CloseFocus
Well-known member
Maybe, but I predict that in ten years we will still be talking about selling our used Ultravids at a slight loss. I'll be curious to see how the other brands function after a decade of use.
Last edited:
-
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.
Leica Still Tops In My Book... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mac308
- Start date
Maybe, but I predict that in ten years we will still be talking about selling our used Ultravids at a slight loss. I'll be curious to see how the other brands function after a decade of use.
jan van daalen
Well-known member
I sold my 10x42 BAs in 2008 for $850. I bought them new in 1991 for $1050.
$200. for 17 years, and they saw a lot of use, though well cared for. Not taking into account inflation, that is $11.75 per year.
I've also bought and sold several used Uvids with similar value retention.
Yeah JG is super pissy about Leica's USA warranty situation as it appears to him these days and has commented many times on many different threads about it, often with anger. He may have a point, but the reality is some of us just aren't excited about it. I've never needed it. B
With Leica, love and hate is very close related.
Last week we sold a old Trinnie 7x42 BN in mint condition for 900,00 euro's and there is a waitinglist!! The brandnew one is at this moment 1.125,00 euro!
A lot of problems are caused by the fact that Meopta produced their scopes and refuses to deliver spare parts AND the fact that higher powers decided that Leica Customers Services (repairs) has to work (at least) cost neutral.
The guys on the workfloor are magicians and not to blame. It is, unfortunately, not possible to send in a bin/scope and have a certain defect repaired if CS discovers more defects. It is all or nothing! Does the client says no to the bill, it is 45,00 euro inspection costs and the bin/scope unrepaired retour.
Stories like these makes Leica moves often hard to follow, because when all the defects are falling under the warranty, the bin comes back brandnew without any bill.
Higher powers at Swarovski and Zeiss Customer Service decided otherwise and thats why their customers service is much more appriciated.
Jan
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
This is a true strawman - Leica is NOT the only brand that holds its value well - I would argue that Zeiss and Swaro do just as well, maybe a bit better for some models - nor does Leica have any sort of tangible advantage on long-term reliability or durability.
This is not a bash on Leica, as I think many of the products are quite nice, but more a temper on hyperbole.
It should also be remembered that $1000.00 today does not equate to the same $1000.00 ten or twenty years ago. A nice Zeiss 7x42 BGAT/P will sell for a bit more than $1000.00 today - near what it cost new twenty years ago - but you can't really claim a ''slight loss'', if you make a fair comparison of inflation and all that....
Now, if you bought it today, for that $1000.00 price, you have a much better chance of seeing a ''slight loss'' ten years down the road. Me, I hope my collection goes up in value, based on purchase price, and have seen prices creep up in the past few months for most older Zeiss models.
Last edited:
From what I see in the UK Leica hold value very well, the used Trinovid BA and BN sell for pretty close to original price if they are in top condition. I have the 8x32BN but have have been looking out for a good 7x42 for ages but as you say Jan, the demand for them is high.
Not pissy, as I could care less. Too many great products out there nowadays. Listening to you Lieca lovers makes me wonder why Leica even has or needs a CS/repair facility. Good luck if you ever need it.
BTW, one of my most favorite binos I ever owned or used was my 10x42BA's.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I'm just curious - which Zeiss and Swaro models are you talking about?
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
I'll speak to Zeiss, as I own a few. The 10x40 BGAT/P goes for about $1000.00, minty, same for the 7X42 BGAT/P. The Night Owl series can go for up to $1500.00.
Much older Oberkochen porro's still command up to $500.00 for the 8x30 and up to 700-800 for the 8x50 and 10x50. The 15x60 BGAT never seems to be found for less than $2000.00. These are asking prices gleaned from e-bay and other ''sell'' sites but they give you an idea of ''value.''
In terms of durability, I can't make an argument one way or the other but I have some Zeiss models that are 45 years old and work as new, as do the rest in my collection. I haven't yet seen any sort of comprehensive reliability comparison between older alpha's, but I sure wouldn't use the number of units up for sale as an indication of durability.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
It's interesting that you focus mainly on a binocular line (the BGAT/P's) that were near the end of their life cycle when Leica first came out with their Trinovid line. But to be fair, when I was trying to think of a Zeiss binocular that would prove your point, it was the BGAT/P and Night Owl lines that came to mind. They always struck me as particularly well built binoculars.
