• 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.
Where premium quality meets exceptional value. ZEISS Conquest HDX.

What the h*** is wrong with Swarovski Europe Servicing? (1 Viewer)

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.
With a needle or sharp pointed knive just lift the sticker from the edge. Done carefully you can use the sticker again. Sadly Swaro doesn't deliver the stickers.
 
With a needle or sharp pointed knive just lift the sticker from the edge. Done carefully you can use the sticker again. Sadly Swaro doesn't deliver the stickers.
And if done not carefully, presumably you would be responsible for scratching the binoculars, invalidating any repair request? Or you could not replace the stickers neatly, then you'd have to live with cosmetic imperfections?
 
Sometimes I really wonder at peoples expectations.

Is it just me, or is it harsh to be heavily critical of Swarovski in this instance, having confirmed that optically the binoculars are perfect, having confirmed that two years have gone past and the OP has not been in touch with Swarovski to query what happened?

The post that was put together could just as easily have been sent directly to Swarovski, but, two years on, it is more important to vent than to search for an explanation?
 
Last edited:
I suppose if I ruined the sticker, I could put the barcode of new stamps as replacements.
That should cover both sides.

The strange thing is I bought the 10x25 Swarovski mint secondhand but the good shop suggested they send the binocular to Swarovski for a free check over.

The binocular was then sent directly to me from Swarovski and they included extra goodies, spare cases etc.

Yet they delivered the binocular with very sloppy hinges.

So I use my old Docter 10x25 that has been used thousands of times in and out of my pocket with no case.
The armour is very loose and I doubt that the binocular is phase coated.
But it delivers, where both the Swarovski and Leica 10x25s don't.

I also used Minolta, Nikon and other 10x25s with great satisfaction for decades.

Regards,
B.
 
[to Maljunulo] you were out back on page one! :D I check out at times and come back - more of a "time out" than a "check out" I guess :)
Yeah, Jan did the same thing, then he was back twice.

Turns out the village interpretation of “I’m out” in here is more of a note of some level of contempt mostly from village elders with no moral obligation to make good on the promised exit. Their disdain is particularly provoked when the village religion is criticized. Peace.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Jan did the same thing, then he was back twice.

Turns out the village interpretation of “I’m out” in here is more of a note of some level of contempt mostly from village elders with no moral obligation to make good on the promised exit. Their disdain is particularly provoked when the village religion is criticized. Peac
Please enlighten us with your views on the "village religion".

I'm not aware of it.
 
I initially thought that I would live with it and not be bothered telling my story, but eventually I've felt like getting this off my chest and sharing my experience with sport optics fans about Swarovski (weird) customer "service"...
I have owned an EL-32 second generation since 2014 which I've been deligthed with, I have taken great care of it and enjoyed many years of use.
I had managed to keep it in stunning condition with zero damage and pristine optics despite taking it on numerous trips.
I noticed that after a couple of years of use, the rubber armour started to get sticky and peel off, to the point that rather big bits of it eventually came off.
So Iexposed the problem to Swarovski customer service 2 years ago and they offered me to fix the problem at no cost after checking the binoculars (which I had sent to Austria).
After a few weeks I received an email from Swarovski saying that my binoculars were ready for collection in their branch in my country.
They had replaced the whole rubber armour and it all looked stunning like new. So far so good!
Here's my mistake: I did not check thouroughly the binoculars before leaving, put the objective caps quickly, packed them in their original case, took them back home and went on holiday the next day.

I noticed (too late) when unpacking them on holidy that the objective lens of the left barrel (right from the top) had turned blue with a very strong reflection as if the coating had been removed or damaged or whatever...It looked perfectly red-brown like the other one prior to servicing
So I wiped the objective gently but the new color is here to stay and it actually seems to be coming from the inside, as though one lens in the barrel is now uncoated or something.
Before you ask, the blue reflection doesn't occur when I view the other objective lens at the same angle.

So I do not know what the hell they did other there in Austria while servicing them, if they gave me another pair instead (though the serial number are is the original one).
I also noticed that the hinge is now harder to push, perharps they did some tightening, I don't know...
I can't be bothered sending the binoculars back to them, they are out of warranty now anyway, I'm sure it doesn't affect the performance in daylight, but the right lens looks like it has a 30 year old coating...which it did not have prior to rubber armour servicing...
So you sent your binoculars in to have the rubber armour replaced two years ago. They were returned with the new armour however one optic shows a different color either from being replaced or damaged. Swarovski apparently did not mention this. And in two years you have apparently said nothing to Swarovski to register a complaint. Suddenly two years later you complain online. There is something missing from the story.
 
And if done not carefully, presumably you would be responsible for scratching the binoculars, invalidating any repair request? Or you could not replace the stickers neatly, then you'd have to live with cosmetic imperfections?

