• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Dreadful customer service (1 Viewer)

Yes indeed! :t: And not necessarily full-fledged geeks either.;)

Bob

Bob:

Now don't downplay yourself, you do qualify as an interested optics
observer. I do find myself in the same category, but I am not a geek. :eek!:

Leica, many are wondering about anything new coming in binoculars. The Perger prism is yours it seems, so what are you going to do with it?

The only changes I have seen recently are just brightly colored armor on some pockets.

With the new factory, I expect we will see some new things coming.


Jerry
 
David,

One of the burning Leica questions for the optogeeks on this forum is what's next for the Perger prism? Any information you can share?

Henry

Henry, (and others)

David (the OTHER David) can expound and properly answer your post, but I asked him this very question at the Birding Optics Expo (in fact it was me who invited him to join birdforum).

He said there that there were no plans he was aware of to use it in any other products. I may be mistaken but he claimed that he hadn't heard inside the company the RUMOR we heard here about it possibly being a platform for an "Ultravid II". Of course the RUMOR is now that this RUMOR has been dismissed as the factory has decided the weight would be too much. That's the RUMOR anyway... :smoke:
 
Last edited:
Woodcreeper,

Thanks for your refreshing comments!
In post 30 you mention that all of leica's competitors (IMHO that would be Zeiss, Swarovski and Meopta) outsource production to Asia. Could you be more specific in this matter?
It is no secret that Zeiss outsources production to Asia, but I haven't so far heard this from the other two.

It may be so, that leica has the most comprehensive WRITTEN warranty of all four, but in reality Leica is at the end of the line up in this matter.
The change in warranty in Europe (going from 25-30 years to 10 years) was needed because the new EU regulations forced Leica, Zeiss and Swarovski to do so. AFAIK this had nothing to do with the aging of their products.
Personally I would love to see that leica put their service and guarantee level on the same high level as Zeiss and Swarovski since ages do.

Jan

Jan et al.

Something we (Leica) have always done is to take the high road in terms of talking of our competition. As you say, it's no secret that Zeiss has outsourced some of their manufacturing. I suggest you approach each of the other companies directly to find out where each of their products is manufactured.

As far as the warranty/guarantee, Leica guarantees that we will service almost every Leica product under the sun, no matter how old. We have a very good warranty and, in the case of the US market, a fantastic Passport guarantee for the first three years. The reason why I emphasized "written" is because other companies offering "better" unwritten warranties can change them at any point. Our lifetime passport guarantee was written from 1999 - 2008, and we honor every one of those cases to this day despite our change in warranty on all product sold since. I can assure you that the cost of indefinite free service for alpha optics is so astronomical that such guarantees will go the way of the dinosaurs in short order. A prediction, yes, but one based in market analysis.

It's one thing to offer unrealistic guarantees and another to provide excellent customer service. The latter, in my opinion, is much more important. I can tell you first-hand that we at Leica USA have made great progress towards improving the latter. Understand that we have three engineers who are capable of servicing all of the sport optics that come through our repair department, so sometimes we get backed up, but in the end this level of expertise is why Leica is synonymous with excellence and longevity. In some cases in the past we had issues with triaging these cases, but again, over the last eight months we have worked hard to make the changes necessary to regain confidence in our customer service department (and you can see this in some of the recent comment threads on this forum). As I said previously, if you have an issue in North America, please contact me directly and I will work to make sure your issue is dealt with in a timely and satisfactory way: [email protected]. If you have an issue elsewhere, I can help direct you to the best person to deal with it.

Cheers

David
 
David,

One of the burning Leica questions for the optogeeks on this forum is what's next for the Perger prism? Any information you can share?