The Night Owl "Design Selection" line was basically two binoculars - an 8x56 and 7x45. When I was buying my first pair of high end binoculars in the early 90's, these were the only other models that tempted me, but the 8x56 was big and heavy, and the 7x45, though nice, could not compete with the Trinovids, at least not in the features I was looking for - it still had fold down rubber eyecups, and the focus knob simply did not have enough surface area. I have never seen a 7x45 for sale, so I don't what they would sell for, or how they have held up over the years, but it's a binocular I have always wanted to look through again.
chris butterworth
aka The Person Named Above
Have to agree. I bought my 8x42BA's when they first came out. I've used them daily ( they were, untill recently, my only bins ) on 5 continents and I've recently had them serviced for the first time. I must admit I never found them heavy, but that could be because my previous pair were Zeiss Jena 10x50, and I'm convinced they were built to double up as tank destroyers for use when your ammunition ran out
There again, I bought them to use and because they suited me, not as an investment or for the badge.
Last edited:
coolhand68
Well-known member
Yet, a little bit better is all the Zeiss HT is over the FL series. In fact, some Zeiss users actually prefer the FL T*. Eventually optics top out, and improvements will be marginal. The Ultravid was only a little bit better than previous versions because those previous versions were that good. When you get to the level of the Alphas, differences and improvements are really a matter of preference, they are all great.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Yeah, they can't sell any of them, can they. :smoke:
Mac, that may not be quite right. Swaro. are masters at marketing. Going by what I gather from Bf. I'd reckon if stats. are obtained for 8/8.5x42 and 10x42 from the several leading "alpha" retailers in the USA or the UK we'd see category 1 below outselling the other three combined. 1 - Swaro. EL Sv., EL non-Sv., SLC (note non-"RB" models!) 2 - Zeiss HT. 3 - Leica Ultravid. 4 - Nikon EDG.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I'll be curious to see if Leica comes out with their own version of Swarovision when they release their new binocular line up. For me it's a solution to a problem that doesn't need fixing, but I can see Leica coming out with a less radical version just to keep up in the marketplace. Gimmicks do bring in the customers, after all. But I'm not going to start eating McDonald's Happy Meals just because I can get a Lego figure, either.
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
And then of course many do not consider it a "gimmick," nor are they victims of Swaro's marketing. Some people have actually compared them and....liked them! :eek!:
If you don't, the solution is simple. Use something else.
If you don't, the solution is simple. Use something else.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I do.
Gimmick
A gimmick could be described as a device for attracting the attention of people, who would otherwise not be interested, but which is of little practical value or relevance.
Even as a Zeiss fan-boy I can see that Swarovision has certainly attracted attention and that many people attest to it's usefulness.
The fact that it is of little interest to me is not relevant and the fact that a small proportion of people find rolling ball objectionable is probably of no more relevance than the fact that some people think Nikon EDGs are ugly or that green Zeiss FLs make them feel nauseous.
Swaros are top quality instruments and are indisputably the top sellers.
Wouldn't count on this lasting much longer though: the Zeiss Dragon awakes :eek!:
Lee
A gimmick could be described as a device for attracting the attention of people, who would otherwise not be interested, but which is of little practical value or relevance.
Even as a Zeiss fan-boy I can see that Swarovision has certainly attracted attention and that many people attest to it's usefulness.
The fact that it is of little interest to me is not relevant and the fact that a small proportion of people find rolling ball objectionable is probably of no more relevance than the fact that some people think Nikon EDGs are ugly or that green Zeiss FLs make them feel nauseous.
Swaros are top quality instruments and are indisputably the top sellers.
Wouldn't count on this lasting much longer though: the Zeiss Dragon awakes :eek!:
Lee
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
Canada or Costa Rica, in the field its all Swaro all the time. You can't argue that they have done a brilliant job of marketing and PR..............oh, and they have a pretty fine product as well.
