Canon 10x42 L IS waterproof binoculars coming soon (1 Viewer)

I had a chance to try a Canon 10x42 L IS recently. I have the 12x36 II IS and really like them, but wondered if I would appreciate the closer focus and wider field of the 10x42s. As expected, they were a bit on the heavy side for my liking. I also agree with the comments folks have made about the adjustable eye cups - a poor implementation.

I found they were a very poor fit in my hand. It was nice to have a button that would turn the IS on with a single push, but I found the button was poorly place for my hands, and pushing it was awkward. Holding down the button on my 12x36s is much easier.

The close focus was nice, but it took far too much turning of the focus wheel to get to the closest focus.

I did like the optics, but the other issues have removed these from my lust list.

Clear skies, Alan

I'm just waiting for them to come out with the second generation of these, minus the bugs. I don't think that anything else will touch it.

Hmmmm.. Should I cancel the order? Or..?

Hi
I'm new here in this forum. I have a Steiner hunter 8x30 and it works fine (light & ok quality), but I'm fascinated about the IS in my 70-200mm 2,8L Canon, and I want a more powerful brighter binocular.

Some days ago I ordered the new Canon 10x42L IS. I know it is heavy compared to my Steiner, and I read some negative comments about the bino here in this tread. Should I cancel the order? Or…… perhaps buy a Scope e.g the Swarovski ATS 80HD? or?....Just receive the Canon and be happy?

Fjellfalck said:

Hi
I'm new here in this forum. I have a Steiner hunter 8x30 and it works fine (light & ok quality), but I'm fascinated about the IS in my 70-200mm 2,8L Canon, and I want a more powerful brighter binocular.

Some days ago I ordered the new Canon 10x42L IS. I know it is heavy compared to my Steiner, and I read some negative comments about the bino here in this tread. Should I cancel the order? Or…… perhaps buy a Scope e.g the Swarovski ATS 80HD? or?....Just receive the Canon and be happy?

Click to expand...

Hi Fjellfalk
Has wherever you are buying them from got a returns policy, if so try them you may not agree with others comments, we are all fussy about different things and send them back if you don't like them.

Mick

I received the 10x42IS--- and …..WOW!!

Well to be honest, some people thought it was too bulky. It is heavy, but after reading some reviews I thought it would feel much more bulky. It does not!
It feels good in my large hands. The ergonomic is good in my opinion. It is very steady in use. The optics is on the level with the best of the best – Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski.. . Very, very bright – Who turned on the light??
Very good angle of view., very good contrast , very sharp – all through the edges.

A very light binocular is nice to handle and bring with you, but it is not the best for viewing in my opinion. This one is steady – very steady. You have the same effect using very small cameras. A larger and somewhat heavier camera is easier to keep steady!

So what happens when you turn on the IS?

Will it work as perfect as with my 70-200mm 2,8L IS lens? You see a lot of details without IS – But with IS – You cannot hear it – WOW!.
You see far more details than any other 10x42mm without IS – I’m quite sure. I have really steady arms and is able to hand held camera gears and binoculars really steady - but I’m not able to hold a 10x very steady for all details more than a second or two. I’m sure no one really is able to hold it steady at all for some seconds. I took some tests – trying to read some plates with text on a distance – with and without IS. The difference was large – I will say huge.

So what about other cons that have been written? Well you find binoculars which are easier to take with you on longer trips because of less weight.

Built quality is superb. Some are complaining of the front caps – falling off (not to the ground – they are linked to the neoprene strap). No problem if you get used to how to fasten them.

A few people complain about the eyepiece adjustor lock not staying in place. I have not had any problems with this so far. A little strange mechanism perhaps – but it works fine to me.

Some people do not like the ergonomic – I think it is good to hold and the IS knob is nice placed for my hands – perfect placed indeed – and you use it with comfort. On – and Off. You do not need to hold it down. Note that I have large hands – I do not know how the ergonomics feels with small hands.


I can return it – but I will not do that. They are what I looked for.

It is a pleasure to use, with a view in the very top class and with details you probably are not able to achieve with other top of the lines non IS 10x binoculars. I look forward to use and test them further.. ..

PS I forgot to mention that a set of 52mm B&W Polarizer works fine with them... no problems with the caps...

Glad you like them, trouble with IS, is that when you get used to using it you will wonder how you ever managed without it.

