Maven B1.2 or Meopta MeoPro Air? (1 Viewer)

[[email protected]]

The above is correct. There is indeed a retail markup. There has to be, since they are a for-profit company. Maven gets to keep more of that markup since they don't sell to a distributor. Given that Maven's binos are sold at full retail, their profit per unit must be quite high. Good idea from the make money business standpoint, but not so much so for potential customers.

I feel the large corporations like Swarovski and Zeiss have to charge more for their binoculars because they need or want that money in many cases to finance or aid other faltering divisions of the corporation. Swarovski's crystal division is hurting now because of the Chinese and Czech Republic competition, so they could be using the optics division to "help" the crystal division. They increase the price of their binoculars to help the total corporate picture look better. That is one advantage a company like Maven, GPO and Tract Toric have over the big three. They don't have to worry about other possibly weaker performing divisions. They also avoid the as they say the "middle man markup". In theory Maven, GPO and Tract should be able to produce a better quality binocular for less money than the bigger corporations, although they are not going to have the R&D resources of Swarovski or Zeiss but really how much R&D is there in binocular development? If Maven can afford to use better quality glass, for example because of lower production costs and less overhead, they are going to produce a better quality binocular and the consumer is going to get a better value.

 

[Steve C]

Here is how I look at this. For the sake of argument, let’s use the Zeiss Conquest as an example. This does not serve as an attempt at a statement on COE. Zeiss goes to Kamakura in Japan. Evidently they take their own design with them, but it’s remotely conceivable, if highly unlikely, even impossible, they could have purchased a Kamakura design to preserve exclusivity. They negotiate a contract. If this is done in Germany the contract would be existing company policies. Even existing company policies have a cost, so those are not free to Zeiss. Kamakura produces some samples. When they get it done to the satisfaction of the customer, it goes. into production. The ordered number of binoculars are delivered to Zeiss. Zeiss then proceeds to determine precisely how much money the delivered binocular cost them. Zeiss would do the same thing if the Conquest came from in house in Germany. Kamakura has to pay their bills, so does Zeiss, so the process is pretty much the same I’d think. Zeiss gets the bill which figures in the final cost, just as Zeiss has costs to pay their organization to put the binocular on Marketing/Sales desk. Zeiss then decides how much to mark it up for sale to their dealers. I’d bet it is not cost plus 10% either, like a whole lot more. They have bills to pay too, not to mention a reputation to maintain. The dealer gets their Zeiss order and they are priced at a level for the dealer to pay their obligations and hopefully make a little money. If Zeiss decided to forgo their dealer network, they could price the binocular to the direct purchase by the customer. How is that different if we replace Zeiss with Tract, Maven or Vortex? Maven and Tract take the direct to customer approach. We don’t know just what the markup is, but at the very least it seems there is a reasonable for a savings to customer that can be offered.

Lets take the Vortex Razor UHD as a final example here. Like the Maven B2 or the B5 in the larger objective diameters, it is a Kamakura product. It becomes pretty obvious they are essentially the same binocular when they are side by side. Yes, I have had them side by side. The magnification lenses have to be different where magnifications are different and Vortex choose to go with an excruciatingly slow focus rate which won’t find a lot of favor with birders. Coatings might be Vortex’s own prescription. Other the differences are negligible to non existent. Except for the price. I should note the Vortex UHD costs over twice as much as the B2. Or did the UHD suddenly become worth $2,400 just because it says Vortex?

