Optics quality expectations (1 Viewer)

[winginit]

Over the last couple of years I've purchased several budget optics online, most between $100-$300. Name brands, positive reviews, but several binoculars were defective out of the box. I exchanged or returned problem units from 5 different brands. In addition to the inconvenience, I had to pay return shipping a few times, effectively increasing the price.

I now have a small optics collection that works well for a range of events and birding/nature outings. But putting it together was often frustrating. I've never bought any other type of gear with such poor quality control.

There's obviously a cost for brands when they exchange, repair or refurbish defective optics, so why isn't there more of an investment in quality control? I'm curious about other people's experiences and opinions. Including folks working in the optics field. Not looking to trash any companies, just hoping for some constructive discussion. Thanks.

 

[John A Roberts]

Hi winginit,

Binoculars that retail for US $100 to $300, likely cost around 1/2 to 1/3 of that price to manufacture
- but many optical tolerances need to be within thousandths of an inch (and mechanical ones within hundredth's of an inch)!

So it’s really no surprise that quality control is going to be inconsistent. As a business model, it's cheaper to accept and scrap a return,
and replace it - assuming the marketing company (vs the actual manufacturer) is still in business.

- - - -
And while with modern production techniques and economies of scale, there’s an increasingly lower point
where optical quality/ reliability/ durability approaches that of premier optics, it’s still well above $300 retail.


John

 

[GrampaTom]

Over the last couple of years I've purchased several budget optics online, most between $100-$300. Name brands, positive reviews, but several binoculars were defective out of the box. I exchanged or returned problem units from 5 different brands. In addition to the inconvenience, I had to pay return shipping a few times, effectively increasing the price.

I now have a small optics collection that works well for a range of events and birding/nature outings. But putting it together was often frustrating. I've never bought any other type of gear with such poor quality control.

There's obviously a cost for brands when they exchange, repair or refurbish defective optics, so why isn't there more of an investment in quality control? I'm curious about other people's experiences and opinions. Including folks working in the optics field. Not looking to trash any companies, just hoping for some constructive discussion. Thanks.

No offense winginit, but the answer to your question seems to fall from how you've purchased. When a product ranges in price as binoculars do from $100. to several thousands, there has to be a wide range of attendant quality. I suspect most here buying at least at some multiple of where you've chosen to purchase, will not be experiencing the same result. Price goes up. Quality goes up.

 

[norway]

When it comes to optics, you generally get what you pay for.

 

[Maljunulo]

I don't know how many is "several" but I think that you would have been better served by buying a single item, which cost whatever you spent on all the others.

 

[beacon hill]

Think when buying on-line it can in theory be best to stick with the smaller dealers
(cough , hint) who due to less volume have the time to give a full inspection before dispatch.
In fact I test everything before it goes live on the website.
Just adds one final last line of defense in the QA dept

 

[winginit]

I appreciate everybody's feedback. Interestingly, it was the more expensive 32mm and 42mm binoculars that were defective on arrival. No issues with the $100 compacts I bought. So it doesn't seem as simple as pay more, get better quality control.

My experience with small online retailers has been mixed (delays, higher shipping). So now if I can't buy local, I purchase online from larger businesses, like B&H.

I regularly use 4 binoculars (1 compact, 2 mid size and 1 full size), plus a monocular. That assortment cost me under $1000. So I guess the take away is it's possible to assemble a good, small optics collection on a budget. But likely not without some amount of hassle.

 

[Maljunulo]

I still think you would be better off with a $1000 binocular, than with a “collection” of lesser optics but it’s your money to spend as you see fit.

Nothing I say will change your mind anyway.

 

[Redneckbmxer24]

You can’t have high expectations with bargain bin stuff.

 

[dries1]

Quality assurance quality control, (QAQC) it costs money. I use labs for analytical data, and I generally check for any obvious lab screw ups; however if the data is to be used in litigation, I now have to hire a specialized company to check the entire package to make sure the laboratory did everything accurately, so another level of $$ spent.
I often think with the low budget glass, the customer is the first line of QAQC.
I agree with using a small retailer, because someone large like Amazon just rethreads returns with many of the products they sell.

 

[Paultricounty]

I applaud him, he’s happy with the optics he got. He put together a nice little collection of optics that satisfies him. Of course if he’s anything like some of us here, he will soon tire of his glass and start to wonder if the grass is greener on the other side of the fence. Then he’ll become one of us and start looking for extra money anywhere he can find it to get his next fix, the mid level optics and beyond.