Henry

Don't I wish I knew! Germany keeps a very tight lid on these things. If and when something new does come out, I'll be just as eager as you to see it. It's funny you ask, though. I was at the Galveston Featherfest last week and had a prospective customer checking out all of the 8x42 binoculars at the dealer table next to me (Eagle Optics). He took out the ELs, the Victory HTs and the Ultravid HDs (I tried to get him to check out the 7x42 Ultravids too, my personal favorites, but he was adamant about 8x). In the end he decided on the Ultravid 8x42 HD. He said he came in wanting to like the Zeiss, but the Ultravids just "felt better" to him. He said they were "more balanced" and he perceived "better contrast and edge definition". I told him I couldn't argue with his choice because I'm obviously biased, but since he was telling me I asked him why he was so committed to wanting the Zeiss upon coming to the show (he HAD a 30-year-old pair of Trinovid 8x40s around his neck!). His reply was interesting: "Well, I guess because they're newer, and a little cheaper* " *only with a show discount on the Zeiss

So my question is, just because it's new- does that make it better? I still use my Trinovid BNs on a regular basis (I suppose if I had the BAs I would upgrade immediately to achieve better close focus). I think the Ultravids hold their own year after year since their release, and the Trinovids, save for the HD element, are essentially the same optically and with a significant savings. I guess my point is that in either case you're buying something you're going to use for many many years, and which will probably outlive you anyway. It's not a phone with the newest high resolution camera, or a car with the latest in hybrid technology- it's 100+ years of craftsmanship distilled down into a rugged instrument meant to bring you closer to nature in any and all conditions. That's not something you need to mess with every year, IMHO.

thanks for letting me rant!

cheers

David
 
Jan et al.

Something we (Leica) have always done is to take the high road in terms of talking of our competition. As you say, it's no secret that Zeiss has outsourced some of their manufacturing. I suggest you approach each of the other companies directly to find out where each of their products is manufactured.

As far as the warranty/guarantee, Leica guarantees that we will service almost every Leica product under the sun, no matter how old. We have a very good warranty and, in the case of the US market, a fantastic Passport guarantee for the first three years. The reason why I emphasized "written" is because other companies offering "better" unwritten warranties can change them at any point. Our lifetime passport guarantee was written from 1999 - 2008, and we honor every one of those cases to this day despite our change in warranty on all product sold since. I can assure you that the cost of indefinite free service for alpha optics is so astronomical that such guarantees will go the way of the dinosaurs in short order. A prediction, yes, but one based in market analysis.

It's one thing to offer unrealistic guarantees and another to provide excellent customer service. The latter, in my opinion, is much more important. I can tell you first-hand that we at Leica USA have made great progress towards improving the latter. Understand that we have three engineers who are capable of servicing all of the sport optics that come through our repair department, so sometimes we get backed up, but in the end this level of expertise is why Leica is synonymous with excellence and longevity. In some cases in the past we had issues with triaging these cases, but again, over the last eight months we have worked hard to make the changes necessary to regain confidence in our customer service department (and you can see this in some of the recent comment threads on this forum). As I said previously, if you have an issue in North America, please contact me directly and I will work to make sure your issue is dealt with in a timely and satisfactory way: [email protected]. If you have an issue elsewhere, I can help direct you to the best person to deal with it.

Cheers

David


David,

Thanks for responding so quick.


In terms of taking the high road......, I didn't put the issue of outsourcing production to the East by the competition of Leica on the table. I was only suprised you even mentioned it, so I assumed you must have knowledge to base this and was curious. Since I know the answer from Swaro (they do not outsource) I don't need to ask them.

Time will tell if the current high standard Swaro/Zeiss service level is unrealistic for the long run.

I do hope we can agree on the issue that it is high time for Leica to launch a successor for the Ultravid HD line. Just bringing new colors in won't do it.

Jan
 
All I can say, in conclusion, with regards to warranty/customer service with Zeiss, Leica, Swaro, Nikon, Meopta, is "watch what they do, not what they say". Lip service don't pay, and Leica's preowned warranty practice in not competitive. Swaro and Meopta neither one outsource BTW.

Thanks for answering some questions.
 
Having recently sold my Trinovid collection, I don't understand the focus on transferable warranties. It was a non-issue for the people who bought my 20 year old Trinovids. There are other brands of binoculars for those who don't feel comfortable buying a used binocular without a transferable warranty. There are more than enough people willing to buy a used Leica as is.
 
It is a little bit disingenuous (only a little, not a huge amount) to claim some high ground for Leica on the basis that no products are outsourced to the far east for manufacturing.

