jan van daalen
Well-known member
Phil,
If this is how you feel, after the incident, I wish you a good life.
I'm out.
Jan
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
What the h*** is wrong with Swarovski Europe Servicing? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Phil212
- Start date
If this is how you feel, after the incident, I wish you a good life.
I'm out.
Jan
Holger Merlitz
Well-known member
I think you are making fun of us - it all makes no sense. You better be suspicious about your inconsistencies ...
Cheers,
Holger
Phil, with all due respect, I understand that you do not like the outward appearance of the two different colored lenses but let’s think about the positives here! Which is, you said yourself, you can see no optical difference, correct?
I tend to agree with Hermann, that Swarovski repair department probably spotted an issue during the repair process and proactively decided to repair it. Granted, yes they did not inform you of it in every detail, which is unfortunate, but I see no reason why they would have done it inexplicably. Surely there was a reason. And if you said there was some detrimental effects I would be all up in arms with you but it doesn’t seem we have any evidence of this at this time.
I think of this car repair analogy. Often times if you get body repair work done on a car that requires replacement of a panel, when they go to paint it, it can very difficult or impossible to perfectly match the paint to the original panels. It’s because the panel is newer or exact paint color isn’t available or other reasons. I think of it like this with the lens. They replaced it and because of that were unable to perfectly color match it.
What would be your dream outcome here? Save for getting a Time Machine, how could this issue be perfectly resolved?
tenex
reality-based
I missed that. I don't think we've seen a case quite like this before. So the problem here is simply that you're complaining on this forum instead of (finally!) contacting Swarovski. Do that. And when you find out what caused this, come back and tell us.
He has stated that apparently there is no fault in “daylight” viewing but he has unproven suspicions that it could possibly effect lowlight viewing? Other than that the only complaint he has is that he doesn’t enjoy the aesthetic appearance of two different colored objective lenses.
This is what I can gather at least.
I think you are supposed to look in the end away from the objectives.
I know that's what I do.
If an internal element has been replaced, say, a focus element, it may not have matched reflecting colours.
The technician should have tried to match colours, but maybe none was available.
It would be quite normal for Swarovski to check the whole binocular and do any work they thought necessary.
This is not underhand, but normal.
If there is no visible difference in use, this is really not a valid reason to complain here.
If you felt angry, you should have complained to Swarovski.
I had to deal with complaints in my business.
Some were valid, many weren't.
With the non valid complaints I just refused them.
However, with binoculars, it seems makers replace or repair just to make the customer happy.
The problem is, each time a binocular is sent in for work, unwanted dust specks might appear or even finger prints.
The customer is always right.
Well, not to me.
More important is the fact that Swarovski rubber armour seems to be poor or faulty.
Luckily, I only have two Swarovski binoculars.
A 10x25 that I cannot use as the eye relief is excessive and it just flops around not holding IPD.
Also an old 10x40 that is just a mess.
I do have good Leica and Zeiss binoculars.
If I want good resolution I use IS binoculars.
It is quite in order not to buy another Swarovski, if someone is angry with Swarovski.
A Zeiss 15x60 was sent into Zeiss head department for moisture on most internal elements, including eyepieces.
The technician knew what he was doing, but chipped an eyepiece element.
He correctly blackened the small edge chip.
This has nil effect on the view.
The cost to me was nothing.
Horace Dall's 8 inch Maksutov Cassegrain had an oversized primary that was not round it was hand produced to approximately round.
This Maksutov was likely one of the best ever made.
I get angry sometimes, but not about optics.
Regards,
B.
The technician should have tried to match colours, but maybe none was available.
It would be quite normal for Swarovski to check the whole binocular and do any work they thought necessary.
This is not underhand, but normal.
If there is no visible difference in use, this is really not a valid reason to complain here.
If you felt angry, you should have complained to Swarovski.
I had to deal with complaints in my business.
Some were valid, many weren't.
With the non valid complaints I just refused them.
However, with binoculars, it seems makers replace or repair just to make the customer happy.
The problem is, each time a binocular is sent in for work, unwanted dust specks might appear or even finger prints.
The customer is always right.
Well, not to me.
More important is the fact that Swarovski rubber armour seems to be poor or faulty.
Luckily, I only have two Swarovski binoculars.
A 10x25 that I cannot use as the eye relief is excessive and it just flops around not holding IPD.
Also an old 10x40 that is just a mess.
I do have good Leica and Zeiss binoculars.
If I want good resolution I use IS binoculars.
It is quite in order not to buy another Swarovski, if someone is angry with Swarovski.
A Zeiss 15x60 was sent into Zeiss head department for moisture on most internal elements, including eyepieces.
The technician knew what he was doing, but chipped an eyepiece element.
He correctly blackened the small edge chip.
This has nil effect on the view.
The cost to me was nothing.
Horace Dall's 8 inch Maksutov Cassegrain had an oversized primary that was not round it was hand produced to approximately round.
This Maksutov was likely one of the best ever made.
I get angry sometimes, but not about optics.
Regards,
B.
Last edited:
jan van daalen
Well-known member
Hi B,
Regarding the 10x25 Swaro with loose hinge:
You will find to small round stickers that hide the hinge bolts on the ocular side of the bin.
Remove those and you will find two bolts/screws. Just tighten them, replace the stickers and the bin is functional again.
Jan
My guess would be the objective lens got damaged in the re-skin process so they replaced it.
A similar thing just happened to someone with Zeiss SF's, and Zeiss addressed it for the person. Maybe Swarovski will too......here it is:
www.birdforum.net
I'll be hear waiting to hear what happens, because people criticizing Swarovski doesn't hurt my feelings
A similar thing just happened to someone with Zeiss SF's, and Zeiss addressed it for the person. Maybe Swarovski will too......here it is:
Help! Coatings on Victory SF being... weird?
Or turn the binocular upside down. Regards. B.
www.birdforum.net
I'll be hear waiting to hear what happens, because people criticizing Swarovski doesn't hurt my feelings
jan van daalen
Well-known member
According to the poster it isn't the objective lens but the focuslens.My guess would be the objective lens got damaged in the re-skin process so they replaced it.
A similar thing just happened to someone with Zeiss SF's, and Zeiss addressed it for the person. Maybe Swarovski will too......here it is:
Help! Coatings on Victory SF being... weird?
Or turn the binocular upside down. Regards. B.
I'll be hear waiting to hear what happens, because people criticizing Swarovski doesn't hurt my feelings
paddyluke
Well-known member
i bet you would not be happy if they were your binoculars??, there may be no optical difference but other users would think you have an inferior pair,2nd's etc, i would not be happy
Hello Jan, good to now. I find the hinges of the CL 25's just a bit loose for my liking. What you have written, does that apply to the newest CL 25's as well? The stickers have to be replaced you wrote. How do you get new stickers? Or can you just leave them without stickers? I just wonder. A CL 25 with stiffer hinges would be welcome.
My guess would be the objective lens got damaged in the re-skin process so they replaced it.
A similar thing just happened to someone with Zeiss SF's, and Zeiss addressed it for the person. Maybe Swarovski will too......here it is:
Help! Coatings on Victory SF being... weird?
Or turn the binocular upside down. Regards. B.
I'll be hear waiting to hear what happens, because people criticizing Swarovski doesn't hurt my feelings
Scott, it is a sensible explanation to what happened, one that considerably elevates the level of what I have read so far anyway.
I did not anticipate the gut reaction of Swarovski's culte fans (very naively), who took a couple of obvious observations as personal attacks. As Mr Spoke would have said: Fascinating!"
