On the occasion of the HDX, thinking about it … (5 Viewers)

[PatR]

Seems the Zeiss people carefully designed the HDX to produce maximum entertainment on this forum.

Looks like it's not being much of a success in other ways.

Seriously, though, the OP in the first post does sum it up by that word success, and NDHunter/Jerry nicely in post #35 above with a few words more.

Seems Zeiss's new models in recent years have impressed us so much that that we expect something mystical when they add a letter X to an existing model!

Tried a pair of 8x42 HDX's yesterday against my own 8x42 HD's.

Both are lovely bino's but whilst I could not tell any difference twixt the two optically, the eyecups were a 'better fit' on the HDX. However I do have the longer eyecups on my 8x42's and they are fine.

I won't bother to fork out an extra £300.

 

[tenex]

From jackjacks post and pictures.

The posts and pictures you were just deriding in another thread as subjective and worthless? These judgments continue to change as needed from day to day. Now that's worthless.

I sometimes wonder: is Dennis‘ fund of completely random statements unlimited, or are there limits?

No need to wonder...

Back to the original post though: isn't it just a little bit boring to have only 8/10 x 32/42 at four price levels? What about 7x, or 8.5, or 12? And no 50mm, and still no 12x in larger glass either, and 15x only in Conquest...

 

[GrampaTom]

To whatever extent you can tell, are these sales of SFL to new buyers, or trade-ins of bulkier models? And why do you suppose such dominance isn't evident on this forum, with either SFL or NL? Instead many here seem to want something that isn't on offer

As we’ve discussed in the past, Bird Forums binocular sub group is not zactly representative of the Bino buying general public. It’s prolly the last place a Product Manager would come for intel on decisions to be made re product planning, e.g. models, specs, prices, attributes.

Spend time here and it becomes apparent that this is a place folks come to talk about binoculars. The motives behind the conversation are not quite the same as say if one were out shopping for a bino to go, ah.. er.. birding. The conversation is the purpose, expressing one’s opinion what it’s all about. Any survey of us, as we’ve discussed would be less than helpful to those PMs trying to make good decisions.

 

[Scott98]

Back to the original post though: isn't it just a little bit boring to have only 8/10 x 32/42 at four price levels? What about 7x, or 8.5, or 12? And no 50mm, and still no 12x in larger glass either, and 15x only in Conquest...

I have to say, this mid-range area - Nikon Monarch HG, Zeiss Conquest - is somewhat baffling. It's expensive, but has obvious flaws compared to binos just a few hundred dollars more (CA, prism spikes, FOV, etc). I think this mid-range is the one that's most at risk from cheaper, direct-import KUO binoculars.

And this without offering any new or unique size and magnification options. Always the same sizes. Never a 7x42 or 7x35. Never 8.5 or 9x. Never a 50mm. I'm more likely to seek out a Maven or something like that. If KUO comes out with some of these sizes they'll have the whole niche to themselves.

I know we're optical fanatics here, but this is reflected in what I see birding too. Most binos fall into 2 groups, the Monarch 5/7's, Athlons, Vortex....or Swaro EL's. Every once in a while I do see a Conquest, but far less often than HT's and SF's.

 

[GrampaTom]

The posts and pictures you were just deriding in another thread as subjective and worthless? These judgments continue to change as needed from day to day. Now that's worthless.


No need to wonder...

Back to the original post though: isn't it just a little bit boring to have only 8/10 x 32/42 at four price levels? What about 7x, or 8.5, or 12? And no 50mm, and still no 12x in larger glass either, and 15x only in Conquest...

Your first paragraph is spot on. Was trying to find those comments made week or so back that were critical of Jack Jack and wandered a bit towards the personal, even. Then this?

Not sure I feel the same about last paragraph. 8/10, 32/42 represents the “big 4”, the most important grouping of binos from a sales volume potential. I “suspect” This group is large enough to warrant all the various price points. This ol PM does not find that boring. I get though as a consumer it may be so. Most of us just wanna buy one (or 2). These other non big4 binos have a place to be sure, but sales more than likely don’t support the same numbers of brands, models, pricing levels.

