Product: Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32
Country of Origin: Portugal
Weight: 630g
Chassis: Rubber armoured Magnesium
Eye Relief: 17mm
Exit Pupil: 4mm
Dioptre Range: +/- 5 D
Field of View(Published): 124m@1000m (7.07 angular degrees)
ED Glass: Unknown
Eye Cups: Removable, twist-up in 5 locking steps
Light Transmission: 90%(published)
Close Focus: 0.95m(measured)
Waterproof: Yes to 4 metres depth
Nitrogen Purged: Yes
Coatings: Fully multi-coated, P40 phase coatings, HDC coatings, hydrophobic & dirt repellent coatings applied to outer lenses.
Tripod Adaptable: No
Dimensions: W/H : 11.7 x 13 cm
Warranty: 10 years
Supplied Accessories: Leica padded strap, rain guard, ocular lens caps, lens cleaning cloth, non-padded neoprene carry bag, instruction manual, warranty & test certificate.
Price: £700-£750(UK)/$899 USD
Preamble
A work begun September 1 2020.
Leica (formerly Leitz) is a name familiar to all camera and binocular enthusiasts. For over a century, this German based company has brought to market state-of-the-art products for discerning outdoor enthusiasts, combining high quality optics with award-winning mechanics, creating instruments that are not only highly durable but have great aesthetic qualities that make them a delight to hold in the hand and to just look at.
The Trinovid line of binoculars by Leica has long been considered the company’s ‘heritage’ brand. First produced in the late 1950s, the Trinovids were so named because of the three features – or Tri Novitäten in the German tongue – which combine state-of-the-art optics, true internal focusing and excellent ergonomics in one tidy package. If you think the latest incarnation from Swarovski – the NL Pure’s – have a wide field of view of at 159m @ 1000m, it pays to remember that Leica was churning out Trinovids with much larger true fields – up to 170m@1000m by the mid-1960s. If that ain’t prestigious enough, a Leica Trinovid – really a highly specialised 10 x 40 monocular nicknamed the “Eye of Apollo” – accompanied the US astronauts on their epochal sojourn to the lunar surface in the northern summer of 1969.
The Trinovid remained Leica’s flagship binocular until the introduction of their Ultravid line in the mid noughties, but were continued as a lower cost alternative until Leica ceased production of the Trinovids altogether in 2015, much to the chagrin of many Leica fans. So that was the end of a line of binoculars that served the outdoor enthusiast perfectly for well over half a century right?
Thankfully, no!
In 2016, the company announced a new line of Trinovids, revamped with an ‘HD’ moniker. As usual, the new Trinovid HDs – all made in Leica’s factory in Portugal – were first launched in the perennially popular 8x and 10 x 42 incarnations, but a year later Leica added two smaller glasses to the same family – the 8x and 10 x 32. This review will take a close look at the 8 x 32 model. Leica specifically marketed the new Trinovid HD line as “entry-level premium class,” whatever that means.
In order to make this review as objective as possible, I would like to compare and contrast it with the performance of two other 8 x 32 models; the Celestron Trailseeker and the Viking Optical Merlin ED 8x 32, shown below;
These models were chosen for a number of reasons; both have fully multi-coated optics, dielectric and phase corrected roof prisms, while the Merlin has two ED elements in its objective for improved colour correction. These models retail at considerably lower prices than the Leica however – the Trailseeker (recently discontinued) at ~£150 and the Merlin at ~ £239. So, testing these units along side the much higher priced Leica would serve as a good reality check in terms of both optics and ergonomics, and will thus provide the reader with a much better overall indicator as to whether or not the Leica Trinovid HD is worth its much heftier price tag.
First Impressions & Ergonomics
The Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 was purchased brand-new from an authorised UK Leica dealer – The Birder’s Store – for a good price; £699, which included free expedited special delivery to my door. I was actually struck by the number of stores that advertised the instrument on their websites, only to find, upon further enquiry, that many did not have it in stock.
Now what do the townies call that again?
Oh yes; vapour ware.
This was not the case with the Birder’s Store however, the staff of which were friendly and professional throughout, and were able to process my order the day before it arrived here.
