One ounce makes a lot of difference when you are carrying the binoculars all day, especially when you are your age! You should know that grasshopper.
-
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 Ultravid 7Ń 42 (HD/BR) vs Leica Trinovid 7x42 BA/BN (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter master5
- Start date
When was the last time your scale was calibrated? Show me your scale with a known weight on it.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
No, not really and if one once ever did bother me Iād just leave the lose change in my pocket in the car š. This might come as a surprise to you, but you know you could also just get a lighter strap.One ounce makes a lot of difference when you are carrying the binoculars all day, especially when you are your age! You should know that grasshopper.
Are we really going to start that Kung fu fighting again šāš¼
Why would I want to get a lighter strap to carry the heavy 770 gram 7x42 UVHD when I could just carry the lighter 740 gram FL 7x42 with a more cushioned strap and have a much bigger 8.6 degree FOV instead of a puny 8.0 degree FOV, a brighter 93% transmission instead of a dull 88% transmission, have no CA with the FL instead of tons of edge CA with the UV and have all the advantages of an AK prism like better 3D and a more transparent image with the FL instead of the light robbing SP prisms with all those inefficient extra reflecting surfaces.
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Good grief, they were fairly weighed as the makers intend them used, with their rubber covers & carry strap fitted; both weigh pretty much the same, with the Leica a smidgen lighter.
Checking 'Binoculars Today' website as a reference, the Leica weighs a few grams lighter than the Zeiss.
------
Checking 'Binoculars Today' website as a reference, the Leica weighs a few grams lighter than the Zeiss.
------
Not at all irrelevant to me because the compact size of the UV+ means it can, without neck strap, fit into my larger jacket side pockets. It provides an unobtrusive and extremely pleasant everyday-carry during colder seasons.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Because they make beautiful high light quality straps that would enhance the beauty and functionality of high quality binoculars. And the UV's are a modern design that has a more real life image with enhacened color, that we all know is warm and delicious, in a package that has the Leica build quality like no other. As apposed to the old design with artificial green image on the world, with some old style edge distortion that everybody knows about.
And lets not forget one important fact, your not selling a UV
. And we all know how that effects the quality of binoculars for some Remember, Master Po was blind.
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Dennis, thanks for the laugh.
Perhaps we ought to let the OP thread resume
You must have LARGE jacket pockets! The Leica website says the Leica UVHD+ 7x42 weighs 770 grams. Would they lie? The big difference between the FL 7x42 and the UV 7x42 is the 8.6 degree FOV of the FL compared to the 8.0 degree FOV of the UV. I had the Leica Retrovid 7x35 and the UVHD+ 7x42 at the same time and the Retrovid was just as good optically, only smaller and lighter. They would fit in your jacket pocket even better. They both had a puny 8.0 degree FOV, though.
Leica Ultravid HD-Plus 7x42
The 42 HD-Plus series are among the most compact binoculars in their class but their light-gathering power competes with larger 50 mm models.
leicacamerausa.com
I own 7x42 UVHD+s and 7x42 Trinovid BNs.
The Ultravids are noticibly a little bit better optically. And the Ultravids are a little more refined in every other way.
The Trinovids are sweet though. They are a little more utilitarian and beefy than the Ultravids. Their design certainly has its virtues and I would not describe one as better than the other, just different. A matter of taste.
It's worth the upgrade for the slightly better optics if you can sell your Trinovids at a decent price and buy some Ultravids at a decent price. If not, then I wouldn't bother with it or worry about it.
The Ultravids are noticibly a little bit better optically. And the Ultravids are a little more refined in every other way.
The Trinovids are sweet though. They are a little more utilitarian and beefy than the Ultravids. Their design certainly has its virtues and I would not describe one as better than the other, just different. A matter of taste.
It's worth the upgrade for the slightly better optics if you can sell your Trinovids at a decent price and buy some Ultravids at a decent price. If not, then I wouldn't bother with it or worry about it.
FLs are a good choice as well. Denco is right, they do have a larger field of view and are a bit brighter than the Trinovids or Ultravids. That seems to be the Zeiss way of doing things - bright and wide. Very nice. I believe they are unique with their AK prisms in the world of 7x42s.The trouble with all 7x power binoculars is they have too small of an AFOV. The Leica Trinovid 7x42, Leica UVHD+ 7x42, Leica Retrovid 7x35, and even the Nikon EDG 7x42 have an 8 degree FOV which is fine with a 8x magnification because it gives you a 64 degree AFOV but with a 7x it is only a puny 56 degree AFOV. I am not sure why that is that way, but it is. The only 7x binoculars I know of that have bigger than an 8 degree FOV is the Zeiss FL 7x42 which has an 8.6 degree FOV which works out to a 60.2 degree AFOV and the Nikon WX 7x50 which has a 10.7 degree FOV which works out to a 74.9 AFOV.
I always like at least a 60 AFOV or more in my birding binoculars. The WX 7x50 weighs 5 pounds and is huge and too big for the normal birder, so the ONLY choice you really have in a 7x42 with a decent size AFOV is the Zeiss FL 7x42, and they are harder to come by than hens teeth. The 7x42 FL is great because it has a greater DOF than 8x, it is easier to hold steady than 8x, it has a huge FOV of 450 feet, they are brighter than most 8x42's having a bigger 6mm EP. They also have more 3D and higher transmission than most 8x binoculars because of the AK prisms. For those reasons, the only 7x I like for birding is the Zeiss FL 7x42.
Zeiss Victory 7x42 T* FL Binoculars Black Case Neckstrap Lens Caps - Pristine | eBay
Find many great new & used options and get the best deals for Zeiss Victory 7x42 T* FL Binoculars Black Case Neckstrap Lens Caps - Pristine at the best online prices at eBay! Free shipping for many products!www.ebay.com
Those virtues lead Denco to a clear preference, but it isn't as definitive for me. The Leicas compete in my opinion. Leicas have very nice and saturated colors that make a uniquely beautiful view. You can't go wrong with Trinovids, Ultravids, or FLs. All great binoculars. If the price is right, I would not hesitate to act on any of them. Actually, the price has been right for me and I have acted on all of them.
If you decide to change or "upgrade" your Trinovid BA to an Ultravid, IMO it would make the most sense sense to go all the way to the UV HD + version. In side by side comparisons of the Trinovid BN with the UV HD+ in 7x42 and UV BR with UV HD+ in 10x50 I thought both the HD+ were noticeably, even if only slightly, better in overall image quality, for me most noticeably in terms of a brighter image. As always your mileage may vary.
Mike
CharleyBird
Well-known member
You just won't let it go šYou must have LARGE jacket pockets! The Leica website says the Leica UVHD+ 7x42 weighs 770 grams. Would they lie? The big difference between the FL 7x42 and the UV 7x42 is the 8.6 degree FOV of the FL compared to the 8.0 degree FOV of the UV. I had the Leica Retrovid 7x35 and the UVHD+ 7x42 at the same time and the Retrovid was just as good optically, only smaller and lighter. They would fit in your jacket pocket even better. They both had a puny 8.0 degree FOV, though.
Leica Ultravid HD-Plus 7x42
The 42 HD-Plus series are among the most compact binoculars in their class but their light-gathering power competes with larger 50 mm models.
Perhaps you need to take your 'facts' from more reliable sources, and maybe keep your binoculars for a longer time to get to know them
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Leica 7x42 naked š
CharleyBird
Well-known member
Zeiss 7x42 naked
CharleyBird
Well-known member
7x42uv in 3 season Pategonia
CharleyBird
Well-known member
7x42uv+ in summer Endura
has530
Well-known member
I canāt help but think of how when threads a certain member starts get off topic, said member rants and raves about people ruining his thread. And yet, OP asks about BA/BN vs UV and gets a barrage of posts about how neither as good as a completely different bino (which that certain member happens to be selling two models of at the moment).
But as to the original questionā¦ I have had a few of the older trinovids and various ultravids (almost all 8x though) and found that optically they are very similar. The newer ultravids do give slightly more contrast probably due to newer coatings. They claim newer ED glass in the HD/HD+ but to my eyes the difference in CA is pretty subtle. The biggest difference is the ergonomics. The trinovids are fine and feel quite sturdy but the ultravids are sublime. Perfect focuser, the thumb ridges at the perfect balance point, my favorite eyecups, they just feel right in your hands and on your face. Now of course ergonomics are a matter of both anatomy and preference so what works for me others may have a different experience but that has been my experience.
But as to the original questionā¦ I have had a few of the older trinovids and various ultravids (almost all 8x though) and found that optically they are very similar. The newer ultravids do give slightly more contrast probably due to newer coatings. They claim newer ED glass in the HD/HD+ but to my eyes the difference in CA is pretty subtle. The biggest difference is the ergonomics. The trinovids are fine and feel quite sturdy but the ultravids are sublime. Perfect focuser, the thumb ridges at the perfect balance point, my favorite eyecups, they just feel right in your hands and on your face. Now of course ergonomics are a matter of both anatomy and preference so what works for me others may have a different experience but that has been my experience.
Last edited:
jafritten
Well-known member
No offense intended, Charley. I just thought that if someone decides whether to go for either a UV or an FL a few grams don't matter. By the way, I also appreciate the light weight of the UV and even more so its compactness.
Really, the weight isn't what matters between the two. It is the FL's 8.6 degree FOV versus the UV's 8.0 degree FOV and the 5% difference in transmission. The FL is a much brighter binocular, especially in low light, and has a much bigger FOV with no CA. I think the FL 7x42 could hold its own even against the legendary Habicht 7x42 in low light. There is less than 2% difference in transmission.
Last edited:
