A Work Commenced October 23 2024
Product: Leica Ultravid HD 8 x 42
Country of Manufacture: Portugal
Chassis: Magnesium alloy overlaid by protective rubber
Exit Pupil: 5.25
Eye Relief: 15.5mm
Field of View: 130m@1000m(7.4 degrees)
Dioptre Compensation: +\-4
Coatings: Fully broadband multicoated, AquaDura Hydrophobic coatings on ocular and objective lenses
ED glass: Yes, Schott Fluorite
Field Flatteners: No
Waterproof: Yes
Nitrogen Purged: Yes
Close Focus: 3m advertised, 2.9m measured
Tripod Mountable: Yes
Dimensions:12.1 x 14.2cm
Weight: 790g advertised, 792g measured
Accessories: Soft padded carry case, objective covers, ocular rain guard, padded neck strap, instruction manual, test certificate & warranty card
Warranty: 10 Years
Price: £1000 (bought used), £1799 new
The Leica Ultravid series of high performance binoculars were introduced in December 2003, followed in 2006 by their so-called HD series incorporating Schott Fluoride glass in their objectives. Finally in 2016, Leica brought the latest incarnation of the Ultravid to market with their HD Plus line of binoculars which offered slightly better coatings to improve light transmission. Long sought after by binocular enthusiasts for their elegant design and uncompromising optical performance, they’ve remained a favourite among birders and other outdoor enthusiasts.
That said, in the past few years new and highly advanced binoculars promising equal or better optical performance at a fraction of the retail price of the Ultravids have now come to the fore. I was keen to see how these expensive Leica binoculars stacked up against one of these products in particular: the Sky Rover Banner Cloud (SRBC)APO 8 x 42. The results were very enlightening to say the least!
Having related highly accurate data concerning the SRBC APO 8 x 42 and 10 x 50 models – now corroborated by dozens of user testimonials – these instruments have been almost universally lauded for their sensational optical performance at an amazing price, I was keen to see how they would perform against a known quantity in the high-end binocular market, so I bought in a used Ultravid HD 8 x 42, which has essentially the same optical and mechanical features of the newer HD Plus model.
Having previously shown the SRBC 8 x 42 to be optically superior to both the Zeiss Conquest HD (see post #1069) and the Zeiss SFL binocular, I knew going in that the Ultravid HD would be facing a formidable challenge.
A Brief Look Around the Leica Ultravid HD
For many, the Leica Ultravid represents the pinnacle of optical and mechanical refinement. With a magnesium alloy chassis, a titanium alloy focus wheel, overlaid by a sexy black vulcanised rubber armouring, you can see why these instruments were drooled over by many on binocular porn sites like Birdforum.
The underside reveals thumb indents- a feature designed to baby the user into positioning their thumbs while looking through the instrument. Thankfully this feature has largely fallen out of fashion. I personally dislike them and find it patronising that a company as big as Leica would presume to know anything about how I like to handle binoculars.
The twist up eyecups are excellent: some of the best in the industry. They offer plenty of eye relief and can be unscrewed to assist cleaning the ocular lenses.
The objective lenses have excellent multilayer coatings that maximise light transmission (of the order of 90 per cent) and the outer lenses of both the objectives and eyepieces are treated with the company’s patented AquaDura film designed to prevent the build up of water droplets while glassing in adverse weather conditions.
The focus wheel is large and centrally placed, with a built-in dioptre adjustment accessed by pulling out the top part of the objective. Once you’re done with that adjustment, you simply pop the focuser back down to lock it in place.
But while many of these features first found on European- made binoculars were considered state of the art only a few years ago, cutting-edge Chinese-made binoculars like the SRBCs now share many of these features, and then some. It has comparable or slightly higher light transmission, excellent hydrophobic coatings on its outer lenses and twist-up eyecups of comparable quality. They can also be unscrewed for cleaning.
Thankfully though, the SRBC dispensed with a locking dioptre. Instead it is smooth and continuous, avoiding the common problem of shifting out of place as it is slotted into position.
