• 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.

Buying Chinese products (binoculars) yes or no (3 Viewers)

Let´s sort this out, .....

Just bought a new keyboard for the comp. Had to because even the genuine Apple keyboard (made in ? ...yes!) proved not to be even moderately water-proof.
Now I have a new one which smells like a mix of wang tang instant soup, an old pencil eraser and territorial markings of a mink. So I am wondering what kind of substances are going in my fingers and what effects they might have on bodily functions.

Would have paid twice as much for a more trust-inspiring but there are none. Every single piece of plastic accessory is made in C.

As far as binoculars are concerned I feel much more relaxed and happy with something more expensive from Austria which has been certified to be practically free of substances which are not meant to be parts of my regular physiological cycles.

solventic greetings,
T
 
Hello Sancho and ThoLa,

Chinese products are certainly ubiquitous and often unavoidable. Rather than simply question the nature of the Chinese regime and its questionable human rights policies, suppression of religious groups and dissidents, as well as its cultural imperialism to minorities, I would pose another moral question. Am I engaging in exploitation when I purchase goods manufactured in China? As little as a Chinese worker may get for his labour, it would seem that his lot has improved in the last thirty years, but is that improvement at the expense of the well being of Western workers? Have the crony capitalists and party functionaries received most of the benefit of China's economic growth or is it being spread through much of society? The Chinese may even be working in safer environments than workers in India, considered to be a democracy.

Such conundrums have no simple answers.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :brains:
 
Last edited:
Err, when you purchase Chinese goods, you're not giving 100% of your money to the Chinese government. Think of the all the blue collar labor that goes into that product, regular folk with families earning much less.

Also, a lot of companies design in house and manufacture in China or some other cheap labor country. Just because the Chinese are contracted to build it doesn't mean they are 100% designing it. You are not killing innovation simply by manufacturing overseas. Heck, the great example is the iPhone and most all Apple products. Massive design efforts in the US, produced in China. One of the most reputable and design conscious companies out there. I don't think they're watering down their design and innovation by manufacturing overseas.
 
Original R&D means a huge investment in engineering and retooling and that means increased prices! Then the luster falls off the product? would you be willing to $1200 for a new ZR HD2? Especially when you can find EDG's, EL's, FL's, and ultravids for close to this?

Do you really think the additional price for the alphas is all R&D overhead? Its 2009 and IMO, simple mechanical/optical devices like binos do not require a huge R&D budget. Not compared to a few decades ago. You'd be surprised at how much "R&D" can be done by a freelance engineer at home these days. Innovation doesn't require the resources of a huge corporation. Heck, its usually the companies that have become complacent that usually stop innovating. Look at the American auto industry. Leica's camera division has been playing catch up since the 60s and quite frankly doesn't seem to give a damn.
 
RD isnt in China afaik and the cheap price does not seem to be related to production only since many company's got production in low wage country's. Other factors seem more or as important. Maybe less expenses for advertising and staff etc.

I truly hope so dusty but at the price point that we are at with the likes of ZR and Vortex and such I don't think so.... Original R&D means a huge investment in engineering and retooling and that means increased prices! Then the luster falls off the product? would you be willing to $1200 for a new ZR HD2? Especially when you can find EDG's, EL's, FL's, and ultravids for close to this? I know I wouldn't and it has nothing to do with anything but quality and the history of service provided by the top four...
 
Do you really think the additional price for the alphas is all R&D overhead? Its 2009 and IMO, simple mechanical/optical devices like binos do not require a huge R&D budget. Not compared to a few decades ago. ....

I am inclined to think that the opposite is true.
Today's budgets are likely higher. There is more competition, and it takes far more effort to come up with anything better, let alone truly novel. People also seem to be much more discriminating nowadays.
Decades ago a designer did not need to ponder a host of different materials, it was "brass & glass".
All the advanced coatings we have nowadays need quite a bit of research and know-how. Then they have to be matched to a host of glass types.

Finally the turn-over times have certainly shortened. A few months after a new model has been released people begin to ask the question what we are going to have next!? A model has been around for several years is considered (by some) to be "yesterday's cold potatoes". This attitude puts additional pressure on companies and will increase R&D demans rather than relaxing the strain in these departments.


Out-sourcing engineering work to free-lancers may be a way to cut costs even more but is certainly not a move that ought to be applauded.
Brutal hire&fire was yesterday; nowadays we don't hire in the first place.

T
 
It is pretty much the same in all industry. A quality product needs more R&D. An especially a new product. That said, the new cheap ED binos required some research.
 
Do you really think the additional price for the alphas is all R&D overhead? Its 2009 and IMO, simple mechanical/optical devices like binos do not require a huge R&D budget. Not compared to a few decades ago. You'd be surprised at how much "R&D" can be done by a freelance engineer at home these days. Innovation doesn't require the resources of a huge corporation. Heck, its usually the companies that have become complacent that usually stop innovating. Look at the American auto industry. Leica's camera division has been playing catch up since the 60s and quite frankly doesn't seem to give a damn.
I do think it is due to R&D and constant retooling after short runs and very high quality control which means very high labor.... Your right though innovation does not require a huge corporation but the sport optic divisions of Swaro, Zeiss, Leica, and Nikon are relatively small in comparison to the size of the overall company. And I can guarantee you the big four do their own R&D in house. The American auto industry is just a whole other matter that can't even begin to be sorted out on a forum like this! Just way too many pieces to that puzzle!

RD isnt in China afaik and the cheap price does not seem to be related to production only since many company's got production in low wage country's. Other factors seem more or as important. Maybe less expenses for advertising and staff etc.
Your right... There is not much R&D in China right now but that is my point! If the big four ever decide to pull out of the sport optic game them either we will be left with the level of technology we have now or Chinese firms will be forced to do there own R&D and the price point of all these Chinese bins will rise dramatically!
 
I do think it is due to R&D and constant retooling after short runs and very high quality control which means very high labor....

Ok, but not everyone is in the market for a ultra high QC low yield product. Thats not really efficient. But if you don't manufacture efficiently, then someone else will and sell a lesser product for well, less money. This is still assuming R&D time is similar but you have to account for different wages in different countries, etc, etc.
 
Ok, but not everyone is in the market for a ultra high QC low yield product. Thats not really efficient. But if you don't manufacture efficiently, then someone else will and sell a lesser product for well, less money. This is still assuming R&D time is similar but you have to account for different wages in different countries, etc, etc.
Well I'll leave this thread alone after this... I'm quit sure that everyone here is tired of hearing it from me.... hahaha So I apologize but I will say one last thing and then leave the rest to all of you!
I understand that the high-end bin is really a very small segment of the market but all technology in every field has a trickle down effect... Today's newest greatest high-end thing is tomorrows standard for the masses... Without the high-end market driving technology there will be no growth in any of the lines... So companies have to have the investment in both R&D and the high-end product or the growth of the product dies!
 
Well I'll leave this thread alone after this... I'm quit sure that everyone here is tired of hearing it from me................................

On the contrary, CL, your posts are consistently balanced and highly informative.

One thing I don´t understand is why any optics manufacturers bother "pushing" innovation any further. Surely we are at the limits of what glass and alloys can do with light? The most stringent "geek-tests" show only the most minor and irrelevant differences between the various alphas, and product differentiation is now based more on non-optical features. Surely it would make more sense for the alpha companies to produce "more of the same" at cheaper cost, than continue to "innovate", when 99.99999% of binocular-users (including me) can´t distinguish optically between L/S/Z etc.? I mean, whether one is a HD/ED/EL/SE/ or FL fan, how much "more" binocular does one need? With the comparatively tiny sales-volume that 1,400-euro plus binos enjoy, how do they turn over any profit by tweaking the designs and producing a "new" model, with even tinier sales? I´m not complaining, just musing...and admittedly when the "new" EL´s come out (if ever), I´ll want to know all about them...but I honestly don´t know personally (in the real world) any other birder or bino-user who cares, or who even knows that new EL´s are flagged, or what ZR´s are or where they´re made.
 
Last edited:
On the contrary, CL, your posts are consistently balanced and highly informative.

I subscribe to that.

One thing I don´t understand is why any optics manufacturers bother "pushing" innovation any further. /QUOTE]

Why do race drivers still go in circles, risking their necks, to squeeze another one-hundredth of a second out of a lap? We are certainly at a limit (or are we?) of what rubber tyres and alloys can do to a track.
Must be something deep inside the darkest recesses of human nature itself, I suppose.

Surely we are at the limits of what glass and alloys can do with light? ...

"Surely we are at the limits of what wooden wheels and horses can do with desert sand" Isn't that what they used to say at Tombstone when gun slingers were idling away their days at the OK Corral waiting for the stage-coach? ;)

I mean, whether one is a HD/ED/EL/SE/ or FL fan, how much "more" binocular does one need?

Have a look around this place! You'll find the answer - many answers - in the fierce battles people are having.

Or am I wrong?
T
 
On the contrary, CL, your posts are consistently balanced and highly informative.

One thing I don´t understand is why any optics manufacturers bother "pushing" innovation any further. Surely we are at the limits of what glass and alloys can do with light? The most stringent "geek-tests" show only the most minor and irrelevant differences between the various alphas, and product differentiation is now based more on non-optical features. Surely it would make more sense for the alpha companies to produce "more of the same" at cheaper cost, than continue to "innovate", when 99.99999% of binocular-users (including me) can´t distinguish optically between L/S/Z etc.? I mean, whether one is a HD/ED/EL/SE/ or FL fan, how much "more" binocular does one need? With the comparatively tiny sales-volume that 1,400-euro plus binos enjoy, how do they turn over any profit by tweaking the designs and producing a "new" model, with even tinier sales? I´m not complaining, just musing...and admittedly when the "new" EL´s come out (if ever), I´ll want to know all about them...but I honestly don´t know personally (in the real world) any other birder or bino-user who cares, or who even knows that new EL´s are flagged, or what ZR´s are or where they´re made.
Innovation is in our DNA.
http://blog.modernmechanix.com/mags/PopularScience/6-1942/sound_detectors.jpg
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/20/tech/main4198551.shtml
 
Surely it would make more sense for the alpha companies to produce "more of the same" at cheaper cost...

Like I said, if they don't do this, someone else will do it for them.

On another note, I'm curious as to what others think about "copying" the alphas really means. What features/innovations do the alphas possess that are actually patentable? If any, have they been infringed?
 
Ah, think of the possibility of being able to "morph" into an affordable new binocular technology known as "Brain Wave Binoculars" using "neuromorphic" technology to study "darkmorph" and "lightmorph" raptors. Morph will be heard from the Chinese on this! You bet!;)
Bob
 
Warning! This thread is more than 15 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