I've sent in my trusty old pair of 10x40B binoculars to Zeiss, USA for a service and cleaning. I've bought these in South Africa around 1979. a Few days later I received an e-mail saying they cannot be repaired and a new pair will be issued under the warranty. The repair department called me to discuss the replacement and yesterday I received a brand new pair of Zeiss Conquest 10x42 HD bins. Amazing service indeed, although I will miss my old companion of 40+ years. Thank you!
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Well done Zeiss!! (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Pafuri
- Start date
Kevin Conville
yardbirder
Fantastic.
Can't argue with that kind of service.
Can't argue with that kind of service.
tenex
reality-based
"Can't argue with that kind of service".... if you can get it.
Inspired by the OP here, I sent my now little-used 8x30 BT* in for service. The focus wheel needed work (both stiff and too much play), and I was hoping it could also be updated to P* prisms (bought in 1989, it should have had them already but I didn't know that at the time). Just got the response: no prism replacement possible. No offer to swap for a P* model, or upgrade to anything newer, even reconditioned. They will only repair the focus wheel.
I had also just read a post here (can't find it now of course) describing how Swarovski had rebuilt someone's early 7x42 SLC with new prisms, armor, etc, all free of charge. Now that would encourage brand loyalty. At similar cost, Zeiss hasn't really been on my radar anymore for various reasons... now one more.
(Then again, I also remember reading complaints about Leica service, when I've had only good experience with them. Is it all largely random?)
Inspired by the OP here, I sent my now little-used 8x30 BT* in for service. The focus wheel needed work (both stiff and too much play), and I was hoping it could also be updated to P* prisms (bought in 1989, it should have had them already but I didn't know that at the time). Just got the response: no prism replacement possible. No offer to swap for a P* model, or upgrade to anything newer, even reconditioned. They will only repair the focus wheel.
I had also just read a post here (can't find it now of course) describing how Swarovski had rebuilt someone's early 7x42 SLC with new prisms, armor, etc, all free of charge. Now that would encourage brand loyalty. At similar cost, Zeiss hasn't really been on my radar anymore for various reasons... now one more.
(Then again, I also remember reading complaints about Leica service, when I've had only good experience with them. Is it all largely random?)
So you took a chance with a 1989 pair of binoculars and it didn’t pay off. Good on Zeiss I say.
tenex
reality-based
Ignore list activated. First time... hopefully last.
OhWeh
Well-known member
Tenex, you'd send in a glass. Zeiss repairs or repaired the glass. Where is the problem?
If Zeiss tells you, exchange of old components against components of a newer model is not possible, they know what they say.
If they'd send everyone, who asks for repair, a new modell, it would be a big waste of resources. (Besides the waste of money).
If Zeiss tells you, exchange of old components against components of a newer model is not possible, they know what they say.
If they'd send everyone, who asks for repair, a new modell, it would be a big waste of resources. (Besides the waste of money).
I have to say that while I sympathise with your disappointment, it isn't a big surprise that by now Zeiss have no replacement P* prisms left. These Dialyts were very popular by all accounts so it is no shock that Zeiss have used up the spare prisms they had. Nor is it a shock that they don't have P* models on the shelf just waiting for 30 years for some deserving customer.
As to being offered a replacement model when yours only needs a tweak or two to the focus wheel, I really think this is an unrealistic expectation.
I have had binos like this repaired and adjusted and if I had been offered a replacement I would have thought it was madness. And I am certain there is nothing in the 1989 warranty from Zeiss that would encourage such an expectation.
I hope this doesn't come across as a rant and I hope I don't get put on your 'ignore' list.
Lee
Last edited:
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
They fixed a 30 year old bin - there are only one or two other manufacturers that would do that.
tenex
reality-based
This would be of some value to me if I actually found the bino usable in its present state, as I no longer do.
