Leica Trinovid 8x32BN - surely the best binocular ever produced! (1 Viewer)

[timtagel]

I say 'best', with some licence, for we all know that choosing the right model is a very personal decision. My nomination for this model, however, derives from its superb performance in, what I would consider, all the important factors in binocular design - namely: build quality, size, ergonomics/handling and optical performance. I own and have owned a lot of top-drawer binos, review cameras for a living, so know something about optical equipment and am extremely impressed with this modern classic.

We all know the Trinovid 8x32 BN is not the latest model, but much is written about the compromises buyers make with more modern equivalents - the Leica Ultravid's clunky handling, the EL's ergonomics, the Nikon HG's build quality etc, for a start. All these newer rivals also sporting hefty price tags, when at that level of expenditure, compromise should be the last thing in our minds.

There, I've set the cat amongst the pigeons, what do you guys think?

 

[Pinewood]

Hello Timtagel,

I think that, as a class, those binoculars with FL, ED or HD glass, have such improved colour quality and contrast, that the BN, which I own, is obsolete. However, there are some features, which might endear this binocular to others, or there may some may be so constrained by price as to find the BN attractive. As you wrote, this is a personal matter.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur Pinewood :scribe:

 

[Kevin Conville]

That's a tune I can dance to. Everyone has their preferences surely, but for me the 8x32 Trinovids are just right. I like everything about them and after trying new designs, I still marvel when I pick them up.
I'm convinced the demand for these will continue to grow and will be at the top of the list of classic binos to acquire.

It's a shame that Leica quit producing the 32mm BNs. Swarovski still produces SLCs for instance but maybe Leica was concerned they would cannibalize sales of the Ultravids. They probably would.

 

[Kevin Conville]

Hello Timtagel,

I think that, as a class, those binoculars with FL, ED or HD glass, have such improved colour quality and contrast, that the BN, which I own, is obsolete.


Arthur Pinewood :scribe:

Sorry, but I disagree. HD, FL, et al is largely marketing BS. In an 8x32 size bino it probably would be hard to discern a difference. High power and large objectives create more of a demand for controlling chroma and have their place there.

I would also argue there's a lot more to a field optic than controlling chroma, or absolute optical acuity. Handling and build are at least equal.
Obsolete? Wow.

 

[AlanFrench]

Alas, not enough eye relief to allow me to see the entire field with my glasses on. They are certainly a fine glass, but that eliminated them from my list.

Clear skies, Alan

 

[stuart C smith]

i will stick to my nikon superior e .

 

[timtagel]

Good points, fellas, but I'm talking about a binocular model that is an all-rounder. I would argue, having looked through them, that the Ultravid, HD and EL etc glass demonstrates a marginal improvement - to some the difference cannot be detected at all!

I have to agree with Kevin re. the marketing BS comment. I think it's outrageous that Leica is charging £1,400 for a pair of binos that features so few innovations from previous models. It seems the 'aqua-dura' self-drying lens technology, for example, is a gimmick and a feature so seldom used to merit it a false benefit - and I live in the north of Scotland. If it's raining that bad, stay inside and pour yourself a large Glenmorangie while you wait for the skies to clear.

The term HD also has connotations of the type of image we're now seeing in high definition broadcasting. There's nothing earth shattering about the views in the HD, from what I hear and I admit it's only what I hear and read. But come on, for that money, you'd expect Leica to ship a life lister bird with every box!

So, my argument isn't about superior optical quality alone, but a whole list of factors where the 8x32 BN excels - a strike rate that not all the current 'A grade' models can match.

 

[elkcub]

Sorry, but I disagree. HD, FL, et al is largely marketing BS. In an 8x32 size bino it probably would be hard to discern a difference. High power and large objectives create more of a demand for controlling chroma and have their place there.

I would also argue there's a lot more to a field optic than controlling chroma, or absolute optical acuity. Handling and build are at least equal.
Obsolete? Wow.

I see what you mean about being in a State of Denial. Actually, when incorporated into the optical design properly, the chromatic benefits (or color perception effects) of ED, HD, FL, etc. can be discerned, — but not always easily. I think that's primarily because we lack mental/verbal constructs to discuss them, and also because their appearance is largely target dependent.

Obsolescence occurs when an object is no longer wanted, even though it may still be in good working condition. I'd be happy to provide a home for any such unfortunate BNs. Nevertheless, from my perspective the 8x32Bn has far too much distortion to qualify for perfection.

Elk

 

[Kevin Conville]

Elk-

I didn't say the effects of added ED elements couldn't be discerned, I said (essentially) that they don't mean much in an 8x32 bino. And as you also mention, are very much target dependent. Bigger lenses and greater magnification exacerbate chroma and it's side effects.

And just what is the big revelation about ED optics in binos anyway? Big deal. Low dispersion lenses have been around for a long time and ED, LD, HD, ULD glass was created to be a cost effective and more durable alternative to flourite lenses. Flourite has had durability issues and some early telescopes used them in the outermost location of the objective set. They've learned since. They absorb water and can crack from large temperature variations.
The top makers haven't been tripping over themselves to incorporate these low dispersion glass elements until recently, though adding them in a binocular format doesn't add much cost. In this case, the perceived "need" is following marketing to a degree as makers try to distinguish their product.

