Problem with green coating of EL SV 8x32 (1 Viewer)

[paddyluke]

In my opinion, there is nothing "foolish" about buying good equipment. Especially if the manufacturer takes care of problems, as Swarovski are doing.

This debacle must be costing them a big pile of money. (and goodwill)

i think you mean "responsibility" and not "goodwill"

 

[Richard D]

But only Swarovski are suffering from the armour failures though it seems.

Zeiss have had problems too - the grey SF had very similar issues, and most photographers avoid DEET like the plague.

 

[OrangeO]

The way to ensure your favourite company keeps striving to produce better and better products isn't to try and downplay their mistakes.
That's just telling them you'll buy any rubbish as long as it has the logo.
You're smarter than that, aren't you?

You should be giving them the hardest time of anyone here.

Swarovski should continue improving their armor but if I'm honest that's not in the top 5 or maybe even top 10 things I wish they would improve. At least if something goes wrong with the armor you can send them in to get it fixed for free, quite an inconvenience and annoyance but a solution. None of the other things I wish they would improve can get fixed by sending them in.

How much you downplay or overstate how significant the armor issues are comes down to what you think about the product. If you think the binoculars are close to perfect aside from the armor issues you will certainly think the armor is a catastrophic flaw. If, on the other hand, you think there are a lot of things that could be improved about the binoculars you will downplay the armor as a fault among many.

I really wish the armor was my biggest issue with their binoculars.

 

[SGBirder]

Swarovski should continue improving their armor but if I'm honest that's not in the top 5 or maybe even top 10 things I wish they would improve. At least if something goes wrong with the armor you can send them in to get it fixed for free, quite an inconvenience and annoyance but a solution. None of the other things I wish they would improve can get fixed by sending them in.

How much you downplay or overstate how significant the armor issues are comes down to what you think about the product. If you think the binoculars are close to perfect aside from the armor issues you will certainly think the armor is a catastrophic flaw. If, on the other hand, you think there are a lot of things that could be improved about the binoculars you will downplay the armor as a fault among many.

I really wish the armor was my biggest issue with their binoculars.

What other issues?

 

[Conndomat]

What other issues?

Not good for farsighted glasses wearers...

Andreas

 

[paddyluke]

What other issues?

price 😉

 

[Barred Wobbler]

But only Swarovski are suffering from the armour failures though it seems.

And as I've repeatedly said, including not so far back in this thread, mine, bought in 2016, fell to bits and had to be recoated in 2019, despite me hardly ever using DEET and when I do, I scrupulously wash my hands before touching anything, because my other gear is a lot more valuable than my bins and I don't risk that kit either.

But people still post that 'it's DEET', or 'you must have sweaty hands', 'you must live in a jungle'.

All this despite me copying the statement I got from Swarovski in 2019 where they say it's a result of them introducing a new biodegradable coating to save the planet.

 

[Maljunulo]

Not good for farsighted glasses wearers...

Andreas

What do you propose they do as a solution?

 

[paddyluke]

What do you propose they do as a solution?

make them good for farsighted glasses wearers...

 

[Maljunulo]

make then good for farsighted glasses wearers...

Okay ……. How?

 

[paddyluke]

Okay ……. How?

i'm not a designer/manufacturer of binoculars so have no idea how

 

[Conndomat]

What do you propose they do as a solution?

Maybe adjust the advertising text?

"Only recommended to a limited extent for far-sighted eye glasses users."

Consequently, an improved eyepiece design would have to take place.
It just can't be the far-sighted person running the risk of scratching their lenses, IMO a design flaw.

Andreas

 

[OrangeO]

What other issues?

1. price
2. glare
3. bright ring around the edge
4. contrast
5. chromatic aberrations
6. focus wheel
7. weight
8. objective cover design
9. strap adapter design
10. accessory bag

I could keep a while going before I get to the armor.

 

[Maljunulo]

There isn't anything on this earth that someone, somewhere, can't find fault with.

 

[Conndomat]

I often complain about the NL, but you can't blame the binoculars for a lack of contrast and too much CA, the NL do very well in these points in particular.

Just my two cents..

Andreas

 

[Maljunulo]

you can't blame the binoculars for a lack of contrast and too much CA,

Andreas

This statement has me totally confused, can you explain or say it a different way?

 

[Conndomat]

This statement has me totally confused, can you explain or say it a different way?

IMO the NL have very little CA and have good contrast!

I can't explain it any simpler than that.

Andreas

 

[rodneyAB]

As to my NL32: there is no problem.
FSB is 10/10
FHR is 11/10
Strap lugs 10/10
Light weight self made fabric strap utilizing lug adapters 15/10
Objective covers removed.
Ocular rain guard flipped to facilitate easier removal, stringed to strap.
Diopter adjustment lever 10/10.
Optically perfect for my eyes 10/10.
Wasp waist weight balanced is perfect for my aged arthritic hands 11/10.
Focus wheel well placed functions as it should no change needed 10/10.
Armor with fine tooth texture complements the sexy shape of the wasp waisted NL design 12/10.

 

[Gijs van Ginkel]

None of the swarovski binoculars (CL, EL, SLC etc.) used by us and our students gave us any problems, so there is hope.
Gijs van Ginkel

 

[paddyluke]

anyone on here bothered whether or not swarovski use environmentally friendly formula armour(the problem armour) on their binoculars?