-
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... (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Mac308
- Start date
Its true I have seen Jan refer to Swaro as the Number 1 many times but always in connection with 'which alpha brand sells most units in his experience' or just being the most successful alpha brand in marketing.
And I have seen some people misrepresent this as some sort of statement like 'Swaros are wonderful and I sell Swaros, so hot foot it down to my shop quick and buy a Swaro today!' Sometimes when looking deeply you can see things that aren't there.
I have seen Jan say he is disappointed by Zeiss getting involved at various levels with out-sourcing production. And I have seen some people get hot about this too (whereas me, the Zeiss-boy thought its a fair opinion) and misunderstand it. I was not alone in thinking that Jan's views about this were unfairly interpreted, here is Steve offering his take:
Jan also offered a correct (at least in my opinion) stance that as a dealer his basic concern was that the customer should get the value they pay for, and as long as that is met, it should not make much difference if the Conquest HD is Japanese. He then added his personal qualifier that Zeiss ought to be up front and say where they are made and that he personally feels that the European alphas should stay European. It seems you guys jumped to the conclusion that Swarovski is an in house European, and that since Jan sells Swarovski, he somehow is feathering his own nest. Come on, but that is like saying you can't review something you own, because if you own it, you obviously like it, and since you like it, you can not fairly comment on it.
I put a few words of the above in italics because this seems to sum up the whole anti-Jan movement.
The same 'jump to conclusions' lead to criticism of him for criticising the customer service offered by some alphas in Holland and Belgium, as if the guy has no right to have an opinion on this. And this despite the fact that he explicitly stated that Meopta and Nikon are fine products, just let down by poor back-up.
Meanwhile another well known Swaro dealer posts the following, without any any whisper of protests by those who want to protect us from dealers touting for business on the Forum:
SLC 15x56s in the U.S.
Yeah!! Our first new model SLC 15x56s will be in shop tomorrow. While they no longer have a tripod adapter included, we have a couple in stock that we will include for Birdforum members if interested. Feel free to PM.
Yeah!! Our first new model SLC 15x56s will be in shop tomorrow. While they no longer have a tripod adapter included, we have a couple in stock that we will include for Birdforum members if interested. Feel free to PM.
Yes, its a genuine advert with a special offer for BF members. Personally I don't have a problem with this as its a new model in short supply and Swaro enthusiasts are being informed about its availability.
But the silence of the advocates of 'no dealers allowed to tout for business here' and 'No publicising of Swaros allowed' was deafening.
Lee
Last edited:
Nice info Pomp.
Some interesting differences between the two dealers:
Eagle Optics has 6 Swaros in the top 10 but B&H only 3
B&H has 4 Leicas in the top 10 but Eagle Optics only 1
Both dealers have 3 Zeisses in their top 10
Fascinating stuff this baloney :-O
Lee
FrankD
Well-known member
Lee,
I think the differences between the two businesses could be explained in a variety of ways.
For example, both B and H and Adorama can, from time to time, have some killer "regular prices" on a variety of sport optics. Case in point, the Leupold Mojave that Steve and I just reviewed is priced at $349 at just about every retailer except B and H. They have it at $279. I have not looked at any Alphas lately so I cannot say this definitely applies here but if one retailer or another tends to have better prices on a given manufacturer's products then they would, theoretically tend to sell more of them. If that is the case then that would explain why one list is different than another.
My second thought would also be that the clientele for each of these retailers could be completely different. In my opinion, one is sort of a camera store that deals in sport optics. The other is a birding sport optics store.
Third, it could be that one retailer tends to push a given manufacturer for one reason or another. If the person you are relying on for advice tends to favor Brand X over Brand Y then they are more likely to sell Brand X.
Just my thoughts.
I think the differences between the two businesses could be explained in a variety of ways.
For example, both B and H and Adorama can, from time to time, have some killer "regular prices" on a variety of sport optics. Case in point, the Leupold Mojave that Steve and I just reviewed is priced at $349 at just about every retailer except B and H. They have it at $279. I have not looked at any Alphas lately so I cannot say this definitely applies here but if one retailer or another tends to have better prices on a given manufacturer's products then they would, theoretically tend to sell more of them. If that is the case then that would explain why one list is different than another.
