[crock]

Eagle Optics just sent me a pair of brand new 8.5X42 Swarovisions after waiting a lifetime to purchase a set of alpha quality binoculars. I have no problem holding my 8X32 Vipers steady, but I just cannot get along with the larger Swarovskis. It looks like I am going to trade in the Swarovskis for either a set of 12X36 or 10X42 Canon IS binoculars. I am leaning heavily towards the 10X42 but am wondering if I would actually see more detail with the 12X36 and save some weight in the process. It is not possible for me to try them out at a store before I buy them.

[etudiant]

Hi crock,

Welcome to Bird Forum!
The advantage of the 10x42 is that you get a brilliant view, very bright and in true color. It is a first rate glass, very comfortable to look through. Moreover, being sealed and waterproof makes it much more user friendly, imho.
That said, you will lose some reach vis-a-vis the 12x36. I got the 10x42 to replace a Docter 12x50 Nobilem and still miss the extra power.
I'd love to see a Canon 12x50ISL, to keep the quality and luminous image of the 10x42 while adding the extra zing of a 12x. A decent harness such as the dirt cheap BinoManager sold by Coleman:
http://search.coleman.com/cgi-bin/Ms...0#.Tndgruzhh8s
solves the weight problem nicely, at least for me.

[Sancho]

I've owned all the Canon IS (except 18x50) at one time or another. I now use the 15x50 for seawatching. The 10x42L is stunning optically, but with idiotic eyecups and the weight/handling of a small brick. The 12x36 I found very comfortable in the hand, and I agree with etudiant about the extra reach of the 12x36. It is noticeable. But you will be losing the brilliance of the 10x42L (while saving a few bob). It's a tough call. I'd probably prefer the 12x36 above all other IS binos, as it combines a nice extension of reach with the weight and comfort of a much smaller bino. However, it's not an "all-round" bino, as the FOV is too narrow for closer work, and it dims considerably in low light. If you have big hands and don't mind the extra weight, the 10x42L might be perfect. Try them first before committing your hard-earned wonga.

[etudiant]

Originally Posted by Sancho

I've owned all the Canon IS (except 18x50) at one time or another. I now use the 15x50 for seawatching. The 10x42L is stunning optically, but with idiotic eyecups and the weight/handling of a small brick. The 12x36 I found very comfortable in the hand, and I agree with etudiant about the extra reach of the 12x36. It is noticeable. But you will be losing the brilliance of the 10x42L (while saving a few bob). It's a tough call. I'd probably prefer the 12x36 above all other IS binos, as it combines a nice extension of reach with the weight and comfort of a much smaller bino. However, it's not an "all-round" bino, as the FOV is too narrow for closer work, and it dims considerably in low light. If you have big hands and don't mind the extra weight, the 10x42L might be perfect. Try them first before committing your hard-earned wonga.

Just to follow up on the 10x42 eye cup issue, it is a non problem if you wear glasses. The eye relief is quite adequate and the glasses eliminate the need to try to push the hard and chunky (45mm diameter) oculars nearer to the eye sockets.
For people with deep set eyes, the design will be less comfortable, although idiotic may be a bit harsh.

[Sancho]

Originally Posted by etudiant

For people with deep set eyes, the design will be less comfortable, although idiotic may be a bit harsh.

! True. Perhaps "Curious" would be more apt.

[gekanukr]

Hello guys. I'd like to ask if there is big difference between 12X36 is and 12x36 IS II (IS quality and picture quality)? I found a few offers of new 12x36, doesn't it sound strange thats they're new because they're are not produced anymore?? Thanks

[etudiant]

Hi gekanukr,
I'd assume that people are selling left over old inventory of the first 12x36 glass.
The 12x36 IS II is a redesign, lighter and more compact according to the Canon web site.
However, there is no indication if any changes were made in the optics, nor have I ever seen a comparison review. It may just be a different housing or it may be a more substantial redo.
All you have to go on is the reviews, which do seem positive.
I remain very pleased by my 10x42ISL, even though it is heavy (1030gm vs 660gm for the 12x36 IS II).

[hinnark]

Originally Posted by gekanukr

Hello guys. I'd like to ask if there is big difference between 12X36 is and 12x36 IS II (IS quality and picture quality)? I found a few offers of new 12x36, doesn't it sound strange thats they're new because they're are not produced anymore?? Thanks

The two 12x36 Canon IS are complete different binoculars. The first version came on market back in the 1990s and it had roof prisms. I think that this model was the very first IS bin on the market. The second one is a clone of the 10x30 (same eyepieces and prisms, different objectives) which have porro prisms. I would assume that the 12x36 I is now heavenly outdated although its FOV was wider than the later model. But nowadays most dealers or sellers don't know that there did already an earlier version exist and so it could be they don't mention the correct specification or name.

Steve