 

[Brink]

Here is how I look at this. For the sake of argument, let’s use the Zeiss Conquest as an example. This does not serve as an attempt at a statement on COE. Zeiss goes to Kamakura in Japan. Evidently they take their own design with them, but it’s remotely conceivable, if highly unlikely, even impossible, they could have purchased a Kamakura design to preserve exclusivity. They negotiate a contract. If this is done in Germany the contract would be existing company policies. Even existing company policies have a cost, so those are not free to Zeiss. Kamakura produces some samples. When they get it done to the satisfaction of the customer, it goes. into production. The ordered number of binoculars are delivered to Zeiss. Zeiss then proceeds to determine precisely how much money the delivered binocular cost them. Zeiss would do the same thing if the Conquest came from in house in Germany. Kamakura has to pay their bills, so does Zeiss, so the process is pretty much the same I’d think. Zeiss gets the bill which figures in the final cost, just as Zeiss has costs to pay their organization to put the binocular on Marketing/Sales desk. Zeiss then decides how much to mark it up for sale to their dealers. I’d bet it is not cost plus 10% either, like a whole lot more. They have bills to pay too, not to mention a reputation to maintain. The dealer gets their Zeiss order and they are priced at a level for the dealer to pay their obligations and hopefully make a little money. If Zeiss decided to forgo their dealer network, they could price the binocular to the direct purchase by the customer. How is that different if we replace Zeiss with Tract, Maven or Vortex? Maven and Tract take the direct to customer approach. We don’t know just what the markup is, but at the very least it seems there is a reasonable for a savings to customer that can be offered.

Lets take the Vortex Razor UHD as a final example here. Like the Maven B2 or the B5 in the larger objective diameters, it is a Kamakura product. It becomes pretty obvious they are essentially the same binocular when they are side by side. Yes, I have had them side by side. The magnification lenses have to be different where magnifications are different and Vortex choose to go with an excruciatingly slow focus rate which won’t find a lot of favor with birders. Coatings might be Vortex’s own prescription. Other the differences are negligible to non existent. Except for the price. I should note the Vortex UHD costs over twice as much as the B2. Or did the UHD suddenly become worth $2,400 just because it says Vortex?

I don't think Zeiss is selling the binoculars to their dealers at "retail" price. If I look up my Nikon Monarch, they cost $980 to buy directly from Nikon. They also cost $980 from the authorized retailers. Similarly, Zeiss probably sells their binoculars to the retailers at "wholesale" pricing and they make less per binocular than Maven direct sales. The $1000 class of Japanese/Kamakura binoculars are all generally about $1000 for x42 glass. Unless the Maven is on a different level entirely (never looked through them so I can't say) I don't think the direct-to-consumer model is saving anybody significant money.

 

[jgraider]

Brink, you need to study up on Tract Optics then. Significantly less money than $1000 but they can hang with any of them at that price....for about $700. They are the real deal.

 

[Steve C]

Brink,

Where did I say Zeiss sells to dealers at retail price? They sell to dealers at dealers price. It is the dealer who sells to the consumer at retail price. Youi get the same retail price if you buy from Zeiss because they can't drive dealers out of doing business with them because you can get it from Zeiss at the same price the dealer paid for it. It does not work that way.

You could just as easily look at your Nikon Monarch as Nikon getting a double dip. Nikon got paid twice, once from the dealer markup, which they don't reduce to you for reasons stated above, and they got paid again from the retail markup.

JG has a point. I do happen to trhink Maven makes a better than $1,000 binocular. Not everyone will agree with that, but I've had mine for 7 years now and after comparing them to anything I can find, I still think that. Personal opinion vary. Marketing is marketing and nobody knows what sort of price the direct to consumers folks are paying and what percentage they mark that up for sale. But when yoiu have to pay twicwe as much for a Vortex UHD it seems the savings potential is pretty obvious.

 

[PhilR.]

Other the differences are negligible to non existent. Except for the price. I should note the Vortex UHD costs over twice as much as the B2. Or did the UHD suddenly become worth $2,400 just because it says Vortex?

The UHD is not worth $2400. They are merely priced that way.

The real-world purchase price of a 50mm UHD is about $1575. Or about $1485 if one is lucky enough to have a military discount. It does not come as a surprise that the Vortex does cost a bit more than their rivals. They have always been that way. Probably why they are so willing to replace broken items with new ones. But the UHD does not cost twice as much as a B2.

