-
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 HD+ 12x50 vs Meopta Meostar 12x50 B1 Plus (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter HenRun
- Start date
Yarkho
Optics afficionado
You're right, "amber" describes it better, and is also consistent with the transmission graph as measured by AllBinos.
I'd be interested in how you describe the Leica transmission, which according to AllBinos also has a peak around 700nm, but with slightly different shape.
Here for the original B1 version:
www.allbinos.com
I'd be interested in how you describe the Leica transmission, which according to AllBinos also has a peak around 700nm, but with slightly different shape.
Here for the original B1 version:
Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.
looksharp65
Well-known member
In fact, I have a B1 8x32 that I bought used as early as 2013 so it should qualify as vintage, right? To me, the colour cast is decidedly yellow similar to, but not as pronounced as the old 10x40 Dialyt T*. That is why I yearned för a newer iteration and you provided it
This colour cast can be disturbing in overcast weather. I had one binocular that certainly had an amber colour cast and it was the 1st gen Nikon HG 10x32 (same as the LX, pre-HGL/LXL). Ath the same time I had the 10x32 FL and both were very nice in their own regard, but both were too far off neutral colour.
//L
In fact, I have a B1 8x32 that I bought used as early as 2013 so it should qualify as vintage, right? To me, the colour cast is decidedly yellow similar to, but not as pronounced as the old 10x40 Dialyt T*. That is why I yearned för a newer iteration and you provided it
This colour cast can be disturbing in overcast weather. I had one binocular that certainly had an amber colour cast and it was the 1st gen Nikon HG 10x32 (same as the LX, pre-HGL/LXL). Ath the same time I had the 10x32 FL and both were very nice in their own regard, but both were too far off neutral colour.
//L
Ok, owning both: how do you characterize the color difference between the 2013 B1 and the current B1 Plus?
As mentioned before I have looked through older B1 Meostars which I found too yellow/orangey for my liking, it was overbearing in late afternoon light. The B1 8x32 I have is nowhere nere that, though it is on the warm side of neutral. It is a 2015/2016 B1.
A short look at our silver grey car with grassy (green/yellow) background and a low lit gravel road as a backdrop gives me the impression that the B1 8x32 I have is ever so slightly warmer than the B1 Plus 12x50HD.
In comparison to the SFL 8x40 the 12x50HD is similar, perhaps the SFL is a little cooler but going from the SFL to the B1 and back again the impression is that the B1 is just slightly warmer than both of them.
Adding the Leica 12x50 UVHD+ to the mix it also feels a little bit warmer than the SFL but more of a reddish warmer instead of the slight amber warmer of the Meopta B1.
After swapping around for a little while all I could tell is that all of them are nice to look through and except for the initial difference I failed to find something that made me go "uhuh" with any of them.
Swapping between the B1 8x32 and the Leica UVHD+ they are more similar than the others both in respect of "warmth" and CA behaviour.
In both cases I like the image I get out of them.
At the top of my preference list when it comes to color rendition Leica has always come out strong. The 12x50 UVHD+ follows in that tradition.
It does not mean it is the best on paper, it is just that I really like looking through the Ultravid binoculars but up until I changed glasses there was a slight penalty in viewing comfort for me.
I am off now for a few hours of glassing with the Meostar and the Leica 12x50. It will be a mix of forest and long range viewing (from a lookout near the house). Visibility is great today, chilly and clear blue skies. Perfect for a 12-15X bino on a monopod.
You're right, "amber" describes it better, and is also consistent with the transmission graph as measured by AllBinos.
I'd be interested in how you describe the Leica transmission, which according to AllBinos also has a peak around 700nm, but with slightly different shape.
Here for the original B1 version:
Meopta Meostar B1 8x32 - binoculars review - AllBinos.com
The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.
I will look into this for sure. Other than what I have written already I can say that the B1 8x32 is far from being a perfect binocular. However it is certainly good enough - with some margin - to be thoroughly enjoyable for everyday use. Size, ergonomics, ease of view etc.