My second thought would also be that the clientele for each of these retailers could be completely different. In my opinion, one is sort of a camera store that deals in sport optics. The other is a birding sport optics store.
Third, it could be that one retailer tends to push a given manufacturer for one reason or another. If the person you are relying on for advice tends to favor Brand X over Brand Y then they are more likely to sell Brand X.
Just my thoughts.
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I would think that the sales numbers for high end binoculars are actually quite small. How often to do even binocular fanatics like us buy a new binocular? Swarovski selling twice as many binoculars than Leica might just mean that in that month, there were two Swaros sold and one Leica. We may picture the binoculars flying out the door into the eager hands of binocular lovers, and in a just world that would be the case, but in reality it's probably more like a trickle. Even in a birding festival with thousands of birders, the chances that anything more than a tiny proportion have purchased their binoculars in the last year are small at best. The truth is that people tend to keep their expensive binoculars for a long time, and there are so many sellers of high end binoculars (at least on the internet and in sporting goods stores) because the profit margin is high, not the sales volume.
Hi Frank
Thanks for those thoughts. You are dead right that loads of factors can affect these results
As I was looking through Eagle Optics lists I could see that some models were flagged up as having special sales prices which could mean those models could float up the rankings and influence how the top 10 or 20 look, especially if the sales statistics cover a period similar to the length of time the special price applies.
If one store has more 'walk-in' customers than the other then point of sale displays and promotions and, as you say, the opinions of sales staff, could all make a big difference.
My favourite store over here is my fave because it has a countryside view from the showroom through windows that open. This sort of store may well get different results from an in-city store with no view at all apart from inside the store itself.
Some months ago Mike Jensen said that there are no industry statistics that enable them all to know exactly who is selling how many of which models and where.
Lee
jan van daalen
Well-known member
SV8.5x42
SV10x42sv
SLC 8x42
Pocket 8x20
Pocket 10x25
SV 8x32
Trinovid 8x42
Legend HD 8x42
Excursion 8x42
Geovid 8x56.
That's our list in volume best sold over all in 2013.
Brock, you outperformed yourself!
Selling a Nikon violation of an Swarovski patent as an evidence of Swarovski copying Nikon's EDG flat field and eliminate them by threatening wiht a law suit.
Then softening this statement by adding: "While we never know exactly what went on in the development of the SVEL......
Also getting a little bit personal on my integrity....
Our sales list is about the same as those from E&O and B&H, but YOU could always sell it as "all those traders boost their most expensive products", or something like that and then you are right again in your perception, aren't you(?).
Could we classify this as the inconvenient truth?
Jan
SV10x42sv
SLC 8x42
Pocket 8x20
Pocket 10x25
SV 8x32
Trinovid 8x42
Legend HD 8x42
Excursion 8x42
Geovid 8x56.
That's our list in volume best sold over all in 2013.
Brock, you outperformed yourself!
Selling a Nikon violation of an Swarovski patent as an evidence of Swarovski copying Nikon's EDG flat field and eliminate them by threatening wiht a law suit.
Then softening this statement by adding: "While we never know exactly what went on in the development of the SVEL......
Also getting a little bit personal on my integrity....
Our sales list is about the same as those from E&O and B&H, but YOU could always sell it as "all those traders boost their most expensive products", or something like that and then you are right again in your perception, aren't you(?).
Could we classify this as the inconvenient truth?
Jan
CloseFocus
Well-known member
I agree about the 32mm size - I use my 10x32mm UV's 90% of the time. I had planned on them being my only non-compact binocular, but in some types of birding, woodland mostly, they were simply not bright enough, so I ended up with an 8x42 UV as well. Now that I have sold my Trinovids I have money to spend, and I'm torn between the 7x42 and 12x50 UV. I don't know if I could live with the 10.8 foot near focus of the 7x42, or the weight of the 12x50, so I may just use the money to buy non-essentials like food and clothing. But if a good deal pops up...
FrankD
Well-known member
Mark,
Is this based on the number of reviews of specific binoculars received from purchasers?
I remember before Nikon dropped Eagle Optics that the Nikon Binocular which received the most reviews by far was the Monarch 8x36. A very moderately priced binocular. It had about 50 reviews, close to what the 8.5x42 Swarovisions had at that time.
