Yes, I very much oversimplified the criteria for a perfectly relaxed view.
-
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 (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter HenRun
- Start date
Looking at the moon today with both the Leica and the Meopta. There is no question about it, the Meopta is a little crisper. Very clean, high contrast monochromatic view. If I had not gone between the two I would have thought the Ultravid superb. But it is just excellent. 
As for the afternoon/evening views of deer and hare (just the one hare) the UVHD is really gorgeous to look through - with the slightly larger AFOV and slightly brighter image. Ultravids have very relaxed viewing and late evenings (and rainy days) I do prefer it over the Meostar.
Looking at the three grazing deer with both as light levels were dropping the Ultravid was nicer overall - but as long as light levels were enough the Meostar brought a slightly higher level of detail. With the Ultravid the view is always gorgeous but when I switched to the Meostar the specular highlights in the eyes of the deer was visible, not so with the Ultravid. Sharp, but eyes are black blobs. With the Meostar it is a black blob with a specular highlight.
In some sessions over the last week I have found Meopta edging out the Ultravid for that last bit of (both tripod supported) resolution in the center. But this evening I was watching a very small bird in a treetop with the Meopta and thought the Ultravid might not make it - but I was proven wrong. I could eek out a little more detail in the bird colors, despite the Meopta feeling a little more distinct at first, the Ultravid gave me a little more color detail.
I know the Meopta very well and it is never disappointing. There have been times I have been looking at things in low light where I do prefer the Ultravid view though. It is hard to explain - but if I want to see the smallest detail, the Meopta is the best for me. However if I want to observe things the Ultravid is always nice.
If that makes any sense.
As for the afternoon/evening views of deer and hare (just the one hare) the UVHD is really gorgeous to look through - with the slightly larger AFOV and slightly brighter image. Ultravids have very relaxed viewing and late evenings (and rainy days) I do prefer it over the Meostar.
Looking at the three grazing deer with both as light levels were dropping the Ultravid was nicer overall - but as long as light levels were enough the Meostar brought a slightly higher level of detail. With the Ultravid the view is always gorgeous but when I switched to the Meostar the specular highlights in the eyes of the deer was visible, not so with the Ultravid. Sharp, but eyes are black blobs. With the Meostar it is a black blob with a specular highlight.
In some sessions over the last week I have found Meopta edging out the Ultravid for that last bit of (both tripod supported) resolution in the center. But this evening I was watching a very small bird in a treetop with the Meopta and thought the Ultravid might not make it - but I was proven wrong. I could eek out a little more detail in the bird colors, despite the Meopta feeling a little more distinct at first, the Ultravid gave me a little more color detail.
I know the Meopta very well and it is never disappointing. There have been times I have been looking at things in low light where I do prefer the Ultravid view though. It is hard to explain - but if I want to see the smallest detail, the Meopta is the best for me. However if I want to observe things the Ultravid is always nice.
If that makes any sense.
Yes, much! We now await Conclusion 4.0. ;-)
HR, yes, the Leica may discern more colors, but certain colors, or certain hues of colors (in certain light conditions). I'd be very interested to know if this happens thru. the Meopta with other colors and hues (i.e, you discern more, vs Leica). I found Ultravid erases different hues of brown/ish of bark on trees. This was in a deliberate test, vs some other very good bino, not Meopta, what, I now forget. I now don't have an Ultravid to do that vs Meopta. Thanks!
HR, yes, the Leica may discern more colors, but certain colors, or certain hues of colors (in certain light conditions). I'd be very interested to know if this happens thru. the Meopta with other colors and hues (i.e, you discern more, vs Leica). I found Ultravid erases different hues of brown/ish of bark on trees. This was in a deliberate test, vs some other very good bino, not Meopta, what, I now forget. I now don't have an Ultravid to do that vs Meopta. Thanks!
This thread made for an interesting read that comes close to home.
I have recently picked up a Swaro 12x50 EL SV. I also have a 10x42 Ultravid (my first binocular, bought in 2006), and a Cabella's version of the Meopta B1 HD 15x56 that I have been using a lot for four years now.
My collection seems to orbit the bins discussed.
I haven't had a lot of time with my EL 12x50 yet (though I was watching two Sharp Shin hawks in the neighborhood this morning).
We will be at our cottage in a couple weeks (on the Bay of Green Bay on Lake Michigan in Wisconsin) which is where I get to really put my optics to good use.
This discussion has me revved up for some mornings outside !