It has no weaknesses that would make me disregard it and on the other hand it is not great enough to be the only 8X bino in the setup for me.
As a complimentary binocular it is just about perfect, it does not steal the "thunder" of the top dog in the house but it is always up for a walk.
Conclusion and summary:
I wish I could have edited the first post in the thread to include a Jump to Summary for those who wish to avoid eye strain by reading long winded postings from yours truly.
After a very windy outing with both the Ultravid and the Meopta my earlier findings were confirmed but in real field use the conclusion is different from my earlier chasing faults with CA torture and looking at the edges of the field stops.
Even if it helps in evaluating the optics there is always more to it in field use, unless the bino is really annoying to look through.
The Ultravid is a pleasure to use. A real pleasure.
I can see why folks here really like it and hang on to it. It has the same color signature as the rest of the Ultravids and the AFOV is generous.
There is a calmness to the view which is hard to explain. In the field CA is very seldom noticed, which is a relief. Looking at a sun lit transformer pole it pops out distinctly in places but scanning barren trees for birds the view is for the most part monochromatic. Contrast feels very natural and the AFOV is a little more generous than in the Meopta coupled with a wider, slightly brighter view. Detail at range is superb. Looking at small structures a few km out there is no visibly annoying CA and it is mostly while panning that CA is visible streaking by the treeline in the outer edges, again, you see it but the center part of the image looks great.
Monitoring the surroundings from the lookout was a pleasure. Overall the view is even nicer than in the Meopta - but with some caveats. The view is calmer in the Leica and the larger field of view coupled to the slightly more generous AFOV is impressive. However the practically available extra real estate is not that much larger and at distance the extra FOV feels less important. But, is nice to have of course.
The distortion in the Ultravid feels really nicely weighted which is what makes the image so pleasant for long range viewing and the usable field of view for detailed viewing is generous. Chromatic abberation is a complete non issue at this range and scanning fields, houses and roads is very rewarding. I did not think the Ultravid would be a great cityscape binocular but I am rethinking that now.
Through the Meopta the view is fabulous in a different way. The AFOV though not as generous, is still excellent and the field of view is narrower but arguably has a smaller drop off towards the edges. Overall it is a supercrisp analytical view. The field stop drop off is faster on the Meopta though and I don't have the right words for it but the view is a little "busier" in the Meopta towards the edges. With that I find that the distortion curve is better applied in the Leica for calmness of view, even if it is not "better" in terms of seeing detail.
For general viewing this is not something that is bad with the Meopta, it is just nicer in the Leica. None of them are flat field binos.
Contrast seems a little higher in the Meopta and it crunches the shadows a little more giving me a more distinct "snap" to microdetails at far and some small outlines seem a little more visible in the Meopta but going back and forth the Ultravid has the same micro contrast but a slightly lower overall contrast.
As I noticed before the Ultravid pulls a little more detail out of the shade - at the slight expense of sometimes feeling a little bit washed out in the colors due to the higher transmission and the flat light. Meopta feels duller and a little more grey in comparison and crunching the shadows a little in the flat light. The crunching of the shadows and silhouettes makes the Meopta seem more contrasty while still being a bit duller in color separation.
If this makes any sense to you. It is a trade off between perceived contrast and color detail. Both are fine for different reasons.
As for birds in flight the usual suspects did their circling of the fields (a pair of Harriers about a km out and circling the fields) and a lot of "cross town traffic". To my delight the Harriers repeated the pattern which meant that I had time to swap binoculars and this is where it became really interesting for me.
With the Ultravid I had some initial hunting before snapping the birds into focus. Keeping them (well, one of them) in center the CA was very low and detail was great. At times the bird and my panning would have it venture out of the center and at those times some CA halos appeared around the bird which is a little detracting from the viewing when they are so small but for the most part it was a matter of returning the bird to the center of the image. The birds at this range are quite small and at times competing with some floaters in the eye (haha) and this is where the extra wide field of view in the Leica does not really help out. There is a whole lot of nothing around the scaled down bird in the center. But as far as a 12X bino goes, the view is hard to beat...
