Leica is not getting the attention it deserves (1 Viewer)

[Patudo]

I would guess that if people (whether birders, hunters, etc) just happened to try current S/Z/L bins side by side without previous exposure to marketing or having salesmen gush about the superiority of flat-field etc, many would leave with a Leica, very happy with its beautiful view, straightforward ergonomics, and build quality, not quite having figured out how the others seemed fussy in comparison and not caring.

I don't know about this myself. I think just as many, if not more, in those same circumstances, would choose a SF or NL (as Suffolk naturalist did just recently) for their wider field of view; some might also prefer the SF or NL handling, and/or might perceive the Z/S image to be "all sharp".

I think Leica's status in the camera world helps them just as much as Swaro/Zeiss marketing. There is probably also a difference between those who purchase binoculars for "the view" and those who use binoculars to search for things.

 

[Rg548]

I would like to view thru a BN one day.....
I don't think most would be able to tell any difference between most binoculars as most still haven't figured out the diopter in their own pair!

Leica is boutique.... but I enjoy being 'a part' from the masses but still want quality so Leica a good fit...

Make sure it is a serviced pair.
I looked through some, and my BN dream was shattered.
I then chanced upon a serviced from Leica pair in a shop.... the difference was huge.... I bought them.
I was so impressed I sold those, and sourced an 'as new' pair..... and they're superb..... 154 later serial number

 

[Scott98]

Any older binocular is going to need to be serviced. It's the dark side of vintage binos. In my experience, most of them are out of alignment. Father Time also does bad things to grease and most older binos are in need of re-greasing as well.

 

[John M Robinson]

I second that.

I got some BAD news yesterday people, Leica discontinuing the classics (Retrovids)! 😲😞😢

Paul

That’s very sad. I’m glad I got a pair of 7x35 to last the rest of my life. It was definitely a challenging thing to do, upgrading the old classic, and I assume there were design constraints that prevented them from making them 100% submersible, but I also felt they didn’t go all out in marketing them. They really didn’t try to sell them to anybody but us old farts who remembered the old ones.

 

[Paultricounty]

That’s very sad. I’m glad I got a pair of 7x35 to last the rest of my life. It was definitely a challenging thing to do, upgrading the old classic, and I assume there were design constraints that prevented them from making them 100% submersible, but I also felt they didn’t go all out in marketing them. They really didn’t try to sell them to anybody but us old farts who remembered the old ones.

When I had bought mine about two years, the rep at Leica talked so highly of these, but his biggest concern was that they're not water proof. He had told me he was waiting for the rubber armor version coming out, but couldn't verify when they would be available. It seems that, and the Noctivid 32's never came to be.

Paul

 

[Trinovid]

You know what would be really cool? If they discontinued them and then, after a ‘sell off of old stock’ period, released the new improved Retrovid. Fully waterproofed, with slightly grippier focus knob, and maybe even Uppendahl’d.

 

[John M Robinson]

You know what would be really cool? If they discontinued them and then, after a ‘sell off of old stock’ period, released the new improved Retrovid. Fully waterproofed, with slightly grippier focus knob, and maybe even Uppendahl’d.

Nice dream 😊😊😊

 

[Chotacabras]

I would guess that if people (whether birders, hunters, etc) just happened to try current S/Z/L bins side by side without previous exposure to marketing or having salesmen gush about the superiority of flat-field etc, many would leave with a Leica, very happy with its beautiful view, straightforward ergonomics, and build quality...

That might have been me this weekend, if the Leica eyecups hadn't all been so intolerably short 🙄

 

[John M Robinson]

That might have been me this weekend, if the Leica eyecups hadn't all been so intolerably short 🙄

Short? They seem the same depth as most when screwed all the way out. I’m not sure what you mean by short?

 

[NDhunter]

Any older binocular is going to need to be serviced. It's the dark side of vintage binos. In my experience, most of them are out of alignment. Father Time also does bad things to grease and most older binos are in need of re-greasing as well.

That is not true, not sure why you posted that rubbish.
Jerry

 

[Chotacabras]

Short? They seem the same depth as most when screwed all the way out. I’m not sure what you mean by short?

Too short for my face-shape, I get black-outs aka "beaning". Or more precisely: maximum eyecup extension in these binoculars is insufficient to provide me with the required eye relief. [So alternatively, one could say that the eye relief is too long for me.]

I think I'm explaining this correctly (experts pls jump in if not), and I think it's a fairly common problem among people who don't wear glasses when using binoculars.

In my case: deep Leica brand loyalty, but I can't even consider modern Leica because eyecups too short.

 

[Trinovid]

Nice dream 😊😊😊

Let me know if you see them before I do, the 7x35 Retrovid+ that is.

