-
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
Hi Jerry
A small point but Zeiss didn't give van Daalen the boot. Zeiss Oberkochen (not the optics factory) insisted he give up some internet domains that were owned by him and then promptly made them available to his competitors.
Van Daalen then gave Zeiss the boot.
Lee
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Jerry,
If you quote over events from the past, please qoute correctly would you, and not just twist it to prove your point.
Thanks
Jan
Lee,
Still too myopic, you didn't look back far enough, his statements were not as restricted or qualified as you cite above when he first started posting here and even long after that. Getting piled on repeatedly for it might have forced him to reform somewhat, if so, he got the message, but I'm still skeptical about his use of the word "proof: in his post earlier on this thread, having seen him use it repeatedly to equate sales figures as "proof" of Swaros being the "best" among the alphas. My auto industry analogy already pointed out the fallacy of this kind of argument.
Apparently, you are only selecting posts that seemingly reinforce your position, so I will have to go back and dig out those references myself when I have more time and then send them to you so you can eat crow (which when done in numbers is called a "murder".
In the meantime, I will follow his posts to see if what you say is true, but I think it might be wishful thinking on your part, because you tend to see the best in people rather than "the best" in binoculars..
Regarding your comments about being a dealer... As a member, everyone is entitled to express his or her opinions about optics, but as a dealer, blanket statements about one's best selling brand being "the best" bins among all others based on sales figures should be more tempered; otherwise, they sound too self-serving, even if that was not the intention.
Btw, when are the two of you setting a date?
<B>
OK Brock. Maybe its just me. I could understand this finger-pointing if van Daalen was selling swamp water as a cure for cancer, but he is not.
It seems absurd to me that we all know Swaros are superb (OK they have some weaknesses that we discuss from time to time) and van Daalen knows they are superb, but he is not allowed to say they are superb because he is a dealer. Can't get my head around that.
I go to a local nature reserve and see mostly Swaros out of the alpha brands, I go to the Western Isles of Scotland and on the ferry boats out to the islands when all the birders on the boat get their bins out to look for sea birds, the alphas I see most of are Swaros. Eagle Optics has 6 Swaros in their top 10 best sellers. But van Daalen saying Swaros are the top sellers arouses suspicion. Sorry I just don't get it.
And yes I remember van Daalen has said many time that Swaro rules the alpha world because they spend more on R&D than Zeiss and Leica added together. As I remember the story I think it was a get together of top guys from all of the alphas and their dealers. The Zeiss and Leica guys were not struggling to decide whether Swaro sells most units and they had a good reason to explain Swaros sales dominance: a bigger R&D spend. And apparently van Daalen shouldn't be allowed to refer to this in case it sells more bins for him. This seems a preposterous proposition to me. But then maybe its me.
And although I have not been counting I don't know that van Daalen has referred to Swaro's dominance any more times than you have thrown rolling balls and crappy focusers into a thread. I don't ascribe any suspicious motives to you doing this but, hey, you never know about folks do you?
And suggesting that van Daalen's motive for commenting on Swaros is an underhand one to increase his own sales makes me wonder why folks from Opticron, Adorama, Nikon, Zeiss and a Swaro dealership in the States can put in appearances here, make recommendations as to models, post info about availability and special deals, get gushy about new upcoming models, flaunt the name of their brand or business in their posts (unlike van Daalen) and not get censured.
Brock, it just seems unjust to me. And rather undemocratic and anti-freedom of speech.
As to when me and van Daalen are going to get tie the knot (LOL) well, I think my Troubadoris and his Anne would have something to say about that. And while I actually do think that on average Dutch ladies are the prettiest in Europe, that is not something I would say (sorry Jan) about Dutchmen :-O
Lee
Pinewood
New York correspondent
CloseFocus
Well-known member
Lee,
This confuses me because if Swarovski spends as much on R&D as Zeiss and Leica put together, where are the results? Except for the flat field of Swarovision, which we all agree any manufacturer can do if they want, I don't see any obvious technical superiority in the EL line (leaving out the second tier lines). We make great hay here over the minor differences between the different alpha brands, but we all know that they are all great in their own ways, and that much of the difference comes down to personal choice - do you want a flat field, does the binocular fit your hand, does the focus knob turn too hard or easy, etc.
More R&D is required to field more binocular lines, however, and in that situation, I'm sure Nikon rules the roost, because I don't think anyone sells more binoculars than Nikon. But they compete in every market niche too. Swarovski sells the CL and SLC line, and I will admit I don't know where they stand in the optical pecking order, but I know the new Trinovids have been compared optically to the Ultravids, and from my experience, they feel just as rugged. Except for a little extra weight, a slightly smaller field of view, and about a foot and a half of near focus difference, they are the optical equals of binoculars costing 30-40% more.
Many people here attribute Swarovski's success to marketing, but now we hear that the Leica people themselves believe that R&D is the issue. Is it because of something about the current line, or perhaps that the binocular division hasn't been given enough money to develop a new line, which most Leica fans would agree would be very much appreciated?
Joe
Last edited:
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Lee,
Still too myopic, you didn't look back far enough, his statements were not as restricted or qualified as you cite above when he first started posting here and even long after that. Getting piled on repeatedly for it might have forced him to reform somewhat, if so, he got the message, but I'm still skeptical about his use of the word "proof: in his post earlier on this thread, having seen him use it repeatedly to equate sales figures as "proof" of Swaros being the "best" among the alphas. My auto industry analogy already pointed out the fallacy of this kind of argument.
Apparently, you are only selecting posts that seemingly reinforce your position, so I will have to go back and dig out those references myself when I have more time and then send them to you so you can eat crow (which when done in numbers is called a "murder"
In the meantime, I will follow his posts to see if what you say is true, but I think it might be wishful thinking on your part, because you tend to see the best in people rather than "the best" in binoculars..
Regarding your comments about being a dealer... As a member, everyone is entitled to express his or her opinions about optics, but as a dealer, blanket statements about one's best selling brand being "the best" bins among all others based on sales figures should be more tempered; otherwise, they sound too self-serving, even if that was not the intention.
Btw, when are the two of you setting a date?
<B>
Since you are talking about me (Am I getting Dennis II?????) I'll respond.
In the past (and present) we disagreed in some area.
So, you sell it as I got piled repeatedly which might have forced me to reform somewhat, getting the message.
Maybe in your dreams!!!
Keep digging, Brock.
Jan
The Perger prism rangefinder, which radios signals to the matched rifle scope, which adjusts its reticle position for dead-on aim at any range, and is settable for any bullet trajectory, proves that Leica is capable of formidable R&D, and not just a stick in the mud. They just apparently aren't very interested in us, is all.
Ron
Ron
Mac308
Well-known member
Personally, I've never doubted Swaro is tops in sales. As I've said, I believe they got there through a brilliant marketing strategy. It was, IMO, implemented in the 1990's and is now bearing full fruit.
They give professionals a VERY DEEP discount. As a result, these "people in authority" carry them, and thereby promote them. Look through birding and hunting magazines... you'll see more Swaro's hanging around "professionals" necks than anything else.
They visually design their binoculars to stand out (see above).
While it's not completely stated, they essentially have a no-fault, transferable warranty. The word of mouth marketing resulting from this liberal warranty cannot be understated. But one does pay for it.
Because of the above, Swaro bins have become De rigueur in the birding and hunting world. It's a statement about one's self. I'm absolutely convinced this last aspect cannot be understated.
I personally think Swaro builds a fine product, though undoubtedly more fragile than a Leica Ultravid. A binocular is the sum of its parts, and I find the Leica Ultravid a superior binocular, all things considered. But, I have no doubt Swaro tops it substantially in sales, for all the reasons I state.
They give professionals a VERY DEEP discount. As a result, these "people in authority" carry them, and thereby promote them. Look through birding and hunting magazines... you'll see more Swaro's hanging around "professionals" necks than anything else.
They visually design their binoculars to stand out (see above).
While it's not completely stated, they essentially have a no-fault, transferable warranty. The word of mouth marketing resulting from this liberal warranty cannot be understated. But one does pay for it.
Because of the above, Swaro bins have become De rigueur in the birding and hunting world. It's a statement about one's self. I'm absolutely convinced this last aspect cannot be understated.
I personally think Swaro builds a fine product, though undoubtedly more fragile than a Leica Ultravid. A binocular is the sum of its parts, and I find the Leica Ultravid a superior binocular, all things considered. But, I have no doubt Swaro tops it substantially in sales, for all the reasons I state.
Last edited:
CloseFocus
Well-known member
Now if they could improve on that to where the binocular would home in to some little bird peeping in the bushes, THAT would be cool. I would definitely pay the price for that technology 8-P
FrankD
Well-known member
Well said Mac and my feelings on the subject as well.
brocknroller
porromaniac
After reading Jerry's post, you could be correct about Jan reforming, but I am most definitely accurate in characterizing his previous behavior. Why you still don't "get it" even after hearing it confirmed by others or think that it was okay, I can only attribute to an emotional form of Inattentional blindness.
Love is blind (sometimes deaf and dumb too). :smoke:
My last word on the subject, but I'm sure not yours. I will ignore the epilogue.
<B>
My last word on this too:
I think this has nothing to do with 'dealers should tread carefully' on BF. If it was then Proud Papa would be condemned for blatantly advertising availability of SLCs and a special deal on the tripod adapter.
I think it has everything to do with Jan's 'in your face' usage of English (not his first language remember) that can come across as brash, headstrong and 'shoot from the hip', and in your face and loads of other descriptions. I first met this brand of English when doing business with Holland back in the 1970's and met it in the late 90s and 00s when working for a company that had a warehouse in Holland.
To me it is just the way some Dutch use English but I can remember how I reacted the first time I heard it and thought ' you really like the sound of your own opinions don't you?'.
Basically I think Jan has got up the noses of some people with what they perceive is his attitude and they have proceeded to veil this with the disguise of 'he can't say that because he is a dealer'.
OK. Thats me done on this one.
Leo
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Joe,
R&D results:
CL pocket, a go between, between a pocket and a midsize model.
CL 30, complete new design (not my favorite).
EL Range, only model with rangefunction where the laser goes outside the optical path.
ATX, modulair telescope design.
SV series, 32, 42 and 50mm.
SCL series 42 and 56 mm.
Same period Leica:
HD upgrade UV and Geovid.
Geovid Perger.
Upgrade Geovid HD sofware and now called R.
1.8 extender scope.
Trinovid 42.
Same period Zeiss:
HT 42 and 54.
Victory RF.
Conquest HD Japan.
Terra China.
BTW, the remark about the R&D budget did not come from us, but was the response from the brand as an explanation for the sale figures.
Jan
CloseFocus
Well-known member
Jan,
It does look like Leica may need to break open the piggy bank just a little...
As always, your insights are appreciated.
Joe
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Yup. I'll second that. Jan never said sales equaled "proof" of "best" either. Reread #133. I can't find anything in this thread to that effect.
Poor Lee. Now he's "myopic," "blind," "deaf," "dumb," doesn't "get it," and will henceforth be "ignored." :-O
Mark
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Is this the story of the good, the bad and the ugly?
Gijs van Ginkel
Well-known member
Dear all,
I have asked the manager of the binocular shop of the Dutch Bird Protection Association how the division of sales in their shops was (they sell for approx. 1 million euros per year).
By far the majority of sales was from Swarovski followed far behind by Zeiss and Leica.
Something else: I presented a lecture at the Binocular History Society meeting in Jena in 2011 about the history and quality development of Swarovski Optik from 1935 to the present time. In my presentation I had chosen measured optical properties as a measure of quality.
I compared similar instruments of different companies with similar instruments of Swarovski of the same time period and it struck me that for example the binoculars with built-in range finders from Leica and Zeiss were rather far behind the new range finder of Swarovski. My conclusion was that in the last decade both Leica and Zeiss, despite the very nice instruments made, were as far as quality was concerned, lagging behind the newest Swarovski models. At the discussion after the lecture an important coworker of Leica rose from his seat and explained the audience that it should be common knowledge that Leica and Zeiss both had quite a bit of trouble of financial and other nature, which prevented them from catching up with Swarovski.
Here in this forum a sometimes rather unfruitful discussion takes place with the analysis that a lot of consumers are rather stupid followers of fashion trends from which Swarovski takes its profits. There will certainly be some persons who act this way, but my experience as a sales person was different. Generally consumers were convinced by the quality of handling and optical performances of the binoculars and that was the reason for them that the Swarovski models were their favorite choice.
I have visited all three companies and it struck me also that Swarovski had organised its design and quality teams better than Leica and Zeiss. And these teams keep very good contact with different consumer groups, which I observed to a lesser extent at Leica and Zeiss.
Personally I a like the beauty of the Leitz-Leica designs of the post WW-2 binocular production: slim, beautiful models with good optical performance and also very reliable/strong.
However my experiences with the service level of Leica were not so good, while Zeiss and Swarovski do an excellent job in that respect.
Gijs
I have asked the manager of the binocular shop of the Dutch Bird Protection Association how the division of sales in their shops was (they sell for approx. 1 million euros per year).
By far the majority of sales was from Swarovski followed far behind by Zeiss and Leica.
Something else: I presented a lecture at the Binocular History Society meeting in Jena in 2011 about the history and quality development of Swarovski Optik from 1935 to the present time. In my presentation I had chosen measured optical properties as a measure of quality.
I compared similar instruments of different companies with similar instruments of Swarovski of the same time period and it struck me that for example the binoculars with built-in range finders from Leica and Zeiss were rather far behind the new range finder of Swarovski. My conclusion was that in the last decade both Leica and Zeiss, despite the very nice instruments made, were as far as quality was concerned, lagging behind the newest Swarovski models. At the discussion after the lecture an important coworker of Leica rose from his seat and explained the audience that it should be common knowledge that Leica and Zeiss both had quite a bit of trouble of financial and other nature, which prevented them from catching up with Swarovski.
Here in this forum a sometimes rather unfruitful discussion takes place with the analysis that a lot of consumers are rather stupid followers of fashion trends from which Swarovski takes its profits. There will certainly be some persons who act this way, but my experience as a sales person was different. Generally consumers were convinced by the quality of handling and optical performances of the binoculars and that was the reason for them that the Swarovski models were their favorite choice.
I have visited all three companies and it struck me also that Swarovski had organised its design and quality teams better than Leica and Zeiss. And these teams keep very good contact with different consumer groups, which I observed to a lesser extent at Leica and Zeiss.
Personally I a like the beauty of the Leitz-Leica designs of the post WW-2 binocular production: slim, beautiful models with good optical performance and also very reliable/strong.
However my experiences with the service level of Leica were not so good, while Zeiss and Swarovski do an excellent job in that respect.
Gijs
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Leica calls THAT British racing green??!? :eek!: It's not. I actually like this shade which is khaki green if ever there was.
Mac, put in an order. Just right for hunting, birding too. :t:
Mark