...but it can be done! Switching to the Meopta the same pair stands out a little better from the background. Sure, the same crunching of shadows apply but the birds get monochromatically isolated against the background which makes the outline even more easily visible than in the Leica. With the Meopta you snap the bird into focus and then you have that perfect outline. Together with the smaller field of view I feel like I am closer to the bird even though magnification is the same. There is less distraction in the Meopta with that smaller field of view when following birds in flight.
This is what the Meopta does best, and that is why it is a keeper for me. I have yet to see a 12/15X bino that does this as well and this is the reason I went from the Meopta to the Swarovski NL 12x42 Pure and back again. Viewing commercial jets streak by at altitude it is the same, a pin sharp and well defined image.
Final conclusion:
Not surprisingly enough, other than in the category of Birds in Flight, where I personally hold the Meopta as the champion, both binoculars are great companions. My guess is that most people would prefer the Leica, and I won't argue too much with that. Most people would definitely have chosen the Swarovski over the Meopta - while I did the opposite.
I know the Meopta inside and out by now so seeing the difference in character was easy enough. There are traits of the Ultravid I really appreciate and would probably not have bothered me with the Meopta had I not seen the difference. Monitoring the bird feeders both of them are sound performers and the right magnification for that distance. Meopta has a little more perceived contrast to it though detailing is the same between the two.
The lingering question is will I keep the Leica? I was not planning on having two 12X binos - especially not since I have the APO Televid 65 for longer range viewing - but the Ultravid has some merits in foul weather and in the forest where it slightly outperforms the Meopta.
For hand held use I can't say one is better than the other. Meopta is quicker to the eye but after some trial and error with the Leica I can't say that either one is easier to handhold than the other, both are at the limit of what is useful to me.
On a monopod they are equally great in use.
Other points on the imaginary score board:
Straylight and glare handling. Tie.
Did not even think about it once during the two longer outings. Both are great with glasses. I did get a little bit of reflections from my glasses with the Leica at one point, but not the bino at fault. Exemplary performance.
Build quality: Tie.
Different approach, look and feel but equally robust. I keep thinking "Subaru" with the Meopta, rugged and it works.
Handling: Tie.
Slight nod for balance on the Meopta and the sculpted ridge is better placed for my hands. I hold the Leica a bit further out to balance it. Leica feels ligher though they weigh the same.
Focuser: Meopta.
Focusers on Meopta have generally been good, but oftentimes a slight play changing direction. On my 12x50 it is perfect, both in evenness and resistance. I am praying it stays like this. There are only a handful of binos that I have handled that have been this good. Dioptre adjustment is adequate on the Meopta, but not great. At least I don't have to change it once set, unless my friend borrows it.
Leica is good to very good. But there is some intitial friction at times. As a HD Plus version this is the reworked focuser,better than the old one which I thought was adequate at best. On this sample very good by Leica standards but far from the Meopta or the other - better - competitors.
Dioptre adjustment is great on the Leica.
I can see myself keeping the Ultravid around for some time - I enjoy the different look it brings to the table. After the initial impressions which were good but not superlative great it has grown on me for sure. Scanning distant scenery with the Leica was - hate to admit it - nicer than with the Meopta.
For birds in flight and winter use the Meopta will definitely be the go to binocular for me I. And it does not fail at general viewing either of course.
The Meostar is that great "clinical/analytical" viewing instrument and the Ultravid has that gorgeous Leica outlook on things. If I keep gravitating towards grabbing the Leica after the summer it has earned a spot on the roster. If not, it will bring a smile to the face and years of service for someone else and I will cherish the time we had together.
I have a pair of 8x binos so why not live a little and enjoy a pair of 12x binos as well?
SELF JUSTIFICATION NOTICE:
It is always good to have a spare/back up. You never know. Am I right? (please tell me I'm right)
I wish I could have edited the first post in the thread to include a Jump to Summary for those who wish to avoid eye strain by reading long winded postings from yours truly.
After a very windy outing with both the Ultravid and the Meopta my earlier findings were confirmed but in real field use the conclusion is different from my earlier chasing faults with CA torture and looking at the edges of the field stops.