 

[Scott98]

That is not true, not sure why you posted that rubbish.
Jerry

Take it easy big guy

 

[Patudo]

I suppose it depends what you consider old or vintage. From my experience (and I haven't bought/sold hundreds of binos like some here) more than 50% of the 1950s/60s porros I've purchased have needed attention. If buying this type of binocular, especially from countries with a humid climate like the UK, you need to expect that many will require a service.

Even the more robust roof binoculars like the Leica BA/BN series - many of those are close to or over 30 years old now, and over that period of time O-rings can deteriorate, affecting sealing. That shouldn't automatically deter potential buyers, as they are still functional and usable binoculars. But time, as far as binoculars are concerned, does the reverse of curing all ills.

 

[Paultricounty]

I suppose it depends what you consider old or vintage. From my experience (and I haven't bought/sold hundreds of binos like some here) more than 50% of the 1950s/60s porros I've purchased have needed attention. If buying this type of binocular, especially from countries with a humid climate like the UK, you need to expect that many will require a service.

I’ve bought and sold and have a few dozen from the 50’s, 60’s , 70’s and 80’s, all porros. There was a lot of garbage cheap stuff that is just awful. The high end glass from these decades that were very good to excellent , if taken care need very little. It has a lot to do with who you’re buying them from. If you’re buying from some of the auction sites the ratio of bins needing repair is much much higher. If you’re buying from people here, Cloudynights and Astrmt, your chances of getting a very clean piece is very good, especially from guys that are collectors and/or are rotating or moving on from the genre. It seems to me the better the initial quality of the Binocular, the better chance of getting a nice one.

Paul

Even the more robust roof binoculars like the Leica BA/BN series - many of those are close to or over 30 years old now, and over that period of time O-rings can deteriorate, affecting sealing. That shouldn't automatically deter potential buyers, as they are still functional and usable binoculars. But time, as far as binoculars are concerned, does the reverse of curing all ills.

 

[Paultricounty]

He doesn't sound like a parrot to me, he sounds human Every binocular's got some faults, no need to go all sychophantic IMO. The OP asked why Leica doesn't get more recognition - why attack the credibility of people who answer? The conversation can only go downhill from there.......

I think it’s because when someone says they see CA all the time in the center image of Leica’s binos, there’s something there to refute the claim.

 

[William Lewis]

Too short for my face-shape, I get black-outs aka "beaning". Or more precisely: maximum eyecup extension in these binoculars is insufficient to provide me with the required eye relief. [So alternatively, one could say that the eye relief is too long for me.]

I think I'm explaining this correctly (experts pls jump in if not), and I think it's a fairly common problem among people who don't wear glasses when using binoculars.

In my case: deep Leica brand loyalty, but I can't even consider modern Leica because eyecups too short.

I find the same with a lot of leica's, black outs with the noctivid and most ultravid's, they don't really do it for me so I don't give them a huge amount of attention!

The exception in the line up is the 8x32 ultravid which fits me well, I like that one. When I eventually manage to rationalise down to one binocular that would be on the shortlist.

 

[hopster]

I think it’s because when someone says they see CA all the time in the center image of Leica’s binos, there’s something there to refute the claim.

I sometimes see CA in the NV 8x but almost never in the centre if I have my eyes placed correctly, and even then only in the worst possible cases (e.g. a distant crow against a bright grey sky) and it's very mild relative to the amount of detail and colour available. Eye position (both laterally and distance from the eyepiece) is important to get right though. This comes as you get to know the binocular.

Nearer the edge it can arise. For example, I was in the Alps 2 weeks again and a dark mountain ridge with a bright distant peak behind it had a fine green line along it if I chose to move my eye from the centre to look at it. Moving your eye slightly in the eyepiece will make it disappear completely.

 

[John M Robinson]

I find the same with a lot of leica's, black outs with the noctivid and most ultravid's, they don't really do it for me so I don't give them a huge amount of attention!

The exception in the line up is the 8x32 ultravid which fits me well, I like that one. When I eventually manage to rationalise down to one binocular that would be on the shortlist.

It’s funny how we are all so different. I love Leica and really love everything about the 8x32 BNs and Ultravid, but I get kidney beaning with both those models.☹️ On the other hand, the 8x42 Ultravids fit me like a glove. The Nikon SEs have a reputation for causing blackouts, yet I own both the 8x32 and 10x42 and both are perfect for my eyes. That’s why it’s so important to try before you buy.

 

[Paultricounty]

I find the same with a lot of leica's, black outs with the noctivid and most ultravid's, they don't really do it for me so I don't give them a huge amount of attention!

The exception in the line up is the 8x32 ultravid which fits me well, I like that one. When I eventually manage to rationalise down to one binocular that would be on the shortlist.

Interesting, it’s the one Leica with the least amount of eye relief and smallest eye lenses of the whole line up. Just goes to show what works for one doesn’t work for all. Try before you buy.

Paul 🙏