• 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.

What binoculars have the best build quality? (1 Viewer)

I think James is right: anecdotal evidence is interesting but is likely to be misleading. There was a time when a steady trickle of complaints about Swarovski focusers (including one from me) gave the impression to some (especially Brock) that Swaros were fatally flawed in this respect. This reaction totally ignored the fact that Swaro has been for years, and still is, the biggest selling alpha, and this doesn't happen with fatally flawed binos.

My best answer to Dennis's question is this: on the two biggest nature reserves local to my home town, there are two brands that I commonly see being carried by every member of groups of visitors. I see many brands there, and sometimes might see two people together carrying the same brand, but there are only two brands where I am no longer surprised to see a group of 3-4 people all carrying the same one.

The two brands are Swarovski and Opticron.

This situation has pertained for the last 10 years at least so I am confident that the opinions about these brands that get shared between folks are consistently good and this has gone on for so long I conclude that reliability and therefore build quality is maintained at a consistently high level.

Lee
 
Last edited:
Hi,

it really depends on how you define build quality - some possible categories:

- consistent optical quality (think lemons which just don't give a good view)
- consistent mechanical quality (the usual focuser problems)
- resistance to chemical agents (think rubber armor getting tacky with time - Leica Televid spotters getting blind when exposed to salty air)
- water proofing (think the Leica U-Boat affair)
- resilience to serious abuse (think torture tests like allbinos, the Zeiss conquest torture video or finally the proofing instructions for east german army Zeiss Jena EDF)

But since a rigorous test with the numbers for statistically significant results might be a lot of work or quite expensive if using the last category, we will have to do with anecdotal evidence...

For that I can contribute, that I like my Nikon porros quite a lot so far - optics and mechanics are great and no problems with armor either. This seems to be consistent with the relative lack of compaints in the Nikon subforum.

Joachim
 
Endurance

Bring on your green glass for endurance then a final meeting in the Colosseum,
just kidding.

A.W.
 
Last edited:
Lee. Do you think Zeiss have fallen off in quality over the last few years? There has been quite a few comments about initial quality problems with Zeiss products even their top end stuff like the SF. I wasn't real impressed with the quality of the new Zeiss Victory 8x25. It seemed that the older Zeiss Victory 8x20 and the FL series were higher quality than the newer models like the HT and SF. What do you think?
 
The old Leica Trinovids are the toughest roof prism binoculars I've ever seen.
If they brought them back with the newest glass, I might have to get a pair. |8)|
I like my HTs just fine but they don't compare to the toughness of the old Trinovids.
My old Swarovski porro prisms are extremely well built too.
 
The old Leica Trinovids are the toughest roof prism binoculars I've ever seen.
If they brought them back with the newest glass, I might have to get a pair. |8)|
I like my HTs just fine but they don't compare to the toughness of the old Trinovids.
My old Swarovski porro prisms are extremely well built too.
I wonder if the new Trinovids Leica is supposed to come out with will be as durable as the older Trinovids?

https://us.leica-camera.com/Sport-O...ing/Binoculars/Leica-Trinovid2/Trinovid-Range
 
Dennis,

Good thread starter, I was wondering the same thing myself.

The porro is a NVF 7X40 Zeiss Jena used in the cold war, it has been used by many paramilitaries over the world. A heavy glass providing over 8 degrees FOV and almost indestructible like the old Hensoldt DFs. The Docter 7X40 roof is an upgrade to the original Zeiss jena EDF 7X40 also used in the cold war but with modified lens coatings to take away the Zeiss Green color tinge (It is essentially the same glass). It is a great bino for hunting or general field use in any weather, a bit heavy for some and not for those who do not like IF glass. The field of view is ~130m/1000m similar to my Zeiss Octarem 8X50s.

I wonder if the quality will go down, the Zeiss FL 8X32 I have is constructed of primarily non metal and it is very well thought out glass, but many glasses that are out today are using cheap plastic, and are not put together well as well as those 15 years ago. An example are my Hgs, made in 2002 through 2004, a bit heavy but very well made and have proven the test of time. I still get pleasure using them.
I tend to buy binos that have been around for a period of time (in years not a few months) I just procured a mint EDG 8X32 proven to be a good glass over time and while many purists say the FOV is not large enough ,7.8 degrees is almost 8 so to me the same essentially. The same is with the FL 8X32 a proven bino with no issues and it has been around for a while.

