Swarovski - odd business policy - near point (1 Viewer)

[nodd]

It will be interesting interesting to see some unbiased comparisons to between the EL and close focus EL Field Pro when the NL become available.

 

[elkcub]

...
I wonder if the strategy of the threat of a longer close focus in the future is a way of boosting EL sales in the short term before NL comes fully on stream.

Lee

Gee, Lee, do you really think they'd do that? :egghead:

Ed

 

[Hermann]

I appreciate the passionate arguments voiced here by those who, it appears, so regularly use their binoculars on targets closer than 3.3m, but it surely must be the case that the great majority of ELs spend 99% or more of their working lives focused beyond 3.3m, and it wouldn't surprise me at all if 90% or more of EL users hardly ever use their binoculars at less than 3.3m.

Despite the vocal pronouncements of several folks here, I for one don't need a short focus distance. I'd very much prefer binoculars without it, and without the optical compromises short focusing distances always entail, and without the ever increasing weight of such do-everything-binoculars.

I find it pretty sad that more and more manufacturers concentrate on including all sorts of "features" like a close focusing distance, very large fields of view, sharpness to the very edge of the field of view and so on, that make it more and more difficult to achieve the best possible image quality in the centre where it matters most.

And I find it more than just sad that the one feature that has a huge impact on the amount of detail a binocular shows, namely image stabilisation (real image stabilisation, not that gimmicky headrest Swarovski would like everyone to buy at a ludicrous price) seems to be ignored by all the main manufacturers, except Canon.

Hermann

 

[Patudo]

Despite the vocal pronouncements of several folks here, I for one don't need a short focus distance. I'd very much prefer binoculars without it, and without the optical compromises short focusing distances always entail...

I agree with this - I would rather the cost of reducing short focus be spent on wider field of view, better edge performance king or other optical aspects that make more difference to me.

Having said that, I realize others (possibly many others) may use their close focus much more extensively than I do, indeed, may even consider 3.3m to be too short. How often we use our binoculars to the limit of their close focus, and what the ideal close focus distance should be, probably deserves to be the subject of a new thread entirely, instead of being submerged into the wider discussion about NLs and ELs. I thought about starting one, but there already is one.

I, in all honesty, find the center performance of modern alphas stunningly good - I think this is why edge sharpness and now field of view have been steadily improved, since on-axis sharpness is already so good (and seems to have been for many decades, if my 1950s era porros are anything to go by). Given that, I welcome improvements in field of view and edge performance, which are both desirable qualities to me; and being a glasses wearer, I'm glad that modern designs now deliver fields of view comparable to those of the great old classics of the past to those like myself.

My own experience, though, very much agrees with yours in relation to image stabilization showing more detail. I would be very grateful for your thoughts on Canon's performance compared to the Zeiss 20x60S mechanical stabilizer I asked in a post on another thread: https://www.birdforum.net/showpost.php?p=4024153&postcount=89.

 

[etudiant]

I don't know there are a lot of improvement's on the new NL. A way bigger FOV, better ergonomic's with the slimmed down tubes for a more comfortable grip and a smoother,faster focuser that is better positioned, forward weight distribution so the binocular's feel lighter and last but not least the game changing head rest for a more stable view. The EL's were already close to being perfect but the NL's could be the most perfect binocular's available. Easily worth the difference in price IMO. Where else are you going to find an 8x42 binocular with a 480 foot FOV WITH sharp edges? The new Swarovski NL has all the improvement's on the new Zeiss SF PLUS a much bigger FOV WITH sharp edges, better ergonomic's with the slimmed down tubes and the ground breaking head rest plus you get the best warranty and service support in the industry all at about the price of the SF. What more could you ask for?

I entirely agree that the NL offers real improvement, most notably the increased FoV but also in ergonomics. My only point is that these were only enough to justify a modest price increase over the EL, so Swaro made the business decision to despec the EL to avoid having two nearly equally priced alphas.
Had Swaro been able to make the NL dramatically better than the EL, they could have shifted the entire price structure upward, with a preeminent NL at around $4000, the EL at around $3000 and the CL somewhere below that.
Achieving that was impossible, so they repositioned the EL by subtracting features, a very painful decision, as Dale has already noted.

 

[[email protected]]

I entirely agree that the NL offers real improvement, most notably the increased FoV but also in ergonomics. My only point is that these were only enough to justify a modest price increase over the EL, so Swaro made the business decision to despec the EL to avoid having two nearly equally priced alphas.
Had Swaro been able to make the NL dramatically better than the EL, they could have shifted the entire price structure upward, with a preeminent NL at around $4000, the EL at around $3000 and the CL somewhere below that.
Achieving that was impossible, so they repositioned the EL by subtracting features, a very painful decision, as Dale has already noted.

I really can't see Swarovski keeping these three different model's in their top tier lineup. I mean they have the SLC, EL and now NL in all different sizes. I could see them dropping at least one line and I think it might be the EL's regardless of what they say. Why would they dumb the EL down to almost the close focus of the SLC which is a $1500.00 binocular now. As you say they don't want the EL cannibalizing sales from the NL. I think once they come out with the NL 8x32 the EL's will be gone.

 

[elkcub]

Well, suppose they just stopped production of the EL models and began marketing the new NL models?

Ed

 

[dries1]

Perhaps the latest price drop on the ELs is to clear them out.

 

[elkcub]

... I think once they come out with the NL 8x32 the EL's will be gone.

Ok, so they could have retained the 8x32 EL and drop the others.

Ed

 

[elkcub]

Hey, I really don't care, and it's a good question why anyone else should. Why do you care?

Ed

 

[Pinewood]

Well, suppose they just stopped production of the EL models and began marketing the new NL models?

Ed

Hello Ed,

Is not the NL price point a little too steep for many?

Stay safe,
Arthur

 

[[email protected]]

Perhaps the latest price drop on the ELs is to clear them out.

That is why I think they are going to do.

 

[elkcub]

Hello Ed,

Is not the NL price point a little too steep for many?

Stay safe,
Arthur

Arthur,

Without the need to retool, restock, and repair the EL series (except for the 8x32 model, perhaps), the NLs might have been introduced at a lower price. New models always come at higher price, and as we know the economic pain is part of the ultimate pleasure. I mean, like, they are a lifetime investment after all.
:smoke:

Be well,
Ed

 

[[email protected]]

Hello Ed,

Is not the NL price point a little too steep for many?

Stay safe,
Arthur

The Zeiss SF is up there in the same ballpark and some of the spotters are $3K. I think a lot of people will pay for $3K for a top alpha binocular especially from Swarovski. Swarovski because of its reputation has the ability to succeed in the ultra-premium market. They own the premium optic market, especially in the US. Hunter's and birders will pay for what they think is the best and I don't think most will bat an eyelash at the $3K mark. Most consider it a lifetime purchase so averaged over 50 years it isn't that much. Hunter's spend a lot on their equipment probably more than birders with their expensive guns, scopes, ammo, guides, and most of the time spotters. IMO the longer close focus of the EL is not really an issue because realistically if you can afford to spend $2200.00 on a pair of binoculars you can most likely afford to spend another $800.00 and get the NL's with the closer focus and all the other upgrades. I know I would not buy the older EL's anyway.

 

[Troubador]

Gee, Lee, do you really think they'd do that? :egghead:

Ed

Well let's see what we have got here.

The price reduction of EL is because it would otherwise clash with NL, according to Swaro.

But the price reduction is on now.
Yet NL doesn't arrive until September assuming the promised availability date is kept.
Seems like Swaro wants to sell more EL than they might otherwise do, and, 'hello, whats this?' An increase in close focus distance of EL at some point in the future!
Add them together and we have the attraction of a current price reduction and a deterrent against waiting in the form of a specification down-grade by way of an increase in close focus distance in the future.

Draw your own conclusions :eek!:

Lee

 

[A2GG]

I googled the 8x32 EL and don't see much of a price drop.
I see a couple reputable stores have them for $1979 usd and others
at $2200. I'm taking about reputable dealers.
Is that a significant discount ? What was the prior price?

 

[Kammerdiner]

OK, I just tried to buy an 8x32 SV from a big retailer. Reasons to follow. Anyway, the site said "available in two to four months." Which means, I suppose, that the 8 x32mm NL is not far behind, and a new far-focusing EL is in the works.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I will bow out again.

Oh, and why I'd want a second 8x32mm SV? My wife commandeers the one I already have.

 

[Taxboy]

Well let's see what we have got here.

The price reduction of EL is because it would otherwise clash with NL, according to Swaro.

But the price reduction is on now.
Yet NL doesn't arrive until September assuming the promised availability date is kept.
Seems like Swaro wants to sell more EL than they might otherwise do, and, 'hello, whats this?' An increase in close focus distance of EL at some point in the future!
Add them together and we have the attraction of a current price reduction and a deterrent against waiting in the form of a specification down-grade by way of an increase in close focus distance in the future.

Draw your own conclusions :eek!:

Lee

I think you've hit the nail on the head here and for me the chance to get a new pair of EL's form £1500 is too tempting and I'm biting in the next week or so.

The NL will still be around the £2000 mark for a while I'm after release

Sent from my SM-T800 using Tapatalk

 

[[email protected]]

OK, I just tried to buy an 8x32 SV from a big retailer. Reasons to follow. Anyway, the site said "available in two to four months." Which means, I suppose, that the 8 x32mm NL is not far behind, and a new far-focusing EL is in the works.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I will bow out again.

Oh, and why I'd want a second 8x32mm SV? My wife commandeers the one I already have.

If an NL 8x32 is on the horizon it make's you wonder if you should wait for it or spring for the NL 8x42 in September. The NL 8x32 will probably have a 520-foot FOV!

 

[dalat]

If an NL 8x32 is on the horizon it make's you wonder if you should wait for it or spring for the NL 8x42 in September. The NL 8x32 will probably have a 520-foot FOV!

I'm seriously considering buying a Zeiss SF 8x32, I will do once I had one in hands and it is really as good as I hope for.

If Swaro has a wide angle NL32 in the make, they better announce it soon. If they don't I'll assume it's still some years away and will not wait for that.