 

[exup]

Every few weeks there is a debate on quality of products and when defective products get to a customer, the customer is thus disappointed. This disappointment is often greater if the product is of higher purchase cost.
The combined 'wisdom' is often that quality should be inspections along the manufacturing and supply chain e.g. factory inspectors or retailers opening boxes and doing an 'eyeball' check. The net result of this historic approach to quality is that if one of the inspectors finds a defect, then the best outcome is a costly rework or if not economically feasible, then scrap.
This old "make, inspect, rework, scrap" paradigm is not really the modern approach to design and manufacture of many products today. It is costly to inspect, rework and scrap. The modern, better and much more cost effective approach is to make it right first time.
The effort is thus invested in controlling the design and manufacturing system, with emphasis on key design parameters and consistent delivery to these key parameters.

Here is a good summary of manufacturing process control:

Process Capability & Performance (Pp, Ppk, Cp, Cpk)

Process Capability & Performance (Pp, Ppk, Cp, Cpk) are indicators of the specification relative to process dispersion and process centering.

sixsigmastudyguide.com

If the process is under control and generates product to design requirements, then multiple and costly inspections/ Inspectors with scrap and rework is greatly reduced or even totally unnecessary. This is not new.....it was Deming and companies such as Toyota that forged the modern era of manufacturing.

Six sigma is 3.4 defects per million ..... Although there is a philosophical debate on the number of opportunities Vs number of products.....the principle is that don't make defective products in the first place, so inspections and rework/ scrap become redundant steps. The customer gets less defective and disappointing products, the company spends less on inspections and rework/ scrap...... with the long term outcome of cheaper products to a better "quality". Just like modern cars compared to 1960/70/80s vehicles. There are far far less inspections and reworks today, but the complexity and quality is far higher.

I am as yet undecided where consumer optics fall into this modern manufacturing paradigm..... it appears that there are reported defects across every price sector, including the top tier £/€/$3000 bracket. I suspect that the optical consumer market is lagging behind in adopting six sigma and modern quality models of design and manufacture.

 

[Dyrlege]

I appreciate everybody's feedback. Interestingly, it was the more expensive 32mm and 42mm binoculars that were defective on arrival. No issues with the $100 compacts I bought. So it doesn't seem as simple as pay more, get better quality control.

My experience with small online retailers has been mixed (delays, higher shipping). So now if I can't buy local, I purchase online from larger businesses, like B&H.

I regularly use 4 binoculars (1 compact, 2 mid size and 1 full size), plus a monocular. That assortment cost me under $1000. So I guess the take away is it's possible to assemble a good, small optics collection on a budget. But likely not without some amount of hassle.

When walking around (not when specifically birding) I usually bring my Curios. That's ONE pair of binos in a pocket at less than you paid for your collection and with excellent optics, much better than most.

 

[Patudo]

I think it's fair to say one can find very worthwhile binoculars, even today, for a (fairly) reasonable cost. But even with some knowledge and experience (which makes choosing the right binocular much easier) you can still expect some level of hassle and frustration. John's post #2 I think sums up the issues with regard to quality control in lower end optics very well. With older binoculars, that may cost the same as today's "budget optics" but were far from budget items in their day, I tend to have at least some idea of what to expect in terms of build and image quality. The hassle comes from the issues that 30+ year old optics are likely to have.

There is a strong argument for putting everything into just one excellent binocular. My brother does exactly that and I sometimes think, when using his (excellent) 8.5x Fieldpro that I ought to do the same. But I enjoy using different formats with their different capabilities and qualities.

 

[beacon hill]

Regards expectations.
I had a recent customer who by what he was saying had issues with quality of a number of binoculars.
Guessing they all got returned.
After buying from me, sent them back, explaining issues with them.
I found no problems that he described, and politely advised him to re think his budget, which
agreed with.
Good luck to the next shop he went to.

 

[Redneckbmxer24]

But I enjoy using different formats with their different capabilities and qualities.

Me too, so I just buy them in quality binos. Life’s too short to use sub par glass.

 

[tehri]

Of course if he’s anything like some of us here, he will soon tire of his glass... Then he’ll become one of us

🤣