal lighting conditions, but the purple/green color fringes are pretty wide and "fuzzy" off axis making them hard to miss in more severe conditions. With my wife's 8x32 Ultravid HD or my 8x32 EuroHD the color fringing off axis is barely there in the center, and thinner and crisper edged when it shows up off axis. My Pentax 9x32 (Sightron clone) even handle CA slightly better than the Trinnies, the Tract Torics are fairly similar, and the Minox HG are a bit worse.
- Third, there is a TINY bit of desaturation in the blue end of the spectrum which results in a SLIGHT warming or yellowing of whites and a reduction in the vibrancy of deep blue tones. The 8x32 UVHD clearly has whiter whites and bluer blues, which to me lends credence to the idea that these Trinnies were given the Ultravid BR coatings vs the newer coatings used on the UVHD (I assume to save a bit of cost and place them a small peg below the UVHD series at the time). Again, I will emphasize that this is *slight*, but I'm very sensitive to color balance and immediately notice the slight "dingy" cast it gives to the sky for example.
- Fourth, a few tiny ergonomic nitpicks... the biggest of which is that they are a bit on the "chunky" and heavy side for my tastes. The balance is quite good, although it's a bit back heavy, but with my thumbs behind the nicely shaped bottom ridges I can hold them quite steady for a 10x. However, I notice arm fatigue creep in with protracting scanning. The chunky barrels are also compounded a bit by the bulk of the wide, raised center bridge. Also, the focus knob, while very precise, has a bit of "stiction" that can make small, smooth one-finger adjustments difficult. However, since it's a double-length knob with the integrated diopter and I have my hands wrapped around the brick, I end up using two fingers which gives me that extra little bit of control to make precise adjustments.
- Finally, I noticed some fogging on the oculars when using them recently on a cold, damp morning, which I assume would be mitigated by the AquaDura coatings on the UVHD/HD+ models.
THAT SAID.... if you take the 2012-2015 Trinovid and added a bit more FOV, slightly better coatings, a bit less CA, and shaved off a tiny bit of weight.... well, that would be an Ultravid HD! So hard to complain really, especially for the price.
I am fully convinced of the common consensus that the 2012-15 Trinovids are indeed Ultravids optically, just lacking some of the newer innovations of the UVHD series like improved coatings, "fluoride" objective lenses, and AquaDura. Comparing to the 8x32 UVHD on hand, the UVHD is a bit brighter, a bit whiter, with a wee bit more "sparkle" and superior CA reduction. At the original price point of $1,500 they were awkwardly positioned since at that point just spend a few hundred more for the UVHD; however, if you can find them used at 1/2 the price, they are an absolute steal.
I've been on a bit of a 10x42 bender recently, having been an 8x user traditionally. That said, I also don't have an alpha budget, so I've been playing in the midrange space (starting with a Tract Toric UHD) trying to find a high value optic. This was a model that I'd always been curious about, having read many times that it was essentially an Ultravid BR in a slightly cheaper wrapper, so I couldn't resist the opportunity to try these.
Now, I'm not going to say anything that hasn't been observed by others, but having used them heavily as my primary optics for the past 2+ weeks, my bottom line conclusion is that these are one of the all-time great "hidden gem" optics, and at the prices they run used these days (if you can find one!) they are one of the very best optical values around. They fully deserve their cult status as a "secret Ultravid".
Make no mistake, the quality of the view is unequivocally, 100% alpha in terms of center field sharpness, contrast, color saturation, and that elusive "clarity" or "sparkle" that only the best glass provides. These are not "almost alphas" like the Conquest HD or Razor HD, they are ALPHA optically, full stop. They give up precious little to my wife's 8x32 Ultravid HD, which nobody would dispute is alpha quality. No, it's not an ultra-wide, field flattened view that's sharp to the edges like the latest and greatest top dogs, but the general impression in the field is of a gloriously clean, transparent, razor sharp image with that classic "Leica feel" of vibrant, saturated, contrasty colors that "pop".
More than anything, the "micro-contrast" or "perceived sharpness" they provide is just jaw dropping; I cannot imagine a 10x optic being sharper than these. It does not surprise me at all that these had equal tested resolution with the $2K alphas in the well known 2012 Birdwatching review that declared them indistinguishable from the Ultravid HD. The other day I was at a local lake, scanning the gulls perched on the dam almost 1/2 mile away; I could not believe the clarity and detail I could see at that extreme distance hand-held, the white breasts and head of the Western Gulls just popped against their dark gray backs.
Glare control is very good; not the best, but plenty good enough for it not to impinge on the view in the center. Interestingly, when reading Tobias' review of the Ultravid 8x42 HD, he mentioned "peripheral crescent flaring... looking against the sun" yet it "manages to keep very low veiling glare levels in the image center under most conditions". This is *exactly* what I've observed on these Trinnies: when looking in the direction of the sun, there are some bright crescent flares, yet somehow it never intrudes into the center of the image. Holding the binoculars out and tilting them around in the direction of the sun, it shows like a bright "rim" right at the edge of the exit pupil, and I can usually eliminate it by adjusting my eye position slightly to avoid the offending exit pupil edge. In nearly any other lighting situation they show basically zero glare / flare.
