They were millionaires but they sold it all to get the bino collection and now live in a cardboard box
you never know
-
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.
Leica 7x42 Ultravid checks all the boxes (best binoculars) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Paultricounty
- Start date
you never knowPaultricounty
Well-known member
Why not , I read through yours.
I was using perfect to elicit responses, Advertising exaggeration, you remember advertising, right?
Im not sure why your negative. Was out birding today for hours
Perfect , adjective. Having all the required or desirable elements, qualities and/or characteristics as good as it is possible to be.
I wouldn’t want to go to NJ either, who lives there?
Paul
But a nice cardboard box, possibly a duplex with a small skylight.They were millionaires but they sold it all to get the bino collection and now live in a cardboard box
Knowing what I know now, if I wanted a UVHD+ 7X42 I'd be sorta open minded. I'd certainly be open to a Retrovid 7X35. I know several of us hound it over and over but it's a jewel and a bargain, especially the ones BF members are selling on the classified. I like mine just as much If not more than the UVHD+. ALSO....if I had my mind made up for a full sized 7X42, a Meopta B.1 is truly just about as good. FL is just as good. Same for a SLC B. When you see one of those available in good shape at a price you can live with, JUMP ON IT.
BTW...The UVHD+ 7X42 has gone up to around $2399 here but you can find them on ebay for around $2000 if you look.
Last edited:
Retro 7x35 right? Think Im heading there, its a 1970 unrequited thing....
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Leica 7x35 classic (aka retro) does not check all the boxes 😜😉✌🏼.
Attachments
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
There’s a nice looking retro FS now…. Not mine but a great deal by all appearances!
A2GG
Beth
I do.
Owned the 7x42 Uvid HD+ for about 4 years. It’s wonderful and probably still my favorite the of binos I’ve owned.
Now I use Trinovid HD 8x32 as my main bino and I really enjoy using it.
Saw some nice birds through it this morning. Leica zee best (for me).
Paultricounty
Well-known member
😃. That Trinovid in 32 is a sweet little package. Leica magic👌
Who's boxes?
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Tyson Fury, Deontay Wilder, Dillian Whyte to name a few.
What! You get to ignore the apostrophe s? At least you're consistent. Do I hafta put one o those smiley thingies to say that?
Paultricounty
Well-known member
No Tom , you misunderstood again. All three of those guys told me at Weidmans gym , the Retros don’t check all the boxes. 🙄
MiddleRiver
Well-known member
If not too personal - why did you get rid of the 7x (after 4 years?)?
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I was curious myself. I’ll bet it was weight. My wife liked the UV42 and EDG’s, until I handed her the 32UV. Now UV’s and the Habicht’s are her favorites.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Nice! Great pictures, I wish I could take pictures like that. 🙏🏼
Paultricounty
Well-known member
All great replies and opinions, great stuff and Thank you all.
I’d like to ad a few things after reading some posts. (with pictures).
As per some of the boxes that I opined would be checked (imo , ok Tom) is the 7x. Of course there are people who prefer 8x, 10x and 12x, I actually prefer 8x myself. But the reason I checked that box is because to most people from 8 to 80 can hold a 7X fairly stable, and the added DOF is a nice benefit, especially more so if what you are doing is more nature or landscape observing, imo, ymmv.
On the merits of the focuser , although there are smoother more fluid focusers like the SF and EDG to name two, the I reason I checked the box on the ultravid focuser , is that it performs the exact same way in temperatures from 10° to 100°, that can’t be said for most of the others.
Chuck , I’m using some of the ones in your reply today and I see you rated the build quality of the EDG last. I was curious as to your thoughts on why? To me these things are beasts , there’s no plastic anywhere, the rubber armor looks like it’ll last a lifetime , it looks a heck of a lot thicker and more robust than the Swarovski‘s or the Zeiss.
I used the word immersive, it has been used here dozens, if not hundreds of times, and probably not a good word to describe what I tried to convey.
“Immersive: is a term used to describe experiences that fully engage the senses and draw the audience into the scene or activity” Not a great description of what some see in certain binoculars. I’ll try to better describe what I see when I look through the Ultravid relating to the box I checked.
I think quite a few binoculars use some kind of field flattener or try to design away the curvature of the lens. To some people it seems to be a two dimensional or a flat image quality. Not really that noticeable until you put it side-by-side with something like an ultravid. Does that make any sense?
I’d also like to add a little disclosure , or a hold harmless affidavit if I may. I made a negative remark possibly touched a few nerves , when I compared a certain Binocular that it looked like the barrels got run over by a motorcycle. This was a flippant, tongue-in-cheek statement derived by multiple people on this forum that don’t like the squeezed barrels on an the NL‘s , I have them, and I actually like them a lot. My comment was that the people who don’t like them can’t complain about the more traditional barrels on Ultravids, nor can they complain about the size, weight and length.
It seems that there are a lot of Leica fans here, and it sure seems possible that they are a bit more passionate about that opinion than some of the Zeiss or Swarovski guys/gals. But I could be wrong there.
🙏🏼✌🏼
Paul
I’d like to ad a few things after reading some posts. (with pictures).
As per some of the boxes that I opined would be checked (imo , ok Tom) is the 7x. Of course there are people who prefer 8x, 10x and 12x, I actually prefer 8x myself. But the reason I checked that box is because to most people from 8 to 80 can hold a 7X fairly stable, and the added DOF is a nice benefit, especially more so if what you are doing is more nature or landscape observing, imo, ymmv.
On the merits of the focuser , although there are smoother more fluid focusers like the SF and EDG to name two, the I reason I checked the box on the ultravid focuser , is that it performs the exact same way in temperatures from 10° to 100°, that can’t be said for most of the others.
Chuck , I’m using some of the ones in your reply today and I see you rated the build quality of the EDG last. I was curious as to your thoughts on why? To me these things are beasts , there’s no plastic anywhere, the rubber armor looks like it’ll last a lifetime , it looks a heck of a lot thicker and more robust than the Swarovski‘s or the Zeiss.
I used the word immersive, it has been used here dozens, if not hundreds of times, and probably not a good word to describe what I tried to convey.
“Immersive: is a term used to describe experiences that fully engage the senses and draw the audience into the scene or activity” Not a great description of what some see in certain binoculars. I’ll try to better describe what I see when I look through the Ultravid relating to the box I checked.
I think quite a few binoculars use some kind of field flattener or try to design away the curvature of the lens. To some people it seems to be a two dimensional or a flat image quality. Not really that noticeable until you put it side-by-side with something like an ultravid. Does that make any sense?
I’d also like to add a little disclosure , or a hold harmless affidavit if I may. I made a negative remark possibly touched a few nerves , when I compared a certain Binocular that it looked like the barrels got run over by a motorcycle. This was a flippant, tongue-in-cheek statement derived by multiple people on this forum that don’t like the squeezed barrels on an the NL‘s , I have them, and I actually like them a lot. My comment was that the people who don’t like them can’t complain about the more traditional barrels on Ultravids, nor can they complain about the size, weight and length.
It seems that there are a lot of Leica fans here, and it sure seems possible that they are a bit more passionate about that opinion than some of the Zeiss or Swarovski guys/gals. But I could be wrong there.
🙏🏼✌🏼
Paul
Attachments
A2GG
Beth
Yes, it was the weight and bulk.
After the Ultravid 7x42 I used a couple of 8x30.
After a while I missed Leica and decided to give the Trinovid HD 8x32 a try. I dismissed the Trinovid for years based on what I considered ‘poor’ specs for 8x32. But in use it’s great and the numbers become irrelevant. I wouldn’t complain if some things were to be improved like a bit wider fov and less weight but it works just fine for me as it is.
A2GG
Beth
I had no complaints about the focuser on my 7x42 HD+. It was nice and smooth and worked perfect in all temps.
The Trinovid HD focus is even smoother. It’s probably the best focuser I’ve used.
I haven’t used it in very cold temps yet. This winter I’ll see how it works.
Conndomat
United States of Europe
Basically you don't see anything with 8x that you don't see with 7x, a matter of taste...
Good news, global warming may come.😁😜
Andreas
Similar threads