The instrument came in the standard padded grey Leica box, complete with neoprene carry case, a lens cloth, padded neck strap with the Leica logo, rain guard, tethered objective lens covers, instruction manual, test certificate and warranty card. I was immediately struck by the beautiful, solid build quality of the instrument, with its magnesium chassis and thick, flat black rubber armouring. The red Leica logo made for a nice aesthetic touch embedded at the end of the right barrel of the instrument. Built like a proverbial tank, the large central focus wheel moved with silky smoothness, taking just over two full revolutions from one extreme of its travel to the other. This extra long focus travel is unusual in a binocular of these specifications but is required for the instrument’s amazing close focusing distance of under 1 metre – the closest I have personally encountered by quite a considerable margin, with the exception of the marvellous Pentax Papilio II 6.5 x 21, with its unrivalled 0.5 metre minimum focus. After a few times using the instrument, I did detect a very slight amount of play in the focuser, which was a wee bit distracting but something I could easily live with
I was very much looking forward to examining the eye cups on this Leica, which turned out to be every bit as good as I had hoped! They are beautifully engineered with five positions from fully extended to fully retracted, and all locked into their respective positions with a loud and reassuring ‘click’ sound. Supremely comfortable, they are ‘cushioned’ in a lovely soft rubber that sanctions prolonged glassing in the field They remain in place with a rigidity(read rock solid) that I had come to expect from this company owing to my previous pleasant experiences with its smaller sibling – the Leica Trinovid BCA 8 x 20 pocket glass. Sporting a very generous eye relief of 17mm, this is one binocular that eye glass wearers will never struggle to see the full field with! That’s good news going forward, as I don’t know if I will eventually(maybe a few decades hence when I’m in my 70’s lol) have to observe with my eye glasses on all the time. The eye cups are also removable should I wish to give them a thorough clean.
I normally wouldn’t even comment about the rain guards and tethered objective covers – like who really cares lol? – but in this case I have to say that they were of unusually high quality- a first for a premium manufacturer like this. The rain guard is very snugly fitting – indeed it takes a bit of effort to prize it off if you’re in a hurry. But I find that it affords that little bit more protection to the eye pieces during rough handling, especially if dust, dirt and sand etc are prevalent. This is the case irrespective of whether or not the eye cups are extended or fully retracted.
Same goes for the objective lens covers too. Unlike most others which are far too loose, these stay on snugly helping to protect the instrument.
It’s just a pity I’ll never use them!
Unlike the older Trinovids and the current Ultravid models, the new Trinovid HDs have their dioptre setting placed under the right ocular lens, as is common with the vast majority of binoculars you’re likely to come across. It has a prominent red line which one can use to mark the optimal setting for your right eye but is not lockable unlike that found on the Ultravid models. Many of the reviewers cited above view this as a retrograde step, but personally, I have always felt that having a lockable dioptre is a bit of a gimmick; more an over-engineered ‘gee whizz’ solution than anything else and not really worth the extra cost incurred in acquiring a model with one installed. Other folk may have different opinions on this and that’s OK. But there are other practical reasons why I prefer to have a dioptre setting that can be adjusted on the fly. Knowing my own physiology, I have come to learn that my eye sight can change ever so slightly if I glass in the early morning after resting for many hours, or after staring at a computer screen for a long period of time. I also notice small changes if I’m tired. And all of these states often have me reaching for the dioptre ring to micro-adjust the focus in my right eye during critical glassing moments when I require the very finest images the binocular is likely to provide. The adjustments, though very slight, are nonetheless real, and so having a well-made but conventional dioptre ring that I don’t have to adjust by pulling on the focus wheel and fiddling with a dial is actually a distinct advantage in my books. All of this may seem a bit new to many readers, but I can assure you I am not alone in noticing this in prolonged field use.
My first look through the Trinovid greatly impressed me; I was immediately taken by its bright, sharp and colourful images of the creation. Indeed, that first look convinced me that I had a first-rate optic in my hands, as I will elaborate on shortly. So, without further ado, let’s have a look at the results my tests revealed about this binocular in comparison to the other models cited above.
