swarovision 10x42 vs canon 10x42 is (1 Viewer)

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

Troubador said:
Dennis

Maybe you have been looking at the wrong butts. I was looking at one last week and I can tell you it had any Prius or Ferrari beat.

The Canon is not only ugly, it is made to fit the hand or paw of an alien. It is so heavy that trying to make it back home while carrying it could kill you from hunger, thirst or exhaustion or all three, especially if you keep taking a rest to consider how many butts are better looking than it.

Put it objective-lenses down on a worktop in the kitchen and your wife will pick it up thinking its a food processor. Your kids will try to force fruit into it in order to make those thick fruity drinks.

Neighbours you invite around for drinks will pick it up to make vodka martinis that are shaken, not stirred, and finally your local Mexican band will (providing Trump hasn't kicked them out) think it is the new iMaraca from Apple.

Got the picture?

Lee

The thing is when the new digital binoculars do appear they will probably resemble the Canon but greatly outperform any present binocular so everybody will have to get use to the looks of a non-conventional binocular. Look at the digital Sony binoculars. Might as well get used to the fact that your binoculars are going to look like a prop from Star Wars now. Once the new wave of binoculars take over your old Zeiss SF and Swarovski SV will resemble the old polaroid cameras compared to the new technology. Canon has did a pretty good job of cramming all the necessary electronics in something that looks somewhat like a conventional binocular and doesn't weigh 5 pounds. There are some good butts in Sheffied heh?

etudiant · Aug 28, 2017

[email protected] said:
The thing is when the new digital binoculars do appear they will probably resemble the Canon but greatly outperform any present binocular so everybody will have to get use to the looks of a non-conventional binocular. Look at the digital Sony binoculars. Might as well get used to the fact that your binoculars are going to look like a prop from Star Wars now. Once the new wave of binoculars take over your old Zeiss SF and Swarovski SV will resemble the old polaroid cameras compared to the new technology. Canon has did a pretty good job of cramming all the necessary electronics in something that looks somewhat like a conventional binocular and doesn't weigh 5 pounds. There are some good butts in Sheffied heh?

Hopefully the digital binocular will be more svelte, as it certainly won't need two separate optics trains. I'd expect something like a zoom lens with dual displays and some image processing to enhance the 3D perception.

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

etudiant said:
Hopefully the digital binocular will be more svelte, as it certainly won't need two separate optics trains. I'd expect something like a zoom lens with dual displays and some image processing to enhance the 3D perception.

I think the Sony Digital binocular above actually looks pretty slick.

fazalmajid · Aug 28, 2017

[email protected] said:
The thing is when the new digital binoculars do appear they will probably resemble the Canon but greatly outperform any present binocular so everybody will have to get use to the looks of a non-conventional binocular. Look at the digital Sony binoculars. Might as well get used to the fact that your binoculars are going to look like a prop from Star Wars now. Once the new wave of binoculars take over your old Zeiss SF and Swarovski SV will resemble the old polaroid cameras compared to the new technology.

I don't know about the Sony DEV-50 but I had the previous generation DEV-3 and it was pure garbage. The EVF in the eyepieces was grainy like a 1990s vintage camcorder, and the recorded photos were not even at the level of my 2MP Canon digital Elph of 2000. The Canon 10x42L IS is optical and quite decent, if heavy with with poor ergonomics, in no way comparable to the Sony trash.

etudiant · Aug 28, 2017

fazalmajid said:
I don't know about the Sony DEV-50 but I had the previous generation DEV-3 and it was pure garbage. The EVF in the eyepieces was grainy like a 1990s vintage camcorder, and the recorded photos were not even at the level of my 2MP Canon digital Elph of 2000. The Canon 10x42L IS is optical and quite decent, if heavy with with poor ergonomics, in no way comparable to the Sony trash.

The DEV-3 was a pioneering product, with all the shortcomings that entails, as you point out.
The more recent DEV-50 is a good step better, but Sony has not continued with a further improved third model, perhaps because of economic pressures.
Still, the technologies seem compelling, as digital allows image stabilization and intensification as well as zoom and recording/playback in one package.
The main obstacle imho to getting this type of product launched is the poor optics market acceptance of modern technology.

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

fazalmajid said:
I don't know about the Sony DEV-50 but I had the previous generation DEV-3 and it was pure garbage. The EVF in the eyepieces was grainy like a 1990s vintage camcorder, and the recorded photos were not even at the level of my 2MP Canon digital Elph of 2000. The Canon 10x42L IS is optical and quite decent, if heavy with with poor ergonomics, in no way comparable to the Sony trash.

I have heard the Sony's are very poor. Until we get a decent digital binocular we will have to make do with the Canon or traditional binoculars.

Troubador · Aug 28, 2017

Theo98 said:
Gee Lee, you are just too kind! :eek!: :loveme:

Ted

Hi Ted
Yes, I sugar-coated it to make it easier to take :-O.

I picked the 10x42 L up at Bird Fair and have been visiting my physiotherapist ever since. When I have finished this treatment I will book an appointment with my psychiatrist to delve into my past and sub-conscious to try and find out why I even thought about looking at IS binos. It must be something to do with my mother, these irrational behaviours are usually due to mother/son relationships.

OK enough already. The Canons are great at what they do even if I don't find them appealing. And Dennis saying that all binos will look like this in the future is like telling me all the ladies will be tattooed and have piercings in the future: this doesn't fill me with joy.

Lee

kabsetz · Aug 28, 2017

I like to defend the 10x42 L against unfounded slander, but when it comes to its looks I feel I don't have a case and give up.

However, the weight and handling are easily mastered. Nothing that a healthy individual who takes good care of their physique could not take. The image is worth it.

