Leica Still Tops In My Book... (1 Viewer)

[Jonathan B.]

Sure, they don't bring out new models as rapidly as the Detroit auto makers, but they're built like Teutonic Tanks... there's something about bringing products more slowly to market that is old-fashioned and smart. Do it right first.

The Ultravid line is diminutive in size, has actual working objective covers (ok, the ocular cover stinks, but I replaced mine with the BN version), a terrific diopter adjustment ring, and an internal build that is second to none. Their grease-less focus knob is also brilliant... some here gripe about it, but I've used it at -30F and it works just like at +90F... you can't say that about any other binocular.

So here's to Leica... still the top of the heap all things taken in consideration. A binocular is more than just its view, it's the sum of its parts!

I bought my pre-HD Ultravid BR 7x42 in November 2003, shortly after the model was released (for $1199). It is my binocular of choice in winter, because as Mac308 says, the focus mechanism operates exactly the same over a temperature range of more than 100 degrees fahrenheit. (I have used it from -18 to +105.) When I bought it, the focus was "notchy," which was a common complaint. It has improved with use, but it still is not as smooth as the focus in other bins I own.

I have two complaints about it. One is noticeable CA in some high-contrast subjects, even though the complete lack of CA was one of Leica's big selling points with this binocular. This weakness rarely impacts my birding. The other issue is its long close-focus distance, which makes its use on insects poor, so I use a different binocular during the warmer months of the year.

One other thing: These were shipped with objective lens covers that were tethered, but which snapped up and down into place. They lasted one day. Leica promptly dropped that design and introduced another tethered version that was quite good. My tethers are long gone, but the surviving push-on covers are still supple and tight after nearly ten years, making them the best lens covers I have had on any binocular.

This is a fine binocular, providing sharp, crystal-clear, contrasty images. Given their performance and tank-like construction, early Ultravid BRs can be purchased used for bargain prices on eBay and elsewhere.

I have never had any issues with internal haze/fog. The armor has swelled and become a little loose, so I plan to send it to Leica this year to replace the armor and to make the modification to the focus wheel that they developed years ago. When I bought it, Leica still offered their lifetime passport warranty, so I believe these repairs will be free.

 

[CloseFocus]

Is there any reason to think the Trinovids are more reliable / better built than the competition of the day?

Judging by the number of Trinovids that are still being sold, yes. I don't remember what the top of the line Swaro and Zeiss were in the eighties and nineties, but that's because there aren't a whole lot of them still around. The Trinovids were heads and shoulders above the competition back then. I never even took a Swaro seriously until they came out with their now classic double barrel design. Can someone refresh my memory on this, or am I remembering wrong?

 

[james holdsworth]

Judging by the number of Trinovids that are still being sold, yes. I don't remember what the top of the line Swaro and Zeiss were in the eighties and nineties, but that's because there aren't a whole lot of them still around. The Trinovids were heads and shoulders above the competition back then. I never even took a Swaro seriously until they came out with their now classic double barrel design. Can someone refresh my memory on this, or am I remembering wrong?

If were are talking about late eighties / early nineties - the Bausch and Lomb Elite's / Nikon HG / HGL's were the best roofs, IMO. There was still the Zeiss Classic line, lots of those still out there, and after that came the EL's.

I would never say the Leica's were ever ''head and shoulders'' above the competition, nor were they any more durable or long-lasting. They do have, at least here, a cult-like following and bit of a time-enhanced reputation. I would say the same of the Zeiss classic line - they are good but not as good as we would like to think - the Oberkochen porro's were better in many ways.

I would say there are lots of great condition Leica / Zeiss / Swaro.'s of various vintages only because they were very costly and [as a result] used lovingly and kept in the finest condition.

 

[Jonathan B.]

Judging by the number of Trinovids that are still being sold, yes. I don't remember what the top of the line Swaro and Zeiss were in the eighties and nineties, but that's because there aren't a whole lot of them still around. The Trinovids were heads and shoulders above the competition back then. I never even took a Swaro seriously until they came out with their now classic double barrel design. Can someone refresh my memory on this, or am I remembering wrong?