Also not an original observation, but the build quality is top notch. These have the proverbial "built like a tank" feel and exude solidity and engineering excellence. I seem to always like Leica eyecups and these may be the best I've ever used -- they are rock solid in operation and have just the right texture of soft rubber covering to be comfortable, and they have a nice taper which fits my eye sockets perfectly (unlike some bigger non-tapered eyecups which are too wide). The eyecup mechanism is as solid and robust as anything I've ever used, and there are 5 regulated stops which *LOCK* in place with a firm click; once a position is set they cannot be moved accidentally, which is a common problem with intermediate stops on most binoculars.
The stops are also smartly placed. Want to jam them deep into your eye sockets? The fully extended position is just right for the eye relief, I can see the full FOV with zero blackouts. Prefer to rest them on your brow a bit, so they aren't fully jammed into the eye socket? There's a stop just a small click in from fully extended that is perfect. Wear glasses but have really thin lenses so you get blackouts? There's a position that's a small click out from fully retracted. And one extra that's basically in the middle, just in case. PLUS, it you still can't find the sweet spot, the friction of the rotation and the rigidity of the detents allows for intermediate positions between stops by twisting down and "resting" the eyecups at a semi-stop just before it slides in and locks into the detent. Tobias also notes this in his review of the Ultravid HD, "you can not only fix the cups into the stops going upwards, but lock them also against the stops going downwards".
So, with all the glowing positives out of the way, there are a few nitpicks. Nothing is perfect after all:
- First, the FOV could be a bit wider; it's not narrow at all, but it feels fairly pedestrian compared to the two other 10x42's that I've been playing with (Tract Toric UHD and Minox HG MiG) which both have ~6.5 degree FOV that gives a really relaxing, walk-in feel.
- Second, the chromatic aberration control is below average for the (original) price point. It's clean enough in the center to not be an issue in real world viewing in normal lighting conditions, but the purple/green color fringes are pretty wide and "fuzzy" off axis making them hard to miss in more severe conditions. With my wife's 8x32 Ultravid HD or my 8x32 EuroHD the color fringing off axis is barely there in the center, and thinner and crisper edged when it shows up off axis. My Pentax 9x32 (Sightron clone) even handle CA slightly better than the Trinnies, the Tract Torics are fairly similar, and the Minox HG are a bit worse.
- Third, there is a TINY bit of desaturation in the blue end of the spectrum which results in a SLIGHT warming or yellowing of whites and a reduction in the vibrancy of deep blue tones. The 8x32 UVHD clearly has whiter whites and bluer blues, which to me lends credence to the idea that these Trinnies were given the Ultravid BR coatings vs the newer coatings used on the UVHD (I assume to save a bit of cost and place them a small peg below the UVHD series at the time). Again, I will emphasize that this is *slight*, but I'm very sensitive to color balance and immediately notice the slight "dingy" cast it gives to the sky for example.
- Fourth, a few tiny ergonomic nitpicks... the biggest of which is that they are a bit on the "chunky" and heavy side for my tastes. The balance is quite good, although it's a bit back heavy, but with my thumbs behind the nicely shaped bottom ridges I can hold them quite steady for a 10x. However, I notice arm fatigue creep in with protracting scanning. The chunky barrels are also compounded a bit by the bulk of the wide, raised center bridge. Also, the focus knob, while very precise, has a bit of "stiction" that can make small, smooth one-finger adjustments difficult. However, since it's a double-length knob with the integrated diopter and I have my hands wrapped around the brick, I end up using two fingers which gives me that extra little bit of control to make precise adjustments.
- Finally, I noticed some fogging on the oculars when using them recently on a cold, damp morning, which I assume would be mitigated by the AquaDura coatings on the UVHD/HD+ models.
THAT SAID.... if you take the 2012-2015 Trinovid and added a bit more FOV, slightly better coatings, a bit less CA, and shaved off a tiny bit of weight.... well, that would be an Ultravid HD! So hard to complain really, especially for the price.
I am fully convinced of the common consensus that the 2012-15 Trinovids are indeed Ultravids optically, just lacking some of the newer innovations of the UVHD series like improved coatings, "fluoride" objective lenses, and AquaDura. Comparing to the 8x32 UVHD on hand, the UVHD is a bit brighter, a bit whiter, with a wee bit more "sparkle" and superior CA reduction. At the original price point of $1,500 they were awkwardly positioned since at that point just spend a few hundred more for the UVHD; however, if you can find them used at 1/2 the price, they are an absolute steal.
