Review, Leupold Mojave BX-3 8x32 (1 Viewer)

[PeterPS]

mojave bx3 8x32

The harness costs 40$-60$, so the binos are sold for less than 200$! How do these guys make a living?---the production cost should be less than 75$---is that possible? The harness seems to be the same as:
http://www.s4gear.com/pages/products/lockdown.php
and it is definitely an overkill for such light binos. I bought one some time ago with the intention to use it for an EII 8x30 (known to bounce and swing unless constrained in some way), and I gave it away after a single attempt to use it---too cumbersome for the small EII.

I am now pretty sure that my problem with the Mojave (described in a previous post) was caused by my astigmatism and presumably a poor DoF of the example that I had (which needed 2 turns to go from 0 to inf, instead of the usual 1.5 turns).

Peter.

 

[hawken 12]

I have been using a set of these for the past 6 months and overall I like them very much. When I first got them I noticed all the same things that others have mentioned. Useless case and rain guard and I didn't care for the way the neck strap attached using those little metal key rings. Also the focus was a little stiff in the beginning. All that being said they are still a nice little set of binoculars. The focus has smoothed out nicely over time and their size and weight make them great to handle. Optically they have always been fine and when Midway put them on clearance, I decided to purchase 2 more pairs at that nice price. One for a Christmas gift and one to keep as a spare. After opening and checking them out I noticed a few differences. One had a stiff rough focus while the other was much better than the one that I have been using for 6 months. Also one had eye cups that twisted out loosely with no actual clicks between positions just like my original pair. The other however had definite sharp clicks between the detents. I returned the pair with the rough focus and received a replacement which was just fine. In conclusion I believe that QC is a little problem with this model and with my samples at least, the models with serial numbers below 100,000 were the ones without problems.

 

[ceasar]

Eagle Optics doesn't seem to carry Leupold anymore. Anybody know why? They usually give good info on accessories that come with the binoculars.

Bob

 

[hawken 12]

Update to my 12/19 Post ------ In the past 3 weeks the replacement Mojave's that I received both went bad. Using one out in the cold last night the right barrel frosted up and took several hours indoors to totally clear up. The other that I gave as a Christmas gift developed problems also. The focus became extremely stiff out in the cold and after a time of trying to use it, the focus became totally loose and had no stops in either direction. Coming back in the house we noticed some type of lubricant seemed to be coming from the back of the focus knob. Needless to say, both of these babies are going back and this time I would like a refund. My original one still works fine.

 

[bluespiderweb]

Having read the posts Hawken made about his problems with his Mojave 8x32's, I decided to test out mine in the cold weather here in Eastern PA. I put them in my wife's cold car for about 7 hours (in the teens temp wise), and just went out and tried them. Mine work even better in the cold! The focus on mine is perfect for these temps, it seems-very smooth and easy. No fogging, and no other problems-and they are serial numbered some 800 over the 100,000 mark.

I have been using them only for indoor use, since I got mine, and have been quite happy with their performance there as well, though at first the focus showed more stiction than they do now-they have smoothed out over time too as some have reported. Nice bins-I like the 8 degree view.

 

[hubcap]

Mine are #100017 and are superb in all aspects.
No problem with focus or fogging in 18-20 degree weather.
Impressive view. I am very pleased with them.

 

[PeterPS]

There are happy users as well as unhappy ones (myself included----my sample had a very small sweet spot, as described in some previous posts in this thread). The problem seems to be QC.

 

[Steve C]

I have come more and more to discount the QC business. I've seen multiple samples many binoculars people complain about from the QC angle. However, I'm still looking for serious QC issues. I have about reached the conclusion the variation is in the eyes of the users much more than in the QC tolerances of the binocular. That is one of the main reasons of trying before you buy. I realize this is not always possible and sometimes reviews like ones found here on BF and comments from users are where we have to base or buy/don't buy decisions. I can only describe what my eyes see. My eyes are mine only and do not belong to anybody else. I do not for a second discount that people are not seeing what they say they are seeing so please nobody take this wrong.

I have long since ceased to be surprised by how any particular set of eyes will react to any given binocular. I also have come to the conclusion that there is no one design, no matter who make it or how much it costs, that will not have detractors. If there was a perfect design we'd all have it because that's all that would sell.

So when I see QC complaints what I write it off to (in a larger sense anyway) is that I'm reading a comment from somebody who has eyes that are not getting along with the binocular. No, I'm not saying there are not binocular lemons. No I'm not saying that people who see objectionable images are seeing things either.

 

[PeterPS]

There is no doubt in my mind that our eyes play an important role, and not only them---the shape of the face, the depth of our eye sockets etc. I may see glare in cases in which you do not see any, I may detect CA whereas you see none. A particular set (say the SE 8x32) may blackout on me all the time, whereas you have no problem with it at all. Our taste plays an important role too: I may find that a focuser is buttery smooth and you can find it very stiff etc etc. Human variations do play an important role when assessing binocs. But QC issues do exist and play an important part too. I have seen too many bincos with such issues to dismiss QC. In fact I believe QC issues can easily be exacerbated in the binoc business. When one of us gets a lemon we return it, but its issues are subtle, and quite likely it will be sold again. This way a lemon caused by a QC miss can reach many of us: say the QC yields 1% lemons, but one lemon in 100 can reach many more buyers out of 100. This would be another reason for the binocs manufacturers to keep the QC failures lower than for other products (whose issues typically are much more obvious and therefore lemons are removed from the business cycle).
Peter

 

[bluespiderweb]

I have come more and more to discount the QC business. I've seen multiple samples many binoculars people complain about from the QC angle. However, I'm still looking for serious QC issues. I have about reached the conclusion the variation is in the eyes of the users much more than in the QC tolerances of the binocular. That is one of the main reasons of trying before you buy. I realize this is not always possible and sometimes reviews like ones found here on BF and comments from users are where we have to base or buy/don't buy decisions. I can only describe what my eyes see. My eyes are mine only and do not belong to anybody else. I do not for a second discount that people are not seeing what they say they are seeing so please nobody take this wrong.

I have long since ceased to be surprised by how any particular set of eyes will react to any given binocular. I also have come to the conclusion that there is no one design, no matter who make it or how much it costs, that will not have detractors. If there was a perfect design we'd all have it because that's all that would sell.

So when I see QC complaints what I write it off to (in a larger sense anyway) is that I'm reading a comment from somebody who has eyes that are not getting along with the binocular. No, I'm not saying there are not binocular lemons. No I'm not saying that people who see objectionable images are seeing things either.

Yes, no doubt Steve, that individual eyesight, perception, physical traits, etc are to blame on many occasion how one sees through a certain binocular, or how "it fits" them because of their particular set of circumstances. Even a simple mis-adjusted bin might well be blame for some problems found as well, and not a quality control issue.

But then again, when some of us have compared multiple examples of one bin and found one or the other lacking-then I believe we can be more sure that it probably is quality control and some defect in the manufacture, even though some still may or may not see that one problem that you do.

 

[hawken 12]

I am starting to wonder how often that a binocular with a problem is returned and simply sent to the next customer order without going back to the manufacturer to be checked out or repaired.

 

[Steve C]

I am starting to wonder how often that a binocular with a problem is returned and simply sent to the next customer order without going back to the manufacturer to be checked out or repaired.

With some dealers that is a likely scenario. If one calls Leupold, sends it to them, it won't go back in a box unless it checks out. My overwhelming recommendation is to send it to the manufacturer rather than the dealer. Some dealers like Eagle Optics or CameralandNY may be a different story. However I think it is incumbent to contact whichever you send the binocular back to and be persistent, but polite, and keep checking until they tell you the nature of the fault. With some situations you may well get blown off with...sorry it meets specs.

On a larger scale, I'm sure some returns just get re-boxed and sold to the next customer.

 

[peatmoss]

Yes, no doubt Steve, that individual eyesight, perception, physical traits, etc are to blame on many occasion how one sees through a certain binocular, or how "it fits" them because of their particular set of circumstances. Even a simple mis-adjusted bin might well be blame for some problems found as well, and not a quality control issue.

But then again, when some of us have compared multiple examples of one bin and found one or the other lacking-then I believe we can be more sure that it probably is quality control and some defect in the manufacture, even though some still may or may not see that one problem that you do.

Hi bluespiderweb. PM sent.

 

[dropnbassonu]

Trying to find a used pair of these. Anybody have a pair they're willing to part with here in the USA?

 

[Upland]

Trying to find a used pair of these. Anybody have a pair they're willing to part with here in the USA?

https://featheredgeoptics.org/opticron-natura-bga-ed-8x32/

Same bino with ED glass. Good buy. You can also get the updated BX-4 from Optics Planet for less than $350 with their 10% off promo going on now. Or look for a pair of Cabela’s Guide Series 8x32 which are the same as the BX-3 in a different body