 

[tenex]

I have to say, this mid-range area - Nikon Monarch HG, Zeiss Conquest - is somewhat baffling. It's expensive, but has obvious flaws compared to binos just a few hundred dollars more (CA, prism spikes, FOV, etc).

The oddity is that supposedly high-end manufacturers who have a midrange/budget line produced (even something like Terra) somehow imagine their brand name can still command a more premium price for that. Possibly there was some justification for this years ago when they first did it, but not so much anymore.

 

[GrampaTom]

I have to say, this mid-range area - Nikon Monarch HG, Zeiss Conquest - is somewhat baffling. It's expensive, but has obvious flaws compared to binos just a few hundred dollars more (CA, prism spikes, FOV, etc). I think this mid-range is the one that's most at risk from cheaper, direct-import KUO binoculars.

And this without offering any new or unique size and magnification options. Always the same sizes. Never a 7x42 or 7x35. Never 8.5 or 9x. Never a 50mm. I'm more likely to seek out a Maven or something like that. If KUO comes out with some of these sizes they'll have the whole niche to themselves.

I know we're optical fanatics here, but this is reflected in what I see birding too. Most binos fall into 2 groups, the Monarch 5/7's, Athlons, Vortex....or Swaro EL's. Every once in a while I do see a Conquest, but far less often than HT's and SF's.

Baffling? Not so much. Disheartening? More, maybe. Suspect it did not evolve this way, in this order, but still is more than likely the way it is. In the beginning, say a company makes the best bino it can, putting their best foot forward hoping to gain advantage, beat the competition. Old school, I know. Today with the very large range of human being's buying binoculars for whatever reason, people's ability or willingness to pay, depends on their perception of need, purpose and budget. So we have price points. The sort of "sadish" part is the company trying to match these, takes a perfectly good binocular and degrades it a bit here and there, searching for manufacturing costs to justify a lower price, without jeopardizing profit percentage. Or more then likely they just start from scratch and make a bino with less performance than they know how to deliver, trying to make the target price. Surely it did not happen in this order, but feels like it sometimes.

No need for us to feel angst about this, doesn't seem particularly nefarious, just the way it is.

 

[GrampaTom]

The oddity is that supposedly high-end manufacturers who have a midrange/budget line produced (even something like Terra) somehow imagine their brand name can still command a more premium price for that. Possibly there was some justification for this years ago when they first did it, but not so much anymore.

They pay a lot to acquire that market perception though, through advertising, dealer support, online content, show participation, (like yesterdays Lodi Sand Hill Crane event. The biggest guys were there. Thats not free. Soft things to be sure, but thats how the market works.

 

[ArchStanton]

They pay a lot to acquire that market perception though, through advertising, dealer support, online content, show participation, (like yesterdays Lodi Sand Hill Crane event. The biggest guys were there. Thats not free. Soft things to be sure, but thats how the market works.

Did Opticron have a booth? If so, did you by chance to compare the Opticron Auroras to the Conquest HDX's? Fujifilm, Kowa, Zeiss, Swarovski were at the last birding festival I attended. I've never attended the crane festival in Socorro, NM, but it supposedly attracts several major optics manufacturers.

 

[GrampaTom]

Did Opticron have a booth? If so, did you by chance to compare the Opticron Auroras to the Conquest HDX's? Fujifilm, Kowa, Zeiss, Swarovski were at the last birding festival I attended. I've never attended the crane festival in Socorro, NM, but it supposedly attracts several major optics manufacturers.

They did. I use their MM4 77 scope. Good folks. Did not visit though, or make those comparisons. Sorry.

Out of This World Optics from Mendocino was there representing couple Nikons, plus the HGX, SFLs and SFs. Swaro had their own table. As OOTWO sells Opticron and Swaro and the three tables were close, seems an interesting business relationship.