Bob
Pompadour,
Chalk this up to sheer ignorance on my part but I don't know what a "Filter facility" is or how to find it and use it.
Can you help out?
Thanks,
Bob
Kammerdiner
Well-known member
Hi Bob,
That link goes to all binoculars sorted by "best selling," which I take to mean sales numbers over some period of time. EO moves a lot of glass so it's probably a fairly reliable indicator of relative sales.
Mark
Alexis Powell
Natural history enthusiast
I'm late to this thread, but as someone who owns a fair number of premium binoculars and who has no interest in being competitive, brand loyalty, or finding my personal identity in my bins, I just wanted to say that I very much enjoy Leica's style and their devotion to very compact and very solid designs (I'm always amazed at how dense Leica bins feel in the hand). It's true that in full-sized bins Leica hasn't kept up with Z and S, but I can't complain about that except when I'm being a unsatisfiable _optics enthusiast_. As a _birder_, bins reached the level of performance that I want over 10 years ago, so the Leica glass is still very much in the running as a choice for field use. Although I have other, arguably "better" bins, I still use my 8x42 Ultravid a fair amount in the winter for their smooth focus and on all-day bird counts in the spring for their easy eye placement and snappy focus. My 8x20 Ultravid also gets a lot of use, and that model is definitely tops among pocket roofs according to my tastes. Like others in this thread, I have a very special affection for my 8x32 BA Ultras and I'd still be using them a lot in the summer and for travel except that the coatings of my unit are not as good as later BN production so I have to admit that my Zeiss 8x32 FL can see into forest shadows better (more vivid yet neutral color, brighter, maybe better contrast) and as a combo birder-butterfly watcher its close focus is awesome (5 ft); it's also a bit more comfortable while wearing glasses. If the Ultravid HD had better eye-relief and close focus, I'd switch from the FL to it and never look back. I carry my FL in a Leica leather case for the 8x32BN, so I'm constantly reminded how much I miss the feel of the 8x32 Leica.
--AP
--AP
Common Raven
Well-known member
Interesting thread. Anecdotally I can add that when I first started birding in our local Audubon group everyone had Swarovskis. Now 10 years later and everyone has Zeiss. (10x42's). Only once have I seen anyone with a Leica (Duovids 10-15x).
I can tell you though, even among this crowd most of these people just get what's trendy. For example, almost none of them can tell me what advantages are of an 8x32 vs. 10x42, other than the 10x obviously gives you greater magnification. Certainly no of them browses these forums. As I mentioned in another thread, they have no idea what a reverse porro is for example.
-- Alexis I concur. My son has the Zeiss FL 8x32, I have the Leica (pre-HD) 8x32. The Zeiss seems slightly better, but I prefer the ergonomics of the Leica.
I can tell you though, even among this crowd most of these people just get what's trendy. For example, almost none of them can tell me what advantages are of an 8x32 vs. 10x42, other than the 10x obviously gives you greater magnification. Certainly no of them browses these forums. As I mentioned in another thread, they have no idea what a reverse porro is for example.
-- Alexis I concur. My son has the Zeiss FL 8x32, I have the Leica (pre-HD) 8x32. The Zeiss seems slightly better, but I prefer the ergonomics of the Leica.
Last edited:
brocknroller
porromaniac
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>
Last edited:
NDhunter
Experienced observer
Brock:
I agree with your thoughts, as I found Jan's negative posts about Zeiss to be
out of place, after they gave him the boot. I pointed that out, and it seems
we had a small "melee" back then. You are correct that any dealer should tread
lightly on an optics forum.
Things have calmed down and the conversation has been very good since then.
Sales numbers are what they are, and I have pointed out my simple thoughts,
and we all may have an opinion. There are no official sales numbers for the
high end optics.
Jerry
I agree with your thoughts, as I found Jan's negative posts about Zeiss to be
out of place, after they gave him the boot. I pointed that out, and it seems
we had a small "melee" back then. You are correct that any dealer should tread
lightly on an optics forum.
Things have calmed down and the conversation has been very good since then.
Sales numbers are what they are, and I have pointed out my simple thoughts,
and we all may have an opinion. There are no official sales numbers for the
high end optics.