No, I suppose it's not. It did however seem worth a try, and is still a disappointment. I really wanted to see what this glass (or anything similar they might have had lying around) would have been like with P* prisms. In mid-1989, I should have been sold such a unit in the first place (not Zeiss's fault). I consider the previous absence of such coatings a known defect that manufacturers were unethical to conceal (yes, Zeiss's fault). I could have tried to get this glass upgraded long ago, but didn't understand the problem (for the aforementioned reason) and instead replaced and sidelined it. It's not the end of my world, just a story that could have ended better, and left me feeling better about Zeiss.
If you feel sympathetic, that's nice. If you don't, that's fine too, but why would I care to know? If you're spiteful enough to tell me you're glad this didn't work out for me, that's just disgusting.
Perhaps this comment was directed elsewhere, but placing it under a quote from Lee implies you were imputing him. If that were the case, I think that could be categorized as paranoid.
John
tenex
reality-based
Implied impution! Horrors... The unlikelihood of that should suggest that such an interpretation doesn't bear serious consideration.
There's an oddity in colloquial English: the pronoun "one" is considered old-fashioned or even pretentious, so instead of saying "If one feels sympathetic..." one normally says (er, you normally say) "If you feel sympathetic..."
I did make that a separate paragraph. Unfortunately I can no longer edit the post to insert a special header for it, Addressed to all and sundry. Consider the clarification made.
Last edited:
tenex
reality-based
This is odd, there are now messages in the thread that I didn't see before.
"Waste" is not the term I would use. I didn't ask for a new model, except perhaps as a last resort, and a rather old new model would have done fine. "Where is the problem" I have now explained. I don't consider phase-coating a minor refinement (like HT glass) that I happened to just miss out on, but a known serious defect that manufacturers concealed up to the moment of implementing the solution, and did not then actively offer to fix.
In the 1980s my father also tried two different Dialyt models, and they never grew on him. He kept going back to his porroprism binos and could never understand why. I never liked this glass as much as I expected to myself, especially at the price, and never knew why. Some years later when comparing it to the Leica BN I replaced it with, I was just amazed at how much better the BN was, and still didn't understand why. I feel we were duped. I think a lot of buyers were. That's the problem. (Of course Leitz had it too, in those years. The "alpha" binos were actually betas.)
"Waste" is not the term I would use. I didn't ask for a new model, except perhaps as a last resort, and a rather old new model would have done fine. "Where is the problem" I have now explained. I don't consider phase-coating a minor refinement (like HT glass) that I happened to just miss out on, but a known serious defect that manufacturers concealed up to the moment of implementing the solution, and did not then actively offer to fix.
In the 1980s my father also tried two different Dialyt models, and they never grew on him. He kept going back to his porroprism binos and could never understand why. I never liked this glass as much as I expected to myself, especially at the price, and never knew why. Some years later when comparing it to the Leica BN I replaced it with, I was just amazed at how much better the BN was, and still didn't understand why. I feel we were duped. I think a lot of buyers were. That's the problem. (Of course Leitz had it too, in those years. The "alpha" binos were actually betas.)
I had a Zeiss Dialyt 10x40 B GA T* (but no phase coating) from 1986 to 2003 and thoroughly enjoyed using it. Can't say it ever occured to me that I was the victim of a conspiracy for not having been offered a free upgrade to phase-coated prisms. Should owners of uncoated binos have been offered coated optics when anti-reflection coatings were invented? And what about B, high eye relief eyepieces for spectacle wearers? Both of these could be considered 'serious defects'.
Applying this principal to other products would have seen auto manufacturers offering electronic ignition and fuel injection systems to owners of older models to solve the serious defect of low gas mileage.
I think this is an unrealistic expectation in most cases but not all, for example when human safety is involved.
Lee
Applying this principal to other products would have seen auto manufacturers offering electronic ignition and fuel injection systems to owners of older models to solve the serious defect of low gas mileage.
I think this is an unrealistic expectation in most cases but not all, for example when human safety is involved.
Lee
Hi Lee,
I agree. All mechanical things like binoculars become obsolete and unrepairable but with care they can remain useful.
