First review here but I thought this one would have been so valuable for me to read had it existed before I made my purchase.
The Leica Geovid HD-B 10x42 is the most advanced range finding binocular available in the ~$3000 MSRP price point as of Q1 2015. Competitive products in this same price range that I considered were the Swarovski EL 10x42 Range and the Zeiss Victory RF 10x45 Rangefinding Binocular.
The requirements I had (of which no product could fully achieve) were as follows:
1.) I wished to have rangefinding ballistic drop calculations for a high performance crossbow that would assist in calculating real hold-overs for ethical shots from 50 yards to 80 yards.
2.) I wished to have a ballistic calculation for use with a ultra premium rifled slug gun that is about 2 MOA when using sabot slugs out to 200 yards. The slug gun is a big desire because it pushes the slugs real-world at 1735fps MV with a 260r projectile and a BC of .146. Plenty of accuracy for those shots from 130-200 yards provided you know precisely your drops to exceptional detail.
3.) I wanted range finding capability with ballistic calculations for a 6.5x55 and 7x57 for precise firing solutions for shots out to 500 yards, the maximum reasonable distance for CXP2 and CXP3 game where quality bullets will still expand properly. (e.g. Nosler Partition, Accubond, Woodleighs, Oryx)
4.) I wanted excellent glass so I could avoid a separate binocular purchase
5.) I wanted to eliminate carrying my Leica 1000r pocket rangefinder that I purchased <90 days ago
6.) I wanted an excellent warranty and support model
7.) I wanted general EHR capabilities for targets as close as 10 yards and as far as 500 yards
After trying out all three in store I concluded that the Swaro and Leica had comparable glass, the Zeiss i felt was slightly lesser quality in glass but the additional 3mm exit objective did create a larger FOV that was impressive.
Then I stacked them all against my requirements. I did not buy the Swaro because it failed to meet any archery requirements as it could not provide range finding under 33 yards. I called Swaro and they stated this was a patent issue and thus they made the software in that manner.
The zeiss didn't wow me optically or with their grip so that left the Leica meeting most requirements.
What I learned after purchase was the following disappointments about the Leica.
1.) The custom software would not let me put in ballistic data for an arrow or crossbow bolt nor would it permit a drop table based on a 50 yard zero.
2.) The custom software would not permit me to create a 100 yard zero for a 260gr bullet moving at 1735 fps with a BC of .146, so the slug firing solutions are not possible. I subsequently learned that it also will not handle loads like .22 hornet, .357 mag, .44 mag and other loads that have low BCs with 100 yard zeros and moderate muzzle velocities. Adding to this frustration is that you do not get to know if your data is good or bad when using the application to input your data. Only when you take your data.hex file and transfer it to a memory card and place it in your binoculars do you get an ERR3 code that the data is not acceptable to the binoculars. This is problematic as it leaves you scratching your head as to what went wrong. I've called Leica who is indeed responsive to consumers (a good thing) and asked what the minimum thresholds are for what is acceptable load data. They do not know but are going to ask the developer, Gunwerks for clarity. This is an incredibly disappointing situation that I hope Leica will remedy (and I'll write an update if they do) because not every fire solution you use on a rangefinder is for great distances but they are always used to insure an ethical shot. (like a sabot slug from a 2 MOA gun at 100-200 yards for example)
So in conclusion, the Leica Geovid HD-B 10x42 met several requirements but failed to meet all. It will:
1.) meet quality glass requirements
2.) will hopefully meet durability requirements (* more addendum on this below)
3.) It will NOT be able to calculate custom drops for crossbow bolts
4.) It will NOT be able to calculate custom drops for for rimfire, slug, or some straight wall rifle and pistol calibers.
5.) It will be able to calculate drops and firing solutions for high velocity rifles from 100 yards to 1000 yards.
6.) It does have excellent glass
7.) Leica has been responsive to inquiries
That concludes my initial review.
-Rookhawk
*Addendum on quality. I found out the Leica products are made in Portugal, not Germany which is really disheartening for a $3000 product. The 1000r rangefinder I had was used in -4 weather for deer hunting on two occasions. The 1000r rangefinder rubber peeled off in sheets with no abuse on my part. I owned it <90 days and did ask for a refund/exchange towards the Geovids but was told no by the dealer because they cannot sell them as new. I'm waiting for Leica to service the 1000r by replacing the housing or replacing the unit. I'm deeply concerned that the Geovids might use the same rubberizing as the 1000r and I'll be absolutely disheartened if that rubber fails at -4 also because it certainly is well within the optical operating conditions published by Leica.
The Leica Geovid HD-B 10x42 is the most advanced range finding binocular available in the ~$3000 MSRP price point as of Q1 2015. Competitive products in this same price range that I considered were the Swarovski EL 10x42 Range and the Zeiss Victory RF 10x45 Rangefinding Binocular.
The requirements I had (of which no product could fully achieve) were as follows:
1.) I wished to have rangefinding ballistic drop calculations for a high performance crossbow that would assist in calculating real hold-overs for ethical shots from 50 yards to 80 yards.
2.) I wished to have a ballistic calculation for use with a ultra premium rifled slug gun that is about 2 MOA when using sabot slugs out to 200 yards. The slug gun is a big desire because it pushes the slugs real-world at 1735fps MV with a 260r projectile and a BC of .146. Plenty of accuracy for those shots from 130-200 yards provided you know precisely your drops to exceptional detail.
3.) I wanted range finding capability with ballistic calculations for a 6.5x55 and 7x57 for precise firing solutions for shots out to 500 yards, the maximum reasonable distance for CXP2 and CXP3 game where quality bullets will still expand properly. (e.g. Nosler Partition, Accubond, Woodleighs, Oryx)
4.) I wanted excellent glass so I could avoid a separate binocular purchase
5.) I wanted to eliminate carrying my Leica 1000r pocket rangefinder that I purchased <90 days ago
6.) I wanted an excellent warranty and support model
7.) I wanted general EHR capabilities for targets as close as 10 yards and as far as 500 yards
After trying out all three in store I concluded that the Swaro and Leica had comparable glass, the Zeiss i felt was slightly lesser quality in glass but the additional 3mm exit objective did create a larger FOV that was impressive.
Then I stacked them all against my requirements. I did not buy the Swaro because it failed to meet any archery requirements as it could not provide range finding under 33 yards. I called Swaro and they stated this was a patent issue and thus they made the software in that manner.
The zeiss didn't wow me optically or with their grip so that left the Leica meeting most requirements.
What I learned after purchase was the following disappointments about the Leica.
1.) The custom software would not let me put in ballistic data for an arrow or crossbow bolt nor would it permit a drop table based on a 50 yard zero.
2.) The custom software would not permit me to create a 100 yard zero for a 260gr bullet moving at 1735 fps with a BC of .146, so the slug firing solutions are not possible. I subsequently learned that it also will not handle loads like .22 hornet, .357 mag, .44 mag and other loads that have low BCs with 100 yard zeros and moderate muzzle velocities. Adding to this frustration is that you do not get to know if your data is good or bad when using the application to input your data. Only when you take your data.hex file and transfer it to a memory card and place it in your binoculars do you get an ERR3 code that the data is not acceptable to the binoculars. This is problematic as it leaves you scratching your head as to what went wrong. I've called Leica who is indeed responsive to consumers (a good thing) and asked what the minimum thresholds are for what is acceptable load data. They do not know but are going to ask the developer, Gunwerks for clarity. This is an incredibly disappointing situation that I hope Leica will remedy (and I'll write an update if they do) because not every fire solution you use on a rangefinder is for great distances but they are always used to insure an ethical shot. (like a sabot slug from a 2 MOA gun at 100-200 yards for example)
So in conclusion, the Leica Geovid HD-B 10x42 met several requirements but failed to meet all. It will:
1.) meet quality glass requirements
2.) will hopefully meet durability requirements (* more addendum on this below)
3.) It will NOT be able to calculate custom drops for crossbow bolts
4.) It will NOT be able to calculate custom drops for for rimfire, slug, or some straight wall rifle and pistol calibers.
5.) It will be able to calculate drops and firing solutions for high velocity rifles from 100 yards to 1000 yards.
6.) It does have excellent glass
7.) Leica has been responsive to inquiries
That concludes my initial review.
-Rookhawk
*Addendum on quality. I found out the Leica products are made in Portugal, not Germany which is really disheartening for a $3000 product. The 1000r rangefinder I had was used in -4 weather for deer hunting on two occasions. The 1000r rangefinder rubber peeled off in sheets with no abuse on my part. I owned it <90 days and did ask for a refund/exchange towards the Geovids but was told no by the dealer because they cannot sell them as new. I'm waiting for Leica to service the 1000r by replacing the housing or replacing the unit. I'm deeply concerned that the Geovids might use the same rubberizing as the 1000r and I'll be absolutely disheartened if that rubber fails at -4 also because it certainly is well within the optical operating conditions published by Leica.