Even if it helps in evaluating the optics there is always more to it in field use, unless the bino is really annoying to look through.
The Ultravid is a pleasure to use. A real pleasure.
I can see why folks here really like it and hang on to it. It has the same color signature as the rest of the Ultravids and the AFOV is generous.
There is a calmness to the view which is hard to explain. In the field CA is very seldom noticed, which is a relief. Looking at a sun lit transformer pole it pops out distinctly in places but scanning barren trees for birds the view is for the most part monochromatic. Contrast feels very natural and the AFOV is a little more generous than in the Meopta coupled with a wider, slightly brighter view. Detail at range is superb. Looking at small structures a few km out there is no visibly annoying CA and it is mostly while panning that CA is visible streaking by the treeline in the outer edges, again, you see it but the center part of the image looks great.
Monitoring the surroundings from the lookout was a pleasure. Overall the view is even nicer than in the Meopta - but with some caveats. The view is calmer in the Leica and the larger field of view coupled to the slightly more generous AFOV is impressive. However the practically available extra real estate is not that much larger and at distance the extra FOV feels less important. But, is nice to have of course.
The distortion in the Ultravid feels really nicely weighted which is what makes the image so pleasant for long range viewing and the usable field of view for detailed viewing is generous. Chromatic abberation is a complete non issue at this range and scanning fields, houses and roads is very rewarding. I did not think the Ultravid would be a great cityscape binocular but I am rethinking that now.
Through the Meopta the view is fabulous in a different way. The AFOV though not as generous, is still excellent and the field of view is narrower but arguably has a smaller drop off towards the edges. Overall it is a supercrisp analytical view. The field stop drop off is faster on the Meopta though and I don't have the right words for it but the view is a little "busier" in the Meopta towards the edges. With that I find that the distortion curve is better applied in the Leica for calmness of view, even if it is not "better" in terms of seeing detail.
For general viewing this is not something that is bad with the Meopta, it is just nicer in the Leica. None of them are flat field binos.
Contrast seems a little higher in the Meopta and it crunches the shadows a little more giving me a more distinct "snap" to microdetails at far and some small outlines seem a little more visible in the Meopta but going back and forth the Ultravid has the same micro contrast but a slightly lower overall contrast.
As I noticed before the Ultravid pulls a little more detail out of the shade - at the slight expense of sometimes feeling a little bit washed out in the colors due to the higher transmission and the flat light. Meopta feels duller and a little more grey in comparison and crunching the shadows a little in the flat light. The crunching of the shadows and silhouettes makes the Meopta seem more contrasty while still being a bit duller in color separation.
If this makes any sense to you. It is a trade off between perceived contrast and color detail. Both are fine for different reasons.
As for birds in flight the usual suspects did their circling of the fields (a pair of Harriers about a km out and circling the fields) and a lot of "cross town traffic". To my delight the Harriers repeated the pattern which meant that I had time to swap binoculars and this is where it became really interesting for me.
With the Ultravid I had some initial hunting before snapping the birds into focus. Keeping them (well, one of them) in center the CA was very low and detail was great. At times the bird and my panning would have it venture out of the center and at those times some CA halos appeared around the bird which is a little detracting from the viewing when they are so small but for the most part it was a matter of returning the bird to the center of the image. The birds at this range are quite small and at times competing with some floaters in the eye (haha) and this is where the extra wide field of view in the Leica does not really help out. There is a whole lot of nothing around the scaled down bird in the center. But as far as a 12X bino goes, the view is hard to beat...
...but it can be done! Switching to the Meopta the same pair stands out a little better from the background. Sure, the same crunching of shadows apply but the birds get monochromatically isolated against the background which makes the outline even more easily visible than in the Leica. With the Meopta you snap the bird into focus and then you have that perfect outline. Together with the smaller field of view I feel like I am closer to the bird even though magnification is the same. There is less distraction in the Meopta with that smaller field of view when following birds in flight.