Jerry
Bob, saw yours only now. In my previous session at the computer when I tried to get to this site I was barred by a problem encountered before with a message like: "Administrator has blocked your IP address." (Maybe CIA, or maybe Arthur or Brock - just two names I made up with A and B, you understand - hacking in to suppress these statistics.)
Sorry not clearer. Ealge Optics. First screen (on getting to "Binoculars") offers a selection "Price" with several ranges. Chose the last, "$1200+". The next screen has "Sort by" and default here is "Best Selling". The items ≥ $1500 I chose manually (actually ≥ 1499). B&H. In the first screen is "Sort by" and default here is "Best Sellers". At bottom left of screen is "Price Range" where one types in the limits. I just entered the first, as "1490". (In my prev. post I wrote "Filter" with initial uppercase to show I was copying their word. At B&H they have "Filter By" at the top of the parameters, and at EO I first tried a longer route where I think the word "Filter" occured.)
Sorry not clearer. Ealge Optics. First screen (on getting to "Binoculars") offers a selection "Price" with several ranges. Chose the last, "$1200+". The next screen has "Sort by" and default here is "Best Selling". The items ≥ $1500 I chose manually (actually ≥ 1499). B&H. In the first screen is "Sort by" and default here is "Best Sellers". At bottom left of screen is "Price Range" where one types in the limits. I just entered the first, as "1490". (In my prev. post I wrote "Filter" with initial uppercase to show I was copying their word. At B&H they have "Filter By" at the top of the parameters, and at EO I first tried a longer route where I think the word "Filter" occured.)
I wouldn't quite buy in to the theme of this thread, but I have a soft spot for Leicas. I've owned four overall, three Tri's and one UV.
Lately, my most used binocular is a 12x50 Trinovid BN. Although the BNs aren't what you'd call very bright any more, and do show a tad of color in backlit situations, most of the time I notice neither fault. There is a lot more to a binocular than that for me, things that are constantly evident. The serious chunky look of the original Leica Trinovid, the feel of the armor, the way the hand lays on the focus knob, the high weight which "suggests" durable construction (assuming they aren't loading it up with fishing sinkers), properly pincushiony field correction and view comfort are excellent in my opinion. I even like the little things, like the strap loops which look like bent round wire and are easier on the strap than the common sculpted square edged loops. The absence of objective covers, which drives some owners to distraction, taught me that the silly things are unnecessary. The diopter adjustment is unique, and the most elegant of any made, permitting setting with both eyes open and relaxed. They are plenty sharp and the best I've seen in scattered light handling. It is a privilege to use this fine older glass, even though two FLs and a SV are available to me.
Maybe Leica has fallen behind the cutting edge, but they hit a high mark with this model and I expect they can do it again if they care enough, which remains to be seen.
Ron
Lately, my most used binocular is a 12x50 Trinovid BN. Although the BNs aren't what you'd call very bright any more, and do show a tad of color in backlit situations, most of the time I notice neither fault. There is a lot more to a binocular than that for me, things that are constantly evident. The serious chunky look of the original Leica Trinovid, the feel of the armor, the way the hand lays on the focus knob, the high weight which "suggests" durable construction (assuming they aren't loading it up with fishing sinkers), properly pincushiony field correction and view comfort are excellent in my opinion. I even like the little things, like the strap loops which look like bent round wire and are easier on the strap than the common sculpted square edged loops. The absence of objective covers, which drives some owners to distraction, taught me that the silly things are unnecessary. The diopter adjustment is unique, and the most elegant of any made, permitting setting with both eyes open and relaxed. They are plenty sharp and the best I've seen in scattered light handling. It is a privilege to use this fine older glass, even though two FLs and a SV are available to me.
Maybe Leica has fallen behind the cutting edge, but they hit a high mark with this model and I expect they can do it again if they care enough, which remains to be seen.
Ron
brocknroller
porromaniac
Ron,
I speculated earlier or on another thread (too many posts to go back and check) that what you stated in your last sentence about the Leica BN hitting a "high mark" and the features you listed above might be the reason why the new Trinnies haven't caught fire. Hard to compete with a Classic.
What do you think?
Brock
