JabaliHunter
Well-known member
Does anyone have any experience of the Ultravid 8 x 50 HD? There doesn't seem to be many reviews or comment about them that I can find.
-
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.
Ultravid 8 x 50 HD (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter JabaliHunter
- Start date
I hate to see this good question wither on the vine, but there aren't a lot of birders who use 8x50s. I think it's more a low light hunting specialty. Most birders are out in broad daylight and want something light and quick. I have not used an 8x50. But since you are new here, I will just repeat some things that have been said.
I have seen the non-HD Ultravid 8x50 criticized for excessive eye relief and color fringing, by one of our more esteemed and near-impossible to please members. I flip and flop in my sensitivity to color fringing, but hate eye relief problems, and would take that comment seriously.
There aren't many 8x50s to choose from. At this quality level and size, the only competition to the Leica HD is the Swaro SLC 8x50. It's a little heavier, a little wider fielded, lacks ED glass (which allegedly, Leica's implementation of still does not fully eliminate), and is several hundred dollars cheaper. Unless you are knowingly sensitive to color fringing , and/or have money to burn, give the SLC a look too.
Although way outside the birding mainstream, the 8x56 Zeiss FL has been extensively discussed here. It is apparently so good that it is regarded as almost an optical curiosity, and stands on a unique view-quality pedestal. 44 ounces of pure joy, they say. You might want to consider it too, especially if you plan to put it to its intended usage, low light.
But if you just love Leica, follow your heart and go for it! A big fat Leica HD, woah, how bad can it be!? Wish I had one.
Ron
I have seen the non-HD Ultravid 8x50 criticized for excessive eye relief and color fringing, by one of our more esteemed and near-impossible to please members. I flip and flop in my sensitivity to color fringing, but hate eye relief problems, and would take that comment seriously.
There aren't many 8x50s to choose from. At this quality level and size, the only competition to the Leica HD is the Swaro SLC 8x50. It's a little heavier, a little wider fielded, lacks ED glass (which allegedly, Leica's implementation of still does not fully eliminate), and is several hundred dollars cheaper. Unless you are knowingly sensitive to color fringing , and/or have money to burn, give the SLC a look too.
Although way outside the birding mainstream, the 8x56 Zeiss FL has been extensively discussed here. It is apparently so good that it is regarded as almost an optical curiosity, and stands on a unique view-quality pedestal. 44 ounces of pure joy, they say. You might want to consider it too, especially if you plan to put it to its intended usage, low light.
But if you just love Leica, follow your heart and go for it! A big fat Leica HD, woah, how bad can it be!? Wish I had one.
Ron
Hermann
Well-known member
I think 8x50's are nice. I've got an old Zeiss West 8x50 porro that I like a lot. Not quite as heavy as 8x56's, but with a large enough exit pupil for use in low light. Still too large and too heavy for everyday use though.
Hermann
JabaliHunter
Well-known member
Thanks for the replies. I read the 8x56 Zeiss FL thread with a lot of interest.
I could really go for the 8x50 if it had a wider field of view. It strikes me that Swarovski have an ideal platform for a long focal length 8x50 in their EL line with a wide field of view, but I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath!
When I get a chance, I plan to look at the Leica 8x50, Swaro 10x50 and Zeiss 8x56...
I could really go for the 8x50 if it had a wider field of view. It strikes me that Swarovski have an ideal platform for a long focal length 8x50 in their EL line with a wide field of view, but I suppose I shouldn't hold my breath!
When I get a chance, I plan to look at the Leica 8x50, Swaro 10x50 and Zeiss 8x56...
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I've got the older Leica 8X50 BA's (as well as the 8x32 and 8x42), but the specs are still basically identical to the HD's. This is a problematic size for birding. It's not as effective at close range birding as the smaller models because of field of view and depth of field issues, not to mention close focus abilities. I bought mine thinking I would use it to watch raptor migrations, but their weight becomes an issue much sooner than the lighter models. In theory the brighter image and improved resolution would seem to make these much better binoculars than they actually are. I use mine mainly on cloudy winter days, but if I knew that's all I would use them for I wouldn't have bought them.
soloflyfisher
Active member
CloseFocus
Well-known member
The 8x32's are the ones I use 90% of the time. They are light, easy to hold steady, and the best all around binocular for almost any kind of birding. It's the one binocular I would keep if I had to choose.
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Not to mention to "close focus" of 6.9'. Not ridiculously close like 4" in some bins in which the field collapses anyway, although surprisingly the 7x36 ED2 doesn't collapse into mono vision for me at its close focus of 4'3", which makes it very good for watching butterflies and brave chickadees.
The allbino boyz gave the 8x32 HD top billing despite its higher than average distortion, and they really don't like distortion, so that tells you something about the high quality of the HD.
If I could shrink my hands 3x smaller and expand my income 3x larger, I would try one.
Brock
soloflyfisher
Active member
Kind of where I am too . . . I keep thinking about getting something new and different, but my Leica 8X32 BAs are so useful overall I can't really justify spending more money on anything else.
JabaliHunter
Well-known member
Pretty much exactly what I would want them for! For this purpose though, do you rate them? There doesn't seem to be any competition in this category unless you go bigger (8x56).
