Leica Quality Control

[mork]

I recently bought a 10x50 bn 2004 production.I took a flash-light and shined into the objectives.In one objective there were lint and dust particles,the other showed what appeared to be the lens coating coming off.It looked like small droplets of oil all over the lens.This is my fourth pair of leicas and all had this problem!Has anyone ever seen this problem in their bino and does it affect the view.$1400.00 FOR A BINO I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE LINT AND DIRT INSIDE THE BINO AND THE LENS COATING FRECKLING GIVE ME A BREAK!I think leica need to check into their quality control. :

[John Traynor]

I recently bought a 10x50 bn 2004 production.I took a flash-light and shined into the objectives.In one objective there were lint and dust particles,the other showed what appeared to be the lens coating coming off.It looked like small droplets of oil all over the lens.This is my fourth pair of leicas and all had this problem!Has anyone ever seen this problem in their bino and does it affect the view.$1400.00 FOR A BINO I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE LINT AND DIRT INSIDE THE BINO AND THE LENS COATING FRECKLING GIVE ME A BREAK!I think leica need to check into their quality control. :


May I ask where you bought these bins?

[ranburr]

I find the original post very hard to believe. I do believe that you could have gotten one lemmon. I do not believe that you got four lemmons from Leica. If it is true, why would you continue with the brand? Sounds fishy to me!

ranburr

[salty]

i own 2 pairs of leica bin's, and 1 scope - all of wich get used plenty, and they have NEVER let me down. have they been dropped our bought second hand? - they could also of been re-conditioned by someone who was less carefull of there equipment.

[Leif]

I recently bought a 10x50 bn 2004 production.I took a flash-light and shined into the objectives.In one objective there were lint and dust particles,the other showed what appeared to be the lens coating coming off.It looked like small droplets of oil all over the lens.This is my fourth pair of leicas and all had this problem!Has anyone ever seen this problem in their bino and does it affect the view.$1400.00 FOR A BINO I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE LINT AND DIRT INSIDE THE BINO AND THE LENS COATING FRECKLING GIVE ME A BREAK!I think leica need to check into their quality control. :

My APO Televid 77 had a few tiny bits of dust inside the sealed tube from new. I don't regard it as an issue, though it is not ideal. Were all your samples from the same shop at about the same time? If so, and assuming your report is correct, then it might be a bad batch. That is not unknown, even for the best makes. They did once have a problem with the wrong grease due to a supplier error.

Leif

[JCJ]

I recently bought a 10x50 bn 2004 production.I took a flash-light and shined into the objectives.In one objective there were lint and dust particles,the other showed what appeared to be the lens coating coming off.It looked like small droplets of oil all over the lens.This is my fourth pair of leicas and all had this problem!Has anyone ever seen this problem in their bino and does it affect the view.$1400.00 FOR A BINO I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE LINT AND DIRT INSIDE THE BINO AND THE LENS COATING FRECKLING GIVE ME A BREAK!I think leica need to check into their quality control. :


I have also experienced this problem with Leica. Mine has been in their Trinivod Line, BN's and BA's. I have owned nine pair in the last six years. Five BA's and Four BN's--Of these,three pair had similar problems. Two 7x 42's had something similar--like lent or dust on the inside of the Objectives. One pair of 10x50 BN's had what looked to be like the paint coming off or chipping on the inside of the tubing or barrell. I sent them back Leica. They stated that this did not obstruct my view-so they sent them back as is ,and did nothing about it. For $1400.00 it is obstructive in my view!! No doubt Leica makes good binoculars,but I have seen what Mork is talking about first hand. I have not seen this in their new Ultravid Line. By the way all mine have either been purchased from Cabela's or SWFA.

[IanF]

I picked up a pair of second hand 8x32 BA's for half normal price about three years ago now and they are still as good as the day I bought them. After reading these posts I checked mine and there isn't even a hint of dust inside.

Seems very strange from reading the first post.

[barontan2418]

My 8x32 BN's which I purchased just under 2 years ago show a few dust particles when viewed through the objectives as does my Apo 77. Both are excellent optics and the dust doesn’t impair the viewing, I'd still prefer it wasn’t there considering I handed over £1700 for both items.

[Henry B]

Welcome to Birdforum ,Mork....