Lots going on. We were viewing several binos and one scope while a quite good lecture on raptors was taking place in courtyard. Not enough time to do justice to “shopping” went birding as well.

 

[jan van daalen]

Baffling? Not so much. Disheartening? More, maybe. Suspect it did not evolve this way, in this order, but still is more than likely the way it is. In the beginning, say a company makes the best bino it can, putting their best foot forward hoping to gain advantage, beat the competition. Old school, I know. Today with the very large range of human being's buying binoculars for whatever reason, people's ability or willingness to pay, depends on their perception of need, purpose and budget. So we have price points. The sort of "sadish" part is the company trying to match these, takes a perfectly good binocular and degrades it a bit here and there, searching for manufacturing costs to justify a lower price, without jeopardizing profit percentage. Or more then likely they just start from scratch and make a bino with less performance than they know how to deliver, trying to make the target price. Surely it did not happen in this order, but feels like it sometimes.

No need for us to feel angst about this, doesn't seem particularly nefarious, just the way it is.

One of the best posts lately to describe the current situation.
Swaro and Zeiss going to China is a perfect example of it.

 

[PatR]

Baffling? Not so much. Disheartening? More, maybe. Suspect it did not evolve this way, in this order, but still is more than likely the way it is. In the beginning, say a company makes the best bino it can, putting their best foot forward hoping to gain advantage, beat the competition. Old school, I know. Today with the very large range of human being's buying binoculars for whatever reason, people's ability or willingness to pay, depends on their perception of need, purpose and budget. So we have price points. The sort of "sadish" part is the company trying to match these, takes a perfectly good binocular and degrades it a bit here and there, searching for manufacturing costs to justify a lower price, without jeopardizing profit percentage. Or more then likely they just start from scratch and make a bino with less performance than they know how to deliver, trying to make the target price. Surely it did not happen in this order, but feels like it sometimes.

No need for us to feel angst about this, doesn't seem particularly nefarious, just the way it is.

Well said Tom. What the market demands, and is prepared to pay, is the root to it all.

And whilst some might see a dilution in (often perceived) brand quality to be the work of the devil, or the bean counter, there are sound commercial reasons why high labour cost countries are striding with vigour towards manufacturing in the East.

I don't have a problem where a product is made as long as it meets my purchasing needs. I had a very close look at the little MIC Swaro Junior's and I could not see any degredation in build quality or IQ whatsoever. If Swaro could have made them in Austria and made an (acceptable) profit on them then I am sure they would have.

But they didn't.

 

[[email protected]]

"Dear Dennis,

Thanks for your inquiry.

The (discontinued) Conquest HD binocular models were manufactured in Germany.

With Best regards

Customer Care Center
Consumer Products

Carl Zeiss AG
Carl-Zeiss-Straße 22
73447 Oberkochen, Germany

Phone: +49 800 934 77 33
Fax: +49 7364 20-5216
[email protected]
www.zeiss.com/consumer-products

_________

Carl Zeiss AG
Headquarters: Oberkochen, Germany
Chairman of the Supervisory Board: Dr. Michael Bolle
Executive Board: Dr. Karl Lamprecht (President & CEO),
Susan-Stefanie Breitkopf, Sven Hermann, Stefan Müller,
Andreas Pecher, Dr. Jochen Peter, Dr. Markus Weber"

 

[Patudo]

Well, none of Swaro/Leica/Zeiss are charities, so have to be aware of market forces (acutely so I suspect, as the market for high end binoculars seems pretty competitive). And I'm sure consumer price points do exist. I myself would find it very hard to spend £1K on a binocular.

I don't see anything wrong with building something "down to a price" rather than "up to a standard", to invert that oft-used phrase. I'd rather there be an option I can afford instead of ones I can't. It's been that way for a while, except that 20 or 30 years ago the consumer seeking good performance at lower cost might have gone for eg. a Swift Audubon rather than a Zeiss Dialyt.

