• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Leica Prices: 2008 Vs. 2013 (1 Viewer)

Dialyt

The Definitive Binocular
In 2008, I paid £799 for a Leica 8x32BR Ultravid. In 2013, the updated model (Leica 8x32HD Ultravid) from the same supplier costs £1419.

I just don't understand how manufacturers can justify this astounding price increase.

In 2008, £799 was a significant amount, but it wasn't unreachable. Now though, even though I'd like a 10x binocular, I won't be getting one, because all the premium binoculars are now priced well above the £1000 mark. How do makers expect to sell products when they price themselves out of the market? I used to be a premium binocular customer, but the binoculars I now have will most likely be the last binoculars I ever purchase. And that's fine: a pair of Zeiss and a pair of Leica is more than enough for one person!
 
And the economists still claim inflation is less than 2% a year [in Canada and the US], the biggest lie in the financial world. [not that Leica's pricing is all that indicative, but I think it illustrates how a segment of the economy mimics the growth in consumer prices]
 
And the economists still claim inflation is less than 2% a year [in Canada and the US], the biggest lie in the financial world. [not that Leica's pricing is all that indicative, but I think it illustrates how a segment of the economy mimics the growth in consumer prices]

RIGHT!!!!...not just with optics but try basics such as groceries. 2% increase inflation...? Try more like 20% by the time you figure how small the package sizes have become and the cost has increased.

I am astonished that anyone dares prints 2% inflation...no way...not even close!!!

A complete government lie and if nothing else than to appease the masses...
 
RIGHT!!!!...not just with optics but try basics such as groceries. 2% increase inflation...? Try more like 20% by the time you figure how small the package sizes have become and the cost has increased.

I am astonished that anyone dares prints 2% inflation...no way...not even close!!!

A complete government lie and if nothing else than to appease the masses...


Well, they need to prop up this lie to keep interest rates super low - encouraging people to buy mega-houses and cars that they cannot afford - and forcing investors to buy stocks as fixed income pays nothing!

If the true [non-core] interest rate was ever published, it would force interest rates to spike overnight and lead to a complete collapse of this ''debtors'' economy, where the consumer thinks they have everything, but the banks own all of it.
 
Back in the 90s I paid $500ish for a brand new pair of 8x30 Swarovskis. OH BOY wouldn't I love to get a current pair NIB for that!!! o:D

And while I agree completely with the OP, I'm still hoping for some extra work in January that'll net me enough for a pair of 7x42 Uvid HDs though, barring a new model replacement announcement at SHOT... :t:
 
Yes, I Agree...it's out of hand. I don't have much experience using full size bins (only owned one briefly) and was thinking lately that I might want to buy a nice one in the coming year. I am liking the new Trinovid, but jeez it's not that much cheaper than the Ultravid. Why is this new Trinovid model priced so high? Were the previous Trin models this expensive? If I buy one it may have to be a demo...sheesh.
 
I am liking the new Trinovid, but jeez it's not that much cheaper than the Ultravid. Why is this new Trinovid model priced so high? Were the previous Trin models this expensive? If I buy one it may have to be a demo...sheesh.


Coughcoughcough...cough cough CameralandNYcough coughcough...!

:t:
 
This week I watched a little bidding war for a Leica Trinovid 8x32BA, it went for £530, too much in my opinion, they would not have cost much more than that when new, however the used BA and BN,s do hold their value well in relation to the original price. Now I bet these new £1400 bins will not be making almost as much for pre owned in 10 years time ?
 
Well, they need to prop up this lie to keep interest rates super low - encouraging people to buy mega-houses and cars that they cannot afford -


do not forget mega-binoculars


earlier this year I got a pair of Bushnell Ultra Legend HD 10x42s

-amazing optics for the price
-durability may be weak, but I can toss and rebuy 8 more for the price of a new alpha

edj
 
Yes, I Agree...it's out of hand. I don't have much experience using full size bins (only owned one briefly) and was thinking lately that I might want to buy a nice one in the coming year. I am liking the new Trinovid, but jeez it's not that much cheaper than the Ultravid. Why is this new Trinovid model priced so high? Were the previous Trin models this expensive? If I buy one it may have to be a demo...sheesh.

Beth

Trinovid used to be Leicas top model line until Ultravid came along. Now Leica has positioned Ultravid significantly above Trinovid so that for 8x42s the Trinnie is just 30% cheaper (at Eagle Optics) than Uvid.

Guess how much cheaper than EL SV the new SLC from Swaro is? Yep, 30%.

So it looks like Swaro and Leica are treading similar paths.

However the Zeiss model is different: again pricing up 8x42s from EO we find that the Conquest HD is a whopping 56% cheaper than HT. That is getting on for double the price drop over at Leica and Swaro. And just for completeness the Terra ED 8x 42 is 60% cheaper than Conquest HD.

It remains to be seen which strategy will be more successful in the long run but it seems to me that Zeiss does give more of a choice for folks.

Lee
 
Beth

Trinovid used to be Leicas top model line until Ultravid came along. Now Leica has positioned Ultravid significantly above Trinovid so that for 8x42s the Trinnie is just 30% cheaper (at Eagle Optics) than Uvid.

Guess how much cheaper than EL SV the new SLC from Swaro is? Yep, 30%.

So it looks like Swaro and Leica are treading similar paths.

However the Zeiss model is different: again pricing up 8x42s from EO we find that the Conquest HD is a whopping 56% cheaper than HT. That is getting on for double the price drop over at Leica and Swaro. And just for completeness the Terra ED 8x 42 is 60% cheaper than Conquest HD.

It remains to be seen which strategy will be more successful in the long run but it seems to me that Zeiss does give more of a choice for folks.

Lee

I can't help but think we live in a 'throw-away' society, ..world wise. By that I mean that we as consumers will not just toss items away that we pay 100's or a thousand for but , the item itself has a shelf life. Little things break down...the quality comes thru as compared to more expensive ones.

It will be interesting to see on the cheaper bino's in a few years....how cheap are they really? They are masked behind better opitical quality of cheaper bino's of years past but the cheaper bino's of years past were better made and were designed to last longer than now. Just a thought....
 
Well, they need to prop up this lie to keep interest rates super low - encouraging people to buy mega-houses and cars that they cannot afford - and forcing investors to buy stocks as fixed income pays nothing!

If the true [non-core] interest rate was ever published, it would force interest rates to spike overnight and lead to a complete collapse of this ''debtors'' economy, where the consumer thinks they have everything, but the banks own all of it.

So true.... and we have to invest in the market or else whatever you have is lost to this hidden inflation. At least in the market, you have a chance of keeping up with it.

Heaven forbid the next time the economy falters though as one can only raise prices up, reduce the ounces in a can of tuna etc...so much.
 
It will be interesting to see on the cheaper bino's in a few years....how cheap are they really? They are masked behind better opitical quality of cheaper bino's of years past but the cheaper bino's of years past were better made and were designed to last longer than now. Just a thought....

Imans, well you could be right, it remains to be seen.

Seems you have already made your mind up according to your wording above:

'Build quality is masked behind better optical quality' presupposes something rather poor is hiding.

'Cheaper bins were better made and designed in years past'. Really? Are you sure? How? And haven't there always been some bins that were well made and some others that were not so well made? By this I mean that I doubt that all of the cheaper bins from years ago were all well made.

I think we will have to wait and see.

Lee
 
Well, they need to prop up this lie to keep interest rates super low - encouraging people to buy mega-houses and cars that they cannot afford - and forcing investors to buy stocks as fixed income pays nothing!

If the true [non-core] interest rate was ever published, it would force interest rates to spike overnight and lead to a complete collapse of this ''debtors'' economy, where the consumer thinks they have everything, but the banks own all of it.


It's a freaking joke,......and the REAL "inflation" is truly scarry today! But it's a result of something much more serious,......the continual printing of the US Dollar to the point now it is worth just $.01 or $.02 cents of the dollar of the early 1900's.

The Gooberment is ROBBING each and every one of us, but with a mask on and the lights out as if they think they can steal blindly from the sheep. They quote a drastically lower but false inflation number because they HAVE to! All the retirement accounts have cost of living increase provisions! SSI and other retirement plans are robbing those most in need to keep up with the real inflation number.

Over the last 7-10 years the real cost of living increases SHOULD have almost doubled SSI and other retirement program payouts! 20 years ago when I was out of work, unemployement payed out for just SIX MONTHS,.........that was it. Today some unemployed folks have been recieving unemployement benefits for YEARS! They just keep extending the length of time for elegibility. Plenty of our Country's infrastructure needs work, our parks and other National assets some sprucing up,....but the unemployed recieving benefits aren't required to do "something" for their benefits. Go figure...........

SSI is not stable now,....imagine if the "real" cost of living increases were passed along to retired folks along the real inflation number of 15-20% yearly increases! Go to your Supermaket today and spend $75.00 on groceries,....and you can usually hand carry it all out to your car. Do you really think it's "normal" to have the US Government flooding the Federal Reserve and other Banks with fraction of a percent cheap dollars? Our economy is so fragile now that they also HAVE to keep doing it, or game over!

Even more serious is in the near future (5-10 years at most I suspect), the US Dollar will lose it's World Reserve Currency status to, of all countries,....most CHINA! "Barron's" newspaper had an issue several months ago on just that probability! It's a serious issue for the US, but the numbnuts in Washington care more about getting re-elected than protecting the Dollar and what it can buy in the future. I bet Great Britain once thought their World Reserve Currency status would last forever too! But WWll drained them financially, and the printing press was their downfall as it will be here eventually.

Once oil (and other items) doesn't HAVE to be paid for in US Dollars (as is required now!), there will be a HUGE influx of US dollars coming home,.....wanting to buy ANYTHING of lasting value! That will be inflation to behold!

It is ONLY because the US has the World Reserve Currency that we are allowed to print SO MUCH MORE Currency, backed by nothing, and not immediately feel the affects of it on the World scene. Our trading partners would reject the currency (as near worthless) of any other country doing the same as the US,...... running the currency presses nonstop.

Obama has printed more dollars and increased the National Debt more than ALL THE PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS COMBINED !!!!

Think about that one! :eek!:

We need folks in this Country to seriously think about socking a substantial amount of gold and silver away as insurance for the callapse of the dollar. China (the government) has been buying HUGE amounts of gold over the last few years, slowly divesting their large US Dollars reserves. Other Countries are doing so as well, but of course NOT the US Government! They are content to manipulate the gold and silver prices DOWN and don't add to the US gold and silver reserves, to keep panic from the sheeple. Without the downward Government manipulation, gold and silver would be priced much higher than currently shown,....and a billboard for recognization that the US Dollar is inflating out of control.

The US Constitution states ONLY gold and silver were to be our "money",.....but then they can't PRINT gold and silver in unlimited numbers. So they crapped on the Constitution to allow the cronies in Washington access to unlimited spending. Nice fellows we have in Washington, working on OUR behalf! R I G H T !!!!

Citizens of India, China, Hong Kong, Russia, and many other Countries have been building up their personal gold and silver "insurance" reserves. In many countries that is their main savings stash. So sad Americans (for the most part), have not also done so.

The sheep in the US park $$$ away in low/no yield savings accounts instead of something of lasting value. Precious Metal prices do change, but have NEVER been worth nothing and over time an ounce of gold in the 1800's bought a quality suit, and can still be done today. Although I wouldn't be one to spend $1,200.00+ on a suit, I suspect a similar case could be made on the value of an ounce of gold to what an Alpha Binocular might cost! ;)

Get ready folks,...."you ain't seen nuttin yet!"
 
Last edited:
It's a freaking joke,......and the REAL "inflation" is truly scarry today! But it's a result of something much more serious,......the continual printing of the US Dollar to the point not it is worth just $.01 or $.02 cents on the dollar of the early 1900's.

The Gooberment is ROBBING each and every one of us, but with a mask on and with the lights out as if they think they can steal blindly from the sheep. They quote a false inflation number because they HAVE to! All the retirement accounts have cost of living increase provisions! SSI and other retirement plans are robbing those most in need to keep up with the real inflation number. SSI is not stable now,....imagine if the Cost of Living increases were passed along to retired folks along the real number of 15-20%!

Even more serious is in the near future (5-10 years at most I suspect), the US Dollar will lose it's World Reserve Currency status to of all countries,....probably CHINA! Once oil (and other items) doesn't HAVE to be paid for in US Dollars (as is required now!), there will be a HUGE influx of US dollars coming home,.....wanting to buy ANYTHING of lasting value! That will be inflation to behold!

Obama has printed more dollars and increased the National Debt more than ALL the previous Presidents C O M B I N E D!!!! :eek!:


Think about that one!

We need folks in this Country to seriously think about socking a substantial amount of gold and silver away as insurance for the callapse of the dollar. China (the government)has been buying HUGE amounts of gold over the last few years, slowly divesting their large US Dollars reservs. Other countries as well.