I have recently picked up a Swaro 12x50 EL SV. I also have a 10x42 Ultravid (my first binocular, bought in 2006), and a Cabella's version of the Meopta B1 HD 15x56 that I have been using a lot for four years now.
My collection seems to orbit the bins discussed.
I haven't had a lot of time with my EL 12x50 yet (though I was watching two Sharp Shin hawks in the neighborhood this morning).
We will be at our cottage in a couple weeks (on the Bay of Green Bay on Lake Michigan in Wisconsin) which is where I get to really put my optics to good use.
This discussion has me revved up for some mornings outside !
Yes, there are so many factors involved. I agree though on the muddling of bark. I have seen this with all the UItravids I have looked through, for me it seems Ultravid crunches shadows a bit.
As for that very small bird in comparison with the Meostar it could have been the fact that the Ultravid is a little bit brighter and nothing else.
Thank you, HR. To me, about the image in a bino, "reddish," "bluish," "warm," "cold," though useful are not quite informative enough. It's welcome find an actual image or situation described, as you have done. Still better is an idea of the color/s or hue/s involved.
Tangent alert! I wonder if Noctivid is still more neutral than Ultravid in this regard, or has emphases or de-emphases of its own. Those reading, please, don't derail, either PM, or if it's important enough to start a thread do that, instead!
I like the view thru. the MeoStar-HD, and, especially after this thread, am now thinking of its 12x50, as well. Actually, despite what I've said above, am now really not keen to know any lapses it shows in color rendition, because, apart from regrets on choice I will then be seeking scenes to worry about!
Tangent alert! I wonder if Noctivid is still more neutral than Ultravid in this regard, or has emphases or de-emphases of its own. Those reading, please, don't derail, either PM, or if it's important enough to start a thread do that, instead!
I like the view thru. the MeoStar-HD, and, especially after this thread, am now thinking of its 12x50, as well. Actually, despite what I've said above, am now really not keen to know any lapses it shows in color rendition, because, apart from regrets on choice I will then be seeking scenes to worry about!
Adhoc: you are welcome.
For me there is a very simple approach: as long as the bino does not have a noticeably strong hue I seem to adapt to it very quickly.
Adapt = not thinking about it in this case.
There have been very few instances where I have been "put off" by binoculars. Like most I am not a great fan of strong yellow bias, or green-ish/green blue.
The Meopta HD 12x50 is so close to neutral I simply don't notice. I also notice that the UVHD is a little warmer. But that is not something I dwell on when I use either one as none of them stick out. There are times I don't notice the difference.
The older Meopta B1 I have is a slight amber, more of a slight orange than yellow to me. It always looks nice though.
An even older Meopta 7X I tried out was over the top and was a bit overbearing in late afternoon sun where it would be very orangey.
My old favourite Zeiss Victory FL 8/10x32 are quite heavy on the green, almost cyan side of things and once I picked up on that I really did not like it. Apart from that it is a fantastic binocular. But for things in the shade and on overcast days it looks a bit dystopian to me in terms of washed out greenish color. Even though I just wrote "quite heavy" I did not notice it during regular use, during the day or when the sun is out.
For me there is a very simple approach: as long as the bino does not have a noticeably strong hue I seem to adapt to it very quickly.
Adapt = not thinking about it in this case.
There have been very few instances where I have been "put off" by binoculars. Like most I am not a great fan of strong yellow bias, or green-ish/green blue.
The Meopta HD 12x50 is so close to neutral I simply don't notice. I also notice that the UVHD is a little warmer. But that is not something I dwell on when I use either one as none of them stick out. There are times I don't notice the difference.
The older Meopta B1 I have is a slight amber, more of a slight orange than yellow to me. It always looks nice though.
An even older Meopta 7X I tried out was over the top and was a bit overbearing in late afternoon sun where it would be very orangey.
My old favourite Zeiss Victory FL 8/10x32 are quite heavy on the green, almost cyan side of things and once I picked up on that I really did not like it. Apart from that it is a fantastic binocular. But for things in the shade and on overcast days it looks a bit dystopian to me in terms of washed out greenish color. Even though I just wrote "quite heavy" I did not notice it during regular use, during the day or when the sun is out.
Yarkho
Optics afficionado
Most people do not notice color casts - many unless they walk under sodium streetlamps. The eye is a wonderful instrument in this regard.
I found that the Meostars have exactly the same weak-yellow color tint than my glasses, which explains why they seem very neutral to me and why I never noticed unless I did the white paper test / look for it on purpose.
I have one sunglasses that subtly accentuate the oranges and reds; i wear them for summer sunsets and always wonder why other people do not appreciate the scenery as much as I do
I do find the Swarovski binoculars a bit more neutral in terms of color fidelity though.
I found that the Meostars have exactly the same weak-yellow color tint than my glasses, which explains why they seem very neutral to me and why I never noticed unless I did the white paper test / look for it on purpose.
I have one sunglasses that subtly accentuate the oranges and reds; i wear them for summer sunsets and always wonder why other people do not appreciate the scenery as much as I do
I do find the Swarovski binoculars a bit more neutral in terms of color fidelity though.
Last edited:
I tried to "evaluate" the color rendition of Meopta and the Leica 12x50's today. Meopta seems cooler. I would not say greenish though, just colder.
Leica seems warmer and looking at two subjects the UVHD looked definitely "redder" - without going over the top. But enough to notice.
This is in late evening, mixed light with shade and low angled late sun. Looking at deer the fur coat is "warmer" brown through the Leica.
Which one is more accurate? I don't know. Somewhere inbetween when it comes to what I perceive the deer fur with unaided viewing.
Looking at a traditional red house in the distance with white trim the red color itself is not strikingly different, but the Meostar has the trim whiter whereas the Leica picks up more of the reflected red from the house and paints the trim slightly pink-ish red. I don't think I would have even noticed if I had not gone back and forth and then looked through the SFL.
For "reference" I brought out the SFL 8x40 and to my eyes the SFL is very neutral, about as neutral as I have seen, or can make out.
The Meostar HD is so close to the SFL they make a very nice pairing, with some shared similarities.
As usual the Meostar is stunning following birds in flight. Had a pair of honking geese passing by and the looking at the through Meostar reminds me how great it is and it keeps putting a smile on my face.
I can't tell you how and why, but if I look through one eye at a time at something one of my eyes is definitely warmer. It is impossible for me to notice anything with both eyes open. I wonder if all those years louping slides and negatives on a light box did a number on the right eye. If Iook through a loupe and switch eyes the color I see is shifted slightly - definitely not the same. One side (I keep forgetting which) is warmer. I would never have noticed this if I had not looked through a loupe so many times. I tried switching eyes (starting with the other) but the effect was the same.
Leica seems warmer and looking at two subjects the UVHD looked definitely "redder" - without going over the top. But enough to notice.
This is in late evening, mixed light with shade and low angled late sun. Looking at deer the fur coat is "warmer" brown through the Leica.
Which one is more accurate? I don't know. Somewhere inbetween when it comes to what I perceive the deer fur with unaided viewing.
Looking at a traditional red house in the distance with white trim the red color itself is not strikingly different, but the Meostar has the trim whiter whereas the Leica picks up more of the reflected red from the house and paints the trim slightly pink-ish red. I don't think I would have even noticed if I had not gone back and forth and then looked through the SFL.
For "reference" I brought out the SFL 8x40 and to my eyes the SFL is very neutral, about as neutral as I have seen, or can make out.
The Meostar HD is so close to the SFL they make a very nice pairing, with some shared similarities.
As usual the Meostar is stunning following birds in flight. Had a pair of honking geese passing by and the looking at the through Meostar reminds me how great it is and it keeps putting a smile on my face.
I can't tell you how and why, but if I look through one eye at a time at something one of my eyes is definitely warmer. It is impossible for me to notice anything with both eyes open. I wonder if all those years louping slides and negatives on a light box did a number on the right eye. If Iook through a loupe and switch eyes the color I see is shifted slightly - definitely not the same. One side (I keep forgetting which) is warmer. I would never have noticed this if I had not looked through a loupe so many times. I tried switching eyes (starting with the other) but the effect was the same.
Yarkho
Optics afficionado
So AllBinos have transmission graphs for both the Meostar B1+ 12x50 and UVHD 12x50. Attached below for convenience.
www.allbinos.com
www.allbinos.com
Regarding both, they note that the transmission curve is not flat. But, as both you and me wrote (you very eloquently), it is difficult to notice in real use, especially with the Meostar. Other than that, the transmission curves look more similar than not.
One wishes for Gijs van Ginkel to chip in.
As for the eyes... I too have noticed, especially after viewing open sunlit landscape with 8x binos, that my eyes give me different color casts. This makes comparing two binos at the same time impossible (having two binos, each to one eye, must look ridiculous).