 

[Steve C]

The UHD is not worth $2400. They are merely priced that way.

That statement can be made someplace, by somebody, at any place, at any time about any binocular.

 

[Brink]

Brink, you need to study up on Tract Optics then. Significantly less money than $1000 but they can hang with any of them at that price....for about $700. They are the real deal.

I’ve heard of them but never looked into trying them because they focus ccw to infinity. I’ve never seen a Maven or Tract product before so I can’t really evaluate them. The Maven B series usually are discussed as performing in the same class as the conquests, MHG, trinovid, meostar, razor, aurora, etc. Lots of these products are made by the same company as the Maven and are priced the same as them. Maybe they are a notch above and people base their conclusions too much on branding - certainly a common enough occurrence around here.

The tract probably is the real bargain, but they aren’t for me and seemingly not for the OP either.

 

[bins987]

Yes, I offered him $600 at first, but we settled on $650 shipped, which was a great deal. They were just like new like he said.

I came across this thread just now.

Interestingly, Dennis suggested GPO Passion to the same person (op) from whom Dennis had initially bought his GPO on cloudynights.

 

[Paultricounty]

Dennis

I don't intend to be insulting here nor am I trying to start an argument. This is my perspective and it may or may not be useful, but I bet I’m not alone with my view here. I’ve been on BF for a little over 15 years, if memory serves, I think you have been here a little longer than that. In ALL of that time you have never changed. You build up an irresistible urge to start posting about your new binocular. The dam breaks and off to the races we all go. Pretty soon you eventually repeat the process. With the recent turn in this thread I think we are seeing the same thing. Just recently we were all treated to all Dennis all the time on ALL of the threads on BF. Someplace the old adage of enough is enough got ground to dust. You eventually backed off on that approach. Then all of a sudden we get the GPO love. I bet I was not the only one who thought “here we go again!’ I happen to be a fan of free speech and I don’t really begrudge you your posts. It is the sheer volume of them along with a lot the stuff that eventually shows up.

I do not disagree with Ratal’s post above. I have had considerable eye time with the GPO Passion HD and it is a terrific binocular. However ALL of today’s binoculars in that price class are terrific binoculars. The “just blew me away” statement you made with the GPO is simplify the flush of newness with a strong dash of acceptable ergonomics. That coupled with the urge to use colorful adjectives. Nothing in that price class really “blows away” anything else in that price class. Certainly there are things that will separate different specimens for different users, but it really involves the alignment of many different things. Your MO seems to be if you like it we should all like it and you keep hammering away with the same points in multiple posts in multiple threads trying to prove your argument. No problem with the GPO suggestion, but you were starting to overdo it. I have sometimes overdone it in the past, so I recognize the symptom.

So you are saying you have hands on side by side time with both Maven B1.2 and Meopta Air?? Since you bought a GPO can we conclude that side by sides with all three can be included??

Very well said and the best I’ve read about a price point category of binoculars. There all about the same in at the price point give or take optically, one being better in one area and another being a little better in something else. There assuredly preferences based on ergonomics, color rendition and so on.
Thank you

Paul

 

[Upland]

Back to the original topic. I’ve owned both and prefer the Mavens. Build quality of the Mavens, in particular the focus wheel is a bit better. Not that the Meoptas are bad but the Mavens are better. Optically they are both nice but the Mavens have a more immersive view and more sharpness to the edges to my eyes. Having said that I prefer the optics in my HGs to both and that along with the lighter weight is why I still own my HGs and not the others. Unfortunately the HGs come in third on build quality but they aren’t bad in that way. Standard disclaimer. Everybody’s eyes and preferences are different so there’s no substitute for trying them yourself.

 

[dries1]

If one goes for Meopta go for the Meostar, unless weight is an issue.

 

[Upland]

Agreed but weight is always an issue for me since I hike and bike a lot.