This is what the Meopta does best, and that is why it is a keeper for me. I have yet to see a 12/15X bino that does this as well and this is the reason I went from the Meopta to the Swarovski NL 12x42 Pure and back again. Viewing commercial jets streak by at altitude it is the same, a pin sharp and well defined image.
Final conclusion:
Not surprisingly enough, other than in the category of Birds in Flight, where I personally hold the Meopta as the champion, both binoculars are great companions. My guess is that most people would prefer the Leica, and I won't argue too much with that. Most people would definitely have chosen the Swarovski over the Meopta - while I did the opposite.
I know the Meopta inside and out by now so seeing the difference in character was easy enough. There are traits of the Ultravid I really appreciate and would probably not have bothered me with the Meopta had I not seen the difference. Monitoring the bird feeders both of them are sound performers and the right magnification for that distance. Meopta has a little more perceived contrast to it though detailing is the same between the two.
The lingering question is will I keep the Leica? I was not planning on having two 12X binos - especially not since I have the APO Televid 65 for longer range viewing - but the Ultravid has some merits in foul weather and in the forest where it slightly outperforms the Meopta.
For hand held use I can't say one is better than the other. Meopta is quicker to the eye but after some trial and error with the Leica I can't say that either one is easier to handhold than the other, both are at the limit of what is useful to me.
On a monopod they are equally great in use.
Other points on the imaginary score board:
Straylight and glare handling. Tie.
Did not even think about it once during the two longer outings. Both are great with glasses. I did get a little bit of reflections from my glasses with the Leica at one point, but not the bino at fault. Exemplary performance.
Build quality: Tie.
Different approach, look and feel but equally robust. I keep thinking "Subaru" with the Meopta, rugged and it works.
Handling: Tie.
Slight nod for balance on the Meopta and the sculpted ridge is better placed for my hands. I hold the Leica a bit further out to balance it. Leica feels ligher though they weigh the same.
Focuser: Meopta.
Focusers on Meopta have generally been good, but oftentimes a slight play changing direction. On my 12x50 it is perfect, both in evenness and resistance. I am praying it stays like this. There are only a handful of binos that I have handled that have been this good. Dioptre adjustment is adequate on the Meopta, but not great. At least I don't have to change it once set, unless my friend borrows it.
Leica is good to very good. But there is some intitial friction at times. As a HD Plus version this is the reworked focuser,better than the old one which I thought was adequate at best. On this sample very good by Leica standards but far from the Meopta or the other - better - competitors.
Dioptre adjustment is great on the Leica.
I can see myself keeping the Ultravid around for some time - I enjoy the different look it brings to the table. After the initial impressions which were good but not superlative great it has grown on me for sure. Scanning distant scenery with the Leica was - hate to admit it - nicer than with the Meopta.
For birds in flight and winter use the Meopta will definitely be the go to binocular for me I. And it does not fail at general viewing either of course.
The Meostar is that great "clinical/analytical" viewing instrument and the Ultravid has that gorgeous Leica outlook on things. If I keep gravitating towards grabbing the Leica after the summer it has earned a spot on the roster. If not, it will bring a smile to the face and years of service for someone else and I will cherish the time we had together.
I have a pair of 8x binos so why not live a little and enjoy a pair of 12x binos as well?
SELF JUSTIFICATION NOTICE:
It is always good to have a spare/back up. You never know. Am I right? (please tell me I'm right)
Last edited:
Yarkho
Optics afficionado
Another excellent writeup.
As I currently have 7 binos, you won't hear any argument from me 😀 Anyway my justification is it gives me options to pick the right tool for the job. Lately I have been gravitating towards the "clinical/analytical".
And I definitely believe there is a design philosophy to a binocular, or series thereof. And I like to hear from the rest of "the usual suspects".
As I currently have 7 binos, you won't hear any argument from me 😀 Anyway my justification is it gives me options to pick the right tool for the job. Lately I have been gravitating towards the "clinical/analytical".
And I definitely believe there is a design philosophy to a binocular, or series thereof. And I like to hear from the rest of "the usual suspects".