[Lindsay Cargill]

I had an absolute nightmare with a Leica Apo 62. Lens Coating came off. Got 2 Brand new len elements fitted and they were faulty. Leica then gave me replacement scope, which had a scratched lens. Then another which had a different colour cast to the element and speckles where there was no len coating on the surface of the objective lens.

To be fair, Leica tried to put it right but the whole escapade took over 6 months, where I obviously didnt have the use of the scope. Warehouse Express ( excellent service ) agreed to credit note me the amount for the scope, which I returned to them and I bought EL 8.5's which are fantastic ! The manager of Servicing at Leica said, and I quote, "that I was expecting far too much for an instrument that ONLY cost what I had paid" and that " as far as they were concerned it met THEIR standards". I let several other people see it, including professional photographers, and they said it was a shocking for a brand new lens. Clearly a QC problem there then.

I have posted all of this before and I guess all the Leica-phobes will take offence, as they did last time. But scratched lens, missing coating should not be getting out of the factory period. If they looked like that after several years of use, fine.

I still use a Apo Leica 77, and it is optically very good but, if I were in the market for a new scope I would be looking at Swarovski, Zeiss or Nikon. When I bought my Bins I did not even consider Leica.............


Linz

[Swissboy]

[QUOTE=JCJ] I have owned nine pair in the last six years. Five BA's and Four BN's--Of these,three pair had similar problems. [QUOTE]

Mork and JCJ: why would you keep buying Leica if this was a serious problem?

[mork]

In 1999 bought 8x50 bn had dust and lint,sold, bino,cost me $100 for lint he said these guys buying are picky,sold them anyway.Bought 8x50ba from adorama had lint and coatings were pealing off.I am not blind i see what i see. It like the leica view just like everyone else ,but i am not a sucker!Purchased a 10x50br from cabelas,lint,returned.I said self where are these things being made kokomo,for 1.5 ben franklins do not think so!Bought a7x42bn from SWFA,lens coatings were coming off severely on both focul lens and had lint!PURCHASED FIFTH PAIR OF 10X50 BINOS AND STILL CURRENTLY OWN,GUESS WHAT LINT IN RIGHT BARREL,AND COATINGS ARE COMING OFF INSIDE.This is last leica bino.Going to try something else.

[John Traynor]

[QUOTE=JCJ] I have owned nine pair in the last six years. Five BA's and Four BN's--Of these,three pair had similar problems. [QUOTE]

Mork and JCJ: why would you keep buying Leica if this was a serious problem?


I would ask the same question, but I'm beginning to think I'm in the twilight zone.

[mork]

John traynor because i can.Get a flash-light and look inside and you will emerge from the twilight zone.

[JCJ]

[QUOTE=JCJ] I have owned nine pair in the last six years. Five BA's and Four BN's--Of these,three pair had similar problems. [QUOTE]

Mork and JCJ: why would you keep buying Leica if this was a serious problem?


My personal reason is one of bias.My first high end bino was a leica 7x42BA (outstanding),probally shouldn"t have sold them.Since then I have always had a thing for leica. I can 't say I won"t continue to own leica products,but their (QC and slow service), here in the states anyway,makes it a little discouraging. And with companys out there like swarovski,zeiss and nikon they(Leica) need to get it together.


JCJ

[ranburr]

Obviously Leica is absolute crap. I would feel bad making you guys suffer, so send me everything you own that carries this offensive logo. I will be sure to dispose of it properly! Incidently, Adorama is not an authorized dealer and has about 2 million Better Business Bureau complaints against them for selling refurbished equipment as new, or selling counterfit equipment. Cabelas will take anything back and make it right. And finally, Chris and Brady of SWFA would have replaced the binos and made the president of Leica send you a personal apology! Your story does not jive. I do believe that you probably got a bad bino from Adorama.

ranburr

[Ben O]

Still odd to keep buying from a manufacturer that you have had so much trouble from. Clearly the phrase, once bitten twice shy isn't applicable here.

[John Traynor]

John traynor because i can.Get a flash-light and look inside and you will emerge from the twilight zone.


Mork,

You saw lint etc. in a bin yet you repeatedly bought the same brand without checking? That strains credulity in my sphere.

Perhaps the Leica view is so good you just couldn't resist.

Happy birding!

John

PS
My 7X42 Ultravid is spotless.

[John N]

Just inspected my 8x32BN with a flashlight. I bought this pair 12 months ago second hand and I am pleased to say there is no dust at all.