CloseFocus
Well-known member
There is a noticeable improvement in brightness in low light conditions. I don't know if the small amount of extra detail that can be seen is worth the cost (that's up to you to decide!), but esthetically it's much more satisfying to have a brighter image. I'm hoping to someday have the time to do more twilight "owling", so I'm keeping mine for now.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
To update my last post, I have since had the time to do the owling I was hoping to do, and I would like to amend my previous answer. In low light, the 8x50 Trinovid outperforms my 8x42 Trinovid (classic) in a more than noticeable way. Using the 42mm's in extreme low light was simply unsatisfactory; I found myself squinting trying to see detail that was plainly visible in the 50mm's. The larger exit pupil really does make a difference, to the extent that I don't think I really need the 42's, my 32's being my optics of choice for most other daylight viewing (although the 42's are an excellent compromise if you only want to have one binocular).
BTW, I dropped my 8x50's in the sand, which immediatley imbedded itself in the left eyecup, of course. I sent them to Leica, and though it took a few weeks, the eyecups are as good as new. In fact, I think they adjusted the right eyecup for good measure, because they click out easier than before, and feel as if they've been fine tuned to match the left eyecup. They also adjusted the focus tension, making it a little harder to turn, which somehow feels more appropriate for a binocular where depth of field is rarely a problem. All I had to pay for was shipping. Go Leica!
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
Close Focus,
Glad to hear another good customer service story from Leica. I guess that $9 million loss in 2009 got them on their toes!
Plus, they made the focuser tighter for you to boot! You can't beat that.
Shouldn't be a problem for owling or hunting, but you probably wouldn't want them to tighten the focuser on your 8x32 model, which you probably focus with a lot more.
How is the focus on your 8x32 (is it a Trinnie or Ultravid? Ultravid BR or HD?).
Is it smooth or rough to turn? I've read some comments that Leica improved the focus on the HDs and that they are easier to turn than the BRs, but then a HD user with a stiff focuser posted a comment that seemed to contradict that, so I'm not sure what to believe about the HD's focuser. Smoother than the BR's or not?
I understand Leica's philosophy with the greasless focuser so it keeps on turning in very cold weather, but if you don't bird in very cold weather, and my guess is that a lot of people don't since it's slim pickin's out there in the winter with the same old, same old unless you are willing to go deep to find a Snowy Owl or some other bird to add to your life list.
For the less adventurous among us, we have to deal with a stiff focuser the rest of the year when we're birding in fair weather, and I can't see the point of that.
Leica's greasless focuser seems like a feature better suited for hunters than birders.
Perhaps Leica should take an example from Zeiss and make a line of hunting binoculars with greaseless focusers for hunters (and owlers), and another line with grease for birders.
Hocus Focus
Thats kinda like me. Small Leica 10x32 HD and my Hawke 8x56 ED. I love the Hawke in good light also. I think they are really stunning then and I'll forgive any other inconvenience or spec compromise (fov) because of this strength. I had my eye on the new Hawke Panorama models but I like the 8x56 so much I couldn't change. Well it would take something extremely good to convince me.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
Close Focus,
Glad to hear another good customer service story from Leica. I guess that $9 million loss in 2009 got them on their toes!
Plus, they made the focuser tighter for you to boot! You can't beat that.
Shouldn't be a problem for owling or hunting, but you probably wouldn't want them to tighten the focuser on your 8x32 model, which you probably focus with a lot more.
How is the focus on your 8x32 (is it a Trinnie or Ultravid? Ultravid BR or HD?).
Is it smooth or rough to turn? I've read some comments that Leica improved the focus on the HDs and that they are easier to turn than the BRs, but then a HD user with a stiff focuser posted a comment that seemed to contradict that, so I'm not sure what to believe about the HD's focuser. Smoother than the BR's or not?
I understand Leica's philosophy with the greasless focuser so it keeps on turning in very cold weather, but if you don't bird in very cold weather, and my guess is that a lot of people don't since it's slim pickin's out there in the winter with the same old, same old unless you are willing to go deep to find a Snowy Owl or some other bird to add to your life list.
For the less adventurous among us, we have to deal with a stiff focuser the rest of the year when we're birding in fair weather, and I can't see the point of that.
Leica's greasless focuser seems like a feature better suited for hunters than birders.
Perhaps Leica should take an example from Zeiss and make a line of hunting binoculars with greaseless focusers for hunters (and owlers), and another line with grease for birders.
Hocus Focus
I had an 8x32mm Trinovid, but have since upgraded to a 10x32 Ultravid (which I found new on Ebay for a good price). The Ultravid is non-HD, so I was a little apprehensive when I ordered it, but the focuser is very smooth, moreso than my Trinovids, but then again, the Trinovids have had almost 20 years of use. The Ultravids have a light focus knob tension, which they need to compensate for their shallower depth of field. The 10x32's require more focus adjustment, but the result is worth the effort. I didn't notice any difference in focus tension or smoothness on cold days, which is good, because this was a very good year for Crossbills and Redpolls (but still no Snowy Owl).
I have been against ten power binoculars since I first started birding, but the 32mm Ultravids are very easy to hold steady, even though, when I first tested them, they seemed too small for my hands. But birding in Arizona especially convinced me that I needed more power; there were too many times when I wished I could see just a little more detail to positively ID a bird (and the wide open spaces in the desert allow for much more long distance birding than here in Michigan). My 8x42 Trinovids were my main binoculars for many years, but on some days they are actually too bright - watching hawk migrations on clear days would give me a headache.
I also switched to the 10x25 Ultravids for the same reason. My girlfriend got my 8x32 and 8x20 Trinovids, so she has no problem with me spending the money. Women can be very understanding that way.
BTW, her 60mm Trinovid spotting scope became very hard to focus, and Leica repaired it, and paid for return shipping. It's nice to know they stand behind their products.