Tests for Light Leaks and Glare
Setting up my iphone torch at its brightest setting, I dimmed the lights in my living room and aimed the binocular into the intensely bright light beam just a few metres away, studying the image for internal reflections, diffraction spikes, diffused light etc.The Trinovid produced an excellent result, as I had anticipated. No binocular on God’s earth can pass this test with 100 per cent success, but any reflections it possessed were very very minor and strongly subdued. It was fully the equal of my smaller Trinovid in this regard, and also the Viking Merlin ED, but a notch up from the Celestron Trailseeker. If the latter scored an 8.5 out of 10, both the Leica Trinovid HD and the Merlin were awarded a score of 10 out of 10. They both displayed a very weak diffraction spike which I did not find bothersome. This is in sharp contradistinction to that reported on the larger 10 x 42 model reviewed by the gentleman in Review C showcased above.
When pointed at a a bright sodium street lamp at night showed excellent results for all three binoculars. No annoying internal reflections and no sign of a diffraction spike – a result I had anticipated owing to the lamp’s less intense brightness. The Leica Trinovid HD will make an excellent binocular to study night time scenes such as city scapes from a lofty vantage, a bright full Moon, or a distant harbour lit up at night.
All binoculars, no matter how well made, suffer from some degree of veiling glare while glassing under an open sky in broad daylight. I am happy to report that the Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 exhibited the lowest amount of this phenomenon I have personally experienced. It was simply far less of a problem than that witnessed in either the Celestron Trailseeker and Viking Merlin glass when viewing under the same bright, overcast sky, and phenomenally better than the little Leica 8 x 20(which shows very strong veiling glare owing in part to its exposed objective lenses). This was the case even though the objectives on the Trinovid HD were not as deeply recessed as on the Merlin binocular( a full 10mm), so must have been attributed to much closer attention to proper baffling of the overhead light. And while much of this veiling glare can be all but removed by shading the glass from above with an out-stretched hand, it is nice to be able to glass without having to resort to such antics except in the most demanding conditions. Kudos to Leica for addressing this niggling and pervasive problem!
Glassing Tests in a Summer Garden
Glassing some late flowering Cosmos flowers in my back garden in bright sunlight was enough to show off the quality of the images in this new Leica glass. The glass is supremely sharp across the vast majority of the field, with only a little peripheral softness near the field stop. Like all the roof prism binoculars I have had the pleasure of using, lateral(horizontal) field correction is noticeably better than when the same image is examined by moving a target from the bottom to the top of the field (vertical panning). This has hardly been mentioned in the online literature so far as I know.
The Leica image has a sparkle to it that was simply missing in the Trailseeker and Merlin, with noticeably better contrast than either of the test binoculars. Reds and yellows are especially enhanced to my eyes. It was almost as if someone had peeled away a thin veil allowing my eyes to see those last fine details that had remained more elusive in the both the Merlin and the Trailseeker. I could also see that the noticeably wider fields on the latter glasses(136m@1000m) were significantly softer in the outer 30 per cent of the field, indicating that the Leica had a much larger sweet spot. Glassing the top of a telephone pole against a bright overcast sky revealed some colour fringing(chromatic aberration(CA)) in the Leica Trinovid HD. Indeed, in the same tests, it was not present in the Merlin ED and actually less prevalent in the Celestron Trailseeker too! This is in agreement with all of the lengthy reviews cited at the beginning of this blog, but you will still note their comments as stating that the “images are excellent(or very good) despite having noticeable CA. This last point deserves further comment.
So what’s going here? According to Leica USA’s Jeff Bouton, the new Trinovid HDs do indeed employ some kind of ED glass but they are not as well corrected in this capacity in comparison to their more expensive Ultravid line. That said, the image in the 8 x 32 Trinovid HD has a quality about it that places it just ahead of the Merlin glass within its sweet spot, which exhibits better control of CA. I attribute a large part of this to the Leica’s exceptional control of glare which in turn delivers higher contrast images to the more ‘apochromatic’ Merlin. It just goes to show, once again, that a binocular need not exhibit overly aggressive control of secondary spectrum to deliver a gob-smackingly good image. To my mind, the Leica Trinovid HDs offer a very convincing ‘proof of concept’ in this regard. And besides, I rather like to see a little in some images as I have been fond of telling my readers over the years! Having said all of this, I have noticed that the degree of fringing in difficult observing settings is sensitive to eye placement. Paying a little more attention to squaring your eyes in the 4mm exit pupil of these small binoculars will all but eliminate it.
