All Binocular Manufacturers (1 Viewer)

james holdsworth · Mar 7, 2016

The recent Maven discussions got me thinking - just how many bonafide binocular makers are left in the world these days? We have a huge increase in selection compared to 20 years ago, but has anything really changed? Most of these new bins tend to be rebadged Kamakuras, with multiple ''companies'' licensing the same binoc. and then rebadging.

So, if we consider a bonafide binocular manufacturer as one that designs their own optics and designs and assembles the chassis / optics - at least for some models in their range as some have gone to outsourcing cheaper models - I come up with the following...and let's stick with current only, not former....

Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Kamakura, Canon, Kowa, Meopta, Pentax.

I'm not even sure about the last three. What about Steiner, Optolyth, Docter, etc. Any more to add or subtract from that list?

etudiant · Mar 7, 2016

james holdsworth said:
The recent Maven discussions got me thinking - just how many bonafide binocular makers are left in the world these days? We have a huge increase in selection compared to 20 years ago, but has anything really changed? Most of these new bins tend to be rebadged Kamakuras, with multiple ''companies'' licensing the same binoc. and then rebadging.

So, if we consider a bonafide binocular manufacturer as one that designs their own optics and designs and assembles the chassis / optics - at least for some models in their range as some have gone to outsourcing cheaper models - I come up with the following...and let's stick with current only, not former....

Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Kamakura, Canon, Kowa, Meopta, Pentax.

I'm not even sure about the last three. What about Steiner, Optolyth, Docter, etc. Any more to add or subtract from that list?

Did not Holger Merlitz post details about the Chinese binocular manufacturers that produce the bulk of glasses sold today?

Bencw · Mar 7, 2016

james holdsworth said:
The recent Maven discussions got me thinking - just how many bonafide binocular makers are left in the world these days? We have a huge increase in selection compared to 20 years ago, but has anything really changed? Most of these new bins tend to be rebadged Kamakuras, with multiple ''companies'' licensing the same binoc. and then rebadging.

So, if we consider a bonafide binocular manufacturer as one that designs their own optics and designs and assembles the chassis / optics - at least for some models in their range as some have gone to outsourcing cheaper models - I come up with the following...and let's stick with current only, not former....

Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Kamakura, Canon, Kowa, Meopta, Pentax.

I'm not even sure about the last three. What about Steiner, Optolyth, Docter, etc. Any more to add or subtract from that list?

Pretty sure Steiner make their own, there is a clip online showing how they make them, start to finish. Are Docter still in business?

WJC · Mar 7, 2016

Bencw said:
Pretty sure Steiner make their own, there is a clip online showing how they make them, start to finish. Are Docter still in business?

Hi Ben:

I’m afraid I’m going to have to rain on that parade. Even when they were imported by the Harms’ (Pioneer Marketing), many Steiners were coming from Asia. In 2008, Beretta Holding, via Burris Optics—also owned by Beretta—bought the rights and it would seem that even more are now coming from China. It is pretty safe to say that the companies that are actually manufacturing binos these days are unknown to most observers, and that they want it that way. :cat:

While we go ooh and aah over some binos, that market is just “gum on the shoe” to the big names and most just buy and rebrand.

Bill

Gijs van Ginkel · Mar 7, 2016

James, post 1,
I have visited Hartmann, Hertel und Reusch, Steiner, Optolyth, Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss and at the time of my visit they were all making binoculars. Meopta surely does, it has even a similar position as Kamakura, making parts or even complete instruments for other companies. Then there is of course Minox, but I think they also outsource the construction of their binoculars and telescopes. And as Bill Cook has already explained in previous posts many, many brands have their instruments made in Japan or China.
Gijs van Ginkel

perterra · Mar 7, 2016

I wasnt sure Nikon made binoculars any longer. All I have looked at lately were Chinese, so I guess Nikon has a Chinese facility, or do they use some one else.

Seriously, why would a company do a start up to mfg and produce when they can have it made cheaper by someone else with full warranty?

NDhunter · Mar 7, 2016

perterra said:
I wasnt sure Nikon made binoculars any longer. All I have looked at lately were Chinese, so I guess Nikon has a Chinese facility, or do they use some one else.

Seriously, why would a company do a start up to mfg and produce when they can have it made cheaper by someone else with full warranty?

You make a good point, and Nikon does make binoculars in Japan, their
EDG, Premier and EII, and some astro and marine models are made there.

One thing I have learned is that Nikon does have some factories in China,
and they have some stricter quality control than some others you here about.
I have had many Nikon binoculars, and one thing is I find is a nice
quality of construction, and very smooth focusers, not a slacker in the
ones I've tried.

A focuser is important to me, and if I have one with issues it really irritates.
It is one feature on my top 5 needs in a binocular.

Jerry

denco@comcast.n · Mar 7, 2016

james holdsworth said:
The recent Maven discussions got me thinking - just how many bonafide binocular makers are left in the world these days? We have a huge increase in selection compared to 20 years ago, but has anything really changed? Most of these new bins tend to be rebadged Kamakuras, with multiple ''companies'' licensing the same binoc. and then rebadging.