Mick

I just received my Canon 10x42L IS binoculars today. I initially tried them out in my back yard where the distance was limited by trees to about 60 feet. The binoculars were generally exceptionally sharp with excellent contrast and brightness, but I did notice 2 problems. 1) Although the sharpmess was excellent across most of the field, I could see 2 or 3 random areas within the field that were soft--suggesting some astigmatism. (I don't think the problem was with my eyes as I never noticed this with other binoculars). Has anyone else experienced this or could it be a problem with my particular pair?
2) The other issue is that although I could get a very beautiful and detailed central view of the smallest objects, when I took the binoculars from my eyes and then brought them back (without changing the focus), my eyes had to work harder than I would have liked to obtain the same sharpness--I don't know if I am explaining this well, but what seemed to be missing was what is often referred to as "ease of view"--my eyes had to strain somewhat.
Interestingly, when I went to the front of my house where I could look at objects at a much greater distance, the images now looked perfect across the entire field, and the ease of view was excellent. The 2 problems I mentioned above were no longer present.
I was going to return the binoculars prior to this last part of the testing. Now I think I'll keep them.
The stabilization works beautifully, and is quite amazing.

"The other issue is that although I could get a very beautiful and detailed central view of the smallest objects, when I took the binoculars from my eyes and then brought them back (without changing the focus), my eyes had to work harder than I would have liked to obtain the same sharpness..."



Sound like they are not perfectly collimated - a problem I found with the ones I temporarily had. Well, I'm still waiting for them to come out with generation 2 minus the bugs. I'll be first on line when they do.

werewolf said:

"The other issue is that although I could get a very beautiful and detailed central view of the smallest objects, when I took the binoculars from my eyes and then brought them back (without changing the focus), my eyes had to work harder than I would have liked to obtain the same sharpness..."



Sound like they are not perfectly collimated - a problem I found with the ones I temporarily had. Well, I'm still waiting for them to come out with generation 2 minus the bugs. I'll be first on line when they do.

Click to expand...

Many thanks. You are right of course. collimation being off even slightly would result in the eye strain I experienced. I guess I wanted to own these so badly that I forgot my basic binoculars 101. They are going back tomorrow.

Moman,

In case you have not sent them back yet, checking collimation (with enough accuracy for practical purposes) is easy with the Canons since the IS helps you a lot. 1) Find a distant object such as a treetop, lamppost, chimney etc, and center it within the view. 2) Turn on IS. 3) slowly begin to move the binocular away from your eyes, making sure that the target stays visible to both eyes, in both of the exit pupils. 4) In perfectly collimated binoculars, the target will be easily viewed with both eyes even when the binocular is about an arm's lenght away. In poorly collimated binoculars, there will be significant vertical and/or horizontal misplacement of the target already at a distance of some 4-5 inches. In most "normally collimated" binoculars, there will be some misplacement, but you should at least see the target in both exit pupils at a distance of some 10-15 inches. Horizontal misplacement is easier for the eye/brain system to tolerate, while vertical "step" should not be very obvious.

Hope this helps.

Kimmo

kabsetz said:

Moman,

In case you have not sent them back yet, checking collimation (with enough accuracy for practical purposes) is easy with the Canons since the IS helps you a lot. 1) Find a distant object such as a treetop, lamppost, chimney etc, and center it within the view. 2) Turn on IS. 3) slowly begin to move the binocular away from your eyes, making sure that the target stays visible to both eyes, in both of the exit pupils. 4) In perfectly collimated binoculars, the target will be easily viewed with both eyes even when the binocular is about an arm's lenght away. In poorly collimated binoculars, there will be significant vertical and/or horizontal misplacement of the target already at a distance of some 4-5 inches. In most "normally collimated" binoculars, there will be some misplacement, but you should at least see the target in both exit pupils at a distance of some 10-15 inches. Horizontal misplacement is easier for the eye/brain system to tolerate, while vertical "step" should not be very obvious.

Hope this helps.

Kimmo

Click to expand...

Thank you Kimmo,
I already sent the binoculars back. Even if this test showed good collimation, there was still a problem with the binoculars--not a very easy view, and areas of soft focus surrounded by sharp areas (astigmatism?).
Your test for collimation will be used in the future.
Incidently, this all underscores the importance of purchasing binoculars at a dealer where you can test the pair you plan to buy, even if it means spending more. However I couldn't resist the low mail order price of $1,064.95 with free shipping, no tax and a $100 rebate from Canon. I don't know if I am allowed to mention the site here as it may be advertising, however here is a hint: a member of a nation of women warriers.

Kimmo -

I find the best way to test for vertical collimation is to focus the binoc's on a distant horizontal line - a flat horizon, like sea to sky, is ideal. Then I move the binocs away from me as you described. the Canons were significantly off in this test. And yes you're right, the IS made the test easier to perform.

My approximately 13-year old Leica Ultra 8X32's, by the way - knocked about though they've been - are still perfectly collimated. They are built like a tank - but I like IS! IS rules!

"Incidently, this all underscores the importance of purchasing binoculars at a dealer where you can test the pair you plan to buy, even if it means spending more."

Yeah, but if they'll only let you try it out in the store, you can't properly perform the tests.

Expensive binocs like these new Canons need better quality control - and improved eyepiece adjustors and ergonomics. Then they'll blow everything else away!

Does any one know how to adjust the collimation on Canon 12 X 36, mine are now well out of guarantee and could do with a tweak, only I don't know how.

Mick

Mick,

Recollimating the Canons is not a DIY project. One needs Canon's own computer gizmo for adjusting the default settings of the vari-angle prism, in addition to first having to collimate the optical train in a more ordinary fashion. I have had mine collimated by Optifocus (www.optifocus.fi) in Finland, with excellent precision.

Kimmo

Thanks Kimmo, that is pretty much what I would have thought, shame because I like to do these things myself if possible. I shall contact Kayoptics sometime.

Mick

Hi everyone!

This is my first post in this forum. I currently have the Canon 8X25 IS binoculars and I would definitely say that the IS helps tremendously. I don't have a lot of experience with high end binoculars and am looking into buying a good pair. I've looked at the Leica Trinovids (8 and 10X42) in person and have looked extensively at reviews on the Internet of the various Zeiss, Nikon and Swarovski offerings.

I am very interested in the 10X42 L IS binoculars. I see that there is a review of them in Alula. Is there anyway to get that review here in the US? It appears as if it's not yet available on the Internet.

I've used Canon cameras quite extensively and have been quite impressed with both IS and L series lenses. I feel that a small degradation in image quality would be more than worth the trade off for the image stabilization. Has anyone compared the effectiveness of the IS of the 8X25's vs. the 10X42's?

I live in Indianapolis, Indiana. Does anyone have any suggestions of somewhere to go to try these binoculars and other high end binoculars in person?

Also, it's been quite a while since anyone has posted any information on these binoculars. How are they holding up after a year of use? Are you still impressed by them? Do you feel that the image stabilization is a good tradeoff for you?

By the way, I'm quite a big guy and have carried upwards of 4-5 pounds worth of camera gear on my neck, so I don't see the weight of the 10X42's as a hindrance.

Ryan

Welcome Ryan!

Reviews of Alula you ususally find at the Alula.fi website several month after publishing in the magazine. From memory I would say within the IS series of Canon the effectiveness of the 8x25 works best among all. Somewhere I´ve read that the 8x25 stabilize movements until 1 ° while the 10x42 works like the 15x and 18x50 only at 0,7° . Also the 8x25 seems to use another kind of stabilization technique than the other Canon IS binos. However, the 10x42 works pretty good in that respect. There seem to be some improvements compared with older IS binos so I think if you like the 8x25 the 10x42 will do it for you as well. Take a look at the binoculuar forum of Cloudy Nights where you can find more informations about the Canon 10x42 also from people who own these.

Regards

Steve

I'm waiting for Canon to come out with generation 2 IS 10X42 that will hopefully fix some of the problems in the current model, as mentioned in the earlier posts on this thread.

Hi all,

I've enjoyed reading all posts on Canon IS bins and I frequently encountered objections on the weight of these things, by multiple BF members.
I am no great expert in physics, but I know that one heavy object can be balanced with another - on the other side. Allow me to write here again what I wrote in my very first thread, so I can explain.
My Zeiss FL weighs 740 grams; not much for a full size bin, but for me still too much.
I have made a counterweight by putting a 350 gram object in the binocular case and hanging this on the neck end of the strap. So when I put the bins on, the case is hanging on my back and reduces the weight of the bins; they actually feel like midsized bins, I do not notice any neck strain anymore. Wish I had figured this out years ago, pity the many and too heavy bins I've used. It is a good method that should work for any bins; the downpart is the odd look, and the fact that you actually increase the weight by hanging on the counterweight, but there is a much better balance and you have the bins even faster up to your eyes when the counterweight goes down when you raise your bins.
I have tried out this method in the field and the more I get used to it the more I'm beginning to like it. A bino harness could help in the same manner but it keeps the weight on one side - on the front.
You can simply remove the counterweight bino case if you feel you don't need it at a particular moment, then it's just the bino's on a plain strap.
The Canon 10x42 IS weighs 1220 grams, batteries and so on included, so a counterweight on the strap on your back should make them less of a nuisance to lug around all day.

I will read the article Jan Meijerink wrote on the Canon 10x42 IS and will let you know if there is something worth mentioning that hasn't been mentioned already.

Greetings, Ronald