• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Death Of The Alpha? (2 Viewers)

Hello Sancho,

It is uncommon for American bird watchers to carry a 'scope and binoculars.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:
 
...All Canon IS suffer from rotten warranty, really awful service/repair facility, and 'battery anxiety'. For searching in close foliage, etc., none have sufficient FOV.......

Agree on the scant warranty, think the service is adequate, even if not Swaro grade, have never felt 'battery anxiety' with lithium AAs good for weeks of steady service.
FoV is not spectacular for the 10x42ISL, but at 6.5 degrees it is certainly competitive.
AS Pinewood notes, the IS is not a scope alternative, at least here in the US. Given the extensively wooded terrain in the eastern US, where most of the people live, there is limited call for scopes. But lots of stuff flies by and that is where the IS function really makes a difference.
All that notwithstanding, Canon IS sales are sluggish, so your skepticism is clearly the norm.
 
Agree on the scant warranty, think the service is adequate, even if not Swaro grade, have never felt 'battery anxiety' with lithium AAs good for weeks of steady service.
FoV is not spectacular for the 10x42ISL, but at 6.5 degrees it is certainly competitive.
AS Pinewood notes, the IS is not a scope alternative, at least here in the US. Given the extensively wooded terrain in the eastern US, where most of the people live, there is limited call for scopes. But lots of stuff flies by and that is where the IS function really makes a difference.
All that notwithstanding, Canon IS sales are sluggish, so your skepticism is clearly the norm.


I haven't seen any Lithium AA batteries being sold in my local CVS drug store for quite a while. Are they still commonly available?

Bob
 
I haven't seen any Lithium AA batteries being sold in my local CVS drug store for quite a while. Are they still commonly available?
Bob, Energiser L91 ("Ultimate Lithium") batteries are commonly available here in Oz (I get them from my local supermarket) so I imagine they'd be even more readily aviailable where you are (and likely a good deal cheaper).

If I were to buy Canon IS binoculars (and I am thinking about it) I'd be inclined to use Eneloop rechargables, and keep a set of L91s (or L92 AAAs, depending on model) as spares "just in case". Standard Eneloops can be recharged thousands of times so pay for themselves pretty quickly. They are "low self-discharge" batteries, so will be ready and charged when you need them (unlike older rechargables, which always seemed to be flat whenever I went to use them). Oh, and never use alkaline batteries ("alkaleaks") in anything you don't want to lose. Modern rechargables or Lithiums don't leak, so are worth the extra money in equipment not killed.

...Mike
 
It's extremely infrequent that, while birding, I think ''jeez, my view is so shaky, I'd love some IS.''

Sure, you could say that any view would be enhanced but, when birding, it's about making the quick ID and moving on, not gleaning the tiny details - at least in most of my birding. So, for me, IS is overkill almost all of the time.
 
Hello Sancho,

It is uncommon for American bird watchers to carry a 'scope and binoculars.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur :hi:

Really? That's a surprise. The view through the IS10x42 I owned was spectacular, to be fair, and pulled out far more detail than a non IS bino. I think I could see more detail with even the lowly IS 10x30 than with any non-IS 'alpha'.
But I had poor service with a pair of damaged IS 12x36, sent them off twice for repair and each time they came back with extra 'issues', at a hefty cost.
Maybe the scope thing is the main reason Euro-birders generally don't bother with IS binos.
 
I carry a scope and binoculars when I go out birding.

...but then I am usually the only one when I go birding in a group with a few exceptions.
 
It's extremely infrequent that, while birding, I think ''jeez, my view is so shaky, I'd love some IS.''

Sure, you could say that any view would be enhanced but, when birding, it's about making the quick ID and moving on, not gleaning the tiny details - at least in most of my birding. So, for me, IS is overkill almost all of the time.

A professional able to identify his sightings with just a glance will have no need for the IS in his surveys. Being an amateur, I've found the IS super useful for tracking warblers in the canopy, as the bird is actually still in the binocs on the infrequent occasions that it is not flitting. Likewise when glassing a meadow edge or the side of a pond, having a stable view highlights any motion and also helps pull out the birds from the clutter.
 
A professional able to identify his sightings with just a glance will have no need for the IS in his surveys. Being an amateur, I've found the IS super useful for tracking warblers in the canopy, as the bird is actually still in the binocs on the infrequent occasions that it is not flitting. Likewise when glassing a meadow edge or the side of a pond, having a stable view highlights any motion and also helps pull out the birds from the clutter.

In your situation it does sound useful but, then again, it begs the question why the rest of the amateur birding world is wholly unconvinced.
 
In your situation it does sound useful but, then again, it begs the question why the rest of the amateur birding world is wholly unconvinced.