With me, it's the right eye that has a more 'warmer' image. I have never worked in a light box. But I suspect that it's the angle of the Sun with respect to the eyes. My landscape is to the south and west and is open ~60 km so I like to watch the various television towers in the distance and evaluate atmospheric transparency for evening astronomical observations.
I will have to test the 'angle of the Sun' hypothesis in some other place.
My other hypothesis (a bit crazy one) is that it's the IR part of the spectrum that can play a role. The Allbinos give the colors at the X axis, but honestly there's much more to the red part of the rainbow, at least for me, than they show. In particular, they are missing the various dark reds and red-browns.
Meopta MeoStar B1 Plus 12x50 HD - 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.
Leica Ultravid 12x50 HD - 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.
Regarding both, they note that the transmission curve is not flat. But, as both you and me wrote (you very eloquently), it is difficult to notice in real use, especially with the Meostar. Other than that, the transmission curves look more similar than not.
One wishes for Gijs van Ginkel to chip in.
As for the eyes... I too have noticed, especially after viewing open sunlit landscape with 8x binos, that my eyes give me different color casts. This makes comparing two binos at the same time impossible (having two binos, each to one eye, must look ridiculous).
With me, it's the right eye that has a more 'warmer' image. I have never worked in a light box. But I suspect that it's the angle of the Sun with respect to the eyes. My landscape is to the south and west and is open ~60 km so I like to watch the various television towers in the distance and evaluate atmospheric transparency for evening astronomical observations.
I will have to test the 'angle of the Sun' hypothesis in some other place.
My other hypothesis (a bit crazy one) is that it's the IR part of the spectrum that can play a role. The Allbinos give the colors at the X axis, but honestly there's much more to the red part of the rainbow, at least for me, than they show. In particular, they are missing the various dark reds and red-browns.
Attachments
looksharp65
Well-known member
The colour vision constantly works to maintain colour constancy. Our brains assess the colour temperature of the incident light, effects of shaded parts and comparison with other parts of the scene, and ends up with a 'best guess' which astonishingly often is correct. Or...correct may not be the right description. 'Fit' might be better.
Since the perception of colour arises in the brain after huge computational work, there's no objectivity or truth, merely a sensation.
The brain works with comparisons and really goes lengths to white-balance the view. If you put on yellow sunglasses, you'll after five minutes not notice the view is yellow.
So why do so many experience a slightly differing hue in their left vs. their right eye?
I discovered this as early as the age of 7 so it's not cataract or such. Is it a flaw?
No, on the contrary. I believe it's a feature that aids the brain in its work with colour constancy. Having a 'second opinion' boosts the colour discrimination.
I compare it to how some owls have their ears at different height, which helps them decide how deep down under the snow the mouse runs. As far as I know, my theory hasn't been tested scientifically but for me, knowing some of how colour vision works, it appears more than feasible.
//L
L: interesting. 7 years old, that is an early discovery. I noticed it first around 27/28 years of age.
Yarkho: I actually still have a bunch of loupes so I did a white paper test with both eyes just now: my left eye is definitely warmer.
I paid more attention to my eyesight after I had Lasik surgery done on the right eye. I should have done both at the same time, I waited a few years and having ONE contact lens for a few years and glasses with a prescription glass on one side and "clear" on the other was... ...not optimal. But hey, I could not afford the second eye at the time. I was young and liked to travel, and was often broke when I got back.
Yarkho: I actually still have a bunch of loupes so I did a white paper test with both eyes just now: my left eye is definitely warmer.
I paid more attention to my eyesight after I had Lasik surgery done on the right eye. I should have done both at the same time, I waited a few years and having ONE contact lens for a few years and glasses with a prescription glass on one side and "clear" on the other was... ...not optimal. But hey, I could not afford the second eye at the time. I was young and liked to travel, and was often broke when I got back.
The two eyes seeing color differently has been discussed on this forum not so long ago. It was, as I remember, first brought up by Chosun Juan (silent here for some time now?)
HR, thank you for those color rendition comparisons, which are pretty useful to me. For me the Leica view is beautiful and "calm" (hope these terms are not too scientific for you ;-) but also unfortunately "too red"!
Adding in edit: Stated thanks to HR because he did that in response to my request. Yarkho, and Looksharp65, your information also appreciated.
HR, thank you for those color rendition comparisons, which are pretty useful to me. For me the Leica view is beautiful and "calm" (hope these terms are not too scientific for you ;-) but also unfortunately "too red"!
Adding in edit: Stated thanks to HR because he did that in response to my request. Yarkho, and Looksharp65, your information also appreciated.
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
For me the left eye is redder, the right greener (less red?). It's not likely to have been produced by your loupe work; in all the times this subject has come up here, no one has ever said they detect no difference. On the other hand it's slight, not unlike one brand of binocular vs another, and easily overlooked or forgotten... although certain combinations of bin and user can be infelicitous. Some consider certain Zeiss bins too green, while instead I find some Nikons too red. Not too warm, but literally too red. Warm can be more yellow or orange than red, cool can be more blue than green. I think the red-green axis is more important here than a sense of coolness vs warmth, neither of which is actually unpleasant, being so often a matter of ambient lighting.
Harry Stottle
Unknown-Known
Here is a chance for a new business! Attach a Zeiss SF barrel on the left side and a Leica NV barrel on the right to a bridge with the focus wheel of your choice, to correct the colour difference in your eyes. The spare tubes you can sell to someone else.
Tenex: I think I am relieved to find that I am normal.
Or maybe I should be disappointed that I am not "special". At least I can sleep soundly knowing I am not defective.
There have not been many situations where I have disliked a binocular for the color representation alone.
The few times it has happened it has been where the inherent properties of the binocular meets the worst case scenario.
Or as with the Zeiss FL Würst Käse Scenario: the green hue of the binocular being exacerbated in shaded overcast forest environment.
Going from slight green hue to soylent green yuk.
I honestly never noticed it for many years and many situations before that.
Or with the older Meopta Meostar 7x42 sunny side up orange rastasafari edition. During sunset you think you are viewing a Fanta 80's commercial. It was more over the top than the Zeiss FL was. Other than that it was a fantastic AFOV experience and a really sweet binocular.
My current model Meopta is neutral with a tendency towards cool. I mostly notice it comparing it to the Leica which is a little warmer. On their own none of them strike me as anything other than close to neutral.
Or maybe I should be disappointed that I am not "special". At least I can sleep soundly knowing I am not defective.
There have not been many situations where I have disliked a binocular for the color representation alone.
The few times it has happened it has been where the inherent properties of the binocular meets the worst case scenario.
Or as with the Zeiss FL Würst Käse Scenario: the green hue of the binocular being exacerbated in shaded overcast forest environment.
Going from slight green hue to soylent green yuk.
I honestly never noticed it for many years and many situations before that.
Or with the older Meopta Meostar 7x42 sunny side up orange rastasafari edition. During sunset you think you are viewing a Fanta 80's commercial. It was more over the top than the Zeiss FL was. Other than that it was a fantastic AFOV experience and a really sweet binocular.
My current model Meopta is neutral with a tendency towards cool. I mostly notice it comparing it to the Leica which is a little warmer. On their own none of them strike me as anything other than close to neutral.
tenex
reality-based
Interesting. My objection to the red bias of the two Nikon SEs I tried wasn't that it exaggerated any red in a scene too much, but that it seemed to dull or throw off the other colors present. I understand E IIs were like this too before the most recent coatings which I quite like, but otherwise this is the only time I've ever truly disliked a bin's color rendition. And it obviously doesn't bother most people.
Yarkho: I only started to notice the difference again once I shifted eyes from right to left on my spotting scope recently.
Tenex: just got back from a friend who has an old russian porro 7x50.
He claims to have gotten used to the yellow tint but to me it is overbearing. It is usable for observation - but does not look natural.
To me there is no joy in using such a binocular.
He also has the Swarovski Pure NL 8x32 and it was like rinsing the eyes looking through the Swarovski after the Russki.
Third bino I looked through at his place was a Geco 8x32. It is pretty good for the price point. It did have a slight yellow tint to it, I might not have noticed much if I had not looked through the Swarovski at the same time. Of course, going from the russian bino to the Geco made the Geco look very color neutral...
Tenex: just got back from a friend who has an old russian porro 7x50.
He claims to have gotten used to the yellow tint but to me it is overbearing. It is usable for observation - but does not look natural.
To me there is no joy in using such a binocular.
He also has the Swarovski Pure NL 8x32 and it was like rinsing the eyes looking through the Swarovski after the Russki.
Third bino I looked through at his place was a Geco 8x32. It is pretty good for the price point. It did have a slight yellow tint to it, I might not have noticed much if I had not looked through the Swarovski at the same time. Of course, going from the russian bino to the Geco made the Geco look very color neutral...
