Leica is not getting the attention it deserves (5 Viewers)

[Mike F]

That's one of Leica's problems......they waited 10+ years to even try and compete with the EL's. They waited much longer than that to compete with Swaro's warranty and customer service here in the USA. They're always attempting to play catch up, while Swaro remains far out in front.

I look forward to the time then when Swarovski produces an alpha binocular which is pleasant to look through........ one without the nausea inducing rolling ball.......

With the top bins from the big three it’s all a matter of taste and priorities, not which is ‘better’.

 

[NDhunter]

There is one thing often mentioned. and that is the Leica lack of enough eye relief for glasses wearers, in some models.

As far as rolling ball, it only affects around 2% of the population...........

Jerry

 

[Mike F]

There is one thing often mentioned. and that is the Leica lack of enough eye relief for glasses wearers, in some models.

As far as rolling ball, it only affects around 2% of the population...........

Jerry

Jerry, I'm not doubting that statistic if you say it's correct, but I have to say it does seem surprising........

 

[Rotherbirder]

Although I've been a Swarovski user for 20+ years, their aggressive marketing is now starting to leave a bad taste. I see the discontinuation of several EL models - most notably the 8x32 - as a cynical move to push up the price of top-tier, so called 'alpha' binoculars by cutting out cheaper - but not necessarily optically inferior - models from a buyer's options. I may be wrong but that's how it strikes me. Never has an 8x32 Noctivid seemed so attractive a prospect! I've never really 'got on' with Leica binoculars in the past but I would certainly look at one of these now if it was to appear. Leica's quiet, no frills or bluster way of marketing is in complete contrast to that of Swarovski & Zeiss and is often misinterpreted as a lack of drive & innovation. For me, Leica means impeccable, functional yet understated design in a robust package. I would have to check out the optics of course to see whether I could now 'get on' with them.

RB

 

[lmans66]

I agree Rotherbirder.....I feel that since Leica takes a no-nonsense approach...you simply get quality and not over-the-top marketing. It seems that many products and manufacturers feel like they need to blitz the market, get gimmicky, ....that you almost force the brand upon someone. Leica is not one of them, ....my style. I don't think Zeiss is overly forceful either.

 

[Mac308]

As far as rolling ball, it only affects around 2% of the population...........

I'd like to see actual imperical data for this statement. Frankly I don't buy it. In my informal poll of folks I know, it's more like something well beyond 25%.

 

[PYRTLE]

Although I've been a Swarovski user for 20+ years, their aggressive marketing is now starting to leave a bad taste. I see the discontinuation of several EL models - most notably the 8x32 - as a cynical move to push up the price of top-tier, so called 'alpha' binoculars by cutting out cheaper - but not necessarily optically inferior - models from a buyer's options. I may be wrong but that's how it strikes me. Never has an 8x32 Noctivid seemed so attractive a prospect! I've never really 'got on' with Leica binoculars in the past but I would certainly look at one of these now if it was to appear. Leica's quiet, no frills or bluster way of marketing is in complete contrast to that of Swarovski & Zeiss and is often misinterpreted as a lack of drive & innovation. For me, Leica means impeccable, functional yet understated design in a robust package. I would have to check out the optics of course to see whether I could now 'get on' with them.

RB

I agree Rotherbirder.....I feel that since Leica takes a no-nonsense approach...you simply get quality and not over-the-top marketing. It seems that many products and manufacturers feel like they need to blitz the market, get gimmicky, ....that you almost force the brand upon someone. Leica is not one of them, ....my style. I don't think Zeiss is overly forceful either.

I think you're missing the point I raised earlier in that Leica has greatly reduced it's range of latest alpha models available ....just 3 at the moment - 2 Noctovid and 1 85mm Televid angled scope. Whereas at one time they used to offer 8 variants of Trinovid BA/N plus compact and 8 models of 62 /77 telescope (APO /non APO - straight or angled body ). That's 3 at present versus a minimum of 16 models 20 years ago. And yet Swarovski was your choice.
I reiterate, that it is a dramatic case of drawing in their ambitious attitude and watching the others. The Leica 32mm offering is fairly aged now - Ultravid > HD > HD plus.