So, if we consider a bonafide binocular manufacturer as one that designs their own optics and designs and assembles the chassis / optics - at least for some models in their range as some have gone to outsourcing cheaper models - I come up with the following...and let's stick with current only, not former....

Swarovski, Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Kamakura, Canon, Kowa, Meopta, Pentax.

I'm not even sure about the last three. What about Steiner, Optolyth, Docter, etc. Any more to add or subtract from that list?

Kamakura makes them all.

ceasar · Mar 8, 2016

Pentax has some of its binoculars made in the Philippines. And the near legendary Sightron Blue Sky II is made there. Probably other brands too.

Bob

james holdsworth · Mar 8, 2016

perterra said:
I wasnt sure Nikon made binoculars any longer. All I have looked at lately were Chinese, so I guess Nikon has a Chinese facility, or do they use some one else.

Seriously, why would a company do a start up to mfg and produce when they can have it made cheaper by someone else with full warranty?

Exactly. And exactly why we have more and more binoculars produced by fewer and fewer OEMs.

I just hope the trend isn't the death nell for the true high quality, innovative optic manufacturer. Too expensive or not, it's the innovation that drives the industry - every industry needs halo products to aspire to.

perterra · Mar 8, 2016

james holdsworth said:
Exactly. And exactly why we have more and more binoculars produced by fewer and fewer OEMs.

I just hope the trend isn't the death nell for the true high quality, innovative optic manufacturer. Too expensive or not, it's the innovation that drives the industry - every industry needs halo products to aspire to.

Actually every industry needs to be profitable, sport optics are such a small portion of the pie in profitability I'm surprised they still exist at all. It's a dying industry, electrics will be the way of the future, and with it, you will see new brands pop up.

OPTIC_NUT · Mar 8, 2016

Interesting......Fujinon isn't invited to the party somehow.
Most of their gear is Japanese throughout.

peatmoss · Mar 8, 2016

James, I understand the points you made in the other thread. I suppose we live in a world where the resellers greatly outnumber the OEMs. My only beef with the Maven marketing approach is their insistence on name-dropping the OEM any chance they get. I find it off-putting. About your list....

Kamakura's been around since the 1950s and they're still alive and kicking, but who knows if every bin attributed to them is actually theirs. Other old-guard Japanese OEMs are still around too. Consider the venerable old Porro house Hiyoshi which makes Audubons, Forestas, and that classically styled model that has been sold as Ultima/Geoma/Ultraview, depending on the reseller. Hiyoshi also lists Nikon as a "trade partner" so they probably make stuff for Nikon too. Here is their website, http://hiyoshi-opt.com/ .

Among the Chinese, people often mention United Optics, based in Kunming, http://www.united-optics.com/ . Other Chinese companies I've heard of include Bosma and Vision King.

About Meopta, the Meostars seem to be their own product. The designs are very distinct and don't suggest anything else on the market. On the other hand, their lower line, the Meopro, may have some origins in Asia. I say this because the original Meopro (non-HD) line bore a strong resemblance to products offered by Vortex and Viking. With these, I think it's likely that the Asian parts were shipped to the US and assembled locally, so as to qualify for the labeling "Assembled in the USA". As for the current Meopro HD, at this time it seems like a unique line, but who is to say that a similar Asian model is not in the pipeline from another company?

Regarding Pentax, when Hoya owned the company some people speculated that the binoculars were produced within the Hoya group of companies (which also included Kenko). But now Pentax is owned by Ricoh, so it seems pretty unlikely that it is an in-house product.

Gijs van Ginkel · Mar 8, 2016

For regular visitors of, for example the Photokina, it is clear that there are quite a few binocular producers from different parts of the world.
Gijs van Ginkel

Bencw · Mar 8, 2016

Bill, thanks for the info, I didn't know that. It's getting difficult to know where anything is made these days.

Steve C · Mar 8, 2016

One manufacturer that comes to mind that has their own glass and control over the whole process from glass to the box is Kruger.

Swarovski and Zeiss buy glass from Schott, O'Hara, maybe others. As far as I know they don't make their own. The heart of the binocular, the glass, is not from either Swarovski or Zeiss. So they assemble/manufacture a Swarovski or Zeiss branded binocular from glass that is not theirs...just to their spec. James has already defined Leupold as nothing more than a re-brander of stuff. This may come as a shock, but just like Swarovski and Zeiss, Leupold has their own assembly/manufacturing facility. Just like the “Big Boys” they have design engineers (many holders or developers of US patents). The have optical labs too, just like the “Big Boys”. They have whole teams of product development people too, just like the “Big Boys”. Just like the “Big Boys” they use glass they get from outside sources, which they can assemble/manufacture in their very own on their own premises plant. Just like Nikon they have the ability to contract with various OEM's to procure outside their own facility products which they sell...under their own name. But hey Leupold is just a re-brander. Everybody knows they aren't one of the “Big Boys”.

I'm not saying they should be one of the “Big Boys”. I am simply wondering about the distinction. Where is the process much or any different? Leave quality aside, where is the...process...of getting certain Leupold stuff in a Leupold box a heck of a lot different from Zeiss or Swarovski? Or Nikon?