Today's second tier is superior in many respects to binoculars from when Zeiss and Leitz were building "only the best binoculars they could".

 

[GrampaTom]

Today's second tier is superior in many respects to binoculars from when Zeiss and Leitz were building "only the best binoculars they could".

Yep. My Subaru Outback is way more fun to drive then "sports cars" of the '60s

 

[ArchStanton]

They did. I use their MM4 77 scope. Good folks. Did not visit though, or make those comparisons. Sorry.

Out of This World Optics from Mendocino was there representing couple Nikons, plus the HGX, SFLs and SFs. Swaro had their own table. As OOTWO sells Opticron and Swaro and the three tables were close, seems an interesting business relationship.

Lots going on. We were viewing several binos and one scope while a quite good lecture on raptors was taking place in courtyard. Not enough time to do justice to “shopping” went birding as well.

Next time I attend a festival, I'll make sure to sign up for a birding workshop instead of spending so much time checking out the optics. Hopefully, Opticron will come to a local festival next time. Thanks for the reply!

 

[roweraay]

I don't see anything wrong with building something "down to a price" rather than "up to a standard", to invert that oft-used phrase.

Actually in these cases, they are building something that's affordable price-wise, while maintaining the same standard, rather than lowering the quality standards to get to a lower cost-point.

I have premium interchangeable camera lenses (Sony 135mm f/1.8 GM etc., with the "GM" designation against the lens signifying the absolute top-shelf models of theirs) being made in China. In the past, the "GM" designated lenses were always made in Japan. This 135mm f/1.8 GM lens, can favorably benchmark its performance against any such similar product made in Japan or Austria or Germany. No difference in build, or performance or any such objective measure of product quality. Probably a different situation 10 years back, but the folks in China have not been sitting idle either, and have certainly upped their game.

One of my vehicles, a 2022 Mercedes E450 All-Terrain Wagon/Estate, built in Germany, has not had a single problem or rattle or creak throughout my 2 years of ownership. Pure perfection in terms of assembly quality and reliability. I sat in a Mercedes E-class long-wheelbase sedan (which Mercedes makes in China), during a trip to our Asian facility in china, and the car felt identical in quality to my German built Mercedes. The owner stated that it is as tight as a drum, assembly wise, and a joy to own.......just like mine !

 

[[email protected]]

Here is a post by Spiral Horn on Rockslide concerning where the Zeiss Conquest HD's are made, and he personally talked to a Zeiss representative.

Maven vs Zeiss

Hey guys I think I’ve narrowed my search on my next set of binos to the maven B110x42 or the Zeiss conquest 10x42. Still deciding but just seeing what everyone thinks of these 2 thanks

rokslide.com

"With the explosion of Asian manufacturing and competition driving companies to often change where things are made, there is a plethora of misinformation all over the internet. It is always best to do some research to confirm.

Although I’ve seen continued and often varied speculation on bird forums about Conquest HD’s place of manufacture, I’ve never witnessed any Industry PRO or Zeiss Rep clearly state that the Conquest’s optical system is made by Kamakuru or anywhere other than Zeiss in Germany (as declared by Zeiss). US law is very different from the EU in this regard. For a product sold in the USA, it must have received the majority of its fabrication value where it claims to have been made.

I called Zeiss Consumer Products today and confirmed that the current line of Conquest HD Binoculars are made in Germany. The rep was very specific when asked if the Conquest HD was fabricated by Kamakura and assembled in Germany, with a very firm “no.” He went on to say that all the Conquest HD’s critical components were made in Germany. I asked if all the lenses were German, to which he responded that the Conquest has 16 lenses and a host of optical components, most of which are engineered and manufactured in Germany, but that a few do come from Schott Glass facilities in Asia. In addition, he added that some of the Conquest HD’s housing components are outsourced from Japan. So, it is a German designed/engineered and a mainly German manufactured binocular that is built, QA’d, and serviced by Zeiss in Germany (in contrast, the Maven is outsourced manufacture). He finally added that Victory Series Binoculars are made completely in-house, in Germany. Bottom line is the Conquest HDs are a true Zeiss Optic and in my personal comparisons with the FL and SF series, it shows. Their optical quality in the $1K and under category is exceptional. Today, it is the optical quality standard that almost every other glass in that category is compared to."