 

[lmans66]

Yes, correct on the lack of models as Swaro has surpassed the line-up of both Leica and Zeiss and really, the 32 model of the SF just came about this past year for Zeiss so they were on an equal footing with Leica. And yes, based upon my needs as I compared all three brands for a 10x42,...I elected the Noctivid.

I must state though, that when looking for a 8x32, I elected the Meostar B1.1 over the Swaro's of all price-points as well as the Zeiss FL and SF. So it isn't always the qualified alpha that is a winner. As I mentioned earlier, I am interested in the new Meopta line-up of B2's as I feel they will give the others a run for the money.

But for me....I am beginning to see a pattern....Leica, Meopta ..... quality without flash, w/o gimmicks, w/o marketing to sell me to the highest price point possible for little gain.

 

[eitanaltman]

Pretty disingenuous to make that argument, include Televid non-APO models as “alpha” offerings of 20 years ago, but then ignore literally the entire Ultravid HD+ model line and say Leica only has 3 current alpha offerings.

 

[PYRTLE]

Pretty disingenuous to make that argument, include Televid non-APO models as “alpha” offerings of 20 years ago, but then ignore literally the entire Ultravid HD+ model line and say Leica only has 3 current alpha offerings.

Perhaps slightly unbalanced in hindsight; I ignored 50mm models whilst recalling Swarovski also offered non HD 65 and 80 models correspondingly. But back to the thread title ; perhaps you would be so kind as to post your thoughts on a 32mm Noctovid - dead or alive? Whilst in an old seperate thread I mentioned how I was impressed by the overall image when I tested an 8/42 Noctovid (disliked the strap lug position) but chose instead the Zeiss SF for balance and ergonomics.
Thank you.

 

[lmans66]

Perhaps slightly unbalanced in hindsight; I ignored 50mm models whilst recalling Swarovski also offered non HD 65 and 80 models correspondingly. But back to the thread title ; perhaps you would be so kind as to post your thoughts on a 32mm Noctovid - dead or alive? Whilst in an old seperate thread I mentioned how I was impressed by the overall image when I tested an 8/42 Noctovid (disliked the strap lug position) but chose instead the Zeiss SF for balance and ergonomics.
Thank you.

This 'how I was impressed by the overall image when I tested an 8/42 Noctovid (disliked the strap lug position) but chose instead the Zeiss SF for balance and ergonomics.".... is exactly my point. The Noctivid, SF and NL are all great....it is up to 'just what you stated' here as personal choice about the balance and ergonomics. Hence, for me, it was the same 'balance and ergonomics' that impressed me about the Noctivid.

I am thinking that Leica will not venture into the Noctivid 32 line-up....they already have an excellent Alpha in the Ultravid 32 model. And with the NL, SF, perhaps the new Meopta B2, when does the market become saturated?

 

[PYRTLE]

And with the NL, SF, perhaps the new Meopta B2, when does the market become saturated?

Personally, it's not as busy as when I was retailing optics 20 years ago. Alongside the "Big 3" we had Nikon HG (later HGL), Bausch & Lomb, and Kahles offering some options.

 

[jgraider]

Although I've been a Swarovski user for 20+ years, their aggressive marketing is now starting to leave a bad taste. I see the discontinuation of several EL models - most notably the 8x32 - as a cynical move to push up the price of top-tier, so called 'alpha' binoculars by cutting out cheaper - but not necessarily optically inferior - models from a buyer's options. I may be wrong but that's how it strikes me. Never has an 8x32 Noctivid seemed so attractive a prospect! I've never really 'got on' with Leica binoculars in the past but I would certainly look at one of these now if it was to appear. Leica's quiet, no frills or bluster way of marketing is in complete contrast to that of Swarovski & Zeiss and is often misinterpreted as a lack of drive & innovation. For me, Leica means impeccable, functional yet understated design in a robust package. I would have to check out the optics of course to see whether I could now 'get on' with them.

RB

No offense intended......Swaro outsells Leica probably 20:1, or likely more. Swaro is obviously doing something right in the alpha market and everyone else is trying to play catch up. I do not look at Leica's marketing as being "less pushy". I look at it as basically nonexistant and the sales #'s prove it.