[PappaMundi]

I just took a flashlight aided look down the barrels of my 8x32s and my brother's 8x42 Ultravids and found a considerable number of speckles in one of the barrels of the 42s. They appear to be on the internal glass at about the mid point of the binos. It doesn't look like dust or oil,,, and I don't know enough as to guess at what they might be. What I do know is that to my very good eyes there is no discernible difference between the barrels of the 42s, or between the 42s and the 32s. The views they give are still superb and appear uncompromised. I will, of course, let Leica know about these speckles, but I don't expect them to do anything about it. I'll post what I find out from them.

[mork]

John, its kind of difficult to check or ask the dealer to look inside the bino with a light before purchasing,they might think your crazy, and i would do it myself but there hundreds of miles away.I thought i might get a good one eventually. I know leica is supposed to be the "rolex" but in this case it looks to be a "timex".I am not bashing leica, but for hundreds of my hard earned dollars the isides of a leica bino should be spotless.

[John Traynor]

John, its kind of difficult to check or ask the dealer to look inside the bino with a light before purchasing,they might think your crazy, and i would do it myself but there hundreds of miles away.I thought i might get a good one eventually. I know leica is supposed to be the "rolex" but in this case it looks to be a "timex".I am not bashing leica, but for hundreds of my hard earned dollars the isides of a leica bino should be spotless.

Mork,

I agree you should get a clean bin, especially one that is environmentally sealed. I have no personal knowledge of Leica's QC, but we should expect their finished product to be among the very best.

The only advice I can offer is general in nature. Porros are notorious for picking up debris, yet they seem to hold their image quality in spite of internal "pollution". Ideally, we'd all like perfection, but that always comes with a price most are unwilling to pay. Leica roofs are environmentally sealed and one would expect the sealing to be performed only after a thorough internal cleaning and inspection. In your case, and others, something was obviously overlooked. The question is: How does it affect the view?

I had a $350 roof with a flaw that was near the dead center of one ocular. A casual user would never have been bothered by it, but I was constantly irritated that I couldn't get a sharp image in one small area of the central image. Upon inspection and further testing, I discovered the problem and soon received a suitable replacement with no questions asked. If a flaw in their bin bothers anyone, they should certainly seek appropriate remedy. The no-fault repair/replacement warranties offered by many companies are a double edge sword for the manufacturers because, if they don't fix the bin to your satisfaction, you'll be receiving a replacement after your spouse "accidentally" drives over it. The economic reality is that it is often more profitable to build a product with predictable failure rates and simply absorb the cost of repairs. The Leica Lifetime Passport warranty is basically an insurance policy (and a marketing strategy) the consumer pays for when they purchase the bin.

How much debris can be tolerated in or on a bin is very personal. I don't clean my eyepieces that much because the view doesn't seem to be adversely affected by small amounts of dust and debris. Others will disagree.

In any case, a new bin should be clean and free of any obvious defects. As a result of your posts, my LED flashlight will be getting more use!

Best of luck to you.

John

[Swissboy]

I had a $350 roof with a flaw that was near the dead center of one ocular. A casual user would never have been bothered by it, but I was constantly irritated that I couldn't get a sharp image in one small area of the central image. Upon inspection and further testing, I discovered the problem and soon received a suitable replacement with no questions asked. If a flaw in their bin bothers anyone, they should certainly seek appropriate remedy. John

I had a similar problem some years ago with one of the first original Zeiss Victories (I). It also got replaced without any hassles. And that little speck in the center really irritated only after you discovered it against a clear blue sky.

[John Traynor]

I had a similar problem some years ago with one of the first original Zeiss Victories (I). It also got replaced without any hassles. And that little speck in the center really irritated only after you discovered it against a clear blue sky.

Actually, I discovered it when looking at feather details where a small area was always blurry.

[KDGast]

Everyone seems to have a different experience. My experience with Leica is nothing but good! My 8x42 Ultravids are flawless as are my smaller Trinovids. Alway quick response from Leica USA. Same positive experience with several Leica R and M cameras.

[salty]

i have been checking my leica optics while out in the field today and still cant find anything that is not perfect! - im very happy with my gear.

my leica trinovids, ultravids and APO 77 dont show any signs of dust or peeling coatings, so im pleased about that. it hasnt put me off buying leica optics, thats for sure.

but i do remember my other bino's from the past: cheaper makes like tasco, sunagor and praktica etc having little problems - wich you still shouldnt expect that EVEN on low end equipment.

