I thought it might be a good time to start a general discussion on the issue of quality control. I have two pet peeves that surround my experiences with optics over the last half decade or so. The one is quality control. Quality control at almost every price point is significantly poorer than what I would expect without knowing anything about the industry.
To point out one particular example, a few months ago I bought a demo Leupold Cascade porro from the local sporting goods store. It was in perfect condition optically, mechanically and cosmetically. I enjoyed using it thoroughly for reasons I have mentioned elsewhere. I was subsequently forced to sell it but eventually decided to purchase another. The second unit, though as nice from an outward perspective just did not offer me as relaxed of a feeling as I did with the first unit. I tinkered with a variety of different settings to see if it was possibly just me (allergies for example) or whether it was something with the bins. Eventually I took them out one evening and attempted to focus on some of the stars. What I noticed was an issue with focusing those stars in the right barrel. I could never seem to get that barrel to star test well. My thoughts were obviously that there was some sort of alignment issue with the lenses/prism within that barrel.
I subsequently returned it and bought a third pair from a different retailer. This pair is just as consistant optically, mechanically and cosmetically as the original. It is a pure joy to use and I really hope to keep it for some time.
I guess my point is that this is just one example of what I see as being probably the most significant issue facing the sport optics industry today. I sincerely wonder how many binocular purchasing choices were the result of poor experiences with a unit that suffered from quality control issues.
Thoughts or experiences anyone wants to share on this issue?
I am not surprised. When Bushnell E2 first came out, I went to sporting store to check them out. Out of two pairs on the demo counter, one suffered significant edge blurry on the right barrel (6 o'clock position). I guess there must be a lens coating unformity issue. The other pair was perfectly fine.
This seems to be somewhat of an issue and seems that it exists across the price spectrum. I remember a thread here some time ago where Zeiss was getting blasted for quality control. The way the posters were going on it might have been assumed that the discussion was aimed at bubble wrap samples off the shelves at the local Cheap-Mart discount rack. FrankD has even commented on finally getting a cherry Zeiss FL unit after six or so tries. I recall other threads by experienced optics optics folks who have commented on product variability. I can tolerate that, even expect that on the less expensive binoculars, but it seems to be pretty prevalent.
My really pet peeve is diopter adjustment. Often a relatively inexpensive binocular with a decent image will show disconcerting diopter creep. Focus normally and then go through the range of focus movement and the diopter adjustment moves somewhere in the process. Another for example is some potentially decent binoculars will show some really good specimens and the next will be junk. So it does seem that there should be better uniformity
through the specifications in a particular price class.
I think somebody should actually look through the binoculars before they are put in the box and sealed for shipment to customers. I don't know how prevelant that is or how difficult it would be to get people copetent to do that. At some price point, that should be part of the standard package.