 

[CSG]

Honestly, I want to like Swaros but the rolling ball affect of their top tier binocs when I was shopping some years ago is a hard no for me. Whatever nonsense about only 2% notice is not backed up empirically. I've talked to others locally about this effect as well as a couple guys who sell them. None of them own Swaros with that feature. Of the top binoculars I've looked at, Zeiss does the trick for me. The unfortunately discontinued 8x42 HTs are the best binoculars I own and the finest I've ever looked through. I commented about Leica bins up thread. Love my old M4 camera and I love their lenses but couldn't get along with any of their bins.

 

[lmans66]

Honestly, I want to like Swaros but the rolling ball affect of their top tier binocs when I was shopping some years ago is a hard no for me. Whatever nonsense about only 2% notice is not backed up empirically. I've talked to others locally about this effect as well as a couple guys who sell them. None of them own Swaros with that feature. Of the top binoculars I've looked at, Zeiss does the trick for me. The unfortunately discontinued 8x42 HTs are the best binoculars I own and the finest I've ever looked through. I commented about Leica bins up thread. Love my old M4 camera and I love their lenses but couldn't get along with any of their bins.

I never can understand why Zeiss moved away from the 8x and 10x 42. Sure the SF is nice but they are different bins in my thinking. The only thing that I didn't like about the HT was the focus was super sharp, but not as 3Dish... Great bin though

 

[tenex]

I'd like to see actual empirical data for this statement. Frankly I don't buy it. In my informal poll of folks I know, it's more like something well beyond 25%.

With such statistics, we probably need to distinguish between being able to detect RB (and at what level), aesthetically disliking it to whatever degree, and actually being made uncomfortable by it. The success of such models suggests at least that the number sickened by it is indeed rather small.

 

[Aotus]

There's a lot of mud-slinging in here to justify choosing Leica. I think that's unnecessary. If you like them, great, if you don't, cool. It was the over-the-top claims (like swaro rolling-ball effect being "nausea-inducing" - I'm super sensitive to such things and this does not happen to me) that made it hard for me to be confident in making the leap to try an alpha bino. I think everyone agrees that Leica is making some great binos, and the company is not under threat of collapsing because zeiss and swarovski also make good products.

Marketing is part of the business and I don't think it's fair (or true) to single out some brands as using marketing to suggest that others are purists that do not have their strategies at play... Zeiss pushes hard on birding websites (Like THIS ONE), Swaro tries to evoke an impression of luxury/prestige (the ads can be quite douchey), and Leica has a new line of beautiful hipster-retro models of inferior build quality (e.g., non-waterproof). They're all strategies to expend their base, this is the way and you can't fault them for trying to make money. If you want alphas, look to their top tier models for the fair comparison of specs and experiences to choose what suits you.

 

[lmans66]

There's a lot of mud-slinging in here to justify

Ah!...this is half the fun of it all....don't take it away from us

 

[Nethero]

this is the way

I’m not sure if this reference will stick, but...

Enter Grogu.

Aside from that being the first thing that popped into my mind reading your post, I think you are spot on. One thing I have learned is that some people will defend, defend, defend. Which is fine, but it’s almost like they are personally hurt when someone has a quibble with a brand they covet.

 

[AlphaFan]

some people will defend, defend, defend .... a brand they covet.

Very true, and it sometimes gets a bit tribal. A few hunting sites I also frequent appear to have developed a huge “single brand” fan base which virtually swallows all objective discussion of brand comparison. If someone criticizes a feature or “good heavens,” prefers another brand, they are immediately dismissed as uninformed or biased.

I’ve own(ed) and thoroughly enjoy(ed) many wonderful binoculars from Leica, Zeiss, Swarovski, Nikon, etc, and still enjoy trying out other brands and new models. Learned a lot along the journey and today am much less susceptible to advertising, endorsements, hype, and flat-out misinformation. Even today, when considering buying a binocular I prefer to direct-compare, if possible, before buying.

To that end, I own 2x SLCs and have been interested in the SW EL 42mm since they first came out. But from the beginning noticed this strange phenomenon while panning with that particular model, which makes me very uncomfortable. I later learned it was commonly called “rolling ball effect.” I’ve gone back and reassessed the ELs a number of times and the effect is still there. However, many SW fans dismiss it and try to tell those affected that we are either exaggerating, hating on SW, or in a 1:1,000,000 group that sees it. Personally, I’m not very susceptible to seasickness, but would never presume to tell someone leaning over a ship-rail that it was all in their head.