Leupold has service/warranty second to nobody to add to the dimension.

Now are there re-branders? Sure there are, but there is sure a continuum of “buy two dozen off the shelf” to contracting with a firm like Kamakura for a quality glass.

WJC · Mar 8, 2016

perterra said:
Actually every industry needs to be profitable, sport optics are such a small portion of the pie in profitability I'm surprised they still exist at all. It's a dying industry, electrics will be the way of the future, and with it, you will see new brands pop up.

Heck, even as we speak, West Texans are being made in Rhode Island and Puerto Rico. :t:

Bill

WJC · Mar 8, 2016

Bencw said:
Bill, thanks for the info, I didn't know that. It's getting difficult to know where anything is made these days.

Ben:

If I were as gentlemanly as you, I wouldn't know that, either. It's a trade-off, with YOU getting the better half! :cat:

Bill

jan van daalen · Mar 8, 2016

Steve C said:
One manufacturer that comes to mind that has their own glass and control over the whole process from glass to the box is Kruger.

Swarovski and Zeiss buy glass from Schott, O'Hara, maybe others. As far as I know they don't make their own. The heart of the binocular, the glass, is not from either Swarovski or Zeiss. So they assemble/manufacture a Swarovski or Zeiss branded binocular from glass that is not theirs...just to their spec. James has already defined Leupold as nothing more than a re-brander of stuff. This may come as a shock, but just like Swarovski and Zeiss, Leupold has their own assembly/manufacturing facility. Just like the “Big Boys” they have design engineers (many holders or developers of US patents). The have optical labs too, just like the “Big Boys”. They have whole teams of product development people too, just like the “Big Boys”. Just like the “Big Boys” they use glass they get from outside sources, which they can assemble/manufacture in their very own on their own premises plant. Just like Nikon they have the ability to contract with various OEM's to procure outside their own facility products which they sell...under their own name. But hey Leupold is just a re-brander. Everybody knows they aren't one of the “Big Boys”.

I'm not saying they should be one of the “Big Boys”. I am simply wondering about the distinction. Where is the process much or any different? Leave quality aside, where is the...process...of getting certain Leupold stuff in a Leupold box a heck of a lot different from Zeiss or Swarovski? Or Nikon?

Leupold has service/warranty second to nobody to add to the dimension.

Now are there re-branders? Sure there are, but there is sure a continuum of “buy two dozen off the shelf” to contracting with a firm like Kamakura for a quality glass.

Mmmmmmmm....

The R&D budget of Swarovski is higher then that of Zeiss and Leica together.
I have absolutely no clue where Leupold stands in this matter but my guess is.........only Meopta comes close!

I have really never heard of Kruger and don't know a product of them, but even Meopta, who is by far one of the biggest in production scale, doesn't have their own glass industry.

The R&D of the Far Eastern OEM's is mostly paid by the different "brands", so taking everything in consideration I would say that the distinction of a A-brand finds it roots in a much more sophisticated R&D compared to let's say Leupold and that's what we find back in the product, which makes them a big boy.

Jan

WJC · Mar 8, 2016

jan van daalen said:
Mmmmmmmm....

The R&D budget of Swarovski is higher then that of Zeiss and Leica together.
I have absolutely no clue where Leupold stands in this matter but my guess is.........only Meopta comes close!

I have really never heard of Kruger and don't know a product of them, but even Meopta, who is by far one of the biggest in production scale, doesn't have their own glass industry.

The R&D of the Far Eastern OEM's is mostly paid by the different "brands", so taking everything in consideration I would say that the distinction of a A-brand finds it roots in a much more sophisticated R&D compared to let's say Leupold and that's what we find back in the product, which makes them a big boy.

Jan

Jan:

You forgot the part about if your name is not Swarovski you don't get a seat on the board, or has that changed? :cat:

From the Etherial Book:

*****GLASSMAKERS (a bit more on prisms)

Despite conjecture, optical instrument makers rarely produce their own glass, or even lenses. There are glassmakers, optical element makers, opticians, and instruments makers. They work together for a common financial interest, but each firm has its own specialties and infrastructure.

Making high quality optical glass commercially is a massive undertaking. The old Corning location in New York covered 26 acres, with 277,000 square feet of warehouse space, and 30,000 square feet for offices. This is not to say instrument companies don’t have an interest in some glass factories. It just means that when a company needs a few binocular objectives or prisms, they don’t call two doors down and have a cart rushed right over.

Today, Corning, founded in 1851, has about 35,000 employees worldwide, as does Ohara (circa 1935) and Hoya (1941). Corning was responsible for some important firsts—from making the glass for Edison’s first light bulb, through making early headlamps, to casting the great mirror destined for the Hale Telescope on Palomar Mountain.

Perhaps the size of these modern concerns can better be brought into perspective by saying that Ohara alone produces over a half million tons of optical glass each month.

Finally, Schott AG, founded in Jena, Germany in 1884, is the oldest of the European firms and has the fewest employees. Even so, its shadow falls on 35 countries.

Bill

All Binocular Manufacturers (1 Viewer)

Consulting Biologist

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Experienced observer

Well-known member

Well-known member

Consulting Biologist

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread