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="Gianni" data-source="post: 1787323" data-attributes="member: 84626">Hi Ed,I agree!I try to explain my assertion with some exemples.If I plan a production of 1000 bins, I need 2000 front lenses.1st option (1980s): I use only perfect lenses, then I have to produce 2100 front lenses because 100 lenses (5%) don't satisfy my quality (perfection) requirements.2nd option (today): in the past years I performed a “quality study” and I established that only 30 lenses don't satisfy my requirements because 70 lenses have a non-perceivable defect, then I can reduce the costs by using 2070 lenses instead of 2000.Other exemple:1st option (1980s): each mechanical part is superlative...2nd option (today): after the “quality study” I noted that the estimated duration of the mechanics was 100 years, but the average life of a binocular is 20 years, then... why produce an over quality? I can reduce the costs by using lower quality components.About me, I love the extra (non-perceivable) quality, then I prefer to buy a 3000 EUR binocular each 20 years than a 1500 EUR one each 10 years.IMHO the optical performance of a Zeiss Victory is slightly better than a Dialyt, but the mechanical feeling of a Dialyt...I'm near my fifties, but I prefer to buy a binocular with an estimated duration of 100 years, even if i don't estimate to use it for 100 years <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />Finally, i think that the present policy of some alpha firms is based on the "wow effect" in the comparison between an "old" and a present product.</blockquote>

Verification