“SELF JUSTIFICATION NOTICE:
It is always good to have a spare/back up. You never know. Am I right? (please tell me I'm right)”
You are right. That will be 1000 SKr. (Not VAT on consultations).
Great write up Henrun and I am not in the least bit surprised at your findings, the Meopta’s never fail to impress.
The Subaru comparison is excellent! I liken my Meopta’s to my trusty old Lada Niva which embarrassed many a high priced 4x4 with its unbelievable capabilities and was treated with much the same derision by those who have never used them…….until I pulled them out of the brown and smelly!
Built for Siberia..not Suburbia.
The Meopta’s have that same hewn from rock aura. Superb bino’s.
It is always good to have a spare/back up. You never know. Am I right? (please tell me I'm right)”
You are right. That will be 1000 SKr. (Not VAT on consultations).
Great write up Henrun and I am not in the least bit surprised at your findings, the Meopta’s never fail to impress.
The Subaru comparison is excellent! I liken my Meopta’s to my trusty old Lada Niva which embarrassed many a high priced 4x4 with its unbelievable capabilities and was treated with much the same derision by those who have never used them…….until I pulled them out of the brown and smelly!
Built for Siberia..not Suburbia.
The Meopta’s have that same hewn from rock aura. Superb bino’s.
Thotmosis
Well-known member
As always you wrote an excellent review. Happy Leica 12x50 UVHD+ user here and a strong believer in the concept of back up / redundancy, especially for binoculars.
What about the minimum IPD settings of these two beauties, are they the same or is the Leica narrower than the Meopta or vice versa? I had to take the objective caps of the Leica to get the IPD setting right. I think its about time to get myself a Meopta but im reluctant because of the IPD setting.
Have fun with your 12x50’s!
What about the minimum IPD settings of these two beauties, are they the same or is the Leica narrower than the Meopta or vice versa? I had to take the objective caps of the Leica to get the IPD setting right. I think its about time to get myself a Meopta but im reluctant because of the IPD setting.
Have fun with your 12x50’s!
Thotmosis: (and all) thank you for the kind words.
It is actually the same for me with the Ultravid, I had to remove the caps as well. I almost thought they would not accommodate my IPD.
There is about one to one and a half mm left between the tubes for my IPD with the Leica. It works between that small gap and completely together.
On the Meopta the IPD setting is a little more generous so the tubes are around 7 to 8 mm apart at my IPD, which should be similar to your IPD so should be plenty of room to spare. Also the Meopta has a lot more latitude/forgiveness for the IPD setting. Eye placement is not as critical as on the Leica, the Meostar has good wiggle room with and without glasses. It is another strength of the Meopta.
It is actually the same for me with the Ultravid, I had to remove the caps as well. I almost thought they would not accommodate my IPD.
There is about one to one and a half mm left between the tubes for my IPD with the Leica. It works between that small gap and completely together.
On the Meopta the IPD setting is a little more generous so the tubes are around 7 to 8 mm apart at my IPD, which should be similar to your IPD so should be plenty of room to spare. Also the Meopta has a lot more latitude/forgiveness for the IPD setting. Eye placement is not as critical as on the Leica, the Meostar has good wiggle room with and without glasses. It is another strength of the Meopta.
Yarkho: as long as the binos are being used and in rotation I could make room for more.
My small 8x32 Meopta is always within reach, so it gets used pretty much daily. It is the "worst" performer on paper but I enjoy using it so much it is the most used, by a wide margin. Very utilitarian. I think I would miss it the most if it got lost.
The SFL 8x40 is used for forest walks and for occasional use. It simply works in all weather and has the best balance of the lot and is the most stable in hand binocular I have had. It is however my least used binocular. It is the "rational" choice and the best (for me) out of the 8x in terms of price/performance. But if I did not have it I would honestly be ok without it. It is "just" a great binocular.
The Meostar 12x50HD on a monopod is what I usually go out with and it always does the job. So eight times out of ten I grab it over the SFL. And sometimes I head out with both.
