John, it appears that those "red herring" Swaro focuser problems have now turned into grunions running!
That is, there are just too many complaints and returns to ignore w/out feigning blindness.
As far as Bob's assessment of the issue being over-expectations, for $2K, one has the right to expect smooth turning focusers w/out play and diopters that work properly, that's not "perfection" that "proper working order".
There are two separate issues being thrown into the same basket that do not belong together. One is "proper working order". All focusers should work as they were intended from the factory, period.
Swaro or another company should not expect the bins to be returned for repairs for a recurring problem, as Bob contends. Sightron IIs maybe, but not at this price point.
Sure, you will encounter "lemons" at all price points, that's to be expected. Nothing's perfect that's made by humans, but when you have many complaints about the same problem, be it focusers or diopters or floppy eyecups or high CA or significantly truncated exit pupils or annoying flaring, etc., etc., at the higher price points, it's bad form to ignore these issue and have customers keep sending them in for repairs or sending them back to stores for refunds or selling them and buying a competitor's bin such as the recent example of a Swaro EL owner who, after not getting his bin fixed to his satisfaction, bought an FL.
More examples like that will force Swaro to get it right at the factory. They don't want to lose business, but I suspect they think there's so little competition at the top and the Big Three's bins are so different from each other, that brand loyalty will keep customers coming back despite continuing issues with their bins.
It might be that alphas and other companies are not willing to absorb the cost of making a redesign for a recurring problem, and as Bob implied, it's cheaper for them to get returned for repairs.
That's the difference btwn the long established alpha companies and smaller, new companies such as Zen Ray. When Zen Ray found out about the "veiling glare," they quickly devised a "fix". They didn't have the prestige, 80+ years of tradition, and the perception of quality of a "Made in Germany/Austria" product to rest their laurels. They had to respond quickly and effectively.
For years, people complained about Leica's poor customer service, but those "cries" were ignored. Lots of complaints about the astigmatism in the FLs, but Zeiss maintained it was a design decision intended to sharpen the image in the centerfield. With Swaro, it's the focusers, and not just the ELs, also the SLCs.
If you pay for "the best," you should expect "the best," be that warranties, mechanics, optics, etc.
Buyer preferences is another issue altogether, and Bob touched on this above. Not everybody likes fast focusers or slow focusers or on-the-focuser diopters or open bridge roofs or sees CA and thinks it's worth paying $400-$600 for that upgrade at the top tier. Some prefer low distortion bins and can't see RB. Some are not bothered by a high level of distortion (pincushion), others are.
Those are all personal preferences, and buyers have their pick when it comes to these choices among quality binoculars.
That's different than if everything is in proper working order. For example, Leica's focusers are harder to turn than Zeiss' and Nikon's or even Swaro's (depending on the sample), but that's the way they were designed, so they can turn the same way in really cold weather when other brand's focusers might creep to a crawl. So that's a design choice, not one that everybody likes, but as long as it's consistent, the buyer knows what to expect.
But if some Leica focusers were too loose and others too hard to turn and some with play, that would be a QC issue.
As alluded to earlier, there's also a third layer to this, and that's the user's perceptions, not just preferences.
People might be unaware or able to ignore issues such a "rolling ball", "rolling bowl," CA, small sweet spots, focusers that are harder to turn in one direction than the other, diopters that are too sticky or loose because they can "set and forget", etc.
This third factor confuses things, because two people review the same sample bin and come away with different perceptions of it and have different preferences.
Humans are complex and come in all shapes and sizes, so trying to design a a pair of "one size fits all" binoculars is not just a Herculean task, but an impossible one.
On top of which, binoculars have fast optical systems that make the correction of certain aberrations much harder if not impossible compared to slower optical systems such as telescopes.
So you're always working with a set of compromises, and the buyer chooses the set that best suits his needs and preferences.
As long as those parameters are consistent, he knows what to expect. But when quality control is inconsistent, then he doesn't.
A case in point was my first sample Nikon 8x32 HG. The focuser was not only fast but loose and had a bit of play in it. I read in the BF reviews that the focuser was fast, and not everybody liked it.
My sample's focuser was so loose that I had to keep my finger on it while birding so it didn't accidentally get knocked out of focus by movement of the bin. I figured this was the way it was supposed to be, like it or not.
The image was awesome, so I figured this would be something I'd have to live with, though with my focus accommodation, it was challenging. I had to keep changing the diopter setting after I'd overshot my target.
I read more reviews and found some people saying there was sample variation in 8x32 HG's focusers, some were "faster" than others. I also tried a friend's 8x42 and 10x42 HGs, and found those models focusers weren't as fast though still faster than my porros.
So I sold my first sample 8x32 HG, and after a while took a chance with another. Lo and behold, the focuser turned smoothly and precisely. It was still very fast (1/2 turn from cf to infinity), but I didn't have to keep my finger on it to keep it from accidentally turning nor was there play in the focuser.
I also had a 10x42 HG with an optical element on one side that was not coated.
Both these problems could have been found at the factory with good quality control. Japan is world famous for QC. W. Edwards Deming went to Japan in the 1950s and created a QC revolution that made Japan into a manufacturing marvel within two decades.
I tried or owned six sample HGs. Two of those had QC issues (unfortunately, both were ones that I bought). Maybe I was just unlucky. Or maybe Nikon needed to ramp up its QC on the HGs.
My point is that when you pay good money for any product, you should expect it to arrive in proper working order. If that has become an "over-expectation" today, considering the advances in engineering and production, I think our expectations are too low.
Brock