Citizens of India, China, Hong Kong, Russia, and many other Countries have been building up their personal gold and silver "insurance" reserves. In many countries that is their main savings stash. So sad Americans (for the most part), have not also done so.

The sheep in the US park $$$ away in low/no yield savings accounts instead of something of lasting value. Precious Metal prices do change, but have NEVER been worth nothing and over time an ounce of gold in the 1800's bought a quality suit, and can still be done today. Although I wouldn't be one to spend $1,200.00+ on a suit, I suspect a similar case could be made on the value of an ounce of gold to what an Alpha Binocular might cost! ;)

Get ready folks,...."you ain't seen nuttin yet!"

Joe

You couldn't sugar-coat that a little could you?

Lee :smoke:
 
It will be interesting to see on the cheaper bino's in a few years....how cheap are they really? They are masked behind better opitical quality of cheaper bino's of years past but the cheaper bino's of years past were better made and were designed to last longer than now. Just a thought....


Though I realize the length of time isn't very long in the grand scheme of things, I have 2 year and 3 month old $180 binocular that has excellent optical performance and has been used almost daily since then. I have had zero problems with it and don't anticipate any.
 
Imans, well you could be right, it remains to be seen.

Seems you have already made your mind up according to your wording above:

'Build quality is masked behind better optical quality' presupposes something rather poor is hiding.

'Cheaper bins were better made and designed in years past'. Really? Are you sure? How? And haven't there always been some bins that were well made and some others that were not so well made? By this I mean that I doubt that all of the cheaper bins from years ago were all well made.

I think we will have to wait and see.

Lee
Perhaps you are right...not sure. But I consider 'over time' to be much more than just 2-3-4 years in the case of optics. I have a feeling that in 10 years my HT will still hold be working like clock work, just not sure how well my Vortex will hold up within that same period.

I have 20-50 year old pairs of bino's either I bought or handed down from father who had them after WWII. They are still holding up. Now the optical was of those older bino's can't be compared to the latest tech today, but the point is that they are still holding up. Can that be said of cheaper bino's of today in 5 years?
 
Dialyt..........happily, IMHO there`s some fantastic optics to have now for £799 or even half that.

But you make an excellent point, and every time I try the top end glass I feel its more and more difficult to justify those prices now.

My current pairing of an 8x32 Nikon SE and 7x42 Opticron Bga SE cost the total of £469 the pair, (Bga was new), one has stood the test of time build wise and the other feels as well made as anything out there.
 
. This is not as straightforward as you might think.
My Minolta SRT 101 from 1967 in today's money would cost about £1600.
For £1600 one can nowadays buy quite a good camera, whether it is actually better or worse than the Minolta I don't know. The lenses are not that much better maybe worse.
the 58 mm F/1.4 and later the 58 mm F/1.2 and 50 mm F/1.4 and 50 mm F/1.2 in some respects were better or tougher than modern equivalents although the optical performance was not quite as good in some respects. In other words there has not been much advance in almost 50 years.
Also the Minolta was probably tougher and works in extreme cold.

Many binoculars are nowadays cheaper in real terms than they were 50 or 30 years ago.
and the choice of binoculars is staggering even though many sectors are not covered at all and the interests of the user in many cases ignored.

As to inflation there is always a hidden 2 1/2% a year which never gets into official figures.
governments have always worked on the actuality that as money becomes less valuable then people's savings reduce in real terms.
it's like betting on the roulette wheel at a casino. The house always wins even more so if the tables are rigged.
in the UK people put their money into owning houses as the country has limited land and an increasing population so the only true way of preserving wealth was in house ownership.

As to gold this is also not totally full proof as prices go up and down and it can be stolen.

And as to investing in a pension, the fees charged by banks and so-called financial advisers sometimes eats up almost 50% of the value of the fund. There is no way that one is getting true value.
And past governments have committed the biggest heists Britain has seen by the theft of pension monies, and selling the family silver for a pittance and also throwing money down black holes where it disappears without any true benefit to the country.
Unfortunately we are run mainly by incompetents.
they are only really interested in staying in government for five years and getting re-elected with the interests of the public only of secondary importance.
truth and politics don't go hand-in-hand.

But I suppose one should not discuss politics on the bird forum though it does relate to the cost of binoculars.
in some ways we have never had it so good.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top