For some time I scratched the Leica itch with one of my all time favourites: the Leica UVHD 7x42. Loved most about it but struggled with glasses, the AFOV and magnification felt a bit limited. I could not deny that the SFL gave me more reach and detail at medium range viewing.
I could have kept the 7x42 but it felt too extravagant for occasional use and I would hate to have such a special binocular just gathering dust in a cabinet as a "spare to a spare". Gear is meant to be used.
The Ultravid itch would not go away completely and with 12x being my most used magnification I felt compelled to give it chance. Prices for new alpha binos are crazy nowadays so I figured I can always try out a used Ultravid in fair condition.
My small 8x32 Meopta is always within reach, so it gets used pretty much daily. It is the "worst" performer on paper but I enjoy using it so much it is the most used, by a wide margin. Very utilitarian. I think I would miss it the most if it got lost.
The SFL 8x40 is used for forest walks and for occasional use. It simply works in all weather and has the best balance of the lot and is the most stable in hand binocular I have had. It is however my least used binocular. It is the "rational" choice and the best (for me) out of the 8x in terms of price/performance. But if I did not have it I would honestly be ok without it. It is "just" a great binocular.
The Meostar 12x50HD on a monopod is what I usually go out with and it always does the job. So eight times out of ten I grab it over the SFL. And sometimes I head out with both.
For some time I scratched the Leica itch with one of my all time favourites: the Leica UVHD 7x42. Loved most about it but struggled with glasses, the AFOV and magnification felt a bit limited. I could not deny that the SFL gave me more reach and detail at medium range viewing.
I could have kept the 7x42 but it felt too extravagant for occasional use and I would hate to have such a special binocular just gathering dust in a cabinet as a "spare to a spare". Gear is meant to be used.
The Ultravid itch would not go away completely and with 12x being my most used magnification I felt compelled to give it chance. Prices for new alpha binos are crazy nowadays so I figured I can always try out a used Ultravid in fair condition.
Thotmosis
Well-known member
Thank you that is verse usable information.
Because of this tread im using the 12x50 since sunrise this morning for hours and I realize again what a wonderful optical instrument it is.
I will have my guy at the Cayman islands fax you a cheque. There is however a fee for small transactions so don't be alarmed if there is a negative amount on the cheque. You can just Bitcoin me the difference.
Please don't fax me back, I am doing my taxes so the fax is hooked up to a shredder.
I have been using the Ultravid in the morning sun now that the birds are active. It is phenomenal for short to midrange birdwatching.
Donner und blitzen! I just sent you a fax with a Bitcoin transfer and you have shredded it.
All this 12x talk has prompted me to get my Geco (GPO) 12.5x50's out watch a few Curlews in the field below. They have reminded me of their undoubted Zeiss genes, lovely bino's but I must try either the 12x Meopta's or the 12x Ultravids to see what I may be missing.
This is a great thread on bino's which often fall under the radar.
This is a great thread on bino's which often fall under the radar.
Thotmosis
Well-known member
Here in the Netherlands i use it mainly for long distance viewing from my apartment on the 15th floor. If i need high (12x) magnification for walks i take my Duovid with me as it is more compact and the possibility to change magnification. Last summer i was in your lovely country and i was totally addicted and in love with the views through it in combination with my 7x42 Trinovid.
Thotmosis: that's a nice 7x42 you have there. Love the rugged armor. The FL as well!
On the local outing today I discovered a new lookout I had totally missed before.
On a hilltop overlooking the coast, and it is 1.5 km from our house (!) ...
I have been watching a small island opposite a conference hotel nearby, it is packed with Cormorants and there is usually a lot of activity around the islands. Followed a new trail which lead up to a lookout overlooking the Conference hotel and the coast and it was superb: a birds eye view of the opposite island, giving me opportunity to watch the Cormorants against a backdrop of dark forest as well as the higher ones up in the sky.
Very good visibility from that vantage point. There are usually always some Eagles around but the only one I spotted was way, way out. Lots of things to watch with the 12x50 UVHD+. I should have brought the Meopta as well. But next time I will bring the APO Televid 65 and a 12X.
On my left hand side the sun was spoiling the view a little but there was no glare in the bino. I had to shield my left side of the face for scanning the scenery but then I found a small tree to slip into the shade of.
Always nice to discover new spots, and this was literally in the neighbourhood! I think this will be my new go-to spot (the old one is about 500m from the house so I feel kind of lazy when I just go there).
Ultravid continues to perform well. Reminds me very much of the 7x42 in color, contrast and calmness of image when viewing the field.
The only small nitpick was - again - birds in flight. It was doing really well, it is just that the Meopta is literally the best I have seen for exactly this type of birdwatching.
I will return to this spot as soon as I can, might even go there after finishing up my cup of tea.
It is windy / gusty at the coast and birds are hovering the thermals and very active at the moment.
On the way back I was three houses from home and on the phone with my birding friend to tell him about the "new" location.
I was just about to set the monopod down for a last sweep over the fields to the left of me when I noticed a large Eagle. Excused myself, hung up and followed the Eagle for about a minute and then another one appeared (I think it is the very same pair of juveniles I see on the regular).
It is funny that I saw nothing "spectacular" during a 5km + walk with the binocular and 300m from home the sighting of the day appeared.
On the local outing today I discovered a new lookout I had totally missed before.
On a hilltop overlooking the coast, and it is 1.5 km from our house (!) ...
I have been watching a small island opposite a conference hotel nearby, it is packed with Cormorants and there is usually a lot of activity around the islands. Followed a new trail which lead up to a lookout overlooking the Conference hotel and the coast and it was superb: a birds eye view of the opposite island, giving me opportunity to watch the Cormorants against a backdrop of dark forest as well as the higher ones up in the sky.
Very good visibility from that vantage point. There are usually always some Eagles around but the only one I spotted was way, way out. Lots of things to watch with the 12x50 UVHD+. I should have brought the Meopta as well. But next time I will bring the APO Televid 65 and a 12X.
On my left hand side the sun was spoiling the view a little but there was no glare in the bino. I had to shield my left side of the face for scanning the scenery but then I found a small tree to slip into the shade of.
Always nice to discover new spots, and this was literally in the neighbourhood! I think this will be my new go-to spot (the old one is about 500m from the house so I feel kind of lazy when I just go there).
Ultravid continues to perform well. Reminds me very much of the 7x42 in color, contrast and calmness of image when viewing the field.
The only small nitpick was - again - birds in flight. It was doing really well, it is just that the Meopta is literally the best I have seen for exactly this type of birdwatching.
I will return to this spot as soon as I can, might even go there after finishing up my cup of tea.
It is windy / gusty at the coast and birds are hovering the thermals and very active at the moment.
On the way back I was three houses from home and on the phone with my birding friend to tell him about the "new" location.
I was just about to set the monopod down for a last sweep over the fields to the left of me when I noticed a large Eagle. Excused myself, hung up and followed the Eagle for about a minute and then another one appeared (I think it is the very same pair of juveniles I see on the regular).
It is funny that I saw nothing "spectacular" during a 5km + walk with the binocular and 300m from home the sighting of the day appeared.
HenRun, we would gently point out that Summary means short, and Conclusion means that's it.
Just kidding, of course. Your so welcome and readable writing clarifies, among other things, why we may reasonably wish more binos without feeling guilty of excess. But, I think, even that cannot explain away our core motive of "gear addiction"!
PatR, myself, too, have a Meopta and drove a Lada (car, the 1500, long ago, inter alia). The thing was to ostentatiously overtake unsuspecting mildly driven BMWs etc. (No such disturbing motives behind the Meopta—I hope.)
Just kidding, of course. Your so welcome and readable writing clarifies, among other things, why we may reasonably wish more binos without feeling guilty of excess. But, I think, even that cannot explain away our core motive of "gear addiction"!
PatR, myself, too, have a Meopta and drove a Lada (car, the 1500, long ago, inter alia). The thing was to ostentatiously overtake unsuspecting mildly driven BMWs etc. (No such disturbing motives behind the Meopta—I hope.)
Similar threads