Dennis

 

[jan van daalen]

Here is a post by Spiral Horn on Rockslide concerning where the Zeiss Conquest HD's are made, and he personally talked to a Zeiss representative.

Maven vs Zeiss

Hey guys I think I’ve narrowed my search on my next set of binos to the maven B110x42 or the Zeiss conquest 10x42. Still deciding but just seeing what everyone thinks of these 2 thanks

rokslide.com

"With the explosion of Asian manufacturing and competition driving companies to often change where things are made, there is a plethora of misinformation all over the internet. It is always best to do some research to confirm.

Example:

• Vortex Razor was first made in Japan, then moved to China, then the UHD was manufactured in Japan.
• German Precision Optics are designed by GPO, outsourced OEM components that are assembled and QA’d in Germany, but they DO NOT carry a “Made in Germany” label when sold in the USA.
• Leica Ultravid HD+ and Noctivid are made in Germany, but the Trinovid and their rangefinders are made in Portugal (some of the electronic components may be further outsourced).
• Zeiss Victory and Conquest HDs are made in Germany, but the budget Terra line are outsourced and made in China and Japan.

Although I’ve seen continued and often varied speculation on bird forums about Conquest HD’s place of manufacture, I’ve never witnessed any Industry PRO or Zeiss Rep clearly state that the Conquest’s optical system is made by Kamakuru or anywhere other than Zeiss in Germany (as declared by Zeiss). US law is very different from the EU in this regard. For a product sold in the USA, it must have received the majority of its fabrication value where it claims to have been made.

I called Zeiss Consumer Products today and confirmed that the current line of Conquest HD Binoculars are made in Germany. The rep was very specific when asked if the Conquest HD was fabricated by Kamakura and assembled in Germany, with a very firm “no.” He went on to say that all the Conquest HD’s critical components were made in Germany. I asked if all the lenses were German, to which he responded that the Conquest has 16 lenses and a host of optical components, most of which are engineered and manufactured in Germany, but that a few do come from Schott Glass facilities in Asia. In addition, he added that some of the Conquest HD’s housing components are outsourced from Japan. So, it is a German designed/engineered and a mainly German manufactured binocular that is built, QA’d, and serviced by Zeiss in Germany (in contrast, the Maven is outsourced manufacture). He finally added that Victory Series Binoculars are made completely in-house, in Germany. Bottom line is the Conquest HDs are a true Zeiss Optic and in my personal comparisons with the FL and SF series, it shows. Their optical quality in the $1K and under category is exceptional. Today, it is the optical quality standard that almost every other glass in that category is compared to."

Dennis

OK Dennis,

First of all, Leica has no binocular production facility in Wetzlar Germany but only in Portugal.
Second, AFAIK QC of GPO takes place in Germany but production is in China and Japan.
Third, who to believe? The CEO on a professional dealer event on the IWA or the consumer spokesman.
Maybe someone from Zeiss could/would chime in here.

 

[forent]

(...) Maybe someone from Zeiss could/would chime in here.

They probably won't do that.

The high significance that ‘Made in Germany’ has for romantic and unsuspecting customers only leads to these special arrangements where you contribute just enough in-house to the production value that you can write ‘MiG’ on your product without risk. The naive buyer then sees in his mind's eye how Teutonic steel and Wetzlar crystal are miraculously combined by expert Germanic craftsmen.

Why damage this sales-promoting myth by blurting out the mundane truth? Presumably this CEO didn't expect you to peddle his explanation on the Internet either.