I would like to know please which between these are the best regarding their pure optical quality:
Leica Trinovid 12x50 BA and Swarovski 15x56mm -
I am asking just about their sharpness, crispness, contrast and CA control, no matter their different size or weight - which are the ''sharper'' and with less visible CA??
I'd give an edge to the Trinovid for color correction and contrast, but the key word is edge. We are talking very minute differences that many not even show in the field. Both excellent in terms of optics. I'd make a decision based on other factors.
Mostly non-optical factors such as focusing, eye cups, durability, handling, balance and so on, though handling is a moot point if you are using a tripod. Keep in mind, though, if using a tripod, a Trinovid does not have a tripod socket, so you will have to use a strap on style tripod adapter.
The biggest optical difference on these two is probably the magnification, actually, not performance. If you're going to use a tripod, probably makes more sense to opt for the 15x. Edge sharpness is something I am very fussy about, but to be honest, it's not a big factor and both of these will have more than enough.
Just to solve my last doubts:
''Mostly non-optical factors such as focusing, eye cups, durability''
Is the Swaro 15x56's focuser system worse ''mechanically'' than the TRINOVIDs in some aspect or are you telling about their ''less minimal focus distance''capacity against the 12x50's or even about some less easiness to use??
Regarding their durability...since both of them comes with a full 30 years warranty (I am telling about the SLC WB not the NEU version) are the Swaro less durable than the TRINOVID? Is there some specific weakness (regarding durability) with the Swaro 15x56's or Leica?
I'm talking about smoothness of focusing. I'd rate the Trinovid better, there, but the Swaro is no slouch.
Durability? Longevity? My experience in stores, where I could see, firsthand, what got returned to the manufacturer for repairs, suggested that Leica is probably as good as it gets when it comes to mechanical construction and this was also supported by many of my hunting guide customers who used binoculars all day, every day during the hunting season. That is not to say that Swarovski binos are not durable. Just means that Leica had the better track record for fewest repair issues in my years behind the counter. Other folks may have had a different experience. Take it for what it's worth. Hope it helps.
Thanks a lot for such kind of information!
I just forgot to ask an important thing before (my fault sorry) - some people claim the Trinovid's ''image cast'' as almost ''neutral'' or maybe slightly ''warm'' while with the Swaro 15x56's it as a bit ''cold'' (bluish cast?) - could you tell me please if there is really that kind of image cast difference between both?
thank you very much!
You will sometimes hear about colors on certain models tending to be warm or cold. This is mostly a matter of lens coating used, but it is mostly a concern to birders and other users who need exacting color rendition. As for those two, you would probably have to have them side by side to even see any difference as to color tones - it's that slight. Personally, I don't think I would use this as a factor when making a decision on which bino to buy
Just a curiosity - I've heard (regarding the 15x56's) that after their huge improvement through the ''SWAROBRIGHT coating'' on their prisms (versus the pre-Swarobright 15x56's) that they use to improve their coating times to times - mainly on their most recent NEU series (Swaroclean, Swarodur, Swarotop) my questions are:
A) Is there some real noticiable ''image quality difference'' (brilliance, contrast, sharpness) between the NEU versus the pre-NEU (Forest Green with Swarobright)?
B) If YES is there an ''image quality difference'' at the same level as found on the overall image difference between a Trinovid 10x50 BA/BN versus an ULTRAVID 10x50's (non HD) which some people claim as a ''good difference by a good margin''??
There will be much more of a difference between the Ultravid HD and the Trinovid than between the older Swarovski coatings and the new. Contrast, especially, is as good as it gets in any binocular with the Ultravid HD. It is also a nicer handling bino than the older Trinovid. If you want a Swarovski, I'd take the older model in a heartbeat if you could get a good price, but I would save up to get an Ultravid.