• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

Bizarre 'brand new' SF armour issue! (1 Viewer)

laurencejackson

Well-known member
Australia
So...I got a pretty good price-matched deal here in Australia on a brand new pair of 10x32 SFs today. Got to the store and had a look at them, they were all properly sealed in their box and the serial no. was 499xxxx. (a bit low maybe?)

Well I pulled them out of the carry case and I couldn't believe what I saw, I thought Zeiss had craftily brought out a new 'grey' version like the old SF x42s without telling anybody! This brand new 'black' pair were completely discolored all over, as if they were coated in talc powder... They looked grey and what's more, you could wipe/smear the deposit slightly, but it stayed discolored if that makes sense. It was like the rubber was exfoliating but the underlying armour was not black anymore.

I had noticed a similar, but not nearly so bad a situation with the stores' demo 8x32 SFs a few weeks ago. I put that down to the fact that they were demos and handled a lot and didn't think much of it at the time. Does anyone know anything about this or heard a similar story? Is it a zinc like byproduct of the rubber? I'm surprised to say the least because I haven't heard of this being mentioned here on BF or elsewhere..

Any thoughts how this could occur? A bit bummed I didn't get my new bins today though and now...well I'm not sure what to do!
 
That's a shame. Own(ed) three SF's in different formats, but never had an armour issue. Do you have any pictures?
No, stupidly I didn't think at the time...All I can say its very similar to the deposit you get on the rubber focus ring of a used camera lens or spotting scope (Kowas come to mind).

On researching a little, it seems it could be either a mildew, or 'rubber bloom', wax crystals coming off a 'mold-release compound'. But on a new bin... It seems so strange? It's not humid here in WA unlike the east coast, where they may have been initially shipped to...

I found this online, they weren't 'quite' this bad, smoother, but almost!!

1728893928957.png
 
Rubber coatings often go white.

My Conquest HD 8x32 was slightly white when I opened the case after about three years non use, but it simply wiped off.

The earliest bad examples that I know are the 1985? Minolta Autofocus cameras AF7000/5000??

The Fujinon 14x40 that I got for £120 with a six month shop warranty was completely white. It took about an hour to clean it with water.
Otherwise the binocular works as new. It was probably used at sea.

There are numerous other examples, but is a fault that Zeiss should address with the SF above.

Regards,
B.
 
FWIW, I've been told (the FL's had the same issues and would it have been with a Swarovski product BF would explode) it's just for protection of the rubber. Wipe it off, use afterwoods some vaseline to rubb in and that's all.

Jan
 
FWIW, I've been told (the FL's had the same issues and would it have been with a Swarovski product BF would explode) it's just for protection of the rubber. Wipe it off, use afterwoods some vaseline to rubb in and that's all.

Jan
Really? That's surprising as I have owned over the last 25 years, several FLs, recently the conquest HDX and both 8x and 10x42 SFs in the past (why didn't I just keep them...?) and never seen anything like what I saw today. The armour has always been perfect other than in my early FLs, it started to come away from the body a little. I did buy my first grey 8x42 SFs from a BF member Suppressor and I know he mentioned an armor issue with them which he treated before the sale and I received them looking absolutely perfect.

Today, it was truly like one of those chocolate bars that has been left in the heat for too long....!

Also, this wouldn't wipe away easily, it would probably need some form of oil or glycerin etc to break it down, but I am no expert of course. The staff were really shocked (it is a major Australian camera retailer chain) so I don't think they had ever seen it before and they are an official Zeiss dealer.

Anyway, thanks that is interesting Jan, if it is indeed a deliberate move by Zeiss?
 
So long as this is not happening on short time scales, which would be indicative of material defect or poor recipe design, then it should be of little or no concern from a materials perspective.

Sounds like typical blooming, possibly soft block crystallization if it's an elastomer. Low glass transition temperature materials (rubber, elastomers) have enough molecular mobility at room temperature, such that smaller molecules within them can move about and come to the surface. Chemical (in)compatibility, ambient temperatures, and concentration are the main factors driving the rate of blooming or exudation.

It's typically a slow process and often goes unnoticed except in areas unhandled for long periods of time, which allows for surface accumulation.

Soft block crystallization on the other hand, while harmless, can persist in spite of surface cleaning.

A pair of binoculars I bought this year from the 1990s, still New in the box, was well covered in a whitish bloom. It all cleaned off eventually, after a fair amount of alcohol as a solvent and elbow grease.
 
So long as this is not happening on short time scales, which would be indicative of material defect or poor recipe design, then it should be of little or no concern from a materials perspective.

Sounds like typical blooming, possibly soft block crystallization if it's an elastomer. Low glass transition temperature materials (rubber, elastomers) have enough molecular mobility at room temperature, such that smaller molecules within them can move about and come to the surface. Chemical (in)compatibility, ambient temperatures, and concentration are the main factors driving the rate of blooming or exudation.

It's typically a slow process and often goes unnoticed except in areas unhandled for long periods of time, which allows for surface accumulation.

Soft block crystallization on the other hand, while harmless, can persist in spite of surface cleaning.

A pair of binoculars I bought this year from the 1990s, still New in the box, was well covered in a whitish bloom. It all cleaned off eventually, after a fair amount of alcohol as a solvent and elbow grease.
Interesting...thanks for the reply and explanation. I still don't understand though how this can happen on brand new SFs, presumably built within the last 4 years or so and probably more recently than that. The last thing I want to do is drop $2000US and then go home and spend an hour or two scrubbing my new bins!.

My uneducated gut feeling is that this is a basic defect in the armor, my previous SFs which were from 2014 and 2016, never showed this at all and spent 3 months unhandled, on board a container ship bound for Australia.
 
Interesting...thanks for the reply and explanation. I still don't understand though how this can happen on brand new SFs, presumably built within the last 4 years or so and probably more recently than that. The last thing I want to do is drop $2000US and then go home and spend an hour or two scrubbing my new bins!.

My uneducated gut feeling is that this is a basic defect in the armor, my previous SFs which were from 2014 and 2016, never showed this at all and spent 3 months unhandled, on board a container ship bound for Australia.
I would feel the same way, that's a poor user experience. I can't say whether or not its a defect, would require characterizing what came out.

I can say that 4 years would certainly be long enough for this type of process to play out for many, many materials. Even 1 year would not be surprising.

So while it might not be a defect, more careful material selection could be a solution.

It's tricky because soft touch materials often have this issue, and to remove it is a series of trade offs. Typical tradeoff is a harder material.

Temperature exposure is another one, for example storage in a hot warehouse could drive this effect to be worse. Then cooling down too low can also drive it, if whatever's blooming out is soluble.
 
Is it a zinc like byproduct of the rubber? I'm surprised to say the least because I haven't heard of this being mentioned here on BF or elsewhere..
Often zinc stearate, which you will find posts about if you search here. I just encountered it myself all over an Ultravid, as I had once before on a little Docter 8x21 (quite good optically!) that must have sat on a shelf for years. Normally it's just a talc-like powder that cleans right off with soapy water and a cloth, but perhaps yours is different?
 
Its normal, I have had it happen to me lots of times over the years. Just wipe things off and carry on.
It is most likely on softer rubber areas such as eyecups, rainguards, objective covers etc. I recently got
my Conquest 10x42 HD out of the safe, and it needed a wiping off.
Jerry
 
Its normal, I have had it happen to me lots of times over the years. Just wipe things off and carry on.
It is most likely on softer rubber areas such as eyecups, rainguards, objective covers etc. I recently got
my Conquest 10x42 HD out of the safe, and it needed a wiping off.
Jerry

That's the issue though, the deposit doesn't simply wipe off as you would expect if it was a purely cosmetic, talc/powdery residue. It smears a little but stays put on the plastic. My brand new Conquest 8x32 HDX in August arrived with perfect armor and my black 8x42 SFs a couple of years ago ditto.

I cannot see how this could be normal or considered normal or acceptable for a new, sealed top of the range Zeiss. The manager was mouth open and incredulous when he saw it!

Anyway, I've ordered a new one from the original supplier I price matched with for the same price, so roll on Thursday :)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top