Jerky Focus Wheels (similar threads combined) (1 Viewer)

[elkcub]

All,

As I promised Paul Godolphin I am posting all the pictures he sent me on personal email. Since there are 10 pics, and they take much space, I've organized them into two .pdf files that you can download. The zoom feature on Acrobat does a good job with the detail.

I'll provide my own comments on a subsequent post concerning the 10x25 SLC, because I own one. I don't have an EL, so I won't comment about the "hole."

Blue skies,
Ed

 

[griffin]

The Swarovski ELs where on my short list to replace a pair of Ziess I lost a while back. The list has just got a company (at least) shorter thanks in the main to your thread.

That's right , don't listen to the guy that dropped his Swaros down a mountain and they lived. Don't listen to someone who has practically drowned his EL's over the last three years with no fogging. The same man was loaned an identical pair of EL's by Swaro UK while his own got sent back to Austria to remove lens scratches ( under warranty ) all in under 3 weeks !

Do listen to someone who drives "several thousand" miles to photograph a "slot" in the bridge of EL's just to prove it exists, and who doesn't seem happy with anything !

In the words of Del Boy, " You know it makes sense" .........

Bit of advice - put the Swaros back on your list.

Linz

 

[griffin]

Is it just me or is this all getting really silly now ? ! ( not the "binotytis" gags lads - I too must hide the 'plastic' ! )

 

[Sancho]

Is it just me or is this all getting really silly now ? ! ( not the "binotytis" gags lads - I too must hide the 'plastic' ! )

Let´s all go over to the IBWO thread and see how the battle is progressing. It might be a bit of light relief!

 

[Sancho]

The same man was loaned an identical pair of EL's by Swaro UK while his own got sent back to Austria to remove lens scratches ( under warranty ) all in under 3 weeks !

Linz

I´m not suggesting anyone ought to agree with me, and no, I don´t work for any bins manufacturer. But as a "thank you" to Swarovski, who serviced my scope for nothing, and carried out lots of extra work on it that wasn´t even necessary, I´d strongly recommend that if you want to buy a quality product with fantastic aftersales care (in an era when most companies encourage us to discard and upgrade), you seriously consider Swarovski bins. They do seem deeply concerned about looking after their customers, even when there isn´t another buck to be made out of them. For other reasons of my own personal preference and usage, I sold my Swarovski scope and bought a Nikon ED. And no, I don´t like all Swaro products- I chose Leica compacts over the Swarovski version, I can´t understand the whole crystal-encrusted compact range they do, and as for their crystalware....I just hate it. But I like their bins. And that´s my choice. I reiterate - I don´t get paid to endorse Swarovski EL´s. I wish I did, we could alll use a buck. But the bottom line is, no matter what you pay for your bins, from whatever manufacturer, none of us are fools, and no-one forces us to buy them. We choose to pay money for the products that appeal to us. "Imperfections" and all. (Apologies for nudging this thread off towards Economic Philosophy, but I´m not really sure where it was going anyway).

 

[griffin]

Let´s all go over to the IBWO thread and see how the battle is progressing. It might be a bit of light relief!

You go over to the IBWO thread Sancho, me I am off to check if the badge has been put on "squint" on my EL's :'D


Linz

 

[Bubbs]

I was thinking of replacing my ancient Zeiss 10's Dialy'ts for a pair of 8x or 10x
Swaro's....but after reading this thread I've changed my mind. The guy did me a favour.

 

[michaelboustead]

Let´s all go over to the IBWO thread and see how the battle is progressing. It might be a bit of light relief!

PLEASE, PLEASE NOT THE IBWO THREAD, there lies madness.

Mike

 

[Sancho]

I was thinking of replacing my ancient Zeiss 10's Dialy'ts for a pair of 8x or 10x
Swaro's....but after reading this thread I've changed my mind. The guy did me a favour.

Great! He helped you make a choice, and you´re happy with it! :t:

 

[Sancho]

PLEASE, PLEASE NOT THE IBWO THREAD, there lies madness.

Mike

Aw, come on, Mike and Linz, it´ll be great fun...you go in first, I´ll follow...I promise.....anyway there seems to be a lull in hostilities at the moment, I think they´re evacuating the wounded.

 

[matt green]

Some should try using a genuinely crap pair of bins for a year or so?

While not being on the ''breadline'' I had to scrape the barrel for months to get my secondhand Leica's, they're fantastic and an absolute privilege to own and use compared to my old porros.

Matt

 

[griffin]

I was thinking of replacing my ancient Zeiss 10's Dialy'ts for a pair of 8x or 10x
Swaro's....but after reading this thread I've changed my mind. The guy did me a favour.

Sorry for repeat quote from the Swaro thread along the same lines, but given your comments I think it is appropriate.

Linz wrote:

"That's right , don't listen to the guy that dropped his Swaros down a mountain and they lived. Don't listen to someone who has practically drowned his EL's over the last three years with no fogging. The same man was loaned an identical pair of EL's by Swaro UK while his own got sent back to Austria to remove lens scratches ( under warranty ) all in under 3 weeks !

Do listen to someone who drives "several thousand" miles to photograph a "slot" in the bridge of EL's just to prove it exists, and who doesn't seem happy with anything !

In the words of Del Boy, " You know it makes sense" .........

Bit of advice - put the Swaros back on your list."

Linz

 

[griffin]

Some should try using a genuinely crap pair of bins for a year or so?

While not being on the ''breadline'' I had to scrape the barrel for months to get my secondhand Leica's, they're fantastic and an absolute privilege to own and use compared to my old porros.

Matt

Spoken like someone who knows how to appreciate good things in life ! :clap:


Linz

 

[elkcub]

Hi Paul,

These are the 7 complaints you made about the physical aspects of your 10x25 SLC. My comments are based on having owned the earlier model with roll-down eyecups since 1993, — and still using it on a daily basis:

1. The eyelens masks are mis-aligned and look "goofy."
Yes, they do look goofy, but that's how they are. It's normal. I believe the offset results from the collimation process, but I could be mistaken. Mine are also that way.

2.. The focus is imbalanced and needs a permanent offset.
For you it may. The permanent offset is because your eyes require a diopter adjustment, which is why the adjustment is provided.

3. The eyecup widths are uneven.
I don't see that in the photos. I also have an 8x20 SLC with the same retractable eyecups, and the width is deceptive due to the bevels and viewing angle.

4. The strap lugs chafe the cord and the bins fall off.
Valid complaint. Mine are fine on either the 10x25 or 8x20. If yours are tight the company should enlarge the opening and file down any rough edges.

5. "Made in Austria" badge is off-center (or rotated?)
It doesn't look off center to me, and it rotates with the focusing wheel.

6. The right pivot is loose (or protrudes?)
The pivot can be tightened by the company if the tube rotates too freely. Neither of mine have had the slightest problem over many years.

7. No service facilities in the UK, and bins must be sent to Austria for repair. "So much for Genuine UK Imports Warranty."
I don't know what to say here. Swovski Optik North America (SONA) provides superb service in the US. Back in the early 1990s some problems required a trip to Austria. For the past several years eveything seems to be done in the USA — with a long trip to the East Coast.

I hope you will not feel hurt or offended, but I can't actually see much to complain about based on these pictures. If, as you said on another thread, the view was inferior to even a cheap Chinese toy (I'm paraphrasing), then by all means the bins should have been sent back to Swarovski for repairs, wherever that is done. The view is what counts. You might also have have asked for them to service the pivots and strap lugs, because of the danger that poses. To be honest, however, the other complaints are highly debatable or dubious, and if you persisted I'm not surprised that they would have become unresponsive.

These are only my candid opinions, and I'm sorry that you had so much grief over the thing. Do keep in mind, however, that there are two sides to every story and Swarovski is in no position to defend itself on BF.

Blue skies,
Ed

 

[griffin]

Do keep in mind, however, that there are two sides to every story and Swarovski is in no position to defend itself on BF.

Yeah, but plenty of their satisfied and happy customers are ! :bounce:

Well said Ed, very diplomatic.

Linz

 

[Pileatus]

Paul,

The hole in the Swaros serves two purposes: (1) an access port so they can pump nitrogen in and (2) it serves as a drain to let water out. Since nitrogen is slightly lighter than air all the user has to do is keep the hole pointed downward. With the hole pointed downward, nitrogen stays in and excess water drains out. It's really a very elegant design.

Interestingly, Leica's notchy focus wheel also serves two purposes: it keeps hunters happy and irritates birders. Seriously, my Ultravid 7X42 wheel is a bit resistant and I'm not sending it back to Leica. There's no way I'd risk losing the perfect alignment I enjoy whenever I use it. I'm upset that I cannot find the combination nitrogen fill/drain hole on my Ultravid; maybe Swaro holds a patent on it. One can only speculate and keep the darn thing as dry as possible.

Hope this helps!

John

 

[elkcub]

Very cute, John, but let's get real — lest someone actually believe your comments. First, the "hole" is a slot in the bridge assembly forward of the combined focus/diopter wheel. No doubt it's related to the gearing mechanism, which probably can get clogged with dirt or sand if one tries hard enough. The hole may function as a drain for the bridgeworks, I don't know. Whatever it is, it is not possible to see the inside of the hermetically sealed lens assemblies from there. These cells, one inside each tube, are isolated from one another, and also from the bridge. The focusing wheel moves a carrier plate holding the focusing lens by means of a worm gear in each tube of the EL. The SLC is mechanically different, since the worm gears are in the center section, but the lens cells are independently sealed in both cases. I have cut-away diagrams of each type.

Now if we're going to make something nefarious of the slot hole, let me say that no waterproof binocular I've ever seen is immune from mechanical damage due to dirt and sand. When returning from harsh environments I always rinse off the unit, payng particular attention to the grit from around the wheel. Maybe the EL needs a bit more attention — but I'd maintain that the slot has nothing to do with water integrity.

By the way, the mechanisms of Swarovski binoculars are a mechanical engineer's dream, and I'd put them up against any other manufacturer for solid design and durability. They are substantially better than any low-cost item would be, which is a big part of what you get for your money. It's called "quality."

Just my opinions, of course. Thank you, Paul, for bringing this curiosity to our attention, but I really wouldn't call it a design flaw. :brains:

Blue skies,
Ed

 

[Leif]

The latest Zeiss binocular being the result of an unnatural alliance between a Vaseline tube and a pineapple amused me.

 

[Pileatus]

Very cute, John, but let's get real — lest someone actually believe your comments. First, the "hole" is a slot in the bridge assembly forward of the combined focus/diopter wheel. No doubt it's related to the gearing mechanism, which probably can get clogged with dirt or sand if one tries hard enough. The hole may function as a drain for the bridgeworks, I don't know. Whatever it is, it is not possible to see the inside of the hermetically sealed lens assemblies from there. These cells, one inside each tube, are isolated from one another, and also from the bridge. The focusing wheel moves a carrier plate holding the focusing lens by means of a worm gear in each tube of the EL. The SLC is mechanically different, since the worm gears are in the center section, but the lens cells are independently sealed in both cases. I have cut-away diagrams of each type.

Now if we're going to make something nefarious of the slot hole, let me say that no waterproof binocular I've ever seen is immune from mechanical damage due to dirt and sand. When returning from harsh environments I always rinse off the unit, payng particular attention to the grit from around the wheel. Maybe the EL needs a bit more attention — but I'd maintain that the slot has nothing to do with water integrity.

By the way, the mechanisms of Swarovski binoculars are a mechanical engineer's dream, and I'd put them up against any other manufacturer for solid design and durability. They are substantially better than any low-cost item would be, which is a big part of what you get for your money. It's called "quality."

Just my opinions, of course. Thank you, Paul, for bringing this curiosity to our attention, but I really wouldn't call it a design flaw. :brains:

Blue skies,
Ed

Ed,

I know you like to be serious, but this thread teeters on the edge of insanity. I have no idea what Swarovski and Leica engineers were thinking when they designed their binoculars and it doesn't sound like you do either. BF comments are anecdotal, at best.

Maybe Paul is a just a luckless victim of sample variation.

John

 

[Sancho]

Ed,

..............this thread teeters on the edge of insanity....................
John

Yeah, but it holds a curious morbid fascination, like a Fortune Teller who can tell you the date you´re going to pop your clogs.....one keeps on coming back despite one´s best intentions. Think I´ll tell Mrs. Sancho to lock away the computer, or tether me to the main-mast until the storm blows over or something.