Swarovski's SLC was out for several years before the EL, but I don't know how long. In the late 1990s the Trinovid had coatings that rendered a more neutral color cast than the SLC. The 8x30 SLC of around 2000, with updated coatings, is so similar in performance to the 8x32 Trinovid that I found it hard to choose between them at that time. They both lost out to Nikon SE.

 

[Kevin Conville]

I would never say the Leica's were ever ''head and shoulders'' above the competition, nor were they any more durable or long-lasting.

Maybe you just weren't paying attention James.

Leica, with the Trinovid "Ultras" were the first with:
Pop up eyecups
Center diopter adjustment
Truly waterproof design
Hard coatings on the lenses
Greaseless focus mechanism
Serious armor

Along with phase coated prisms, nitrogen filling, and brilliant optics Also lifetime warranty and 3 year "Passport" no fault replacement even if lost, stolen, or destroyed.

They were, and are, the prototype for all modern roof prism binoculars.

They were, to me, at the time, heads and shoulders above anything else available. And that's why I bought them.

In the early 90s it was not uncommon for Zeiss BGAs to have tarnished prisms. I knew two people in our local Audubon whose "Classics" were rendered useless because of black prisms.
Swarovskis of that era made everything look yellow. They both had fold down eyecups that cracked and needed replacement now and then.

 

[Holger Merlitz]

Maybe you just weren't paying attention James.

Leica, with the Trinovid "Ultras" were the first with:
Pop up eyecups
Center diopter adjustment
Truly waterproof design
Hard coatings on the lenses
Greaseless focus mechanism
Serious armor

Along with phase coated prisms and brilliant optics

They were, and are, the prototype for all modern roof prism binoculars.

They were, to me, at the time, heads and shoulders above anything else available. And that's why I bought them.

Except that the phase coating was invented by Zeiss. And regarding truly waterproof: The Zeiss submarine binoculars of the 1930s could be submerged to 40m below sea level ;-)

Yet, the classic Trinovids (with Uppendahl prisms) were definitely outstanding: Very compact, with wide and pleasant fields of view. Later Trinovids were superior, but with reduced field of view. Then, with the Ultravids, improvements turned marginal (only the price was increasing frequently

Cheers,
Holger

 

[Kevin Conville]

Except that the phase coating was invented by Zeiss. And regarding truly waterproof: The Zeiss submarine binoculars of the 1930s could be submerged to 40m below sea level ;-)

Yet, the classic Trinovids (with Uppendahl prisms) were definitely outstanding: Very compact, with wide and pleasant fields of view. Later Trinovids were superior, but with reduced field of view. Then, with the Ultravids, improvements turned marginal (only the price was increasing frequently

Cheers,
Holger

I didn't say Leica was the first with phase coated prisms. I mentioned it, because at the time it wasn't a given. In fact it was unique.

Good luck birding with those Zeiss submarine bins!

 

[Hermann]

I didn't say Leica was the first with phase coated prisms. I mentioned it, because at the time it wasn't a given. In fact it was unique.

Zeiss introduced phase-coating in 1988 or 1989. In fact, some early phase-coated roofs weren't even marked as such, not even on the box. The difference in optical quality compared to models without phase-coating was obvious in the field, especially with binoculars with exit pupils of less than 5-6mm. These phase-coated Dialyts murdered *every* other roof on the market and were the first roofs that could compete with well-made porros.

I remember doing a very thorough comparison between a Zeiss 10x40 BGAT*P from 1990 and, among others, a Zeiss 10x40 BGAT* and a late Leitz/Leica 10x40B without phase-coating, and the difference just wasn't funny. Contrary to what some people claim, the difference wasn't just in contrast, there was a clear-cut difference in resolution as well.

Leica was the first of the big players to follow Zeiss a few years later when they introduced the Trinovid BA series, first the 7x42BA, the 8x42BA and the 10x42BA. These bins had good optics, were waterproof and *extremely* robust, but a bit on the heavy side. Many of those Leica BA are still in use over here, and quite a few of those have never been serviced. They didn't need to be.

And yes, one could say these were the model most modern roofs for birding are based on, with completely internal focussing and so on.

Hermann

 

[jgraider]

Good luck birding with those Zeiss submarine bins!

Good luck selling or buying a 2nd hand Leica with zero warranty. That's a joke in itself.

 

[Troubador]

And yes, one could say these were the model most modern roofs for birding are based on, with completely internal focussing and so on.

Hermann

As everyone knows on BF, I am a Zeiss fan-boy, but I think you are absolutely right Hermann.

Lee

 

[CloseFocus]

Then with the Ultravids, improvements turned marginal (only the price was increasing frequently

Holger

Except for the Ultravids being lighter, more ergonomic, with noticeably improved optics over the Trinovids, while keeping their title of most rugged binocular, what you say is true.

When the Ultravids went HD, that's when I started to question the value versus cost ratio, but that's a road all brands seem to be heading down.

 

[jremmons]

Good luck selling or buying a 2nd hand Leica with zero warranty. That's a joke in itself.

Honestly, Leica does just fine on the used market which surprises me due to the lack of transferrable warranty. I know I'd never purchase one used but I regularly see old Trinovids sold for high prices.

 

[pppppvvvv]

I've just traded a pair in to a dealer.. I got them 2nd hand, and used them for all my birding over 12 years. They had a lot of use.. they lost £150 in value (£650 down to £500). So, they cost me just under £15 per year lol.
I have never owned anything that's held it's value that well.

 

[CloseFocus]

Good luck selling or buying a 2nd hand Leica with zero warranty. That's a joke in itself.

Google "eBay," type in "Leica Trinovid Binoculars," click on "Search"....

 

[Kevin Conville]

Good luck selling or buying a 2nd hand Leica with zero warranty. That's a joke in itself.

I've just traded a pair in to a dealer.. I got them 2nd hand, and used them for all my birding over 12 years. They had a lot of use.. they lost £150 in value (£650 down to £500). So, they cost me just under £15 per year lol.
I have never owned anything that's held it's value that well.

I sold my 10x42 BAs in 2008 for $850. I bought them new in 1991 for $1050.
$200. for 17 years, and they saw a lot of use, though well cared for. Not taking into account inflation, that is $11.75 per year.

I've also bought and sold several used Uvids with similar value retention.

Yeah JG is super pissy about Leica's USA warranty situation as it appears to him these days and has commented many times on many different threads about it, often with anger. He may have a point, but the reality is some of us just aren't excited about it. I've never needed it. B

 

[Mac308]

Yeah JG is super pissy about Leica's USA warranty situation as it appears to him these days and has commented many times on many different threads about it, often with anger. He may have a point, but the reality is some of us just aren't excited about it. I've never needed it. B

All of the above...

 

[pppppvvvv]

To be honest, I'm amazed at the quantity and level of discussion in this part of birdforum.. they are just binocs!

Joking, I'm not trying to turn all of you onto me!

 

[Kevin Conville]

To be honest, I'm amazed at the quantity and level of discussion in this part of birdforum.. they are just binocs!

Joking, I'm not trying to turn all of you onto me!

True that binoculars get a lot of airplay, but around here for the last couple of years it's been a Swaro / Zeiss lovefest. Not Leica. So, go pick on them!

This might be the cue for a certain fanboy to now chime in and say something like That's because there's only one binocular to buy

 

[Pinewood]

True that binoculars get a lot of airplay, but around here for the last couple of years it's been a Swaro / Zeiss lovefest. Not Leica. So, go pick on them!

This might be the cue for a certain fanboy to now chime in and say something like That's because there's only one binocular to buy

Now, who could that be? :h?:

Arthur

 

[Simon Wates]

My Leica Apo82 scope and 12 yr old BN 8x32's are the only material objects I really covet - in fact I think I love them B :king:

There...I said it!

Roll on the groaning posts......