BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steve C" data-source="post: 3382380" data-attributes="member: 56622">There were reports of QC issues when the first SF's were released.  These issues sounded a lot like what are described in the review from the OP.  Other user posts sounded a lot like what Chuck describes with his SF.This poses a couple of questions.  The first is if the review model, which was purchased anonymously (according to the review) was an early release SF that had been in the box on the shelf for awhile?  If memory serves it seems the SF Chuck got was from the time period they were first available.  The next and biggest question is whether or not Zeiss has taken any pains to correct these issues? Things like the internal debris from the photos in the review are certainly not to be expected nor appreciated...either by the consumer or Zeiss.  Loose diopter dials should never have seen release into the wild either. However because one sample has a loose dial, that shoul dnot be taken to mean the SF in general has the issue.I'm not getting into the loose armor too far other than to say all binoculars tend to have some armor looseness and user perceptions can vary a lot.  Just how far was the squinching of armor being carried out to get noises?When prices reach these levels, things need to be better sorted out  before the binocular is boxed and shipped.  Most of the user described issues should be discoverable within a time span of a few minute examination, again, before it is boxed and shipped.</blockquote>

Verification