Many things are factual but unpopular notions and it’s only when they BECOME popular that they are finally taken as factual. With folks who so desperately shun original and thorough research, I’m afraid it will always be that way. Am I saying Etudiant is correct in his statement? Nope! ‘Just that those guilty of paying attention to the world around them—in this case, a hobby or interest—have long noted the validity of my primary sentence. But then, Etudiant is just an ... etudiant. :cat:

Bill
 
It's extremely infrequent that, while birding, I think ''jeez, my view is so shaky, I'd love some IS.''

Sure, you could say that any view would be enhanced but, when birding, it's about making the quick ID and moving on, not gleaning the tiny details - at least in most of my birding. So, for me, IS is overkill almost all of the time.

I agree that this is one of the important reasons that the Canon IS bins haven't been more popular. For ducks and gulls and distant perched birds, they're at their best. For flitting sparrows and warblers in nearby brush, where getting on the bird quickly is the primary limitation, they're not so good--not because of the IS, but because of their poor handling. A bin that handles like one of the popular birding models from Leica/Zeiss/Swarovski etc would be awesome, and I think it would do well, even with other downsides such as longevity limited by electonics.

--AP
 
I agree that this is one of the important reasons that the Canon IS bins haven't been more popular. For ducks and gulls and distant perched birds, they're at their best. For flitting sparrows and warblers in nearby brush, where getting on the bird quickly is the primary limitation, they're not so good--not because of the IS, but because of their poor handling. A bin that handles like one of the popular birding models from Leica/Zeiss/Swarovski etc would be awesome, and I think it would do well, even with other downsides such as longevity limited by electonics.

--AP


Absolutely, and I would probably find the hi-mag Canons great for shore watches and raptors etc., but for the birding most of us do most of the time, IS isn't a priority and also isn't helped by the poor ergos.
 
I feel apologetic for adding to this very well flogged thread but... if Kamakura, or whoever, could deliver next or even current generation stabilization technology in a smaller/more ergonomic/lighter weight package I cannot deny I'd be extremely interested. A lot of my own birdwatching involves observing raptors at long distances (1 km+). There have been many times watching a peregrine on the hunt, 2,000 feet or more up in the sky, that has dwindled from a silhouette the size of a small swift to something more resembling a speck - trying to breathe as lightly as possible, knowing that one wobble might cost you your chance of seeing a stoop that might be the memory of a lifetime - that image stabilization would have been an absolute godsend.
 
I feel apologetic for adding to this very well flogged thread but... if Kamakura, or whoever, could deliver next or even current generation stabilization technology in a smaller/more ergonomic/lighter weight package I cannot deny I'd be extremely interested. A lot of my own birdwatching involves observing raptors at long distances (1 km+). There have been many times watching a peregrine on the hunt, 2,000 feet or more up in the sky, that has dwindled from a silhouette the size of a small swift to something more resembling a speck - trying to breathe as lightly as possible, knowing that one wobble might cost you your chance of seeing a stoop that might be the memory of a lifetime - that image stabilization would have been an absolute godsend.
It would be nice if Tract could produce a 10x42 image stabilized binocular with a reasonable weight wouldn't it? Especially if they could sell it for less than $1000.00. For now we will have to be satisfied with the Canon 10x42 IS-L if you want IS. I know it is kind of heavy and bulky but that is the price you pay to have IS. Because of the IS the Canon is my favorite 10x binocular. You can just see more detail with it and like you say in certain situations the IS is a godsend. The Tract Toric is my favorite 8x because it ticks more of my boxes than any other binocular at a remarkable price.
 
Last edited:
It would be nice if Tract could produce a 10x42 image stabilized binocular with a reasonable weight wouldn't it? Especially if they could sell it for less than $1000.00. For now we will have to be satisfied with the Canon 10x42 IS-L if you want IS. I know it is kind of heavy and bulky but that is the price you pay to have IS. Because of the IS the Canon is my favorite 10x binocular. You can just see more detail with it and like you say in certain situations the IS is a godsend. The Tract Toric is my favorite 8x because it ticks more of my boxes than any other binocular at a remarkable price.

Dennis
Kamakura has registered several patents for image-stabilising tech, so you might get your wish one day.

Lee
 
Dennis
Kamakura has registered several patents for image-stabilising tech, so you might get your wish one day.

Lee
It would be nice if they could build them lighter than the current IS binoculars on the market like the Canon IS and the Nikon Stabileyes but I think to have IS you are going to have to have a heavier binocular until we get digital binoculars.
 
The Nikon, Bushnell, and Fujinon's Techno -Stabi all have the same pedigree which, I believe come from a company starting with ... K.

Bill
 
The Nikon, Bushnell, and Fujinon's Techno -Stabi all have the same pedigree which, I believe come from a company starting with ... K.

Bill

Hi Bill thanks for this. So which company is it?
Choose from Kellogs, Kraft, Kawasaki, Kleenex or Kahles :eek!:
Or Kamakura :-O

Lee
 
Warning! This thread is more than 7 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top