Pretty disapointed with double Leica purchase. (1 Viewer)

[Paultricounty]

Yes both optics are brand new and there was no damage. There is zero doubt that they left the factory like this. How could an internal lens get a chip in it, or the hinge material have defects under the finish post assembly?



I've owned a lot of Swarovskis because they have always been the best when comparing them, not a single purchase has ever been because of the brand name. I like having a variety of stuff, hence why I gave this garbage a try. I've owned all levels of Zeiss, I've owned Leica, I've owned Meopta, I've owned Nikon, and I still own other brands of glass too. Swarovski makes the best binoculars and spotters out there, PERIOD. That said, I can't always justify the price tag, which is why it's not the only brand of bino's I own.

That’s exactly the way many feel about Leica after trying and having the others. And as far as Swarovski making the best binoculars and spotting scopes , that’s your opinion, PERIOD.

I get that a lot of people are going to defend their favorite brand no matter what, but there's a lot of consumers out there that appreciate hearing the bad too so that they can be aware of the worst case scenario when spending thousands of dollars on two metal tubes with glass lenses in them. If you've got an issue with someone reporting a bad experience so others can be aware then perhaps you should stay off the internet and take up knitting as a hobby instead.

You must be mixing me up with some snowflake. And yes there are going to be a lot of people defending their favorite brand, just like you with Swarovski. Regardless if the armor is peeling off of them after a few years use. Maybe if it bothers you that some people are defending the quality of one of the best built binoculars made, maybe you should stay off the internet.

 

[Paultricounty]

Anyone who criticizes any glass here gets shrieked at by its adherents.

It does seem like, in spite of the overall excellence of Leitz optics, that there are reasons why their binoculars trail along in #3 position.

They don’t trail in position #3 behind the others for many. They might trail on some stat , but not in image quality and certainly not in build quality.

 

[Redneckbmxer24]

Both pair of binos are boxed up and headed back to the dealer. He said such blatant QC issues are few but they happen, so I’m not the only one apparently.

FWIW, he had no idea what I was talking about when I mentioned the Swarovski armor “issue” when I was inquiring about the warranty on EL Range TA’s and brought that up and told him I’d forward him links to the threads on here.

I’m going to hold off on ordering any replacements for now until I give it more consideration but I may consider another pair of Geovid R’s and having him open and inspect them thoroughly before shipping. For the price tag and being LRF binos with stellar laser performance (I hit a house over 2100yd repeatedly) the glass quality in the usable percentage of the FOV is quite good. I absolutely will not try another pair of UVHD+’s though as they’re simply not worth the price point, there’s better stuff for less money and way better stuff for the same money.

 

[skahde]

You can go birding with a cheap, chinese glass or a vintage one. With a better bino things get easier and more enjoyable. The joy of using a Leica-bino is not in its sharpness over the field. You have to use it over several hours to really appreciate it. No glass is perfect and I'm not talking about failures in manufacturing. No human made thing is, they are just different. And the hunt for perfection may become addictive, with binos as well as rifles (I prefer pistols, I'm better in competitive shooting with pistols) and many other things.

 

[tenex]

First of all, if you go back and actually read that paragraph you will see that it's an estimate of both units combined and that I stated that the UVHD+ are the better of the two.

Well, I can see how you thought that's what it was, but you didn't say it clearly enough to convey that, and actually you said the UV was only slightly better.

The UV hinge cover may be just plastic, and defects can occur on other $2k bins too. This one on SLC 56s (NIB here) is actually quite common, I suppose it must happen during factory assembly. Once you get a satisfactory example and spend some time with it, you'll see where the money is going.