Leica's factory in Portugal, set up all of those decades ago was an example of this. Yes, the factory is Leica's own, and yes it is in Europe, not the Far East. But at the time (1970's?) this was like an American company opening a factory in Mexico. Wasn't it done to take advantage of lower labour pay rates? And isn't this the factor behind out-sourcing to the Far East?

I am absolutely not criticising Leica for this in the slightest way, only raising an eyebrow at the suggestion that Leica would never out-source.

Lee
 
It sure is good to have you around here now David. You've put some things into better perspective and give us hope that Leica is paying attention.

For the record, I'm a long time user and fan and have had amazing customer service from Leica (NJ) the one time in 32 years I needed it.

Cheers
 
It is a little bit disingenuous (only a little, not a huge amount) to claim some high ground for Leica on the basis that no products are outsourced to the far east for manufacturing.

Leica's factory in Portugal, set up all of those decades ago was an example of this. Yes, the factory is Leica's own, and yes it is in Europe, not the Far East. But at the time (1970's?) this was like an American company opening a factory in Mexico. Wasn't it done to take advantage of lower labour pay rates? And isn't this the factor behind out-sourcing to the Far East?

I am absolutely not criticising Leica for this in the slightest way, only raising an eyebrow at the suggestion that Leica would never out-source.

Lee

In 1952 ELCAN (Ernst Leitza CANada) was opened and in 1973 Leitz Portugal followed.

I was told in Solms that ELCAN was opened because Leitz wanted a facility outside the potential future warzone, after the experience from WW I and II.

I think you are right about Portugal;).

Jan
 
Other European optical companies have expanded outside Europe and this has not necessarily been a bad thing as it it has kept them in business and enabled them to sell their products at competitive prices and keep their name before the public. Leica seems to have taken the lead in doing this as far back as 1952; as Jan notes.

For instance, Meopta, a Czech company, in the USA since 1960, opened a factory for manufacturing optical products, including sport optics, in Hauppauge, Long Island, NY in 1997 and since then it has picked up a major American retailer, Cabelas, to sell it's (albeit rebadged) binoculars in the USA.

http://www.meopta.cz/en/history-1404041995.html?page=3

And Kahles, an Austrian company, whose optics were associated in the past with the Swarovski name, and which has a much older European optics history than Swarovski, now has it's limited line of sport optics made in the Far East.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Other European optical companies have expanded outside Europe and this has not necessarily been a bad thing as it it has kept them in business and enabled them to sell their products at competitive prices and keep their name before the public. Leica seems to have taken the lead in doing this as far back as 1952; as Jan notes.

For instance, Meopta, a Czech company, in the USA since 1960, opened a factory for manufacturing optical products, including sport optics, in Hauppauge, Long Island, NY in 1997 and since then it has picked up a major American retailer, Cabelas, to sell it's (albeit rebadged) binoculars in the USA.

http://www.meopta.cz/en/history-1404041995.html?page=3

And Kahles, an Austrian company, whose optics were associated in the past with the Swarovski name, and which has a much older European optics history than Swarovski, now has it's limited line of sport optics made in the Far East.

Bob

Karl Robert Kahles arranged the merge in 1898 between the optical plant of Simon Plössl and the opto-mechanical plant of Karl Fritsch in Wienna, resulting in the Kahles Optik Wienna Austria plant, which became famous for their riflescopes, astronomical scopes and binoculars. In 2000 they outsourced the bin production to Kamakura..
Kahles was bought by Swarovski in 1974 because they needed the knowledge about riflescopes and Kahles was famous for this.
The Kahles scopes are still home (Austrian) made but since 2000 the bin's are assembled in Austria and made in Japan (Kamakura), the same route Zeiss, years later, took with the Conquest.

So technical, yes, Swaro ownes Kahles, but they are an independent company.

Jan
 
Don't I wish I knew! Germany keeps a very tight lid on these things. If and when something new does come out, I'll be just as eager as you to see it. <snip>

So my question is, just because it's new- does that make it better? I still use my Trinovid BNs on a regular basis (I suppose if I had the BAs I would upgrade immediately to achieve better close focus). I think the Ultravids hold their own year after year since their release, and the Trinovids, save for the HD element, are essentially the same optically and with a significant savings. I guess my point is that in either case you're buying something you're going to use for many many years, and which will probably outlive you anyway.