Examining the exit pupils of the Leica Ultravid HD showed excellent results as you can see below. The pupils are perfectly round and have very dark surroundings indicative of excellent stray light control
That said, the same is true for the SRBC binoculars as my review link above shows.
Comparative Testing
High-end, full-size binoculars like the Ultravid HD series are necessarily chunky. They just have many optical components that make them so. Recent efforts by Zeiss to cut the weight down by mounting thinner lenses etc invariably result in compromises, as I was to discover field testing their SFL range. Accordingly, the 8 x 42 Ultravid HD weighs 792g while the SRBC 8 x 42 tips the scales at 883g, so not much difference there.
The differences did begin to show however, once I began to handle both instruments.
For one thing, I was shocked to discover that the vulcanised rubber armouring on the Leica Ultravid had come loose on the underside of the binocular, manifesting a crunching sound as I pressed my thumbs on the belly of the instrument. Worse still, I was sorely disappointed with the focus wheel on this unit. It was sluggish, with uneven kinematics, and to top it all off, displayed an alarming level of free play. Granted this was an older binocular but Leica has supposedly prided itself in creating products with great longevity. Indeed, this was one of the more desperate manoeuvres by the bino porn stars, who, having conceded the optical excellence of the SRBC (more on this shortly), began looking for other ways to diss them. Well, based on my experience with this Leica Ultravid HD, it’s clearly in need of a service. So much for longevity eh?
The Leica Ultravid HD has a short and stocky frame compared with the SRBC 8 x 42. I found it harder to hold it steady, as the large bridge makes it more difficult to wrap one’s hands around compared with the longer barrels and shorter bridge found on the SRBC. Moreover, the silky smooth focuser and lack of free play on the latter renders it much more responsive to making quick focus adjustments. Overall, I much preferred the ergonomics on the Sky Rover.
The SRBC hydrophobic coating proved the equal of the Leica(Aqua Dura) in being able to disperse a thick layer of condensation applied to the 42mm objectives. Both instruments dispersed this condensation with equal speed.
Unquestionably, the Leica Ultravid HD has very fine optics, but I judged the SRBC to be superior overall. Shining an intensely bright beam of white light from across my living room showed up excellent results with both instruments. I would give the SRBC the nod though in having slightly less internal reflections (read very minimal).
Glassing rocks and the grain on the trunks of trees in the middle distance showed their sharpness to be identical in the centre. The Ultravid HD might have had slightly more ‘sparkle’ and slightly more saturated colours but the differences were very subtle to say the least. Glare suppression was very good in the Leica but it was inferior to the SRBC, as evidenced by glassing some shaded vegetation immediately below a bright afternoon Sun.
Off axis aberrations were better controlled in the SRBC too, especially pincushion distortion, which was much more pronounced in the Ultravid HD. Chromatic aberration was excellently controlled in the centre field of both instruments, but was a little bit more pronounced in the Ultravid HD near the field stops. This appears to be a recurring issue with all Leica binoculars, including their flagship Noctivid model.
Close focus was considerably better in the SRBC (2.09m)than in the Leica, which came in very near 3m in comparison. With a field of view of 9.1 degrees, the SRBC serves up a portal 50 percent larger than the Leica Ultravid HD and it really shows! To my eyes, the SRBC view was just far more compelling, with excellent edge-to-edge sharpness. In contrast, the image looked noticeably softer at the edges of the Ultravid HD. Image brightness appeared the same in both instruments after sunset, and far into the dusky twilight.
Left disappointed, I contacted the seller of the Leica requesting a refund, explaining the deficiencies of its ergonomics, and advising that it be sent in for a service. After resisting for a while, the seller eventually agreed to refund me the money.
In summary, these comparative tests left me in no doubt that the SRBC is a better, more technologically advanced binocular than the Leica Ultravid HD. Indeed, another report issued by a chap in South Korea revealed the 10 x 42 SRBC was also superior to Leica’s flagship Noctivid 10 x 42 as well.