I have an ED spotting scope and it's the only way to go. I've also had apochromatic refractor telescopes and they also are the way to go vs an achromatic, for a superior image. But those are telescopes.

Kind of like the sound of a falling tree in the woods, if you don't see it.... is it there?

These arguments are pretty silly and I only chimed in 'cause I like small Trinovids. If they have too much distortion for you, that's fine. If someone else sees color on a raven's outline, they'll want something else maybe. We're lucky to have so many good choices these days.

 

[elkcub]

... The top makers haven't been tripping over themselves to incorporate these low dispersion glass elements until recently, though adding them in a binocular format doesn't add much cost. In this case, the perceived "need" is following marketing to a degree as makers try to distinguish their product...

Kevin,

I share your skepticism of the motivation behind this rush to low-dispersion glass, where proof of its beneficial effect seems to be marketing assertions rather than unbiased reviews. As far as I know there are no guidelines for complex image quality assessments involving subtle color rendition, so for some implementations, at least, the manufacturer might depend on placebo effects to justify the cost increase.

Elk

 

[Alexis Powell]

I thought maybe I wouldn't participate in this thread, but oh well...

The Leica 8x32 Ultra/Trinovid BA/BN is certainly one of the best (birding) binoculars ever produced. It is my overall favorite 2/3 sized birding binocular ever (after disqualifying the 8x32 Ultravid as too new to judge and the Swarovski 8x32 EL for not being a true mid-sized binocular). For a long time, it stood alone as the only no compromise 8x32 roof-prism birding binocular, and so for me was the obvious choice as a travel binocular. Perhaps it is just because our decade of great birding together, but even today I have more confidence in my 8x32 BA than any of my other binoculars. For me, it combines perfect size, weight, and focus speed/precision, with beautiful build quality and superb durability (I dare say mine look as good as new despite much use in harsh conditions). I also like the ocular guard (the only one that I do like) and the minimalist leather case, both of which contribute to its perfection as a compact/travel bino. I never liked the other Ultra/Trinovids--they were too clunky and heavy, and had poor close-focus (especially in the BA versions). Optically, the 8x32 BA/BN is a standout for its enormous sweet spot and lack of aberrations (just a bit of field curvature). I find it more comfortable on the eyes/brain overall than the Zeiss 8x32 (an awesome optic, but one which doesn't perform unless eye alignment is perfect) and at least as good as the other top-end 8x32. For whatever reason, every time I look through it I think "wow, that's sharp!" in a way that I don't with any other 8x32 except the Nikon Superior E even though I've not found any measureable advantage over my Swarovski EL or Zeiss FL. Contrast and flare resistance are better than any 8x32 or 8x42 I've tested except the current top-end crop from L, Z, S and N, and in these respects I consider it their equal or near equal. I bought mine new in 1998 for $700--sure wish top-end 8x32 models still sold for that! Some might point out that $700 was worth more in 1998, but since my income is essentially equal in actual dollars to what I earned back then, I don't find those arguments very interesting.

What are my 8x32 BA's weakest points? Optically, the BA is definitely not as bright as the latest 8x32 offerings, and in my unit the color balance is slightly biased toward green--enough so that it is easily noticed if conscious thought is directed to color balance (This bias may have been corrected in later BA or in the BN with unannounced coating improvements because I seem to be the only person who ever comments on it). It also certainly has more chromatic aberration than the 8x32 FL, which makes the latter better, for example, for identifying distant birds in flight against a bright sky. And as a butterfly watcher, the close focus is not as good as I'd like. Surprisingly, eye-relief has not been a problem for me. I'm a glasses wearer who usually prefers 18 mm, but somehow the 8x32 Leica has always worked fine with its ~14 mm.

I don't mourn the discontinuation of 8x32 BN production because I like the Ultravid version just as much. It has all the optical properties that I like in its predecessor--NOTHING has been sacrificed--but with much improved brightness and color neutrality. Despite my big hands and its even smaller than BN design, I find the Ultravid a perfect fit. Like the BN and EL, it allows me a nice, secure, wrap-around grip, snug against my palms and deep in my fist. If the Ultravid turns out to be as durable as the BA/BN it will supplant it in my ranking as the best 2/3 sized birding binocular ever. I've don't doubt that the chassis is just as good, but I'm not so sure about the armor, or especially the Ultravid eyecups.

As for ED/HD/FL glass and marketing BS, I've no doubt that the marketing folks at the optics companies tout whatever they can, but if you don't think that lowered CA in 8x32 design (whether due to special glass or some other design aspect--I won't pretend to know what really makes the difference) makes a significant difference in the view that is of practical importance, then I can't believe that you've compared a low CA 8x32 like the Zeiss FL or Nikon SE to their high CA counterparts like the Swarovski EL, Leica Ultravid, and Nikon LXL. After using the Zeiss FL for several days in a row, if I pick up one of the others and put it to my eyes, the CA is horrific (can't help but notice it) until my brain has some time to adjust. I haven't tested the new HD Leica yet to know how they perform.