Well, most people who have had the chance to use the new generation of alpha binoculars in the field won't agree with you here. Most people seem to believe the Ultravids *cannot* compete against the latest offerings by Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss (in alphabetical order). I understand you have to say the things you said, namely that the Ultravid "hold their own year after year since their release", but do you really believe this? I don't.

Do you have access to the sales figures of the Ultravids worldwide? I'd hazard a guess that Leica's marketshare has been dropping quite markedly over the past 10 years. Perhaps the Trinovid can reclaim some of the lost ground in the "not quite alpha" segment of the market, but Leica desperately needs a new range of binoculars that *can* compete against the other alpha bins.

The Ultravid can't.

Hermann
 
Well, most people who have had the chance to use the new generation of alpha binoculars in the field won't agree with you here. Most people seem to believe the Ultravids *cannot* compete against the latest offerings by Nikon, Swarovski and Zeiss (in alphabetical order). I understand you have to say the things you said, namely that the Ultravid "hold their own year after year since their release", but do you really believe this? I don't.

Do you have access to the sales figures of the Ultravids worldwide? I'd hazard a guess that Leica's marketshare has been dropping quite markedly over the past 10 years. Perhaps the Trinovid can reclaim some of the lost ground in the "not quite alpha" segment of the market, but Leica desperately needs a new range of binoculars that *can* compete against the other alpha bins.

The Ultravid can't.

Hermann

As I've understood Sport Optics contributes round 10% to the total leica turnover, which makes it between 25 and 35 million euro's.
Investing in a complete new model, like the Perger Geovid, cost millions. The market in rangefinders (dominated by the Austrian version) is only to be found in the hunting scene, so it will not take a genius to understand it will take some time to reach the break even point.
Personally I would have put my money in a new Ultravid design, and even more now I've understood from David that the "NEW" Trinnie is not a new developed model (as I was told) but a stripped non HD Ultravid. I understand now why, because the budget went to the Perger project. What is left over are cosmetic features.

Yes, the Ultravid HD is a absolute compatible binocular in regards to the FL and EL range. But they moved on and the HT and SV are leaving the HD in their shadow.

Where Zeiss left it in the past by leaning back under the impression that succes was forever, Leica, IMHO, made a fatal judgement call and does not has the financial power to launch NEW models, other than cosmetic changes.

Pointing at non excisting service/guarantee issues and outsource strategies from competitors is marketing mambo jambo and does not conceal the fact that the customer who needs a NEW bin in the top segment does not shop at Leica and thats a damn shame, but reality.

Jan
 
I think that the reason customers who need a NEW bin in the top segment do not shop at at Leica is not because their binoculars are clearly inferior to other Alpha brands (because they clearly are not) but because Leica Corporation has not been concerned with protecting the good name of Leica in the new digital age where opinion has became a major controlling factor in what becomes successful in the marketplace and what does not. Zeiss and Nikon have also been too slow to recognize this.

Swarovski understood this years ago.

About 7 years ago or so I submitted an anecdote on this forum about Swarovski repairing an 8x42 SLC binocular that had been chewed up by a Labrador puppy. Swarovski repaired the binocular, putting it back in like new condition, which included new eye cups, body covering and focus wheel for no charge; and they returned it with a leather chew bone enclosed in the packaging for the dog! This was related to me by the owner of the binocular and the dog. He hunts all over North America and I have no doubt he tells this story where ever he goes when the subject of binoculars comes up.

Swarovski still goes out of it's way to promote the positive image of the company with these type of repairs but most purchasers understand the acronym TANSTAAFL and that any costs involved in doing this will have to be reflected in the sales prices of the new binoculars.

Then again, there is nothing really revolutionary about Swarovision technology. Binoculars with flat fields have been around since at least 1997 when Nikon came out with the SE. Later Nikon's LX roof prisms had the same technology. Nikon did not market it to any extent and the publicity it received was often negative because of "rolling ball."

