NL reliability anecdotes / info: I hesitate to link this here, but I think it’s worthwhile (5 Viewers)

[Isthatascratch?]

Every week -on Sunday 1600- i take a bath and take all my (sealed) binoculars with me and clean them, its standard procedure. After that i use a hair dryer and the special Swarovski Binoculars Balm for nourishment.

Nice ….smooth!

 

[Dennis Mau]

Well sorta... maybe... Hermann. But wait, is it possible there is an "anti Swarovski" mafia here? A case could be made. Methinks though both of these assertions miss the point, are short of the mark.

It is a point Ive raised before that you have already criticized, but I'll speak to again. The Birdforum policy that all opinions are to be respected, protected speech is at the root of this. I get some wont like this and may ironically want to censor THIS opinion. But look at what just happened. The OP reports a potential newish issue with Swarovski construction. I say newish cuz in my 4 years here I dont recall reading about it. The sling attaching hardware affixed to the bino body fails? If true I want to know. We all should want to know.

But even the original post which was based on reports from friends and an authority or two, was a bit far from a direct, first hand report. What was the circumstance? Context matters. How did this happen? It woulda been nice. Instead we have an argument about the bona fides of serious Birding guides and the quality of their indirectly reported experiences. Yikes!

The picture included, added to the controversy. The NL body had an aftermarket part installed. What role did that play? Why was that done? Probably inadvertent. But it surely is cause for a question or 2. Another picture posted was of the failed eyepiece rubber. What purpose did that intend? The OP stated he didnt want to pour gas on things but Im guessing at some level he knew he was doing just that. Saying that almost setup the outcome. Clearly some experienced it this way. Back to the eyepiece pic. To my way of thinking, Im still wondering if these binos were dropped? I see evidence in that pic of that. I admit its a guess. Others have come on and pretty vehemently argued this is caused by sebum, DEET, hot dog mustard... Again not facts just unsubstantiated strongly expressed (maybe even defended) opinions. We dont know.

Denco piles on with a list of 10 or so quotes that, if one took the time to read, you would wonder. What are these people from Facebook or somewhere reporting? Most sound to me like theyre having problems, often complained about here, getting the strap connector properly latched to the bino body hardware. If so how did that relate? Denco is welcome to his opinion, and so yet again we get this. Piling on? Obfuscating?

This is not about a pro or anti Swarovski mafia. That obscures the issue and is itself argumentative, reeks of the personal. It is about the BF notion all opinions are created equal. All opinions are welcome and to be respected. That is never gonna work. It is the direct cause of the controversies that constantly spring up here. And that we are mostly all tired of. Some opinions are indeed fact. Some opinions are based on fact with experience to augment, when fact is missing. All opinions might be qualified with contextual conversation. That would help. Many/most are not. Opinions that have been repeated literally for years, refuted over that same time frame by people who know, and are still be expressed here are not good. This happens as we all know.

How to stop it?

There is nothing confusing about the Facebook quotes. The people have legitimate gripes about their Swarovski binoculars failing too soon, and they are voicing their opinions. There is no way the eyepiece damage was caused by being dropped, and I have explained the reasons for it, but you continue to obfuscate the facts by refusing to accept the overwhelming evidence. It is obvious by all the complaints, Swarovski has problems with their armor melting , the Field Pro attachments coming off and glare and Swarovski needs to fix it. It does no good to try to sweep the problems under a rug and deny they exist. Furthermore, it is better for Swarovski to accept the fact that there are problems and fix them on future binoculars.

 

[GrampaTom]

There is nothing confusing about the Facebook quotes. The people have legitimate gripes about their Swarovski binoculars failing too soon, and they are voicing their opinions. There is no way the eyepiece damage was caused by being dropped, and I have explained the reasons for it, but you continue to obfuscate the facts by refusing to accept the overwhelming evidence. It is obvious by all the complaints, Swarovski has problems with their armor melting and the Field Pro attachments coming off and Swarovski needs to fix it. It does no good to try to sweep the problems under a rug and deny they exist. Furthermore, it is better for Swarovski to accept the fact that there are problems and fix them on future binoculars.

Oh my...

 

[GrampaTom]

I knew what would happen when I posted it but still wanted to at least try to be sincere.

Just a couple things to note: I did post a pic of one of my other friend's bin which failed the same way with the Swaro provided lug attached. This is the third case of this I know of among friends and I had seen one other case go by before (I thought it was here but it must have been on FB, I cannot find it again). From reading through the accounts on David's post it sounded like a few more people were discussing the exact same issue and not just straps unclipping / detaching.

I've got bins from Swaro, Zeiss, and Nikon though I've never had a Leica. My only disastrous failure was with my Zeiss SF's focuser and I know another person who suffered the exact same failure shortly after. I was concerned it would become a pattern but I've not heard about more cases yet. I doubt the Swaro FP mounts tearing out is going to be an epidemic but it doesn't seem like an isolated case any more.

I travel a lot and my bins see a lot of use, though I do take care of them, protect them as best as possible, clean them regularly, etc. I have almost no lens scratches, ever, just a lot of very patina'd armor and a few that have had the armor fall off (one Swaro, one old Nikon) and I've broken an eyecup or two over the years. I've seen a ton of failure modes of all the major bins over the years among acquaintances. I don't expect bins to be immortal, and I don't treat them as an emotional attachment or a heirloom object, I buy the one that I think will work the best for me and then use it. If it lasts 5 years I'm happy but I expect it to last 10 or more. However if it has a massive failure (mount point pulls out, focuser breaks, etc) in the first couple years, that's pretty disappointing. There's a phrase in Spanish about cussing in seven languages which is pretty much what I did when stood in the middle of the Amazon with a monocular half way through a two month trip after my focuser broke and I didn't have any backup bins along.

It seems it's basically impossible to discuss these things here without emotions rising but c'est la vie, I thought it was worth posting and I still think it was.

Cheers for all who've participated though I have appreciated the civil comments more than some of the others

Well if you knew what would happen... If you thought that, might you have found another way to write it? The language of "pouring gas" set you/this up. I get why you would've thought it. But once said, the fight was on, seems. The pic with the aftermarket part messes with things. Im not sure I follow your comment re the pic of another friends bino. Did I miss something was there more than one bino with the failed body hardware? Again I absolutely agree this is an important point that deserves discussion.

Dennis called me an "armchair birder", funny enough. But I am an "armchair lawyer" in that what little I know about the law comes from watching TV shows of lawyers arguing cases. I suspect we would hear in such a show, the reports from friends challenged as hearsay and not admissible. Why? Cuz theres no way to ascertain the actual circumstance of those reports. We cant interview those folks. I expect a defense lawyer would have fun getting the picture thrown out cuz of the aftermarket part installed within the mechanism in question. I bet that was inadvertent. But I wasnt the only one to notice something was amiss in the picture that raised, quite fairly, the question.

How big a deal is it? i suspect if we could get a look at returns from all the manufacturers we would have a very different appreciation for what fails, what they fix, what we don't hear about and what they try and redesign improvements for. We dont know how many of these fail this way from Swaros records. Though I bet its not a lot, otherwise we'd of heard of it before now. And I'd bet a dollar, strap lugs fail on all kinds of binos, given its usually an attached part that is subject to a lot of wear and tear given how people use binos.

But Pbjosh, you were set up to fail. Its not your fault, The point of my piece to Hermann above, was not to criticize you, but to point out something fundamental happening here that set you up. When all opinions are allowed without regard to quality, and are allowed to be repeated over and over again, we get exactly what we have, a culture of gotchas and defensiveness. Its ironic you anticipated what you got.

Why?

 

[Jos Stratford]

Gee, the OP simply started a thread to show a guy's experience with some binoculars ...is it really necessary to turn it into a massive argument about some opinions are worth more than others? Nobody is taking your optics away from you or saying what you should or shouldn't buy, why get so worked up?

It's been said plenty of times before, it's a public forum - opinions will be posted that differ from your own, that is the nature of a forum. Regarding the bit suggesting we should not allow some opinions, it is not the role of Birdforum to censor opinions - or should we have a management board to decide which views are okay and which are not?

 

[Hermann]

It is a point Ive raised before that you have already criticized, but I'll speak to again. The Birdforum policy that all opinions are to be respected, protected speech is at the root of this. I get some wont like this and may ironically want to censor THIS opinion. But look at what just happened. <snip>

Look Tom, I won't get into this debate yet again. I don't agree with you. I think you're wrong. You think you're right. So we'd better agree to disagree. End of story.

This is not about a pro or anti Swarovski mafia. That obscures the issue and is itself argumentative, reeks of the personal. It is about the BF notion all opinions are created equal. All opinions are welcome and to be respected. That is never gonna work. It is the direct cause of the controversies that constantly spring up here. And that we are mostly all tired of. Some opinions are indeed fact. Some opinions are based on fact with experience to augment, when fact is missing. All opinions might be qualified with contextual conversation. That would help. Many/most are not. Opinions that have been repeated literally for years, refuted over that same time frame by people who know, and are still be expressed here are not good. This happens as we all know. [my emphasis]

So you think there needs to be some sort of "authority" that decides what's fact and what isn't. What people should be allowed to write here and what shouldn't be allowed. This won't work, as I argued at length in a previous thread.

And I really resent your use of "we" here to make it look as though your position is shared by all or at least the majority of posters here. It's a cheap trick. And even if you and your hamster agree that you're both tired of what's going on on the forum, this doesn't mean everyone is.

Hermann

NB: I'd prefer the owner of this forum would allow some more rigorous debate in such cases. A nice old flamewar might clear the air once and for all.

 

[SGBirder]

While this thread spun out of control (as always)... there was an interesting reply from Swarovski to the Facebook post shared by the OP - that they "have already implemented changes to the strap attachment, eyecups and armoring". I suppose this somewhat indicates that the FP strap attachment point design was indeed not actually fit for purpose based on the original design/construction.

I wonder what these changes to the strap attachment and eyecups are, and how these changes will be rolled out to sold products. Presumably similar to the armor issue, the improved parts will be retrofitted as part of a repair job. Though a failure of the strap attachment point could result in impact damage, or even total loss of the binoculars off the edge of a cliff or boat. Not sure how a repair would work in such a scenario!

 

[Isthatascratch?]

While this thread spun out of control (as always)... there was an interesting reply from Swarovski to the Facebook post shared by the OP - that they "have already implemented changes to the strap attachment, eyecups and armoring". I suppose this somewhat indicates that the FP strap attachment point design was indeed not actually fit for purpose based on the original design/construction.

I wonder how these changes will be rolled out to sold products - presumably similar to the armor issue, the improved parts will be retrofitted it as part of a repair job. Though a failure of the strap attachment point could result in impact damage, or even total loss of the binoculars off the edge of a cliff or boat. Not sure how a repair would work in such a scenario!

View attachment 1628382

I always love a nice ‘vague’ answer from a manufacturer.

 

[Scott98]

When I looked over the Swaros at the local bird store, they eagerly told me, "...and another great thing about these is that Swaro North America is very close to us in Rhode Island". I thought to myself, that's strange, why would that matter? My Nikons have never needed to go back to Nikon USA?

 

[tenex]

What were the conditions of failure? did it just decide to pop off one day with the bins around his neck?

Just sounds like a frustrated rant from a power user.

I don't think I've ever seen five pages of such stuff appear in one day before, and not surprisingly, almost half from members on my unevenly observed ignore list. A topic like this is like blood in the water to sharks: expensive optics, design failures, reputation, high-stakes issues on which some already know who they want to blame and can't wait to say it, disparage anyone who disagrees, or just rant about whatever.

Thank you pbjosh for mentioning this case anyway; I wasn't aware of this failure mode before, and thought FP was merely a nuisance.

 

[Dennis Mau]

While this thread spun out of control (as always)... there was an interesting reply from Swarovski to the Facebook post shared by the OP - that they "have already implemented changes to the strap attachment, eyecups and armoring". I suppose this somewhat indicates that the FP strap attachment point design was indeed not actually fit for purpose based on the original design/construction.

I wonder what these changes to the strap attachment and eyecups are, and how these changes will be rolled out to sold products. Presumably similar to the armor issue, the improved parts will be retrofitted as part of a repair job. Though a failure of the strap attachment point could result in impact damage, or even total loss of the binoculars off the edge of a cliff or boat. Not sure how a repair would work in such a scenario!

View attachment 1628382

That is the result we all wanted. That is the positive outcome of voicing your discontent instead of trying to sweep the problems under the rug or denying they exist. Fix the problems and move forward. This is the best thread we have had on Bird Forum in a long time. It is so much better than discussing what is the best binocular I can get for less than $500. It was almost like the "Good Old Days" of Bird Forum when we had some real meaningful threads! The only drawback is now all the older Swarovski binoculars will depreciate when the new, improved version comes out with all the problems fixed.

 

[Trinovid]

...they "have already implemented changes to the strap attachment, eyecups and armoring".

Hopefully this turns out to be a good thing for everyone and is made up of updates they can give their custom customers who run into problems with the older versions.

 

[chill6x6]

For absolutely certainty, the "Field-Pro System" is a solution to a problem that didn't exist. I hate it..

 

[greekgeek]

I don't think I've ever seen five pages of such stuff appear in one day before, and not surprisingly, almost half from members on my unevenly observed ignore list. A topic like this is like blood in the water to sharks: expensive optics, design failures, reputation, high-stakes issues on which some already know who they want to blame and can't wait to say it, disparage anyone who disagrees, or just rant about whatever.

Thank you pbjosh for mentioning this case anyway; I wasn't aware of this failure mode before, and thought FP was merely a nuisance.

Amen. Unemotional analysis of the situation from people who are not invested is hard to come by.

 

[Trinovid]

Amen. Unemotional analysis of the situation from people who are not invested is hard to come by.

Virtually impossible in recent times and it's hard to just put people on ignore because a couple of them have enough great input that you don't want to miss out on it.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

For absolutely certainty, the "Field-Pro System" is a solution to a problem that didn't exist. I hate it..

In fairness to them, Swarovski appear to have developed the system to eliminate problems people have suffered and for you to use their system of straps to overcome those issues. Also, they wanted to innovate and differentiate from the competition.

I would assume (and hope) that they did their research in both the fixing and carrying and also the armour changing had clear reasons such as the environment, tactile feel, grip etc. There may also be manufacturing speed and cost advantages.

If they are a modern and organised customer focused organisation they haven’t pulled this out of the air. However, in this modern world you never know?

My main criticism with them (and many of their competitors) is that the information they often make available can be scant. That however, is because I’m a nosy sod when it comes to stuff , probably like many others on here.

I still believe that their biggest hint regarding the armour is the supplied ‘transportable wash kit’ and their videos on how to clean the device under the tap on their video.

 

[temmie]

For those who visit the forum less frequently, we had this opening post:

I am not trying to pour gasoline on any fire nor be provocative. There are clearly very different user groups for optics, and I and my friends tend to be in the “drag it all over the world, it better survive wrapped in a t-shirt in my backpack or bouncing on a car or boat seat every day” crowd. I do not think I abuse my gear - I actually do take efforts to protect and prolong the life of my optics and computers and phones, but I’m probably still at the high-wear end of the bell curve. I don’t have outlandish expectations of immortality for anything I own. Personally, the only binocular service issue I have had is a broken focuser on my Zeiss SF which is also my primary bin. That said, while Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, and other bins have their own service issues, I don’t think the Swaro armor issues are any secret, and it seems that the fieldpro mounts pulling out is a not so rare occurrence as I now personally know at least three people who have had this issue.

Given the amount of discussion here surrounding these issues, and for anyone who is interested in the saga of hard-living bins in the tropics, David Ascanio recently had his fieldpro mount point fall out and posted about it on FB. Of course it’s only a collection of anecdotes but nonetheless, the link for the curious:

David Ascanio

I have used Leica binoculars for 25+ years. They were reliable and strong: almost indestructible! Then, two years ago, with the valuable support of Victor Emanuel Nature Tours I was upgraded with...

www.facebook.com

And we had this answer:

While this thread spun out of control (as always)... there was an interesting reply from Swarovski to the Facebook post shared by the OP - that they "have already implemented changes to the strap attachment, eyecups and armoring". I suppose this somewhat indicates that the FP strap attachment point design was indeed not actually fit for purpose based on the original design/construction.

I wonder what these changes to the strap attachment and eyecups are, and how these changes will be rolled out to sold products. Presumably similar to the armor issue, the improved parts will be retrofitted as part of a repair job. Though a failure of the strap attachment point could result in impact damage, or even total loss of the binoculars off the edge of a cliff or boat. Not sure how a repair would work in such a scenario!

View attachment 1628382

Now if you want to waste your time reading everything in between, there is some signal and an awful lot of noise.
So grab some popcorn and draw your own conclusions / do your own research.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

In fairness to them, Swarovski appear to have developed the system to eliminate problems people have suffered and for you to use their system of straps to overcome those issues. Also, they wanted to innovate and differentiate from the competition.

I would assume (and hope) that they did their research in both the fixing and carrying and also the armour changing had clear reasons such as the environment, tactile feel, grip etc. There may also be manufacturing speed and cost advantages.

If they are a modern and organised customer focused organisation they haven’t pulled this out of the air. However, in this modern world you never know?

My main criticism with them (and many of their competitors) is that the information they often make available can be scant. That however, is because I’m a nosy sod when it comes to stuff , probably like many others on here.

I still believe that their biggest hint regarding the armour is the supplied ‘transportable wash kit’ and their videos on how to clean the device under the tap on their video.

For those who visit the forum less frequently, we had this opening post:

And we had this answer:

Now if you want to waste your time reading everything in between, there is some signal and an awful lot of noise.
So grab some popcorn and draw your own conclusions / do your own research.

Is there an intermission to get more food and drink?

 

[Maljunulo]

In my rather long life experience, those who advocate some kind of authoritarian entity usually envision themselves as a member of that entity.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

In my rather long life experience, those who advocate some kind of authoritarian entity usually envision themselves as a member of that entity.

If I did I’d want a big throne made out of melted Swarovski armour with huge bird feathers to decorate it!