New Ultravids coming (1 Viewer)

[Sancho]

Here´s something even stranger. An Austrian friend who lives here (in Ireland) was going home to visit family. I asked her to check out the prices of Swaro kit in Austria, expecting to be able to get a good deal, considering they´re made in Austria. As it turned out, they were more expensive in Austria than in Ireland. And Ireland, my friends, is not cheap....Go figure.

 

[Omid]

I'm certainly not an optical engineer and hopefully someone more knowledgeable about this will comment, but I suspect it involves the prisms used in their design. And of course, Leica would probably use more costly magnesium and titanium in their construction to minimize the weight like they have with the Ultravids.
Cordially,
Bob

Canon and a couple of other major Japanese optics companies own some key pattents for optical image stabilization in binoculars. See, for example, US Pattent 5,672,862 issued to Canon in 1997.

Another problem is that Leica, as opposed to Canon, is not an electronically knowlagable company. It does not have the resources to deveop an IS system of their own so they have to use (and pay for) someone elses technology.

 

[Surveyor]

Another problem is that Leica, as opposed to Canon, is not an electronically knowlagable company.

I think I would disagree a little about their electronic capacity. They are one of the world leaders in GPS equipment, robotic surveying systems linked to GPS (Google for Leica Smart Station), civil and military remote sensing systems. The Geovid and it's military/commercial counter part, the Vector can interface into the Geosystems components. Their application software takes a backseat to no one.

Ron

 

[screaming piha]

Bob, why should an IS Leica have to weigh and cost so much more? Image stabilization has become a pretty routine and effective and lightweight and inexpensive component of digicams now, including pocket digicams, so why are binoc's lagging so far behind?

Digicams stabilise the sensor, not the lens. This is not only a much easier option than stabilising optics but also a little difficult to do with a human.

 

[solentbirder]

I note with dismay that the prices of the new HD Ultravids at Warehouse Express are as follows:
Ultravid 7x42 HD £1280
Ultravid 8x42 HD £1350
Ultravid 10x42 HD £1420
Ultravid 8x50 HD £1350
Ultravid 10x50 HD £1420
Ultravid 12x50 HD £1570

I find this rather depressing. I really hope that those new to birding don't give up in despair thinking the binoculars they can afford must be useless in comparison. What annoys me is that it's entirely possible to produce a world-class waterproof porro-prism binocular for less than half this amount, yet we still don't have anything like this on the market in 7x35, 7x42, 8x42, or 10x50 (Nikon resolutely stick to the non-waterproof 8x32, 10x42 and 12x50 SE and Swarovski show no signs of rejuvenating the Habicht range).
OK, rant over. Seriously though, I think things are getting out of hand (and that's a binocular-addict talking!). If anyone is listening out there from Zeiss, Leica, or Swarovski please, please stop this crazy price escalation and give us some brilliant porros as an alternative to your roofs. Thanks!

 

[ThoLa]

If anyone is listening out there from Zeiss, Leica, or Swarovski please, please stop this crazy price escalation and give us some brilliant porros as an alternative to your roofs. Thanks!

The only thing they would be willing to listen to is sales numbers.
There are simply too many people with enough money.
Things would change if all interested parties for whom purchasing of such an instrument is a substantial investment would not see any shops for a couple of weeks.
4 to 6 weeks of total withdrawal would change the market.
It's hypothetical, of course, as it is impossible to coordinate so many individuals. Manufacturers capitalize on this.

Simple arithmetics of the capitalist world.

Tom

 

[ThoLa]

...
and Swarovski show no signs of rejuvenating the Habicht range).

In which way should they "rejuvenate" them?

It would be extremely nice to have more high-class Porros, of course, so we would have a choice.

Tom

 

[solentbirder]

Hi Tom,
Well the Swarovski 8x30 Habicht is no longer available in the armoured version (at least here in the UK), the 7x40 has a very small field of view for a 7x and they all (7x, 8x, 10x)have limited eye-relief by modern standards. The eye-cups are common source of complaints too. I was just thinking it's a great opportunity to refresh the range with more modern designs since the Habicht name is already well established. I know I'm probably dreaming.
John

 

[richt]

Hi

Apology if this thread already has a link to the "new" Ulatravids but just in case anyone wants a quick look at the potential changes here is a link

http://www.swoptics.co.uk/view.asp?KEY=2852

Regards
RichT

 

[ceasar]

I note with dismay that the prices of the new HD Ultravids at Warehouse Express are as follows:
Ultravid 7x42 HD £1280
Ultravid 8x42 HD £1350
Ultravid 10x42 HD £1420
Ultravid 8x50 HD £1350
Ultravid 10x50 HD £1420
Ultravid 12x50 HD £1570

I find this rather depressing. I really hope that those new to birding don't give up in despair thinking the binoculars they can afford must be useless in comparison. What annoys me is that it's entirely possible to produce a world-class waterproof porro-prism binocular for less than half this amount, yet we still don't have anything like this on the market in 7x35, 7x42, 8x42, or 10x50 (Nikon resolutely stick to the non-waterproof 8x32, 10x42 and 12x50 SE and Swarovski show no signs of rejuvenating the Habicht range).

The Nikon SE Porros as they are now constructed makes it possible to buy a binocular with undeniably first rate optics at a reasonable price as compared to the costs of their equivalent formats sold by the Leiczeiski trio. Adding waterproofing, armor & new modern eyecups would increase their prices several hundred dollars and they would end up competing with Nikon's LX L Premium Roofs. That isn't a good thing for Nikon. I think the SE's are just fine now. The only thing I would change is the eyecup. There still is a market for this type of binocular and I would let well enough alone.

Cordially,
Bob:t:

 

[elkcub]

The Nikon SE Porros as they are now constructed makes it possible to buy a binocular with undeniably first rate optics at a reasonable price as compared to the costs of their equivalent formats sold by the Leiczeiski trio. Adding waterproofing, armor & new modern eyecups would increase their prices several hundred dollars and they would end up competing with Nikon's LX L Premium Roofs. That isn't a good thing for Nikon. I think the SE's are just fine now. The only thing I would change is the eyecup. There still is a market for this type of binocular and I would let well enough alone.

Cordially,
Bob:t:

Actually, I think they could do very well by just improving the eyecups to LX standards, and not competing with them for waterproofing. Considering the increase in sales they could keep the price about the same, and call it the SE E model.

Ed

 

[jacquot]

Hmmm. How about the SE X model....

 

[werewolf]

Digicams stabilise the sensor, not the lens. This is not only a much easier option than stabilising optics but also a little difficult to do with a human.

Ah, so! I thought there must be something..

Fujinon was also making IS binocs, but they don't seem to be going anyplace with them; and Zeiss was making an extremely expensive mechanical IS binoc, tho I've never heard much about it - and Canon doesn't seem to be in any hurrry to advance the technology and quality of their IS binocs - compared with say digicams and which are constantly evolving and improving at high speed. I'd think the military would be interested in better IS binocs.

Can you Europeans order your binocs from the USA, or will they hit you for import duties?

 

[solentbirder]

....Can you Europeans order your binocs from the USA, or will they hit you for import duties?

For the UK there's Import Duty + VAT (17.5%) charged on the product and shipping cost + a 'Customs processing fee' charged by the post office for the arduous task of clearing the package through customs. An additional hidden cost comes from the fact that the warranty may well be invalid too. So much for a free market!

 

[michaelboustead]

For the UK there's Import Duty + VAT (17.5%) charged on the product and shipping cost + a 'Customs processing fee' charged by the post office for the arduous task of clearing the package through customs. An additional hidden cost comes from the fact that the warranty may well be invalid too. So much for a free market!

Do all EU exported goods get exported free of VAT? Seems like US consumers do pretty good. If the bins are purchased over the net, usually even free of sales tax to many US consumers.

Mike

 

[DavidP]

Do all EU exported goods get exported free of VAT? Seems like US consumers do pretty good. If the bins are purchased over the net, usually even free of sales tax to many US consumers.

Mike

If they are exported outside of the EU then there is no sales tax added or at least shouldn't be.

Isn't it true that even though within the US there is no sales tax levied you're supposed to declare it on your state income tax form at the end of the year.

 

[Pinewood]

If they are exported outside of the EU then there is no sales tax added or at least shouldn't be.

Isn't it true that even though within the US there is no sales tax levied you're supposed to declare it on your state income tax form at the end of the year.

David,

Absolutely true! However in New York State, the levy seems to be less than local purchases, perhaps because only the state tax is collected and not the city tax. My last tax return carefully noted such purchases.

I must add that I generally do not go to a local shop to examine an item and then purchase on line. I think this is rude, if not unethical. Three of my four Zeiss binoculars were purchased, locally, as were three of my Leica binoculars. I think that my last two mail order purchase were for hard to find, discontinued binoculars. Another purchase was for a highly recommended glass, which I not examine, before making a mail order purchase, which was the worst binocular purchase I ever made.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :brains:

 

[ThoLa]

Hi Tom,
Well the Swarovski 8x30 Habicht is no longer available in the armoured version (at least here in the UK), the 7x40 has a very small field of view for a 7x and they all (7x, 8x, 10x)have limited eye-relief by modern standards. The eye-cups are common source of complaints too. I was just thinking it's a great opportunity to refresh the range with more modern designs since the Habicht name is already well established. I know I'm probably dreaming.
John

Hi John!

I share your dream.
True. the armoured 8x30 is gone from the catalogue. But I'd be happy with the black version. I am also not concerned about eye-relief (yet). In fact, I like the narrower spacing of the smaller eye-pieces as they nicely shield the user from stray light which can be a real pain with the over-sized eye-cups of many high-end binos.
I am more concerned about the supposed-to-be stiff focussing mechanism but am completely unable to find a dealer who'd be willing to order an inspection copy.
But this discussion on the goshawks (Habichte) ought to move nextdoors, I think.

Cheers, Tom

 

[Robert / Seattle]

So Tom,

As per all the great opportunities listed in posts above ... (Habicht, 8x42BL, Swaro EL) ...

... how are you leaning at this point? And ... Why?

Robert / Seattle

 

[Omid]

Gentlemen,

Let's bring the discussion back to its original topic: Has anyone in the US seen or examined the Ultravid HD line yet? Are there any bird watching or hunting venues that Leica is going to announce these here in US?