[mork]

Ranburr,adorama is an authorized dealer.

[mork]

KDGAST,if ultravids,trinovids,cameras are so "flawless", how do know about the quick responses from leica usa?

[ranburr]

Mork actually they are not an authorized dealer. If you look at their website they proudly explain that they are a "Grey Market" dealer. They go on to say that their is no difference in dealing with them and an authorized dealer and that they will see to it that your equipment is warrantied. Who it is warrantied through I don't know. I just know it won't be a factory warranty.

ranburr

[Curtis Croulet]

Adorama is listed as an authorized Leica dealer on www.leica-camera.com. However, some dealers sell both authorized and grey-market merchandise. My own view: I can't see spending $1K+ for top-line binoculars and then skimping on the last few bucks for full USA warranty coverage.

[KDGast]

KDGAST,if ultravids,trinovids,cameras are so "flawless", how do know about the quick responses from leica usa?

When I have needed an accessory/part or sent an item in for cleaning, the response from Leica has been excellent. Never had a functional problem with a Leica product including use during a three week Eco-Challenge adventure race.

[mork]

Ranburr,my 10x50 leica bn's from adorama have a full leica lifetime passport warranty,how is that for gray market, do you need a serial number too.As for SWFA they will not refund crap after 30 days and i have not got my apology from leica yet.

[KVRZ]

I own a pair of 8x20 Trinovids for 3 years and liked them so much I bought a pair of 10x50 Ultravids 6 months ago. Both are fantiastic. However, this thread made me paranoid about them having dirt on the inside. I checked by looking in with a flashlight, the only dirt that was revealed was the dirt on the outside surfaces. Great product.

Incidentally I aslo own a pait of Zeiss 10x40 and am equally happy with them.

[Jeff Bouton]

I recently bought a 10x50 bn 2004 production.I took a flash-light and shined into the objectives.In one objective there were lint and dust particles,the other showed what appeared to be the lens coating coming off.It looked like small droplets of oil all over the lens.This is my fourth pair of leicas and all had this problem!Has anyone ever seen this problem in their bino and does it affect the view.$1400.00 FOR A BINO I DO NOT THINK THERE SHOULD BE LINT AND DIRT INSIDE THE BINO AND THE LENS COATING FRECKLING GIVE ME A BREAK!I think leica need to check into their quality control. :

Mork and all,

If you have a legitimate problem with your Leica products I'd be more than happy to talk to you about how we can rectify this. That said I have to admit I'm a bit skeptical. I think anyone who looks at your post history can see a very clear trend: you have only chimed in on optics posts in the month you've been aboard, and only when you have had the oportunity to take a cheap shot at either Zeiss, Leica, and/or Swarovski (in many threads more than one of these). You have not once added anything positive and in every instance you have added "Why not try the Leupold Goldrings?" A binocular that won't be released until June, making it very unlikely you are just another satisfied customer. ;)

That said, I'd think if I were a Leupold executive, or stock holder, I'd be very concerned about a loose cannon out there protraying the company in such a petty light. Particularly when trying to establish a POSITIVE reputation in a new market. If the first opinion of Leupold is drawn from your belittling posts, then I dare say, many might be turned off and not even give this glass a shot, which would be shame for that company because I'm certain a lot of work and effort is going into this campaign. E.g. you draw more flies with sugar.... ;)

At any rate, if you don't work for the company, you are clearly a fan so again I suggest your posts are not helping Leupold's reputation which I know they are investing alot to establish right now. I would further suggest that if you spent more time enlightening folks on the positive features of the Goldrings (beyond an empty "..their great!..." ) rather than taking pot shots (whether an employee or fan) it would work more in your favor and be more useful for all of us who would love to know more about these gems. Again if you have a legitimate issue with Leica product feel free to contact me regarding this. I am a legitimate representative using my real name!

Sincerely,

Jeff Bouton
Leica Sport Optics, USA

[salty]

Jeff: :clap: praise for the leicas B (: exellent optics, too much scare mongering going on.

[matt green]

dear mr bouton would you like to take this oportunity to end this fad for ''leica baiting''and conform to all us forum members that there is no apparent problem with quality control ie lint,dust,paint trapped inside certain models,peeling lense coatings,problems with ''notchy focusing?''poor service etc.we genuinly want to here good things about the company that many[for good reason] rank as the best in the business. i was fortunate to own a pair of bn trinovids a couple of years back wich i considered to be flawless in every possible way,i miss them like crazy and every time i go into the field i cant help regret parting with them.matt

[John N]

Jeff: :clap: praise for the leicas B (: exellent optics, too much scare mongering going on.

No problems at all with my 8x32BNs or my 10x42 ultravids. I am very happy with both and wouldn't change either pair.

[mork]

Mork and all,

If you have a legitimate problem with your Leica products I'd be more than happy to talk to you about how we can rectify this. That said I have to admit I'm a bit skeptical. I think anyone who looks at your post history can see a very clear trend: you have only chimed in on optics posts in the month you've been aboard, and only when you have had the oportunity to take a cheap shot at either Zeiss, Leica, and/or Swarovski (in many threads more than one of these). You have not once added anything positive and in every instance you have added "Why not try the Leupold Goldrings?" A binocular that won't be released until June, making it very unlikely you are just another satisfied customer. ;)

That said, I'd think if I were a Leupold executive, or stock holder, I'd be very concerned about a loose cannon out there protraying the company in such a petty light. Particularly when trying to establish a POSITIVE reputation in a new market. If the first opinion of Leupold is drawn from your belittling posts, then I dare say, many might be turned off and not even give this glass a shot, which would be shame for that company because I'm certain a lot of work and effort is going into this campaign. E.g. you draw more flies with sugar.... ;)

At any rate, if you don't work for the company, you are clearly a fan so again I suggest your posts are not helping Leupold's reputation which I know they are investing alot to establish right now. I would further suggest that if you spent more time enlightening folks on the positive features of the Goldrings (beyond an empty "..their great!..." ) rather than taking pot shots (whether an employee or fan) it would work more in your favor and be more useful for all of us who would love to know more about these gems. Again if you have a legitimate issue with Leica product feel free to contact me regarding this. I am a legitimate representative using my real name!

Sincerely,

Jeff Bouton
Leica Sport Optics, USA
Jeff,i don't care who you are or your credentials,everyone has an opinion and mine is not very good with leica.I own a 10x50bn 2004 production and one of the internal lens is freckling.I would return to leica for repair but a friend of mine returned a 10x50ba for similar problems and leica returned the bino saying that was normal.Matt Green if you would like to see some internal lens freckling on the flawless leicas mine are for sale.

[dwalton]

Jeff,i don't care who you are or your credentials,everyone has an opinion and mine is not very good with leica.I own a 10x50bn 2004 production and one of the internal lens is freckling.I would return to leica for repair but a friend of mine returned a 10x50ba for similar problems and leica returned the bino saying that was normal.Matt Green if you would like to see some internal lens freckling on the flawless leicas mine are for sale.
This thread has now devolved from annoying to absurd.

[John Traynor]

This thread has now devolved from annoying to absurd.


Actually, I think it's been rather instructive.

(1) The odds of one individual experiencing so many optical disasters with one brand is beyond my computational ability.

(2) If the same claims were made about another brand, there would surely be an uproar of unprecedented proportions.

And now, the rest of my story:

After reading this thread, I took a close look at my Ultravid and there's definitely something in there. Mostly it's black, but if I look closely I see a bright spot of red. The red comes and goes depending on the angle of the light and I suspect it's moving around. The other day, the red spot suddenly changed to a streak of yellow and I'm here to tell you that raised my blood pressure a few notches! The yellow flashed by rather quickly and then I saw what appeared to be dark spots all over the lens. I'm guessing it was some form of aberrant CA resulting from excess exposure to ozone or perhaps a rare occurrence of lens freckling, whatever that is.

My wife confirmed both observations and added "My that Pileated looks dashing and did you see that Yellow Shafted Flicker...he simply glows!" I immediately informed her that Leica did not deliver living birds with every binocular purchase! She disagreed. I asked her to prove it. She said, "Look". I countered with "OK, but I'm sure I saw that dreaded purple fringy thing more than once this week..." "Yes dear", she said, "that's a purple finch that's been here all winter." I could see the discussion was going nowhere so I smugly ended with "At least I’m better off than those folks who have rattle snakes in their bins!"

John

[Leif]

(1) The odds of one individual experiencing so many optical disasters with one brand is beyond my computational ability.



You are not alone. I find his report hard to believe. (I'm sure I posted a comment along these lines earlier but can't find it. Maybe it's on a related thread.)

I'm looking forward to upgrading my bins to digital. I'm told the reception is better.

Leif

[Robert Ellis]

I'm looking forward to upgrading my bins to digital. I'm told the reception is better.

Leif

I recently switched it up to a low-carb pair of bins.

[Otto McDiesel]

(1) The odds of one individual experiencing so many optical disasters with one brand is beyond my computational ability.


Well, that's what i thought too, and since i am all "shook - up" from spending a year and a half analyzing data and writing a dissertation, i said to myself: "what would be the odds of such an event actually happening, more precisely,
what would be the odds of a series of four events happening to the same person (out of all Leica customers) when purchasing a product with a rate of failure (defect rate) of 0.001%.
Bare with me here:
I considered 4 consecutive purchases of a defective pair of binoculars by mork, who is one of 10,000 Leica customers in USA, and 1 pair of Leica binoculars are defective for every 1000 sold. Now, the numbers may be different, mork may have purchased 3 binoculars, Leica may have fewer or more customers, and fewer than 1 in 1000 binoculars may be sold defective. It would not change the results by much. One may also argue that greater than 1 in 1000 Leica binoculars are sold defective. Even at 1 defective pair for every 100 sold, the the overall odds are unbelievable.

Here is what i did:

I used logistic regression, a statistical procedure commonly used in medical sciences for studies such as “died/survived”, and I used SAS software to randomize and analyze data.

Without going into details, I will tell you that mork’s odds of winning the lottery are greater by a significant margin than his odds of consecutively purchasing 4 defective Leica binoculars.

So, there are only two possibilities:
One: mork should better start buying lottery tickets fast, before he runs out of luck
Two: he is a damn liar.

[JCJ]

I don't understand whats so hard to beleive. If you will notice I have also posted problems with leica that I have had. And yes ,the internal blackining (paint) was almost completely gone from one of the barrels. I have also had 7x42s with similar problems as Mork. Looks more hair spray on my lenses though. I have since parted with them,but I am sure some lucky someone such as one of you that doesn't believe this problem really exist is enjoying them.My problem was solved when I purchased my 10x42els.The view to my eyes are so good I don't care if rats are running around inside of them.


JCJ

[Otto McDiesel]

I don't understand whats so hard to beleive. If you will notice I have also posted problems with leica that I have had.
JCJ

JCJ, the Birdforum is a very bad way to sample binoculars quality. It is so because people who get a bad sample are much more likely to end up on a forum and discuss about it. For every unhappy Leica customer venting their dissatisfaction, there are thousands that just go birding and never come here. Zeiss also had a few samples with focus knob problems, and Swarovski's were reported to rattle. That does not mean anything, you can not make inferences buy summing up information gathered on this forum..

[henry link]

I don't want to get into the believability debate here, but reading through this thread I noticed that Mork, JCJ and an earlier post by PappaMundi which variously describe "freckling", oily droplets and hairspray like deposits on the focusing element and the interior of the objective strongly suggest to me the possibility of evaporated lubricant coating the glass. I've noticed this in a few porros at the eyepiece end where the lubricant is applied to the eyepiece tubes. It's the sort of thing that might not be noticed unless you know exactly what you are looking for and how to see it. A small amount wouldn't matter, but it can continue to build up over time.

[leicaeddy]

Sorry for my poor English coz it is my second langauge.

I apprepriate the brand loyalty of some Leica's die-hard fans and I love Leica too. But I am kind of person alsways fooling around. IMHO, the picturesque view of BN/BR is second to none. I once saw a photo in the newspaper, picturing the Princess of Japan holding a Leica BN for birding. It should say sth about the optical quality of BNs.

I have no idea about the situation in America, however the QC issue is real, at least in Hong Kong. Most of the time, a little lint or speck doesn't hurt. However, to be Leica fans we should be perfectionist,shouldn't we? IMHO, Leica should address the problem seriously, otherwise the (once) faithful supporters will have affairs with other brands sooner or later.

Last year I sent my 10x50 BR back to the dealer because of lint detected on the focusing lenses in both barrels. Maybe I was overreactive and misused the warrantly coz it didn't affect the performance at all. After 8 weeks, when it returned I discovered that there was a tiny spot at the very edge of the left ocular. This time I didn't take further action coz I didn't want to be too obsessive to it.

The CS of the official dealer in H.K. once told me that he had reflected the QC concerns from the long-term customers to the HQ. However the reply from the HQ was sth like,"if the products are all perfect, then your position can be slashed!" Interestingly, there are few, if not none, QC problems of Leica's products in Japan. Supposedly the importer has done an excellent job as the gatekeeper.(Leica binoculars are considerably more expensive than those in HK, though)

For those who are satisfied with their products, congrulation. Just enjoy the view and don't dwell on it.

[mork]

JCJ, the Birdforum is a very bad way to sample binoculars quality. It is so because people who get a bad sample are much more likely to end up on a forum and discuss about it. For every unhappy Leica customer venting their dissatisfaction, there are thousands that just go birding and never come here. Zeiss also had a few samples with focus knob problems, and Swarovski's were reported to rattle. That does not mean anything, you can not make inferences buy summing up information gathered on this forum..
Well what is your problem otto?

[elkcub]

Well what is your problem otto?

Probably people who ask him "Well what is your problem Otto?" I think he's stated the case nicely. 8-P

Elkcub

[bunny]

I just shone a torch down my 8x42BRs and would you believe it, I found a dead frog!

No seriously - there is a speck of lint or summit on the objective lens, but I'm not really bothered... still, it shouldn't happen, considering how much they cost.

[bunny]

Leica quality control seems to vary, but all binos come with the little signed inspection card, so we know who to go after if things aren't right!

[zuiko]

Hi,

I've just gotten a pair of Leica 10x42 Ultravids and the description of 'speckles' in the tubes describes perfectly what I see scattered in my pair in both tubes on the glass surfaces. These speckles are very small and appear almost metallic; like 'glitter' but much smaller.

A strong LED flashlight reveals them when scanned in various directions from the objective end (viewing also from the objective side).

Despite the fact I saw these I accepted this pair since it was the lesser of two evils (two Zeiss FL's had fingerprints on their prisms!). The speckles are unlikely to be of any consequence optically and I have satisfied myself of this.

The speckles are not being imagined.

My pair also had a small amount of similar 'speckled' metallic dust on the rubber of the rim of the objective. It seems like a contaminant dust of some sort. Perhaps it's glass or metal filings from the assembly area? Not sure, but it obviously exists in some Leica binoculars (including mine) and makes little difference to the image quality.

If you are interested in testing yours then a strong LED flashlight shined in through the objective and viewed from that same side should reveal the reflections from glass surfaces if the light is scanned, and you are wearing your reading glasses (near correction if you're above about 40 years of age). Because glass is clear to light, the real problem is focussing one's eyes back and forth within the tube to see them. I suspect many people with presbyopia will fail to see these because they focus at essentially one focal plane and miss the ability to scan the whole depth of the barrels.

I agree it would be nicer without it, but imperfection is in the nature of things.

Regards.

[Colin Key]

Hi Zuiko,

Glad to see (after reading your posts in other threads) that you plumped for the 10x42 Ultravids rather than the Zeiss FL's - I am sure that you will be very pleased with them. I have both Trinovid 10x50's and Ultravid 10x42's - I still prefer the Trinovids but the much lighter weight of the Ultra's is a winner.

As to the main theme of this thread, I spend all my time looking through the ocular (eyepiece) lenses, not the objectives - the view is far better!!

I have only one criticism with the Ultravids - they stink!! Seriously, when I first unpacked them I was struck by the strong smell of the rubber (green) armouring. I reckoned that this would wear off (like in car tyres or rubber-soled shoes) but it hasn't after 18 months. I am often birding in temperatures over 30 celsius and find that sweaty hands make the smell even worse.

Anyone else noticed this?

[Otto McDiesel]

I have only one criticism with the Ultravids - they stink!! Seriously, when I first unpacked them I was struck by the strong smell of the rubber (green) armouring. I reckoned that this would wear off (like in car tyres or rubber-soled shoes) but it hasn't after 18 months. I am often birding in temperatures over 30 celsius and find that sweaty hands make the smell even worse.

Anyone else noticed this?


I have the black Ultravid 10x42, and i do notice the smell of rubber in warm weather. To me the smell is very much like that of a pencil eraser, and it brings fond memories of pencils and childhood. I love them, smell included, there are no speckles in them, and the focuser is as smooth as one could whish for.

[Chris C]

I have only one criticism with the Ultravids - they stink!! Seriously, when I first unpacked them I was struck by the strong smell of the rubber (green) armouring. I reckoned that this would wear off (like in car tyres or rubber-soled shoes) but it hasn't after 18 months. I am often birding in temperatures over 30 celsius and find that sweaty hands make the smell even worse.



I'm curious about the texture of the ultravids. In the samples I've handled (~ 1/2 dozen) there's been a good bit of variation, with some feeling super slick (mostly the green ones) to being pleasantly tacky. Do the green ones tack up over time or the black ones get slick?

Thanks,
Chris C.

[Otto McDiesel]

I'm curious about the texture of the ultravids. In the samples I've handled (~ 1/2 dozen) there's been a good bit of variation, with some feeling super slick (mostly the green ones) to being pleasantly tacky. Do the green ones tack up over time or the black ones get slick?

Thanks,
Chris C.

I have noticed the difference between green and black rubber, as you mention. I can't comment on their aging, but i believe that the two are different kinds of rubber in the first place (for color reasons).

[Colin Key]

Hi all,

Personally I find the smell from my Ultravids a bit off-putting. If they have been kept in their cordura case for any length of time then the smell can be quite nauseating when the case is opened. Also, in use, it is rather difficult to keep the bins away from your nose!!

Whether the green rubber is worse or the same as the black I can't say; hope more Ultravid owners will respond.

The texture of the rubber armouring is also a bit disappointing. When new, mine had a pleasant feel - not quite "sticky" but a nice non-slip feel. After 18 months of daily use the rubber has become quite shiny and slippery. I wipe them often with a damp cloth to clean off the sweaty hand prints, and in the field sometimes give then a rub with a "Wet One" (moist wipes in an airtight pack which probably contain a small amount of ethyl alcohol) but the original finish cannot be regained.

My wife has Swarovski EL's which have a much better rubber armouring (same as in my ATS80HD 'scope) - this does have a very slight texture to it, doesn't smell and looks as as good as the day the bins were bought.

I also think that the "feel" of the Trinovids was better than the Ultravids, although with years of use they also became shiny.

[Chris C]

Hi all,


The texture of the rubber armouring is also a bit disappointing. When new, mine had a pleasant feel - not quite "sticky" but a nice non-slip feel. After 18 months of daily use the rubber has become quite shiny and slippery. I wipe them often with a damp cloth to clean off the sweaty hand prints, and in the field sometimes give then a rub with a "Wet One" (moist wipes in an airtight pack which probably contain a small amount of ethyl alcohol) but the original finish cannot be regained.



Thanks Colin-- have you tried rubbing the rubber with a fine sandpaper (~ 400 grit)? This might be enough to refresh the surface, though I'd try in a very small area first (I was considering this approach for a new pair of green ultravids if I'd gonet that route...). No suggestions for the smell though!

Cheers,
Chris C.

[zuiko]

For the smell you might try a slurry of bicarbonate of soda (sodium bicarbonate) to treat the rubber. Wash off after a few minutes.

To roughen the rubber fine sandpaper would almost certainly make it smoother acting to polish it in effect.

An alternative would be steel wool applied judiciously; or even the synthetic washing up 'green' scrubbers which would also be safe. Maybe hit two birds with one stone by applying the slurry with the scrubber for a wash.

[xenophobe]

IF you're going to do anything like that... I'd first try the green scrub pad, and then some coarse steel wool.. anything finer and it would definitely start to smooth it out. I wouldn't even consider taking sandpaper to them, but if you do, some 400 grit or higher would probably do the job...

[Colin Key]

Thanks for the tips. It sounds a bit drastic to use any sort of abrasive on my beloved Ultravids (must admit it had already crossed my mind). I might try zuiko's suggestion using a very weak solution of sodium bicarb. on a small area.

I am also thinking of contacting Leica directly to see what they say.

It seems to me that the armouring is made from some "old fashioned" type of rubber rather than a modern synthetic-based product. I wonder if the material will decay (perish) with age?

[Otto McDiesel]

It seems to me that the armouring is made from some "old fashioned" type of rubber rather than a modern synthetic-based product. I wonder if the material will decay (perish) with age?

Leica will replace that for you under warranty.

[chartwell99]

Leica will replace that for you under warranty.

I have an early (1994) 7 x 42 Trinovid BA with green armor which had become slick and, in places, developed a white dusty bloom. Leica Service advised that these conditions were not covered under the lifetime warranty, and recommended the judicious use of Armor All, which actually worked, although it does not to be re-applied from time to time.