For a about 7 years I happily used a Leitz 7x42 Trinovid BA binocular. It was made in 1983. (As you know its Uppendahl Roof Prisms did not have phase coatings.) I got it new for about 1/2 price from a Canadian Dealer after it was discontinued in 1990.
I used it all the time. I thought it was great binocular! And it was, compared to the ones I had been using. It has a big 7mm exit pupil, long comfortable eye relief and a bright clear view to the edge of its 8º FOV.
I wore out one set of eye cups over the years I used it. They were the Screw on type and I was able to purchase new eye cups because Leica (The Leitz name was now history) still had some left in stock. I still have them on the binocular.
When Leica discontinued their 7x42 Trinovid BN around 2004 I purchased one from Cabela's at a sale price of $799.00. (The first time I used it and compared it with my old Leitz 7x42 I was stunned at how much brighter the Leica 7x42 Trinovid BN it was than my old Leitz 7x42 Trinovid BA.
Here is a picture of it from Allbinos: https://www.allbinos.com/1653-Leitz_Trinovid_7x42_BA-binoculars_specifications.html
Here is the one that replaced it: https://www.allbinos.com/628-Leica_Trinovid_7x42_BN-binoculars_specifications.html
Bob
Last edited:
my wife used her Leitz Trinovid from 1976 to 2012 non-phase coated as you point out, and loved it so much that only the closer focus of the later Ultravid persuaded her to retire the Trinnie but she couldn't bear to be parted from it so it is retirement now. You can see the old-timer below.
Lee
Attachments
I sent in 4 Zeiss binoculars to Zeiss.
My Saab engineer was passing near Cambridge and dropped them into Zeiss. He just had a 4 wheel drive Saab sleeper with the speed regulator off. He says 170mph plus.
2 of the Zeiss binoculars were repaired F.O.C.
one was 'lost'
one was unrepaired.
Do I care?
Not really.
To me it is just how the cookie crumbles or the biscuit breaks.
My most used binocular is a Docter 10x25 no phase coating.
I think my FOTON 5x25 is incredibly good for astronomy, no phase coating. It is actually 30mm at the front.
Opticron may repair 30 year old binoculars.
On last night's Planespotters Live on the BBC at 8pm?, the Heathrow tower were using Porroprism binoculars, possibly Opticron?
There was a close up of the front hinge cover with a name but it was too fast for me to read.
Maybe part 2 tonight and part 3 Thursday.
Maybe the Porros give better depth perception.
Previously I think they used Zeiss 7x50 and earlier still old military Zeiss or Schneider?
There was someone on the programme with a collection of over 3,000 aircraft sick bags. The earliest is a 1936 from a Junkers saying don't throw out of the window in German. They flew at 1,000feet.
Regards,
B.
My Saab engineer was passing near Cambridge and dropped them into Zeiss. He just had a 4 wheel drive Saab sleeper with the speed regulator off. He says 170mph plus.
2 of the Zeiss binoculars were repaired F.O.C.
one was 'lost'
one was unrepaired.
Do I care?
Not really.
To me it is just how the cookie crumbles or the biscuit breaks.
My most used binocular is a Docter 10x25 no phase coating.
I think my FOTON 5x25 is incredibly good for astronomy, no phase coating. It is actually 30mm at the front.
Opticron may repair 30 year old binoculars.
On last night's Planespotters Live on the BBC at 8pm?, the Heathrow tower were using Porroprism binoculars, possibly Opticron?
There was a close up of the front hinge cover with a name but it was too fast for me to read.
Maybe part 2 tonight and part 3 Thursday.
Maybe the Porros give better depth perception.
Previously I think they used Zeiss 7x50 and earlier still old military Zeiss or Schneider?
There was someone on the programme with a collection of over 3,000 aircraft sick bags. The earliest is a 1936 from a Junkers saying don't throw out of the window in German. They flew at 1,000feet.
Regards,
B.
Last edited: