Opinion on CN (1 Viewer)

[dries1]

IHF on CN when discussing the new bc from prc ,WOW, they have really drank the Koolaid over there.

"In fact I don't know of any notable optical innovations by Swarovski. I would like to learn more if there are any. Swarovski strikes me as the ultimate follower company, somehow out-incrementing classic innovators".

 

[tenex]

I think those remarks must be understood in historical context, compared to Zeiss in particular. Swarovski didn't invent the field flattener; was EL SV even the first binocular sharp from edge to edge? But arguing over what can be called "innovative" ultimately isn't very productive.

At least someone on CN figured out what "Banner Cloud" means...

 

[dries1]

This is why I am getting fed up with forums; the lectures. Many over there have never held a Swarovski.

 

[Elpha8888]

There are many fine reading threads on CN in regards to Swarovski Binoculars and in particular the EL 10x50, Astro related mainly but very enjoyable. You gotta dig for them.

 

[Elpha8888]

Yes I do agree that most have never held a Swarovski on there.

 

[Patudo]

Perhaps the OP could be so kind as to list Swarovski's notable optical innovations for our benefit...?

PS. how many of us have "held" a WX - does that disqualify us from talking about it?

 

[Geordiestew]

I do enjoy these popcorn moments.

I splurged on a 95mm ATX scope. It's good. It's great.

Having fondled a few pairs of Swarovski binoculars, I decided against getting them. They look lovely. They feel lovely. They are lovely. They were just too bloody expensive for my needs. Something is now available that probably gets 99% of the way there (adjust percentage accordingly for your needs). And 20% of the price. Maybe there'll be quality issues. Maybe they'll break in 12 months. Maybe they'll last 35 years (not sure what percentage of EL/NL users are ACTUALLY using 35 year old binoculars on a regular basis... if you're watching, I'm sure you'll pipe up, the "vocal" minority I'd imagine).

So, the CN lot have been slating your choice of binoculars... so what?! Does it devalue your binoculars? Does it spoil your very lovely view of a bird/mammal? Is your ego SO delicate that you can't handle a bit of criticism or challenge? I could understand MAYBE if you were Mx Swarovski and it's a personal thing.

shrugs

 

[dries1]

Perhaps the OP could be so kind as to list Swarovski's notable optical innovations for our benefit...?

PS. how many of us have "held" a WX - does that disqualify us from talking about it?

you know where you can go right

 

[dries1]

I do enjoy these popcorn moments.

I splurged on a 95mm ATX scope. It's good. It's great.

Having fondled a few pairs of Swarovski binoculars, I decided against getting them. They look lovely. They feel lovely. They are lovely. They were just too bloody expensive for my needs. Something is now available that probably gets 99% of the way there (adjust percentage accordingly for your needs). And 20% of the price. Maybe there'll be quality issues. Maybe they'll break in 12 months. Maybe they'll last 35 years (not sure what percentage of EL/NL users are ACTUALLY using 35 year old binoculars on a regular basis... if you're watching, I'm sure you'll pipe up, the "vocal" minority I'd imagine).

So, the CN lot have been slating your choice of binoculars... so what?! Does it devalue your binoculars? Does it spoil your very lovely view of a bird/mammal? Is your ego SO delicate that you can't handle a bit of criticism or challenge? I could understand MAYBE if you were Mx Swarovski and it's a personal thing.

shrugs

It is not that, it is the bs about a prc binocular being better than a much better binocular (NL) costing much less. It does not devalue anything. but the hype is over the top because they think they are getting a 9 for a 3.
Go enjoy your popcorn.

 

[Patudo]

surely the proud owner of 20, or was that 30 Swarovski binoculars ought to be well up to speed on the history and achievements of the company, including all those notable optical innovations. Lol

 

[dries1]

not even 20, but your envy and coveting does show.

 

[Paultricounty]

I do enjoy these popcorn moments.

I splurged on a 95mm ATX scope. It's good. It's great.

I’m confused by your post, if you could get 99% of the optical and mechanical quality for 80% less why did you buy the ATX?

Having fondled a few pairs of Swarovski binoculars, I decided against getting them. They look lovely. They feel lovely. They are lovely. They were just too bloody expensive for my needs. Something is now available that probably gets 99% of the way there (adjust percentage accordingly for your needs). And 20% of the price. Maybe there'll be quality issues. Maybe they'll break in 12 months. Maybe they'll last 35 years (not sure what percentage of EL/NL users are ACTUALLY using 35 year old binoculars on a regular basis... if you're watching, I'm sure you'll pipe up, the "vocal" minority I'd imagine).

Can you explain why when somebody replies to your post they are the vocal minority? What are your posts , do you belong to some other vocal group? 😵‍💫

So, the CN lot have been slating your choice of binoculars... so what?! Does it devalue your binoculars? Does it spoil your very lovely view of a bird/mammal? Is your ego SO delicate that you can't handle a bit of criticism or challenge? I could understand MAYBE if you were Mx Swarovski and it's a personal thing.

Sometimes people say silly things and then others react to it, but I don’t think it’s been said that it devaluates somebody else’s Binoculars, or that someone can’t criticize somebody somebody else’s criticism. It’s like for me saying a $500 Binocular is 99% as good as a $3000 Binocular, I’d feel silly.

shrugs

 

[Patudo]

not even 20, but your envy and coveting does show.

Wow, the usual playschool level "insight" from Mr. one liner. So everyone that expresses a differing opinion on binoculars, has to envy your massive... collection?

Still waiting for you to tell us about Swarovski's "notable optical innovations"...

 

[dries1]

Go ask the commenter on cn who made the statement regarding Swarovski, don't waste my time.
on ignore now.

 

[Conndomat]

The problem IMO is the hype surrounding the SBC, especially on CN.

Then there are some Chinese user that I still don't know if they are somehow connected to the SBC and to what extent the binoculars are pushed, it is a bit strange.

To be fair, one has to say that there is often inappropriate hype when it comes to Alpha glasses. I'm thinking of the early days of the NL or other candidates. As a sober person, I fundamentally reject such absolutisms, especially when it comes to binoculars that have just come off the production line and are still proving their worth must.

Most of the time, after using it for a while, the topic becomes more objective because the first corpses come out of the cellar.

Andreas

 

[tenex]

I don't frequent CN but have the impression they're a rather frugal lot, more interested in optics than haptics since their bins are so often mounted, and specifically optical performance on the night sky, so it's easy to understand excitement over something like SRBC that slots right into that. (It's also a relatively small market.)

A $500 binocular seems arguably competitive with a $3500 one... why does this situation seem to act like flypaper? Everyone gets to decide for themselves what appeals to them, how to define performance, weigh mechanicals vs optics etc, buy (or not) whatever they prefer for their own reasons, and report whether they're satisfied. Somehow that sounds like an unproblematically good thing. But hype does have an ugly way of turning judgmental, as we've seen...

 

[Conndomat]

A $500 binocular seems arguably competitive with a $3500 one... why does this situation seem to act like flypaper?

There is actually no report yet that has compared the BC in the open field in more detail with $3500 binoculars, IMO there are a lot of guesses from a lot of people.

Andreas

 

[wllmspd]

I did start looking at the patents that Swarovski has filed, not the easiest things to digest. Of course much bino optical design is many decades old and so it’s about adding new materials/coating and dealing with design, ergonomic and manufacturing trade offs.
The WX are great binos, but the ergonomics are not so great.
The CN lot quite like porros as no one can see how unfashionable you are in the dark ;-)!

Peter

 

[Tringa45]

I’m confused by your post, if you could get 99% of the optical and mechanical quality for 80% less why did you buy the ATX?

I think Geordiestew's strategy makes a lot of sense.
Scopes offer much higher magnifications in relation to objective size than bins and these magnifications will expose optical deficiencies.
There are many medium-priced binoculars that come close to the premium examples.
There are no birding scopes for $1000 that could hold a candle to an ATX or fluorite Kowa.

John

 

[Scott98]

I don't frequent CN but have the impression they're a rather frugal lot, more interested in optics t

EVERYONE is a "frugal lot" compared to us!!! Us Binoholic wacko people

I guess my reaction to that somewhat hyperbolic post would be.....why does it matter? Why does it bother you? Who cares I say. Of course a company selling $3500 42mm binoculars is going to take some heat from time to time. I know exactly why I have my 10x56 SLC and they're not going anywhere anytime soon.

People get excited about lower-cost options and new products, that's all it is. I have to admit I've steered away from getting the low-cost stuff from China or Phillipines or what have you, but a 52mm NL Pure knockoff from these guys might change that. I wouldn't expect it to be as good as the high-end brand.

PS...does that photo look like Matterhorn and not China or is just me?