SF Review - Scope Views, Roger Vine (1 Viewer)

Troubador · Apr 9, 2016

The-Wanderer said:
"This June, I was lucky enough to get invited to an advance showing of the new Zeiss Victory SF binocular at Zeiss's production facility in Wexler, Germany. This is their new premium binocular, designed especially with birders in mind. What an eye-opening experience!

I got to watch highly skilled craftsmen meticulously creating the binoculars, one by one. They assembled the parts*with infinite attention, checking and re-checking at each step to make sure the quality was impeccable, making sure the experience of using the binocular would be completely satisfying."
Source: Diane Porter http://www.birdwatching.com/optics/zeiss/zeiss_victory_sf.html

Does anyone know if Roger Vine returned the bin and, if he did, what the response was?

His product would probably be regarded as unfit for the intended purpose in the UK, i don' t know the equivalent term in the US - delinquent?

If this had happened to me in the UK I would have returned it to the retailer as this is who my primary contract would have been with. I would have asked for a replacement and the bin would have been sent by the dealer back to Zeiss UK who would send it back to Germany. Normally I wouldn't expect to hear what had happened to it.
If you buy something in the UK that turns out to be not of merchantable quality or not fit for purpose, you take this up from where you bought the item. Warranties only come into the picture when a fault shows up later.

Lee

The-Wanderer · Apr 9, 2016

Indeed, Lee, indeed.

Chosun Juan · Apr 9, 2016

Troubador said:
Den

Please stop highlighting text in bold.

This is the internet equivalent of shouting in peoples' faces.

It isn't polite.

If you want to give added emphasis to some words or phrases you could put them in italics.

Lee

Lee,

As you can now clearly see, quoted posts are already in italics! (not to confused with Italian - Zeiss ha rilasciato alcune unità di qualità un po 'incerti anonimo su un pubblico ignaro che stanno lavorando gratuitamente come beta tester e gli ispettori qa finali)

Thus it can be hard to highlight a section of text that you want to emphasize - you might use words of plain text within the quoted passage (somewhat counter-intuitively and illogically), underlining, various colours, some combination of the two, or quite legitimately bold highlighting! :-O

Please note that bold highlighting is not YELLING! - THIS (IN CAPITALS) IS YELLING! THIS IS HIGHLIGHTED YELLING! :eek!:

This @#$%^&*! is swearing (potentially in German!

, as is this :stuck: :-@ :storm: :scribe:

Den's highlighting was perfectly valid. Just because someone finds the content of a highlighted passage to be an uncomfortable truth doesn't mean they are being YELLED AT .......... :smoke:

It amazes me the amount of cyber ink that is expended by people trying to tell other people what those other people see or experience better than those other people themselves, as if what those other people see or experience is not valid at all. It is! It can also be legitimately different from what people see or experience. Each is what it is.

Zeiss clearly has quality problems with the SF. Whether they are confined to early production runs, or ongoing (and to what extent) remains to be seen. I for one find it disconcerting that a random unit, anonymously purchased exhibits such quality problems.

Others may (and clearly many do) have zero issues with their units, and that is valid also.

IF you get a unit that is fine, THEN happy days, IF NOT, THEN *not* so much ........ |=@|

While Zeiss may correct glaring problems, we have seen before that other more grey area issues can be left frustratingly unresolved even after much time and mucking around. For a $2500+ instrument this potential rigmarole is unwarranted and unacceptable! Buyer Beware! and Try Before You Buy!

Chosun :gh:

Torview · Apr 9, 2016

I tried SF`s when they first launched that seemed thoroughly underwhelming to me, and recently what I deem to be later models which seemed excellent, in fact everything Zeiss promoted them to be, so as always I reckon when spending this kind of money I like to handle and inspect the very example I`ll be buying, this means going to a trusted dealer where the cost may be a little more than buying online, but I`m convinced with such a major purchase its the best way to go.

And if Zeiss or Swaro offered me a 7x42 to buy, I may well have chosen one from their stable, their loss is Leica`s gain.

denco@comcast.n · Apr 9, 2016

Torview said:
I tried SF`s when they first launched that seemed thoroughly underwhelming to me, and recently what I deem to be later models which seemed excellent, in fact everything Zeiss promoted them to be, so as always I reckon when spending this kind of money I like to handle and inspect the very example I`ll be buying, this means going to a trusted dealer where the cost may be a little more than buying online, but I`m convinced with such a major purchase its the best way to go.

And if Zeiss or Swaro offered me a 7x42 to buy, I may well have chosen one from their stable, their loss is Leica`s gain.

I agree with you about buying from a trusted dealer but the online discounts are very tempting. At Cabella's with tax a Zeiss SF would probably cost over $3200 here in the states. Most good online dealers would allow you to return a defective binocular though and you can save a large chunk of cash.

