Initial Leica Pro 10x32 LRF bino thoughts
The first impression I had when handling the new Leica Pro 32 binos is that the really feel like a nice set of bird watching binos. They are smaller and lighter than other laser rangefinding binos I have used and the open bridge form factor favored by most high end mid size binos. This is a long way from the size and shape of the
Bushnell Fusion 1 Mile ARC binos I reviewed back in 2013. Incidentally, I have just resurrected that review as it was apparently lost in the Scout.com exile period and, unlike most other reviews of that period, I did not seem to have uploaded it to either OpticsThoughts or AR15.com so it was truly not available. The only things that did not strike me as high grade birdwatching bino in either quality or design on these Leica Pro's are the lense caps and the diopters. The lens caps retain nicely when they are closed but when open they are held to the bino body only with what amounts to a stretchy rubber band. This band does not ride in any groove on the binocular barrels and so slips off easily. If you walk around with your lens caps open and dangling, you will loose them rather quickly. As for the diopters, the Leica Pro 32's feature one on each eye right in front of the eye cups instead of a single. These are not locking and move quite easily. At the very least they should be stiffer and, ideally for an optic of this cost, would be locking.
I have not had time to fully evaluate the Leica Pro 32's optically yet, but I have had them on a few nature walks and have also put them side by side with both Swarovski's EL Range 10x42's and also their NL Pure 10x42's. Thank you to the manager at my local Cabela's for providing some time and flexibility in these observations.
View attachment 7847502
Through the lens photos are typically a poor measurement of optical performance and often come out poorly but this one through the Leica Pro 10x32 LRF bios sure came out well
In general I am quite pleased with the optical performance of the Pro 32's. On their own they look great. Bright, clear, sharp, they again leave you thinking your using a nice set of birdwatching binos and not a laser rangefinder. When compared optically to the Swarovski EL rangefinders, the Leica Pro's strike me as roughly equivalent though not the same. Outside, in overcast ideal conditions, both binos do seem very close to the same. However, in brighter conditions of direct sunlight, the Leica's show less chromatic aberration than the Swarovski's and were therefore preferable in those conditions. Inside, in lower light conditions, the Swarovski's were brighter and had better contrast making them preferable in those conditions. The color rendition is likewise a little different between the two sets of binos. Swarovski has a reputation for providing even, true to life, color rendition and that is what I saw in them. The Leicas in contrast really made the greens and reds pop.
View attachment 7847503
Spending a little time with the Leica Pro 10x32 LRF binoculars side by side with the Swarovski EL Range 10x42 rangefinding binoculars
When either set of rangefinding binos was compared to the NL Pures I was reminded that no matter how good the top rangefinding binos get you are always going to give up a bit when comparing them to top binos without rangefinders. The NL's were plainly better than either rangefinding set. Remember that even if you take the laser and receiver out of the lens assembly, as Leica wisely has, allowing you to use the best optimized lens coatings and arrangements for optical performance, you still have a display in there. That display requires a degree of reflectivity and this inescapably lowers your optical performance.
Speaking of that display, it has evidently been brightened since the early pre-production samples as I had no difficulty making out readings in bright sunlight.
As for the laser and software performance. I really haven't had a chance to stretch the laser much yet. Ohio is flat and tree covered so testing a laser requires going somewhere special to do so. A high building, a lake, train tracks, somewhere you can actually sight a significant number of different targets at varying large distances. I just haven't done this yet. Part of the reason for this is that I just received the ballistic software a couple days ago. I think this may also still be beta software as well. The link I received seems to indicate this and my test binos included no information on that aspect of function so I expect it probably has a separate manual of it's own not yet finalized. It will be probably be a couple weeks before I can really dig into the software and evaluate it's ease of use and customizability. My work schedule the next few weeks is particularly slammed.
With respect specifically to Kestrel pairing as Ed asked, I do not actually have a Kestrel to test it with. Here in Ohio average wind velocity is not particularly high but the trees and other near ground structures cause it to eddy quite ferociously and unpredictably. As such, I don't see much of an edge in having a wind meter at my location. The other functions Kestrel does I have done with either an app on my smart phone or old fashion printed dope sheet.
