-
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.
Is it just me? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter GrampaTom
- Start date
Looking through a binocular…..
Do you consider the issues in that list are false information?
This aspect is not clear in your posts.
Or not relevant?
It is no contradiction; you are right both of you. Or not relevant?
Last edited:
Not false, well maybe. More like not important. The reference to 1st world problems is what I’m struggling to make. If you read the quoted dialogue that was in post 1. The fellow survived us. He wrote a review of his new NL highlighting all the “issues” he learned here. Then when pressed he acknowledged why he chose with the stuff that actually matters. see #20...
Last edited:
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Tom, I kind of agree with James on this one. I own most of these top dogs and they all have areas that we call issues, and other areas where things can be improved. Complaints or areas of weakness are pretty much inherent in all of them. I can list an equal number of less than stellar performance issues in all three of those manufacturers, let’s not forget to ad in Nikon. Some of these manufacturers in trying to improve some of these issues have actually gone backwards.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Please do. And then please can you demonstrate not what you've personally experienced, but what gets reported frequently here of these? I agree with most of what James said, except theres an historical issue. He wrote, "I think you’re just noticing because that’s what you own." Id argue no, Im noticing cuz thats whats being written here now. Many of the older respondents here, who's nerves Ive apparently pricked, keep wanting to make this my fandom for Swaro. Hardly. Im loyal to family, friends, ideas. Inanimate objects, not so much. If they dont work and cant be reasonably fixed they go. Bye. What Im talking about is the dialogue, advice here, that focuses on imagined Swaro shortcomings, that are not terribly consequential to why we buy binoculars. And that at a rate that far exceeds Leica, Zeiss, Nikon shortcomings in any recent postings.. That is my impression. Prove me wrong. Is there a shopping list of stuff we complain about for those 3 brands that comes close to Swaro? Now?
I really want to forget your silly political rants.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
They’re only selling political rants to somebody who doesn’t understand them. And because we have differing opinions does it mean that mine is wrong ✌🏼
Thats correct. They are not silly. Because we have differing political opinions, one of which is this conversation does not belong here, you are correct it does not follow yours are wrong. One does not beget the other.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
I can only report my experiences with all of the binoculars being discussed. There seems to be many things here that I and many of the groups that I observe with also don’t recognize, at least in a make or break decision. For instance the glare issue of some of the swarovski‘s , I don’t doubt that some people are having this issue but I truly wonder how much is true and how much is just repeated when some buys another brand. I’ve had over a dozen people using multiple top dog binoculars in comparison with the Swarovski‘s , NL’s and EL’s and I couldn’t definitively say that they were any worse or better than Ultravid‘s or SF’s with glare.
Some people are more sensitive to criticism than others.
I don’t necessarily think that that is true. Leica has had focuser and CA complaints for years , even as they improve in both areas. Zeiss FL edge issues, SF as James stated and I’d ad very thin cheaply made plastic eyepieces with like three threads, Conquest even worse, the list is pretty even. I’d even go far as to say that I think Swaro may have more complainers than actual true issues be ping complained about.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Agreed. Thank you 🙏🏼
Paultricounty: "Some of these manufacturers in trying to improve some of these issues have actually gone backwards." I'm very interested to know examples of this, thanks. I'm only able to recall that in the Swaro. SLC the close focus distance was moved back--to enable the design of the instrument to be simpler and less costly to produce.
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Adhoc, I didn’t know that about the SLC, I do know they did lengthen the short focus distance on the EL 42’s after the NL’s were introduced. I do know that this was not intended as improvement. I got two differing explanations from Swaro on this, one was to make it less expensive so they could lower price , and the other was they couldn’t have the previous model have a better short focus distance. Again I wouldn’t agree that this was done for the intention of improvement.
To name a few off the top of my head of what I feel are backward steps would be , the Kowa Genesis and Swaro using eco friendly rubber armor materials that are not as robust, I’ve had two Kowa’s that the armor peeled, and I’ve seen a few newer Swaros where the armor was lifting in spots. Nikon with what some people say went to eco glass (not sure if that was the change) in the last run of SE’s, some report more CA. The NL line has more click stops than the EL (and SLC if I remember) to help make more minute adjustments (6 or 7 stops) but they are more vague in the actual stops and are not as firm. They don’t have the feel of the previous mentioned, It makes it more difficult to get both set and to stay put.
I might ad the Leica Trinovid HD line is a clear step backwards from the previous Trinovids. Same could be said for Nikon going from one of the best premium glasses in the EDG to the upper mid level MHG. Of course the last two examples are different binoculars from their previous models , so the shift wasn’t intended to be an improvement, but Nikon might disagree , as they have with me , stating the MHG is an improved model. There are a few more I can’t think of right now. I’d like to put the disclaimer in here now, these are my experiences with the products mentioned that I own, owned or have used from others in my observing sphere.
Paul
Paultricounty
Well-known member
Adhoc, I could ad the Swarovski FP attachment system if I wanted to stir the pot , but I think they’re an improvement 🤪✌🏼.
Paul
Paul
yes, of course. If you're asking, I would say no, there is nothing unusual or special about Swaro being piled-on to or overly criticized in these forums. All the binoculars have their worst aspects aired-out over & over again here. It seems like a form of customer feedback to me, a democratic consumer process of people wanting their needs to be listened-to and addressed by the manufacturer.
Swaro:
Loose rubber covering
Glare
Focuser harder in one direction than the other
Sticky rain guards
Objective covers fall off/sticky
Fieldpro solution in search of problem
Flat field distorts things
Fogging
Finger dents in wrong place
Panning uncomfortable for some do to distortion
Shortening close focus in SLC and EL
Leica:
Scritchy/dry feeling focuser
Not very innovative FOV/FF wise
Eye relief
Zeiss:
Plastic eye cups
Feel cheap
Nikon:
No $2-3K entry at the mo (thwarts conversation/comparison)
Weird marketing
Service not so consistent or easy
See it?
Loose rubber covering
Glare
Focuser harder in one direction than the other
Sticky rain guards
Objective covers fall off/sticky
Fieldpro solution in search of problem
Flat field distorts things
Fogging
Finger dents in wrong place
Panning uncomfortable for some do to distortion
Shortening close focus in SLC and EL
Leica:
Scritchy/dry feeling focuser
Not very innovative FOV/FF wise
Eye relief
Zeiss:
Plastic eye cups
Feel cheap
Nikon:
No $2-3K entry at the mo (thwarts conversation/comparison)
Weird marketing
Service not so consistent or easy
See it?
Not sure what you mean with this "Yes of course. If you're asking, I would say no. Sorry, if its just me...
I totally agree its should be a form of customer feedback. Not sure that it is. We almost never hear from a manufacturer. I was told once its Swaro company policy not to participate. So we hang out here doing our best to be heard, hoping, wondering, waiting. Given all that was written about Swaro glare for instance it would seem unconscionable they would bring out the NLs without dealing... right? We don't know. Seems fair conjecture that the unknowing contributes to the criticisms.