Torview · Apr 9, 2016

[email protected] said:
I agree with you about buying from a trusted dealer but the online discounts are very tempting. At Cabella's with tax a Zeiss SF would probably cost over $3200 here in the states. Most good online dealers would allow you to return a defective binocular though and you can save a large chunk of cash.

Maybe, and I have no proof, and I may be wide of the mark, but maybe all the Alpha companies send the cream of the crop after inspection to their retailers with bricks and mortar stores where they are going to be handled and inspected prior to purchase, possibly by a more knowledgeable buyer, and the rest go to the big discounters.

I can`t remember reading a report about dodgy quality from a member here who purchased from a trusted dealer.

Maybe its the fact that your trusted dealer inspects and returns dodgy examples whereas an online retailer doesnt ?

Troubador · Apr 9, 2016

Chosun Juan said:
Lee,

As you can now clearly see, quoted posts are already in italics! (not to confused with Italian - Zeiss ha rilasciato alcune unità di qualità un po 'incerti anonimo su un pubblico ignaro che stanno lavorando gratuitamente come beta tester e gli ispettori qa finali)
Thus it can be hard to highlight a section of text that you want to emphasize - you might use words of plain text within the quoted passage (somewhat counter-intuitively and illogically), underlining, various colours, some combination of the two, or quite legitimately bold highlighting! :-O

Please note that bold highlighting is not YELLING! - THIS (IN CAPITALS) IS YELLING! THIS IS HIGHLIGHTED YELLING! :eek!:

This @#$%^&*! is swearing (potentially in German! , as is this :stuck: :-@ :storm: :scribe:

Den's highlighting was perfectly valid. Just because someone finds the content of a highlighted passage to be an uncomfortable truth doesn't mean they are being YELLED AT .......... :smoke:

It amazes me the amount of cyber ink that is expended by people trying to tell other people what those other people see or experience better than those other people themselves, as if what those other people see or experience is not valid at all. It is! It can also be legitimately different from what people see or experience. Each is what it is.

Zeiss clearly has quality problems with the SF. Whether they are confined to early production runs, or ongoing (and to what extent) remains to be seen. I for one find it disconcerting that a random unit, anonymously purchased exhibits such quality problems.

Others may (and clearly many do) have zero issues with their units, and that is valid also.

IF you get a unit that is fine, THEN happy days, IF NOT, THEN *not* so much ........ |=@|

While Zeiss may correct glaring problems, we have seen before that other more grey area issues can be left frustratingly unresolved even after much time and mucking around. For a $2500+ instrument this potential rigmarole is unwarranted and unacceptable! Buyer Beware! and Try Before You Buy!

Chosun :gh:

Dear Chosun

I envisaged Den copying text into his own post and then italicising. I was taught when I studied for my ECDL that bold is impolite in emails and in posts and I find it so. Of course putting CAPS in bold is even worse.

This has nothing to do with the content and if you think I am ducking the fault issues think again, I have condemned them on this thread as shameful, and I do so again now. And the last time I used the word 'shame' in connection with Zeiss was last year when I pointed out the feel of the eyecups action on their cheap Terras put to shame those on the most expensive Victory models. Guess you missed that. You must have also missed me defending Swaro focusers against repeated attacks from a certain regular on these pages.

Lee

PeterPS · Apr 9, 2016

Maybe its the fact that your trusted dealer inspects and returns dodgy examples whereas an online retailer doesnt ?

Absolutely. You would not expect a big online retailer like Amazon to return imperfect units to the manufacturer (in fact more often than not they would not even know what's wrong with the returned set). In this way a lemon can be resold all over again, generating lots of negative comments.

A small retailer, on the other hand, will typically be well informed of the issues of a set in their stock, and will return dodgy units.

Steve C · Apr 9, 2016

There are only very few dealers with more than a 50-50 chance of having somebody in their employ who has enough optics knowledge to sort out an actual clunker alpha from a perfectly normal one returned for whatever reason.

There are certainly more than these three, but I value SWFA, Eagle Optics and Cameraland NY. Whichever you choose to use, call and ask some pertinent questions before you part ways with that kind of $$.

PeterPS · Apr 9, 2016

Chosun:

What's perceived as yelling somewhere might be a totally acceptable whispering Down Under. We are all different. Just as an example, the many "!" in your post "sound" to me like yelling....

Now to my main point: such matters, and similar ones, would be better resolved via PMs!! (just exclamation, no yelling).

Peter

PeterPS · Apr 9, 2016

There are certainly more than these three, but I value SWFA, Eagle Optics and Cameraland NY. Whichever you choose to use, call and ask some pertinent questions before you part ways with that kind of $$.

Agreed. Especially Eagle Optics: knowledgeable people with a lot of patience (always needed for picky customers).

SuperDuty · Apr 9, 2016

I've looked through three different 8.5 Swarovision in the last four months, two 2010, one 2015, the image of all three looked identical to my eyes. I suspect that the easily discernible variation between like Alpha binoculars that some people notice is mostly psychological.

PeterPS · Apr 9, 2016

I've looked through three different 8.5 Swarovision in the last four months, two 2010, one 2015, the image of all three looked identical to my eyes. I suspect that the easily discernible variation between like Alpha binoculars that some people notice is mostly psychological.

Swarovski binoculars have likely the least variation from sample to sample. That being said, I would not trust comparisons between different bins, unless they're done side by side.

SuperDuty · Apr 9, 2016

Two of the three were compared side by side, then one of those to the third.

pesto said:
Swarovski binoculars have likely the least variation from sample to sample. That being said, I would not trust comparisons between different bins, unless they're done side by side.

denco@comcast.n · Apr 10, 2016

Torview said:
Maybe, and I have no proof, and I may be wide of the mark, but maybe all the Alpha companies send the cream of the crop after inspection to their retailers with bricks and mortar stores where they are going to be handled and inspected prior to purchase, possibly by a more knowledgeable buyer, and the rest go to the big discounters.

I can`t remember reading a report about dodgy quality from a member here who purchased from a trusted dealer.

Maybe its the fact that your trusted dealer inspects and returns dodgy examples whereas an online retailer doesnt ?

That is a good theory. Kind of like why a lot of people don't go through the drive-thru at the fast food places. You don't see what your getting until you open the bag.:eek!:

PeterPS · Apr 10, 2016

I've looked through three different 8.5 Swarovision in the last four months, two 2010, one 2015, the image of all three looked identical to my eyes. I suspect that the easily discernible variation between like Alpha binoculars that some people notice is mostly psychological.

SD:

What's in the SV 8.5 image that's not to your liking? (if everything was "perfect" you wouldn't bother to buy and compare several bins). Maybe you're super-sensitive to CA. I too am sensitive to CA and I see it in the SV and any other bins I have tried, once you move off the axis sometimes even as little as 40-50%. I see it in the SF as well, but it's not serious nor is it in the SV. I have owned an SV 8.5 but it felt much heavier than the SF (on paper it is heavier by only 60-70g, but in the hand the weight difference felt larger). To me the extra weight and different weight distribution of the SV meant extra muscle tremble. Some people claim that heavier bins are easier to hold steady. Heavy bins will damp the higher frequencies of the muscle tremble, simply due their higher inertia, but their weight will eventually lead to larger lower-frequency amplitudes, and those frequencies up to 10 Hz cause resolution loss. Besides weight, the other factor that has made me prefer the SF to the SV was FoV---the SV's AFoV seems even smaller than its actual value due to the decrease in the magnification at the edge.

Peter

SuperDuty · Apr 10, 2016

No binocular is perfect including the SV series, but outside of a little more CA than the best I've seen in that regard, they are my favorite so far.

pesto said:
SD:

What's in the SV 8.5 image that's not to your liking? (if everything was "perfect" you wouldn't bother to buy and compare several bins). Maybe you're super-sensitive to CA. I too am sensitive to CA and I see it in the SV and any other bins I have tried, once you move off the axis sometimes even as little as 40-50%. I see it in the SF as well, but it's not serious nor is it in the SV. I have owned an SV 8.5 but it felt much heavier than the SF (on paper it is heavier by only 60-70g, but in the hand the weight difference felt larger). To me the extra weight and different weight distribution of the SV meant extra muscle tremble. Some people claim that heavier bins are easier to hold steady. Heavy bins will damp the higher frequencies of the muscle tremble, simply due their higher inertia, but their weight will eventually lead to larger lower-frequency amplitudes, and those frequencies up to 10 Hz cause resolution loss. Besides weight, the other factor that has made me prefer the SF to the SV was FoV---the SV's AFoV seems even smaller than its actual value due to the decrease in the magnification at the edge.

Peter

PeterPS · Apr 11, 2016

No binocular is perfect including the SV series.

That's true and it's the basic problem. We all search for that elusive perfect unit, and the search is futile---we'll always have to compromise.

SF Review - Scope Views, Roger Vine (1 Viewer)

More options

Troubador

Moderator

The-Wanderer

Well-known member

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly

Torview

Well-known member

[email protected]

Well-known member

Torview

Well-known member

Troubador

Moderator

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

Steve C

Well-known member

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

SuperDuty

Well-known member

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

SuperDuty

Well-known member

[email protected]

Well-known member

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

SuperDuty

Well-known member

PeterPS

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread