• 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.

NL Pure 10x42 broken connector (1 Viewer)

Richard D said:
Adhesive bonds are frequently stronger than physical bonds - they're extensively used in the aerospace industry to hold critical components together. I'm not a big fan of the field pro system, but using glue is far from foolish. Traditional strap lugs have also been known to fail whether part of the casting or, particularly when screwed in both on cameras and binoculars - I've not been unlucky enough to suffer any failures, but they're not unknown.
Click to expand...

I have been involved in design and manufacture in several hi-tech engineering disciplines such as aerospace, F1 racing and electro-acoustics, and so I'm aware of the strengths and weaknesses of adhesives as opposed to fasteners and structural bonds. If my life depended on hanging from something I know which one I would prefer.

Adhesives are usually specified for ease of manufacture, weight, cost or to deal with awkward surfaces or materials. None of these issues apply here, and of course even the best adhesives are affected by environmental conditions such as heat and humidity far more than the alternatives - unless corrosion is a concern which again it is not here.
 
hopster said:
I have been involved in design and manufacture in several hi-tech engineering disciplines such as aerospace, F1 racing and electro-acoustics, and so I'm aware of the strengths and weaknesses of adhesives as opposed to fasteners and structural bonds. If my life depended on hanging from something I know which one I would prefer.

Adhesives are usually specified for ease of manufacture, weight, cost or to deal with awkward surfaces or materials. None of these issues apply here, and of course even the best adhesives are affected by environmental conditions such as heat and humidity far more than the alternatives - unless corrosion is a concern which again it is not here.
Click to expand...
I believe Swarovski glues the focusing knob on the Curio 7x21 also, and there has been quite a few of those coming off. I know I experienced two Curio focusing knobs popping off on Curio's that I purchased. In my experience over many years of attaching things, I always found a screw worked better than glue. Glues are affected by chemicals like sweat, heat, humidity and especially cold and screws are not.
 
Last edited:
Here is how a strap lug should be attached to a binocular on instead of using glue so it won't come off. There are no screws, but instead a one piece solid metal ring all the way around the binocular objective tube that forms the strap lug. These lugs are not easily coming off when they are attached like this. Also on the Nikon HG 8x42, there is no armor peeling off, objective covers breaking off, the eye cups don't shatter, it is 6 oz. lighter than an NL 8x42 and the case doesn't fade. Best of all, it doesn't have near as much glare as an NL.

P3260822.JPGP3260820.JPG
 
Last edited:
Dennis Mau said:
Here is how a strap lug SHOULD be attached to a binocular instead of using GLUE so it won't come off. There are NO screws, but instead a one piece solid metal ring all the way around the binocular objective tube that forms the strap lug. These lugs are not coming off when they are attached like this. Also, there is no armor peeling off, objective covers breaking off, the eye cups don't shatter, it is 6 oz. lighter than an NL 8x42 and the case doesn't fade. Best of all, it doesn't have near as much glare as an NL. It is called superior Japanese engineering and it is a Nikon HG 8x42.

View attachment 1635704View attachment 1635705
Click to expand...

ā€¦but these binos are a pig ugly design! šŸ¤£
 
Last edited:
The design of the Nikon HG 10x42 is over 18 years, and, IMHO, it looks that oldā€¦.and my eyesight is fine, thank you! šŸ¤£
 
I find it unbelievable that Swarovski just glues the Field Pro connector to the binocular body.! Why would they ever trust glue to hold a $3000 binocular when it can't be as reliable as a solidly attached binocular lug. I doubt I will ever buy a Swarovski with Field Pro strap attachments again if this is true. I never like the Field Pro system anyway and now I really don't like it.
 
CharleyBird said:
Dennis, asked and answered, see post #39
Click to expand...
Obviously it is not true that adhesives are superior in this situation because I have never encountered anybody nor have I had a binocular lug fall off my binoculars in 30 years of using binoculars. Since there are obviously failures of the field pro attachment, I feel Swarovski has made a mistake by using glue to hold the lug on. I personally will not buy a Swarovski binocular with a field pro strap attachment going forward. In fact, I was going to buy the NL 10x32 in the classifieds but changed my mind after seeing this. I have contacted Swarovski and asked them if they are really using GLUE to attach the field pro lugs.

Rg548
"Fair enough.... adhesives have moved on... but there were very few failures flagged up with traditional designed lugs. In all my years, neither myself, nor any of my friends or family that use binos or cameras, have experienced a fail. Yet, these Swaros have been flagged a lot recently. Swaro are trying to move away from the norm, maybe to justify the eye watering costs of their new binos, I don't know. But armour issues and failing lugs are going to prove very costly for them. I would now steer clear of Swaro... which is a shame as we all know, their optics are world-class. It takes years to get a good reputation, but not too long to drop the ball."
 