Stop Press: The Leica Trinovid HD is a decidedly achromatic binocular!
Low Light Tests
The Leica Trinovid HD boasts an excellent transmittivity of 90 per cent, placing it just a few percentage points behind the very best binoculars currently available. But how would it fare against the much more economically priced Trailseeker and Merlin binoculars in low light conditions, such as those experienced at dawn or dusk? Remembering that all three glasses sport fully multi-coated optics, phase corrected prisms with high reflectivity dielectric coatings, I performed some tests on tree branches some 50 yards distant after the Sun had set in early August skies. The results were not surprising to me, given what I had already learned from a number of other tests carried out earlier in the year; there was very little difference in perceived image brightness between all the instruments, though I did give the nod to both the Merlin and the Leica HD over the Trailseeker, but only just. What this tells me is that light transmission is very efficient in these mid-tier binoculars. I would be confident enough to bet that they transmit 85%+ of the light they collect and that’s very good news for the budget conscious consumer. How times have changed from only a short few years ago! What is more, the claim that ED glass results in brighter images was not really in evidence in these tests either, contradicting the claim by the gentleman who conducted Review A above.
Further Impressions in Field Use
The Trinovid HD 8 x 32 has an excellent depth of field. Anything beyond about 50 yards remains in good focus, only requiring a slight tweak of the focus wheel to obtain ultimate sharpness. But it is its remarkable close focus – just 0.95m as I measured it – that really distinguishes it from its competitors including the company’s more expensive Ultravid and Noctivid lines. Viewing objects at close focus – rocks, flowers, insects – has brought many joyful experiences, although I have to switch to ‘monocular mode’ to get the most comfortable views at these short distances.
I measured the field of view under the stars, where I was able to hold Alkaid and Mizar & Alcor in the Plough asterism in the same field of view with a little bit of room to spare. Since these stars are ~6.7 angular degrees apart, I felt the quoted 7.1 degree field was quite accurate.
I realise that many binocular enthusiasts will be a little alarmed by the smaller field of view offered up by the Trinovid HD. Most 8 x 32 models have fields approaching 8 angular degrees or even a little higher, but this was a very deliberate choice in my case. I mean, if I wanted a wider field of view, I could have acquired the Zeiss Conquest or the Swarovski CL companion for about the same price I paid for the Leica glass. But I have discovered that I’m more interested in vignettes where I don’t have to resort to rolling my eyes around to take in the entire field rather than broader vistas. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that smaller fields are more conducive to study than overly large ones! I absolutely love the wonderful sharp field stops on the Trinovid and the way it frames each binocular scene I wish to image. I also understand from past experiences with instruments like the Nikon Prostaff 7s 8 x 30, which has an excellent 6.5 degree field, that optical engineers can deliver better edge to edge sharpness by cutting down the field of view. I think the folk at Leica are fully aware of this trick, opting for bigger sweet spots within a smaller field of view, rather than a larger, more conservative field of view but with the loss of critical definition as one moves from the centre to the edge of the field. Truth be told, a seven degree field is more than ample for virtually every scenario I’m likely to find myself in, and in field use I don’t ever get the feeling that the image is ‘restricted’ or ‘tunnelled.’
The Leica Trinovid HD has special coatings applied to the outer lenses which repel dirt, oil and water. Though some Leica-run websites give the impression that this coating is their patented AquaDura, I felt it best to contact the Leica Sports Optics team directly for clarification on this matter, and here is how they replied:
The lenses of all Leica Trinovid binoculars feature an extremely effective, water-resistant and dirt-repellent coating. It is a similar style of hydrophobic coating in that it doesn’t allow water to pool on the lens should you be using them in the rain and it also makes cleaning them easier as fingerprints and dirt along with water can’t cling to the surface. The actual “Aqua Dura” coatings are reserved for our Ultravid HD+ and Noctivid ranges only.
Fortunately, this is easy to test at home. I set up the Celestron Trailseeker 8 x 32(which does not have such coatings) alongside the Trinovid glass. Both these instruments have the same ocular lens size, so I breathed heavily on them, creating a ‘fog.’ Next I watched both to see which one dispersed that fog more quickly. The easy winner was the Leica. I would estimate that it takes about three times longer to disperse on the uncoated Celestron. This will prove to be very useful in the colder and damper months of the year, where exterior fogging is a common though inadvertent problem.
The Choice of 8 x 32 versus 8 x 42
For less than £100 more, I could have acquired the 8 x 42 Trinovid HD, but I’m a convert to 8 x 32, having enjoyed the larger format glass for quite a while. The main reasons are compactness and reduced weight. I do a lot of glassing; maybe a hour on work days and several hours at the weekends and holidays. The 8 x 42’s I’ve used can be tiresome hanging around your neck after prolonged field use. Indeed, sometimes they felt more like bricks than binoculars. The 8 x 32 format gives up very little to their 42mm equivalents in the vast majority of applications. A high-efficiency 32mm glass like this works well in strong sunlight and dull overcast days. It also performs adequately under a forest canopy, where there is restricted sunlight. Only at dawn and dusk is a good 42mm binocular a better option, but as I said before, I don’t do a lot of glassing at these times. A 32mm is no slouch for star gazing either, as I shall explain a little later. The smaller frame of the 8 x 32 is also more conducive to stashing away in a rucksack or pocket.
Going from a 5.4mm exit pupil on the 8 x 42 to just 4mm on the 8 x 32 wasn’t an issue for me either, as I discovered using both the Celestron and Merlin binoculars. The Trinovid HD 8 x 32 is supremely easy on my eyes and I don’t have any problems with blackouts or kidney beaning. Furthermore, I happen to think that the smaller exit pupil on the 8 x 32 format produces an image that is that little bit sharper than the larger 8 x 42 owing to the reduced aberrations inherent to design of the human eye. Opinion on this matter will undoubtedly vary and there is no absolute right or wrong answer. You see, it’s all about personal taste!
Why not the Ultravid or Noctivid?
As I alluded to earlier, Leica offer higher priced models with allegedly slightly better optics, light transmission and more refined mechanical features, such as a lockable dioptre that I commented on previously. The Noctivid is not available in a 32mm format, so that eliminated it as an option, but it is offered in the Ultravid HD line. Having said that, many experienced commentators will admit that you’re getting 95 per cent of the performance of the Ultravid HD binocular in the Trinovid optic, and I happen to agree with that assessment having average, though well-trained eyesight. I doubt that I would be able to tell much of a difference between these glasses, with gains of just a couple of percent in light transmission and slightly better edge of field performance(the Trinovid shows mild pincushion distortion at the very edge of the field), but I certainly would notice the big gaping hole in my wallet. I was struck by the write up made by the gentleman in Review B above, who commented that although he had intended to acquire the Ultravid HD 8 x 32 that day in the Leica store, he couldn’t tell the difference between it and the Trinovid HD, and ended up saving himself a lot of cash! I’m not a sucker for the law of diminishing returns, so for me, the Ultravid HD is overkill and over priced. I don’t need it nor desire it. I got what I paid for and I’m satisfied!
And last, but by no means least, I wanted a top-tier binocular with solid history behind it and only the Trinovid from Leica really has this. Newer, fancier models come and go all the time, of course, but the Trinovid goes back to an era before I was born and there is a satisfaction in owning an instrument that carries on that tradition.
Your mileage may vary.
Ad Astra
Though you can fruitfully engage with the night sky with any binocular, large or small, I find a 30mm aperture about the minimum that will yield views that will keep you engaged for long periods of time. And going from 30 to 32 mm results in a noticeable (~14 per cent) increase in light gathering power. With the light from the city of Glasgow some 25 miles to the south having diminished during the lockdowns, the sky is noticeably darker to my eyes and more majestic with it. The Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 was my instrument of choice to re-explore a truly dark sky after the summer twilight had come and gone. In mid-August, with no Moon in the sky, I set up a comfortable recliner in my back garden, and lying on my back, I explored the starry heaven down to perhaps the 9th magnitude of glory. The stars appear as beautiful, tiny pinpoints and their colours true and rich. I’ve even watched falling stars streak across the field during the Perseid meteor shower in the second week of August, and even witnessed a few brilliant fireballs with this wonderful, small glass.