I hope that my Zeiss SF 8X42 issue gets resolved, but as a backup I have a 8X42 EDG coming my way, again a proven glass with an actual track record.

A.W.
 
Lee. Do you think Zeiss have fallen off in quality over the last few years? There has been quite a few comments about initial quality problems with Zeiss products even their top end stuff like the SF. I wasn't real impressed with the quality of the new Zeiss Victory 8x25. It seemed that the older Zeiss Victory 8x20 and the FL series were higher quality than the newer models like the HT and SF. What do you think?

What is absolutely the case is that both HT and SF were launched with 'teething troubles'. And since this didn't happen with FL your comment is correct to this extent. I blame Zeiss for being too anxious to get product to market and since we have seen some reorganisation taking place at Zeiss now, it would suggest that there were financial pressures to launch new product, which hardly excuses it. And how big an embarrassment can you get? Zeiss having to tweak the design of the focus system of a bino named after its 'Smart Focus'!

My opinion is that Zeiss has had two episodes of 'premature bino launch' and I hope they have learned from it.

Those launch problems were sorted out and I don't believe there has been a consistent stream of complaints about them since.

Lee
 
Last edited:
Lee,

Which premature launches are you referring to? just curious, I know more about older Zeiss glass than the new.

A.W.
 
"Plastic" is a general term, and really doesn't necessarily equate with "cheap".

Newer composite materials have some amazing physical properties, and the day of bakelite is long over.

Not the same as metal, obviously, but still good materials.
 
The EDG's are very high quality in my opinion and the HG's were also. Have you ever tried the newer Nikon MHG? I am not sure it is the quality of the older HG's. The Zeiss FL's were composite but I think they are higher quality than the new Zeiss stuff.
 
Lee,

Which premature launches are you referring to? just curious, I know more about older Zeiss glass than the new.

A.W.

Hi Andy
The two I mentioned in the post: HT and SF. HT took months to come to market and SF had some modifications to its focus mechanism to address some 'tight spots' that manifested on some of the grey SFs. The later grey SFs had these mods and the new black version had the improved focus from day one.

Its fair to comment that many SF users never encountered this issue and it appears to have been a particular combination of tolerances that only occurred when full production quantities were being turned out. But all manufacturers should know that making prototypes is one thing, producing in quantities is different.

Lee
 
Last edited:
"Plastic" is a general term, and really doesn't necessarily equate with "cheap".

Newer composite materials have some amazing physical properties, and the day of bakelite is long over.

Not the same as metal, obviously, but still good materials.
I don't think the composite Zeiss FL's were cheap at all. In fact to me it seems the quality has went down since then with the HT's and SF's.
 
"Plastic" is a general term, and really doesn't necessarily equate with "cheap".

Newer composite materials have some amazing physical properties, and the day of bakelite is long over.

Not the same as metal, obviously, but still good materials.

I am sure this is correct. 'Plastics' are excellent engineering materials, providing the right one is chosen.

Lee
 
"Plastic" is a general term, and really doesn't necessarily equate with "cheap".

Newer composite materials have some amazing physical properties, and the day of bakelite is long over.

Not the same as metal, obviously, but still good materials.

True,

Sorry, the term is general. I guess I am used to metal as a material in my bins, and I prefer it, I don't need a glass as light as a feather as some do. The FL is built well with composite materials and just wish others (manufacturers and designers) could follow suit. Perhaps I should have said the way stuff is built today, is... well, not too thought out.

A.W.
 
Dennis,

The MHG 8X42, while some do not like the optics, I find them a very good glass with an exceptional bright FOV and I have put mine through some rough days, it is well built. A gentleman by the last name (Costin?) if I am correct) uses them as a guide in Africa, and he is very pleased with them. As much as some do not like Nikon, they have made some very durable binos over the years.

A.W.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 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