|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I am looking at 10x25 for general use. I hae narrowed it to
Leica ultravids vs Swarovski. At this level, are they equivalent in performance and it's just personal preference or are there real differences? I initially considered the Zeiss 10x25, as well, but didn't like the assymetrical design. Also, I've seen people talk about the shake factor.
Are 8x that much easier to hold a steady view? Thanks
|
KennyJ
The British Flash
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 20139
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Menoch ,
Welcome to Cloudy Nights ( and indeed to Cloudy Days ).
Since this is your FIRST ever post to this forum , and it has been MOVED from BINOCULARS to HERE , I just HOPE that YOU have found this forum too :-)
Assuming you HAVE found it , then I think you could do far worse than read through any of the threads here in Cloudy Days which are related to COMPACT or POCKET binoculars .
Because I realise how difficult it can be to find your way around a strange web site , I will find one or two relevant threads after I'm finished writing this and post a link to them , just in case you do not find them .
My first question to you is have you considered the Nikon HGL compacts ?
I ask this because several well respected figures on the birdforum web site seem to think that the Nikon HGLs are at LEAST the equal of the Leicas , if not superior .
My second point is not so much a question as an OPINION .
I REALLY think that if I HAD to make do with a 25mm binocular " for general use " , I would much prefer 7x magnification , with 8x as the absolute higher limit .
In my experience , the combined effects of larger fields of view , longer eye relief , brighter images and ease of holding a steady image , far outweigh any PRESUMED advantage of the extra 2x magnification .
I hope you appreciate that I am ONLY trying to HELP !
Regards , Kenny
--------------------
Milton Wilcox R.I.P
|
KennyJ
The British Flash
Reged: 04/27/03
Posts: 20139
Loc: Lancashire UK
|
|
Menoch ,
A study of the following thread may help you :
http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/83987/page/3/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/1
Good luck !
Kenny
--------------------
Milton Wilcox R.I.P
|
ChrisR
professor emeritus
Reged: 02/11/05
Posts: 518
Loc: Washington
|
|
Listen to Kenny for he is wise 
Now if my opinion were worth much. I like the compact Leica's over the Swarovski's. Both are optically wonderful, and construction wise are also pretty darn good, but in my opinion the Leica's focusing mechanism (especially the diopter) are just a bit easier to use.
Peace,
Chris
--------------------
Journeyman Optical Technician
Amateur Astronomer.
All around good guy
Orion, StarMax 127
Canon, 12x36 IS
Minolta, 8x25 WR
Halco, 7x50
Nippon Kogaku, Micron 7x35
Edited by ChrisR (05/19/06 06:55 PM)
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Thanks for the input. I tried looking around for the nikon HGLs on the web and they aren't on their US site. They look nice, but I wasn't sure if I order them from out of the US if the warranty is valid?
I've looked at this site for awhile and it's full of great info ( kinda of overwhelming how much I need to learn ).
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 18806
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Menoch,
I'm glad you found your way in here, and as I was sure they would, the folks in here know quite a bit more regarding these compacts. Hope you get the help you need.
edz
moderator binocular forum
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
edwincjones
Close Enough
Reged: 04/10/04
Posts: 7980
|
|
I had a chance to compare the Leica and Swarovski (I was looking at 8/8.5x42/43). Optics, build, quality seem simular, but the feel in my hands of the swarovski was just soooooooooooooooo good.
edj
--------------------
|
John F
professor emeritus
Reged: 02/16/04
Posts: 556
Loc: Washington State
|
|
For comfort in the hands the 8.5x42 is in my opinion the most comfortable to hand hold full size binocular. However, Swarovski's binoculars in the 20mm - 25mm size range are another story. The Swarovskis are not particularly bad as pocket size binoculars go (from a hand hold ability standpoint), but they're not great either not do I think any of the others are. It has more to do with the small size and light weight than anything else.
From what I've read the Leica Ultravids are a lot better than their earlier models so if you decide to go with the Leica you should get that model (i.e., the rubber one and not the leather one). Optically, you can't go wrong with either one, they're both very good in general and really outstanding for their small aperture size. I also like the Nikon LX/HG series.
John Finnan
--------------------
BINOCULARS
Nikon 7x50 Prostar
Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV
Zeiss 10x56 Night Owls
Nikon 10x70 Astroluxe
Zeiss 15x60 B/GAT
SCOPES
Questar 3.5-Inch
Tele Vue NP127
EYEPIECES
Binoviewing: 24-19 Pans, 16-13-11-9-7 Naglers
Monoviewing: 31N, 17-13-10-8-6 Ethos & 2x PM
|
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/22/03
Posts: 2039
Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
|
|
Hi,
This may be a tad off thread, and for me, dated but...
Back in the late 1980's, after side-by-side comparison of alot of compacts, i bought (and still use) a pair of Bausch and Lomb 7x26 Custom compacts. They are a reverse porroprism design.
They are really good (for compacts) and are still considered in the "birding" world as a serious compact. Very close focus also.
They are i think, still made, except they have a new, modern style housing and are under the name "Bushnell".
--------------------
"May I have the ability to reduce the uncertainties I can; the willingness to work with the uncertainties I cannot; and the scientific knowledge to know the difference."
Based upon an adaptation from Reinhold Niebuhr's Serenity Prayer, by J. Barsugli, C. Anderson, J. Smith and J. Vogel.
Edited by moynihan (05/20/06 09:49 AM)
|
Rich V.
Post Laureate
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 3143
Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada, USA
|
|
I've had the 7x26 Compacts for 25 years now; they are great little glasses and have an easier to look through and brighter 3.7mm exit pupil. My only complaint is their rather restrictive FOV; the little roofs likely have a wider view. I have a couple different Nikon 8x23 reverse porros (Diplomat and Travelite) and they both also suffer from a smallish FOV. Perhaps this is a compromise when you have tiny eyepieces!
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/71/150x100 Saturn III, 22x70ED, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 EII, 7x35 E, 8x30 EII,
7x26 Custom, 8x23CF AS Diplomat, 6.5x21 Papilio
Scopes:
C9.25, TMB130SS, SV80S-LOMO 80/480
IDA member
|
moynihan
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/22/03
Posts: 2039
Loc: Lake Michigan Watershed
|
|
Quote:
...the 7x26 Compacts... My only complaint is their rather restrictive FOV; the little roofs likely have a wider view.
My Customs have a 7 degree field.
--------------------
"May I have the ability to reduce the uncertainties I can; the willingness to work with the uncertainties I cannot; and the scientific knowledge to know the difference."
Based upon an adaptation from Reinhold Niebuhr's Serenity Prayer, by J. Barsugli, C. Anderson, J. Smith and J. Vogel.
|
Rich V.
Post Laureate
Reged: 01/02/05
Posts: 3143
Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada, USA
|
|
Quote:
My Customs have a 7 degree field
Exactly my point, I should have qualified that statement; 7° at 7x is only a 49° AFOV, very much at the low end of "normal". Look at ANY premium compact binocular and you will see the AFOV is usually in the range of 48° to 54°. Even the roofs at the "wider" end of the spectrum have a FOV that is still rather restrictive; one of the compromises of compacts is a generally narrower AFOV than their larger siblings.
Besides keeping the eyepiece smaller, maybe the FOV compromise with small objectives is figured to keep the light cone striking the retina smaller, therefore concentrating the smaller amount of light into a more compact FOV. I can see how this might be preceived as "brighter". (Oops, this sounds like the start of another thread!) 
Regards,
Rich V
--------------------
Binoculars:
33/50/71/150x100 Saturn III, 22x70ED, 16x70 FMT-SX, 10x50 PCF-V, 10x43 DCF-SP, 10x35 EII, 7x35 E, 8x30 EII,
7x26 Custom, 8x23CF AS Diplomat, 6.5x21 Papilio
Scopes:
C9.25, TMB130SS, SV80S-LOMO 80/480
IDA member
|
Erik D
Post Laureate
Reged: 04/28/03
Posts: 4066
Loc: Central New Jersey, USA
|
|
I went thru 1/2 dozen sub/compact binos during the past 3 years. Also bought EWA 7X25 and 8X25 monoculars with 10 and 8.5 deg FOV for international travel. The Bushnell Custom Compact 7X26 is at the top of my list. I haven't found any compact binos under $300 with better optics. Here is a link to:
A SubCompact Story
Erik D
|
Mark9473
Postmaster
Reged: 07/21/05
Posts: 6459
Loc: 51°N 4°E
|
|
Quote:
Look at ANY premium compact binocular and you will see the AFOV is usually in the range of 48° to 54°. Even the roofs at the "wider" end of the spectrum have a FOV that is still rather restrictive
Your post inspired me to google for the FOV spec of my Leica 8x20 BC. Indeed it is only 50 degrees AFOV! I would have never guessed it is this narrow. I'm very sensitive to narrow AFOV in binoculars in the 10x50 class and up, but in these compacts it has never bothered me.
--------------------
Mark
Leica 8x20; Nikon 7x35; Vixen 8x42; Orion 15x63; Docter 15x60
WO Megrez II 80 FD / APM 107mm f/6.5 / Mewlon 210 on DM-6 + Berlebach Planet
|
11steve
super member
Reged: 07/13/04
Posts: 109
Loc: Hamburg, Germany
|
|
Quote:
I am looking at 10x25 for general use. I hae narrowed it to
Leica ultravids vs Swarovski. At this level, are they equivalent in performance and it's just personal preference or are there real differences? I initially considered the Zeiss 10x25, as well, but didn't like the assymetrical design. Also, I've seen people talk about the shake factor.
Are 8x that much easier to hold a steady view? Thanks
Hi,
the Leica Ultravid is the most recent high class 10x25 and it has noticable more eye relief than the Swaro and slightly better contrast IMHO. In respect of the shake factor it depends on your hands which type of pocket binocular fits better. In my hands for example due to longer barrels most 10x25 fit better than their 8x20 equivalents. So in my case surprisingly a 10x25 shakes often less than a comparable 8x20. I think you simply have to try this by your own. Anyway because of higher magnification a 10x25 has a shallower depth of field than a 8x20 which could be annoying for some people, especially if they´re of older age. What I don´t like with the Swaro pockets and the Nikon HG/LX pockets either is their focus knob locatedon the front (objective) side.
Steve
|
|
0 registered and 17 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: MMICKELS, okiestarman56
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