I’m using my binoculars more and more now to escape the drudgery wrought by this scamdemic and the escalating evil, violence and depravity we’re constantly bombarded with on the air waves. You could say that the sky and the great outdoors have become my new telly. To me the stars are like old friends that come and go as the seasons change and I have enjoyed observing all manner of deep sky objects with this little instrument – the comely Pleiads and the Hyades in the wee small hours of the morning, the Coathanger asterism, the Engagement Ring around Polaris, the majestic Double Cluster and brilliant stellar associations such as Melotte 20 in Perseus. Later in the night, Auriga begins to dominate the eastern sky and all three of its Messier open clusters can be framed within the binocular field. Scanning the Milky Way through Cygnus, I usually pause to soak up the especially rich star fields around Sadr and Deneb, before panning onwards into Cassiopeia further east. The heavens surely declare the glory of God!
I have also enjoyed gazing at the Moon growing ever brighter as the days of August proceeded, its size appearing larger owing to its proximity to the horizon. The Leica binocular serves up tack sharp images of the lunar regolith, set against a jet black sky and remaining pleasingly coherent even at the edge of the field. Placing a bright Gibbous Moon just outside the field stop shows that this binocular is superior to the other models in suppressing stray, off-axis light. And when the rain clouds move in from off the Atlantic, racing across the Moon’s silvery countenance, they create painfully beautiful light shows that are rich in colour. In short the Leica is a wonderful companion whether it be day or night. I have even made some makeshift white light solar filters to fit over the instrument’s objective lenses in order to keep an eye on the Sun. Alas, it appears to be entering what astronomers call a grand solar minimum, which does not bode well if historical archives are anything to go by. Is God saying something here too?
Maybees aye, maybees naw.
A Favourite Birding Spot
In the last twelve months, I have taken up bird watching as another hobby; something I never thought I would find myself doing if I’m being honest. But by and large, the human world has become such a dark place to me that nature is the only refuge I have left. At least she still obeys her Creator lol. I’m very fortunate to live in a place where I can access the wet and the wild, and observe her perfect regularities with all her wonders and beauty. Having a good binocular makes this an especially joyful experience.
Just a half mile from my home is Culcreuch Pond, where I have spent a few minutes on most dry days glassing a pair of Mute Swans and their new family of six cygnets. I have watched them grow from tiny hatchlings to strong and healthy juveniles. The bright, dry spring and warm, wet summer has generated plenty of pond vegetation for them to thrive on. On many days, the adults see me observing them from the banks and begin to swim their way towards me, the cygnets following their parents gracefully in a wonderful flotilla. And they get real close too; often within a few metres of where I’m standing. The youngsters make loud whistle sounds as they approach in search of an easy meal but I have always resisted feeding them. I guess other folk do throw them food, explaining why they cross the pond to see me. To the casual onlooker, they all appear more or less identical, but I have come to know them so well that I can identify unique markers on their body that helps me to distinguish them.
The pond is also a good place to observe all manner of duck, Coots and even the odd Grey Heron lurking in the reedy shallows. Unlike the swans, Herons are far more leary of humans and getting closer than a few tens of metres has proven all but impossible for me. Still, the Leica glass allows me to make up for this distancing and I have observed these magnificent birds as they patiently patrol the shores for approaching fish.
Looking eastward beyond the pond, the hills soar 1,000 feet or so above the valley and I can often observe majestic raptors – mostly Buzzards but also the odd Peregrine Falcon gliding effortlessly on the warm summer thermals. Much of the lower lying parts of the hills are covered by deciduous trees and bracken which change their colours as the seasons progress. Needless to say, I’m very much looking forward to glassing their beautiful autumnal shades as September gives way to October.
Summary & Conclusions
I commend the Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 to the enthusiastic naturalist, birder or casual star gazer. It does exactly what it says on the tin and its robust – indeed slightly overbuilt – construction will appeal to those who value performance over bling. It has a classical look and feel about it that is as good to look through as it is to look at. It is durable, water proof to 4 metres depth, and can be relied upon in all weathers. It yields wonderful, bright and tack sharp images of the creation that will delight anyone who looks through it. Like any other product from the modern world, the Leica Trinovid does have a couple of things that niggle me. For one thing, the silly looking neoprene case does not befit an optic of this quality in my opinion. Nor do I really like the ‘HD’ moniker associated with its name. What does that signify? It’s certainly not a scientific term! Does that mean there will be an HD plus in the future, just like the evolution(don’t we really mean intelligent design?) of the Ultravid model?