--AP

 

[Dennis Mau]

I agree with you in that I had the Leica 8x32 BN's. They are wonderful and my second favorite pair of binoculars in the world that is until I found the Leica 7x42 BN's. They are even better although slightly heavier. But the optics are made by GOD! They are wonderful! Hard to find though now. Look on E-bay. I had FL and ED binoculars including the Zeiss FL and I still like the Leica's better. Looked through the new Leica's HD's and don't notice that much difference between the BN's.

Dennis

 

[NoSpringChicken]

Partly as a result of reading this thread I am now the proud owner of the pair of ex-demo 8x32 BN Trinovids which arrived today.

They are Leica's own demonstrators and look brand new. They come with an excellent rainguard, a decent strap and a high quality case. All this for the princely sum of £499.

First impressions are extemely positive. They feel beautifully engineered and very solid. They are no lightweights but are lighter than my previous 8.5x44 Swift roofs. The focusing is smooth and feels better to me than the Ultravids which I tried a few days ago. The diopter adjustment is brilliant and I think all binoculars should have the same system.

The view seems excellent – notably much clearer, sharper and brighter than the Swift HHS roofs which I have been using. It will be interesting to see how they fare in poor light.

I have been lusting after a pair of quality binoculars, which will outlast me, and hopefully these will fit the bill. New Ultravids and Swaro ELs are really outside my budget so I am hoping for a happy relationship with my little Trinovids.

Thanks for putting them on my radar.:t:

Ron

 

[Drumming Sniper]

I have been lusting after a pair of quality binoculars, which will outlast me, and hopefully these will fit the bill. New Ultravids and Swaro ELs are really outside my budget so I am hoping for a happy relationship with my little Trinovids.



Ron

I bought my pair of Trinovid 8x32 BN back in 2006 and I love'em! The image is superb, I really like the handling and they feel like they're built to last.

I'm sure you'll enjoy using your new bins.

Regards,

DS

 

[josika]

I bought the 8x32 BAs in1995 and they are still like new. They were my first top notch binoculars and even if I got an equivalent ultravid HD or nikon EDG, I will hang onto the trinovids.

 

[Sancho]

Partly as a result of reading this thread I am now the proud owner of the pair of ex-demo 8x32 BN Trinovids which arrived today.

Congratulations, Ron. On reading this thread I searched high and low for 8x32 Trinos (just for research, you understand, as new purchases are denied me until 2009....), and I couldn't find any. I hope you get many years fine service from your Trinos, they certainly seem to be recommended by reputable BF folk.

Timtagel.....I wonder too about the "rain repellent" coatings. Here too, if it rains you brave the elements until such time as you can clean your objective lenses. Or you go home and wrap yourself round a ball of malt. I wonder about your choice of palliative, though....I'd prefer a Laphraoig...which I can still very occasionally afford by foregoing fancy new bins with aquadura coatings.....

 

[angelo225544]

The Trinovid 8x32 BN remains one of the finest bins ever made. Although its image brightness is beginning to show its age, I have never found another 8x32 to exceed its center resolution - which has been truly superb in every one of the 30 or so I have tried. It simply does everything well enough, you can forget it's there. With its superb build-quality and reliability, it belongs on anyone short-list among 32mm bins. A smooth-focusing 8x32 Ultravid, while probably slightly better, may not be worth the price difference; Ditto the 8x32 Swaro EL. Much as I've tried to like the Zeiss 8x32 FL, I have trouble with its relative lack of color intensity and contrast. Zeiss insists this is by design, but I find its image bland by comparison with Leica - purely my subjective opinion. A perfect sample of Nikon's original 8x32 LX(HG) will keep right up with the Trinovid in all respects, including resolution, but I see a bit more sample variation among Nikon's, with regard to resolution.

 

[J Moss]

Hi all.

I've just found a pair of ex-demo Leica Trinovid 8x32s on the net, and they are going for £669. Would you say this is too much? I'm planning to purchase a pair, with warranty etc, but would prefer not to be ripped off. Whay sort of price would you guys suggest is fair?

Thanks

Jason

 

[J Moss]

Also, is the warranty transferable to a new owner from a second-hand pair?

Thanks

Jason

 

[postcardcv]

Also, is the warranty transferable to a new owner from a second-hand pair?

Thanks

Jason

Hi Jason

With Leica bins the warranty goes with the bins so it doesn't matter if you are the first, second, or even tenth owner they'll still be covered. £669 for an ex-demo pair 8x32 BNs seems a bit high to me. A mint condition secondhand pair would only be ~£450.

Back to the thread... I'd agree that the 8x32 Trinovids are a real classic though for me not the best ever. I've had a couple of pairs over the years and unfortunately two developed faults. Leica dealt with these problems under warranty but it did put me off them a bit. I terms of image quality the best binoculars I've ever owned are Nikon 8x30 Es, simply stunning... yet I still reach for my ELs on most occassions.