Dennis Mau said:
Obviously it is not true that adhesives are superior in this situation because I have never encountered anybody nor have I had a binocular lug fall off my binoculars in 30 years of using binoculars. Since there are obviously failures of the field pro attachment, I feel Swarovski has made a mistake by using glue to hold the lug on. I personally will not buy a Swarovski binocular with a field pro strap attachment going forward. In fact, I was going to buy the NL 10x32 in the classifieds but changed my mind after seeing this. I have contacted Swarovski and asked them if they are really using GLUE to attach the field pro lugs.

Rg548
"Fair enough.... adhesives have moved on... but there were very few failures flagged up with traditional designed lugs. In all my years, neither myself, nor any of my friends or family that use binos or cameras, have experienced a fail. Yet, these Swaros have been flagged a lot recently. Swaro are trying to move away from the norm, maybe to justify the eye watering costs of their new binos, I don't know. But armour issues and failing lugs are going to prove very costly for them. I would now steer clear of Swaro... which is a shame as we all know, their optics are world-class. It takes years to get a good reputation, but not too long to drop the ball."
Click to expand...

Swarovski makes GREAT binos. They are expensive, yes but for sure it could be much more. Swarovski has a good guarantee policy and if faults occur in these high end bins, they will comply with their guarantee backed up with the company name and honor. Companies do not get far by producing "things/articles" that the end user dislikes. If that was the case it would mean many layoffs and sales plunging.

The following are company mistakes that ended up in big sales loss even in bankruptcy:
-New Coca-cola 1985.
-DMC DeLorean car.
-Nike shoes sold trough internet platform rather than psychically due to new IT CEO manager.

It you do not like them, and by how I read your posts Dennis you REALLY REALLY do not like them. You are a great NIKON Monarch HG squire/defender and It is ok is fine.
BY the way :ROFLMAO: I brought up NIKON MONARCH, What is you opinion about them DENNIS?
 
claves_10 said:
Swarovski makes GREAT binos. They are expensive, yes but for sure it could be much more. Swarovski has a good guarantee policy and if faults occur in these high end bins, they will comply with their guarantee backed up with the company name and honor. Companies do not get far by producing "things/articles" that the end user dislikes. If that was the case it would mean many layoffs and sales plunging.

The following are company mistakes that ended up in big sales loss even in bankruptcy:
-New Coca-cola 1985.
-DMC DeLorean car.
-Nike shoes sold trough internet platform rather than psychically due to new IT CEO manager.

It you do not like them, and by how I read your posts Dennis you REALLY REALLY do not like them. You are a great NIKON Monarch HG squire/defender and It is ok is fine.
BY the way :ROFLMAO: I brought up NIKON MONARCH, What is you opinion about them DENNIS?
Click to expand...
I think when the word gets out the field pro attachments are glued on, the sales will plunge. People don't know the lugs are merely glued on right now. I am certainly not buying any more Swarovski field pro binoculars until they fix the problem. What Nikon Monarch? If you are referring to the newer Nikon M7 or HG, I think they are both the best bargains at their price point. I do generally like the optics of Swarovski's outside of a little glare. I was going to buy Owlbarred'd NL 10x32's for $1600 in the classifieds because they were a good price and I like 7.4 degrees FOV and sharp edges, but I saw this about the field pro attachments being glued, and I changed my mind.

Not only that, but I bought a pair of Nikon HG 10x42's instead for $1000, and they have a 6.9 degree FOV so a slightly smaller FOV, but they take in twice the light of the NL 10x32 with the 42mm aperture, and they have one piece solid metal lugs which are attached by completely going around the objective tube for a very secure lug. I am surprised how good they are optically. I like them considerably more than the Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42's I had. The Nikon HG 10x42 has a significantly bigger FOV than the Zeiss Conquest HD 10x42, and it is very noticeable.
 
Last edited:
Dennis Mau said:
No, I just contacted them yesterday, and they said they were inundated with emails about broken field pro attachments and melting armor, so it might be awhile.
Click to expand...
You DID NOT write that up at the beginning :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:. Do not add up lines please I can stop laughing. Besides I would need to read the whole thread again if ANYONE adds science fiction information. "scotty beam me up"
 

Similar threads

A
NL Pure 10x42 or 10x52
2 3
Replies
42
Views
4K
tehri
tehri
R
NL Pure objective cover design
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
GrampaTom
G
M
Pure NL the right one for me?
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
12K
Yarkho
Yarkho
Z
New user with NL Pure 10x32 Problem
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
NatureLover123
N
S
NL Carrying Bag Color Fading
2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
MiddleRiver
MiddleRiver

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top