If so, I’m not for chasing the wind. But I guess some folk will never be content.
For sure, the Leica Trinovid HD 8 x 32 is an expensive instrument by almost anyone’s standards, but I feel its cost is justified in this case, especially if you intend to use it as frequently as I plan to, by day and by night.
Highly recommended!
Neil English is the author of many books in amateur and professional astronomy. He prides himself in sorting the bling from the bread. You can support his ongoing work by purchasing one of his books or by making a small personal donation. Thanks for reading!
Hi Neil
Just read your very honest and interesting review from my cottage here in the Hebrides which I found quite refreshing.
I remember years ago listening to Kenneth Clarke (rtd Tory MP) explaining to children about birds that there’s the most fascinating world visible through binoculars that most people don’t know exist.
The simplicity of this stuck with me.
I too never seen my myself as a birdwatcher but now encompasses much of my enjoyment.
Scamdemic! ….. couldn’t agree more.
Keep writing
Cheers
Gerry
Cheers Gerry,
Writing from the Hebrides: pure bliss! I envy you!
Binoculars have certainly extended and enriched my life during these dark times.
And the little Trinovid brought a very broad smile to my face.
Thanks and best wishes,
Neil.
Wow….
I feel that you and I so Lind minded..
Brother’s in knowing the Glory of God
And seeing it so clearly as we take a closer look at His wonderful creation..
I’m 59 years old and been struggling a little with health..
Mainly due to 2 different times with getting covid 19..
It’s made me weak…
But I absolutely love God’s nature both physically and Spirituality..
Knowing my Father personally is the greatest thing that I found…
I tell everyone that I would die without his Presence in my roller-coaster journey in life..
Anyway,
When I read your review it just drawed me in when your stated see the Glory of God..
It absolutely declares it… And I fell like I was setting down with a like minded brother over a cup of coffee and chat about our hobbies and passions in life…
Thank you for that..
I got into nature when I decided to be a conservation officer in college..
Worked as a park naturalist for a few years after college and got into binoculars..
I appreciate good quality stuff and did a lot of reading on all the manufacturers and sizes…
I have a very pleasing quality 7×42
That’s so easy on my eyes that I love..
A 10×25 compact binoculars that I use a long side of my 7×42
And been going back and forth for months on the Leica Trinovid 8×32
Or zeiss conquest hd 8×32 or the nikon monarch m7 8×30
I really wanted to Leica or Zeiss but there never on sale and the cheapest I’ve seen was $879 for the Leica..
I saw on Amazon the nikon monarch m7 8×30 like new for just $299
So I ordered it and will get them in a few days..
I think I could really get into having 4-5 pairs of $1,000 dollars plus binoculars and enjoying them but I think after getting the nikon m7 I will have 3 different sizes and that’s all I need..
My other passion is quality watches..
I absolutely love how high end watches are hand made and it’s a work of art that I enjoy having several..
My favorite is the Rolex Air King 2022
With rolex you can’t just go in a buy one..
You have to be put on a waiting list for usually 1-2 years to get one from a authorized rolex dealer..
I got a call 3 months ago and absolutely live wearing it..
Anyway,
Thanks again for your wonderful piece on the Leica… And sharing and declaring God’s workmanship in your live for nature..
Blessings…
Greg
Dear Greg,
Thanks for your message and for sharing your purchasing experiences.
Nature is all that’s left.
Kind Regards,
Neil.
Great read!
I just bought my first pair of quality binoculars and it feels like I have supervision now. I bought the 8×20 Ultravid, but I woundernif I should instead buy the trinovid 8×32 for almost the same money.
My main use will be casual city watching, and animals and scenery on vacation.
The ultravid 8×20 is great in optics but of course lacks In ergonomics compared to a full size 32 as the trinovid.
Any thoughts on my dilemma?
Dear Harban,
Many thanks for your message.
