Find one that is really a weakness in the binocular. The only one I have ever seen was written by the professional writer on Amazon who said his Swaro's became gritty in Africa and we all agreed that was a hoax.
-
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.
Swarovski Price Increase January 1st, 2014 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter BruceH
- Start date
- Status
Here is ANOTHER BAD REVIEW ON MEOPTA'S. ONLY 2 STARS!
1 of 3 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars not a good choice, November 29, 2010
By J. Simonis (defiance ohio) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)
This review is from: Meopta Optics MEOPRO 8x42 Binoculars (Sports)
got one of these about a year ago. I am very disappointed with these. I just can't get good focus and they have strange distortion. They also are heavy and just cost to much. I thought they would be fine because they are made by a European company with a good reputation but mine at least are the worst i have tried.
perterra
Well-known member
Status driven I think
Dennis, pl. see: in this thread my post #59 just above. At least three SLCs in this part of the world, of three people I know. Sorry, due to my wish for anonymity of location (not only self) would not like to state where that is, beyond "tropics"! One person had this general fact confirmed by Swaro. Austria or Britain. In the other current Swaro. thread posts #257, Sweden, and #258, USA (both on page 11). Etc. But maybe the bottom line is the one in that last-cited post (smiley included): Don't worry, be happy.
henry link
Well-known member
Why do you guys persist with Dennis? Do you expect his behavior to change? The Ignore List is made expressly for the Dennises of the world.
It's a good point Henry but it's done for the benefit of the new people who come here for information.
When they find out that Dennis has to spend more time defending his reviews than he does in writing them they will know how much credence to give them.
It doesn't take long to point his inconsistencies out and people here seem to take turns in doing it.
Bob
Henry,
My arguments against Dennis' ranting are much the same as Caesar's, and are arguments I make against any overly zealous individual: though I don't expect the individual's behavior or opinions to change, I do expect those people who read my retaliations to take the individual's statements with a little wariness, and maybe question the validity of the individual's statements.
All the best,
Justin
FrankD
Well-known member
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Looks like they are picking cherries during December in Colorado. As Bryce pointed out the fogging was external so not a fault with the binocular. It turns out what Dennis thought was a cherry was not a cherry at all.
What caught my attention was the statement that Swaro "would not have done this". Think again. Here is a post from The Kingfisher describing actual internal (not external) fogging of his brand new just released Swarovski SLC 8X42.
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2848340&postcount=246
After getting it back from Swarovski service "after it had taken on water" and also focus issues, the focusing mechanism then made squeaking sounds.
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2871091&postcount=1
Actually, one particular member described it as thus....
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2871292&postcount=7
An extra $1,000 plus does not guarantee perfection. To paraphrase Dennis, it seems there is one thing or another with those $2,000 plus binoculars.
Dennis, it is time to stop drinking the Kool-Aid and start paying attention.
Last edited:
Henry, my answer to your question: maybe a subconscious wish to justify my own rhetorical question (wow, that only needs some Latin - Brock, Lee pl. help) in <this post> a few mths back.
mooreorless
Well-known member
mooreorless
Well-known member
A2GG
Beth
I can tell you never shot a rifle.
I shot a shot-gun once. I shot at the clay pigeons and missed every
single one
I think I got the edge of one of them though...that'll learn it.
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
Holding Dennis to his word
OK .........
From The Kingfisher review that I mentioned above:
"Woke up this morning and thought I would use my new SLC..and then discovers that one half is completely fogged up - on the inside! Now, about 45 minutes after the discovery, the foggy thing still has not completely disappeared. My copy of the new Swarovski SLC does not seem to be particularly waterproof"...
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2848340&postcount=246
Does anybody actually believe this means we have heard the last from Dennis.
OK .........
From The Kingfisher review that I mentioned above:
"Woke up this morning and thought I would use my new SLC..and then discovers that one half is completely fogged up - on the inside! Now, about 45 minutes after the discovery, the foggy thing still has not completely disappeared. My copy of the new Swarovski SLC does not seem to be particularly waterproof"...
http://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=2848340&postcount=246
Does anybody actually believe this means we have heard the last from Dennis.
mooreorless
Well-known member
I shot a shot-gun once. I shot at the clay pigeons and missed every
single one
They can be hard to hit, it helps to get a little help from someone in the know. At least you used a shotgun!:t:
I think the focus knob on the Swaro is just designed to be a bit stiff..... That is just a Swaro, so I don't look down upon Swaro for that....The same way the Focus knob on the HT is designed to be silky smooth...
Swaro's and HT's are different...different optics, different ergonomics etc..and both of them are worth the price and the price increase in my mind. If a can of tuna can go up in price and now we are purchasing 5 ounce cans instead of 7 and paying more for it, why not the cost of a good bino?
Okay...what is it about these postings..... A posting about Swaro and there is all of this talk about Meopta's and quality of (well, lack of quality when compared to ah Alpha). Why can't people who want to address a particular brand of bino stay on their forum section. Meoptas have a place designated for them, ..so, stick to that...
BruceH
Avatar: Harris Hawk
I shot a shot-gun once. I shot at the clay pigeons and missed every
single one
Annabeth ... You would have gotten them all if you had been wearing Alpha shooting glasses. |=)|
I didn't say it was stiff, I said that it acted as if it was sand-filled and now features an excessive amount of play.
Meopta and others were brought up to counter the idea that inflation justified price increases; the mentioned competitors are lowering prices while the alpha producers increasing prices due to "inflation". Quality control and such was brought up by Dennis who for some reason thought it necessary to defend Swarovski's status as alpha optics, a point which was not originally being debated.
Happy holidays,
Justin
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
If the ''sub''-alpha's sold out at current pricing, then we would see higher prices but, I suspect, they have trouble selling at that price point.
Something that sells well commands higher prices, something that doesn't gets cut or slashed. Swaro knows it can sell SVs at these higher prices, it knows its market segment. The market rules such things.
Something that sells well commands higher prices, something that doesn't gets cut or slashed. Swaro knows it can sell SVs at these higher prices, it knows its market segment. The market rules such things.
- Status