What was revolutionary was how Swarovski marketed their version of it. For example, how about this tour through the mountains of Extremadura, Spain to introduce the EL 50mm binoculars to "experts" which Dale Forbes ran in 2011! I found this link to it in about 3 minutes! Great advertising! This is simply one example. You can find more things like this too.

http://birdingblogs.com/2011/charliemoores/extremadura_el50_swarovision_swarovski

One wonders why Nikon, Zeiss and Leica never do things like this.:smoke:

Bob
 
There are many who think Ultravids are still the best binoculars available, no matter what the sales numbers. Of course a new Leica binocular line would be nice, but most of the optical improvements of all the premium brands have been merely incremental for quite some time. The difference for me is that Leicas are the only binoculars that feel like they were engineered by engineers, and not designed by designers.
 
But surely using an all new technology like the Perger prism in a niche product (bino with rangefinder) is not a decision made by engineers but, much worse, by marketing.

What, please, is TANSTAAFL?
 
I think that the reason customers who need a NEW bin in the top segment do not shop at at Leica is not because their binoculars are clearly inferior to other Alpha brands (because they clearly are not) but because Leica Corporation has not been concerned with protecting the good name of Leica in the new digital age where opinion has became a major controlling factor in what becomes successful in the marketplace and what does not. Zeiss and Nikon have also been too slow to recognize this.

Swarovski understood this years ago.

About 7 years ago or so I submitted an anecdote on this forum about Swarovski repairing an 8x42 SLC binocular that had been chewed up by a Labrador puppy. Swarovski repaired the binocular, putting it back in like new condition, which included new eye cups, body covering and focus wheel for no charge; and they returned it with a leather chew bone enclosed in the packaging for the dog! This was related to me by the owner of the binocular and the dog. He hunts all over North America and I have no doubt he tells this story where ever he goes when the subject of binoculars comes up.

Swarovski still goes out of it's way to promote the positive image of the company with these type of repairs but most purchasers understand the acronym TANSTAAFL and that any costs involved in doing this will have to be reflected in the sales prices of the new binoculars.

Then again, there is nothing really revolutionary about Swarovision technology. Binoculars with flat fields have been around since at least 1997 when Nikon came out with the SE. Later Nikon's LX roof prisms had the same technology. Nikon did not market it to any extent and the publicity it received was often negative because of "rolling ball."

What was revolutionary was how Swarovski marketed their version of it. For example, how about this tour through the mountains of Extremadura, Spain to introduce the EL 50mm binoculars to "experts" which Dale Forbes ran in 2011! I found this link to it in about 3 minutes! Great advertising! This is simply one example. You can find more things like this too.

http://birdingblogs.com/2011/charliemoores/extremadura_el50_swarovision_swarovski

One wonders why Nikon, Zeiss and Leica never do things like this.:smoke:

Bob

Bob,

If I analize what you say correctly, you basicly say that the current dominant position of Swarovski in the optic industry mainly comes from great advertisement and clever marketing rather than offering similar optical products.

If life was only this easy.

And no, they didn't invite me either Bob;)

I agree with you that the Ultravid is a splendid optical product, but it is at the end of it's lifetime. The 8x42 HT cost 1.945,00 and the SLC 1.640,00 euro's and offer a much higher lighttransmission. The HD cost 2.035,00 euro and is NOT superior to the HT and SLC/SV as claimed earlier in this thread. It's only superior in price.
Do your math!

I think much more factors than only smart advertisement/marketing brought Swaro (and will bring Zeiss) where they are now.
Yes, the current service improvement of Leica is a big step forwards and yes, the HD is/was a great instrument. But we need more!

Jan
 
The market in rangefinders (dominated by the Austrian version) is only to be found in the hunting scene

The majority interest in RF bins is certainly in the hunting market but it is not exclusively so. There are other applications in wildlife and habitat management where they are used and seen to be used (including on television programmes) by naturalists and others who do not shoot.
 
But surely using an all new technology like the Perger prism in a niche product (bino with rangefinder) is not a decision made by engineers but, much worse, by marketing.

What, please, is TANSTAAFL?

It's a American expression like: There is nothing like a free lunch.

I had to look it up also at Wiki under acronym Tanstaafl.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top