I’ve used the 8x 20 Ultravid extensively, and tried very hard to see if I could do everything with it. Alas, as hard as I tried, I couldn’t. It’s just that when you move up to a quality 8x 30/32mm binocular, the improved ergonomics and the ease of the optical view become very compelling. The larger format is just so much easier to use and will serve you better in dull winter light and also later into the evening when the light begins to fade.
The Leica Trinovid HD 8x 32 is a very fine binocular, but I can recommend an even better instrument than the Leica glass to you that costs far less. It’s the new Oberwerk SE 8 x32 ED. The optics on this binocular are quite simply stunning! It’s razor sharp from edge to edge, has excellent brightness, contrast and colour rendering. I reviewed the same instrument here:
https://neilenglish.net/product-review-obserwerk-se-8-x-32/
Like the Leica, the Oberwerk SE is built like a proverbial tank and is fully water proof and fog proof. It also offers up a wider and better corrected field of view than the Trinovid HD. Best of all, it retails for $249.95 but you will have to pay a bit extra to get it shipped to the UK from the US. It’s a bit heavier than the Trinovid HD(630g) at 798g but it handles superbly.
I feel it’s an instrument that is impossible to pass on, especially if you want the very best bang for your buck.
I still use a pocket binocular if I absolutely need the smallest and lightest package for certain activities, so I settled on the Zeiss Terra ED pocket 8 x 25 for those purposes. The 8x 25 is also easier to use than any 8x 20 format I’ve tried.
With best wishes,
Neil.
Good afternoon Neil.
I’ve long enjoyed visiting your blog site and reading your binocular thoughts. I enjoyed the above review (to compare the newer Trinovids to my beloved 8×32 BN) and its mention of Culcreuch Pond – it brought back memories of your lyrical ‘adventures with a pocket binocular’ posts which seem to have disappeared.
I’d be fascinated to know, further to your replies to others’ posts above, what your current binocular arsenal now consists of. I note that you now perhaps prefer the Zeiss Terra to the Leica Ultravid pocket models – and that lead me to wondering what are your other preferred models based on application?
I hope you’re still enjoying the Pentax 20x60s – I often lug mine to the local reservoir to count the ducks from afar!
God bless you and keep you,
James
Hello James,
Long time no hear from. Good to see you’re still about!
With the binocular project now pretty much completed, I’ve refrained from doing any more reviews. The book is now at the copy editors.
I’d be happy to disclose my finalised binocular arsenal:
Nikon EII 8x 30 and 10 x 35
Classic Nikon Action Mark I 7x 35( mid 80s vintage)
Opticron Dioptron 8x 32(Japanese classic)
Oberwerk SE 8 x 32
Svbony SV202 ED 8 x 42
Pentax PCF 20 x 60( same old instrument).
No pocket binoculars. The 8x 30 Nikon E II is effectively a pocket glass.
I expect to do more travel blogs.
Currently in Ireland for vacation; doing some urban birding.
Thanks and God bless,
Neil
Hello Neil,
Great review! I’m also considering this particular model at the moment, I have a high quality 7×42 and 8×20, and it would be nice to round out the collection with a device that is lighter than the 7×42 but gathers more light and is simpler to use than the 8×20.
I’m wondering if you primarily use the 8 x 30-32 format for night sky observation. You mentioned in your review that this format seemed like the minimum viable format in order to enjoy night sky observations for long periods of time. My 8×20 is good for moon observations but is a bit uncomfortable for star sweeping due to the small exit pupil and rather dim view. The 7×42 is great for this but a bit heavy. I’m curious weather I could actually get away with just one 8×32 binocular like this for all terrestrial/astronomical use and sell off the other formats altogether.
Thanks!
Hello Sam,
Thanks for chiming in and for the thumbs up on the review..
My favourite format is indeed 8x 30/32 as you can squeeze a lot of performance out of these compact models during daylight hours. That said, I’m less inclined to use these apertures for astronomical use, preferring the traditional 10×50 format for serious observations. However, for casual viewing, I do like to use wide angle 8 x 30s but I definitely prefer more magnification and aperture, so I really enjoy my Nikon EII 10 x 35 with its enormous FOV for those sorts of activities.
Hope that helps.
Best wishes,
Neil