I would say you are correct.
Jerry
 
Hi,

my guess would also be the replacement of some optical element in one tube with a spare part, which might have more current coatings and thus different thin film colors in reflection. Coating failures would probably not be uniform but localized with clearly defined edges and probably also visible against a white wall.
Same for cement failure... and an uncoated element should actually start to be visibly darker with 4-5% reflection per surface...

I would have expected this replacement to be listed on the statement of work done which tends to come with the instrument after a warranty repair too - is this paperwork still available?

Anyways, complaining after two years is a bit difficult...

I'd say, don't fret about cosmetics and enjoy the view...

Joachim
 
Last edited:
Turns out the village interpretation of “I’m out” in here is more of a note of some level of contempt mostly from village elders with no moral obligation to make good on the promised exit. Their disdain is particularly provoked when the village religion is criticized. Peace.
Ok that's it.....I'm outta here :p:p

sorry, couldn't resist
 
FWIW another Swarovski with significant heterochromia, this time an NL:

From SBU on Facebook.jpg
From the Facebook account Swarovski Binocular Users

While the different coloured reflections are understandably of concern to the owner of such an optic, as others have commented
the effect is unlikely to be noticed in use, as the brain subconsciously reconciles the different information received by the two eyes.

- - - -
Another example is with rangefinder binoculars. Most designs provide a different image to each eye in terms of transmission.
However, this is almost never commented on by those testing them 🧐

For more, see the various comments along with the transmission graphs from Gijs, at: Loss Of Brightness With 8X42 RF (HT)


John
 
Last edited:
Most modern Swarovski’s have a unique, yellow-green objective coating colour that you would assume is there for a reason…your eye may not perceive the difference between the two tubes but, still, I wouldn’t like the disparity.
 
Most modern Swarovski’s have a unique, yellow-green objective coating colour that you would assume is there for a reason…your eye may not perceive the difference between the two tubes but, still, I wouldn’t like the disparity.
No, my SLC 8/15x56 go more into the red spectrum, similar to the FL lenses.

Two slightly different coating reflections are actually just a cosmetic effect, no one will notice a difference visually.
If you look closely and take into account the influence of the sun, you can see that hardly any two objective fit together perfectly.

By the way, our eyes perceive colors etc. differently even if many people don't notice it, this effect is far greater.

Andreas
 
Two slightly different coating reflections are actually just a cosmetic effect, no one will notice a difference visually.
If you look closely and take into account the influence of the sun, you can see that hardly any two objective fit together perfectly.
speaking as a layperson, not an optical expert - you've been warned - my impression was that the coatings lab tunes each batch of lens coating to the specific characteristics of each batch of glass. In order to achieve maximum transmission.

So slight differences in the glass - different melts - can result in the coatings coming out slightly different colors. They're probably aiming for 0.1% to 0.25% reflection from the glass surface. Once that's achieved, nobody will be able to see any differences in the imagery through the glass. They're both coated to maximum efficiency and will work the best that way.

It just looks odd in binocular objectives right next to each other. I have a couple sets of high-end astronomy eyepieces. In one of them, the eye lenses appear either greenish or purple. They're the exact same product. Very similar to the photo above.
 
In high end movie and broadcast lenses, each group of say 6 elements in a 30 element lens are coated with account of refractive index.

The cemented surfaces are also coated with respect to refractive indices.

In addition there are two layers of edge blackening optimised for refractive index.

These lenses cost £10,000 to £200,000.

I don't think any binoculars go to these extremes, possibly the WX?

Pentax do coat some cemented surfaces on some items.

As stated above, at least my two eyes perceive colours differently, particularly grass colours.

Whether there is any difference regarding binocular refracting colours, I don't know.
This is common in Soviet binoculars and I don't see any difference.

Regards,
B.
 
In high end movie and broadcast lenses, each group of say 6 elements in a 30 element lens are coated with account of refractive index.
I think these high-end binoculars very much are doing this on every glass surface. You couldn't get to 91-92-95% transmission through a pile of lenses and prisms otherwise.

One thing I've noticed is the professional video equipment niche seems to have the very highest prices and profit margin. I haven't checked into camera lenses, but when you look at the mountings - video heads and tripods - the prices are double what you pay for similar equipment from astronomy companies. Or more. And the gear is generally weaker and flimsier than astronomy gear. I'm skeptical that any improvement could be made on the optics in the current generation of Swaro binoculars and scopes, Zeiss, etc.
 
They will send a technician the next day to India to fix any problem.

You don't get that for binoculars.

Vinten tripods are pretty good.

Chinese astro mounts and heads are not well machined.

If you want expensive, I have seen hand aspherised military lenses at one million dollars plus.

Regards,
B.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top