Kimmo

edwincjones · Aug 28, 2017

It come down to either IS or tripod when >10X

edj

Stanbo · Aug 28, 2017

kabsetz said:
I like to defend the 10x42 L against unfounded slander, but when it comes to its looks I feel I don't have a case and give up.

However, the weight and handling are easily mastered. Nothing that a healthy individual who takes good care of their physique could not take. The image is worth it.

Kimmo

It's a funny thing but when i've got them to my eyes I can't see what they look like.

Stan

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

Stanbo said:
It's a funny thing but when i've got them to my eyes I can't see what they look like.

Stan

Exactly. They just give you a superb view of the bird.

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

Troubador said:
Hi Ted
Yes, I sugar-coated it to make it easier to take :-O.

I picked the 10x42 L up at Bird Fair and have been visiting my physiotherapist ever since. When I have finished this treatment I will book an appointment with my psychiatrist to delve into my past and sub-conscious to try and find out why I even thought about looking at IS binos. It must be something to do with my mother, these irrational behaviours are usually due to mother/son relationships.

OK enough already. The Canons are great at what they do even if I don't find them appealing. And Dennis saying that all binos will look like this in the future is like telling me all the ladies will be tattooed and have piercings in the future: this doesn't fill me with joy.

Lee

"The ladies will be tattooed and have piercings in the future."

They are already are in Colorado. Disgusting. Most are fat too.

denco@comcast.n · Aug 28, 2017

edwincjones said:
It come down to either IS or tripod when >10X

edj

10x is the dividing line between what you can hold steady. I can't really hold 10x that steady hence the Canon IS's.

Troubador · Aug 28, 2017

kabsetz said:
I like to defend the 10x42 L against unfounded slander, but when it comes to its looks I feel I don't have a case and give up.

However, the weight and handling are easily mastered. Nothing that a healthy individual who takes good care of their physique could not take. The image is worth it.

Kimmo

Kimmo

My remarks about Canon 10x42 L IS are not meant seriously, I was just fooling around.

Lee

Troubador · Aug 28, 2017

[email protected] said:
"The ladies will be tattooed and have piercings in the future."

They are already are in Colorado. Disgusting. Most are fat too.

Dennis

I was only joshing about these Canon binos and teasing you a little bit. I congratulate you for not rising to the bait and keeping your cool.

I wasn't joking about ladies, tattoos and piercings however. Sorry to hear that they have reached Colorado already. Fortunately living at such an altitude and suffering from oxygen depletion you are probably so light-headed and off the planet that you like weird stuff like image stabilised binos. Ooops. Sorry, I did it again. I will try to be better behaved in future.

Lee

Theo98 · Aug 28, 2017

Troubador said:
... I was only joshing about these Canon binos and teasing you a little bit...

:eek!:...Lee, you cut me to the chase. Always thought of you as a pillar of integrity and honesty. Surly, you must be "jesting about teasing"??? 3

|

| :t:

Stanbo said:
It's a funny thing but when i've got them to my eyes I can't see what they look like.
Stan

Well, can't say their looks ever scared away any fauna or wildlife during my glassing sessions...just other observers!

Ted

kabsetz · Aug 28, 2017

Troubador said:
Kimmo

My remarks about Canon 10x42 L IS are not meant seriously, I was just fooling around.

Lee

Lee,

Of course I knew you were joking. I also know that smartish people often use joking as a vehicle for forwarding an agenda they feel somewhat strongly about, knowing that if challenged, they can use the "I was just fooling around" defense. What people joke about and how tells a lot about their true beliefs and feelings.

On Canon and IS, I don't actually care that much what others say, think or feel about them as long as I get to use them, except that it is a pity when polarized opinions stop interested people from trying them out for themselves.

Kimmo

Troubador · Aug 29, 2017

kabsetz said:
Lee,

Of course I knew you were joking. I also know that smartish people often use joking as a vehicle for forwarding an agenda they feel somewhat strongly about, knowing that if challenged, they can use the "I was just fooling around" defense. What people joke about and how tells a lot about their true beliefs and feelings.

On Canon and IS, I don't actually care that much what others say, think or feel about them as long as I get to use them, except that it is a pity when polarized opinions stop interested people from trying them out for themselves.

Kimmo

Yes you are right about this and I should say I was more teasing Dennis than having any other agenda and I wouldn't think that my jokes about Canon IS bins looking like food mixers would put anyone off trying them out.

To correct any bad impression I will say here that IS binos are a well established technology and are a solution that anyone with shakey-binos problems should consider and try for themselves.

And it is always nice to have a sense of humour about binos and not take them too seriously, from time to time.

Lee

Troubador · Aug 29, 2017

Theo98 said:
Lee, you cut me to the chase. Always thought of you as a pillar of integrity and honesty. Surly, you must be "jesting about teasing"??? 3 || :t:

Ted

Ted
I was certainly teasing Dennis a little because there was a time when he would have unleashed an Escalade-load of posts in response but these days he is above rising to such teasing.

Do I think Canon IS binos are curiously ugly things? Certainly I do but hey, beauty is only skin deep and Canon's IS binos do what they say on the can.

In the dim and distant past, despite my fave brand being Zeiss, I have also said of their FL model that only its mother would think it attractive. But FL 8x32 is a great little bino, as is Meopta's MeoStar 8x32 that a few years ago to me looked strangely afflicted with a spotty disease but now after using it in the field it is a model I am very fond of.

Teasing and joking doesn't necessarily mean a lack of respect, either for Canon's IS binos or Dennis.

Lee

edwincjones · Aug 29, 2017

...........

Teasing and joking doesn't necessarily mean a lack of respect, either for Canon's IS binos or Dennis.

Lee[/QUOTE]

As a relative newcomer to BF I realize that the ongoing fight/hostile interactions is a fun game for Dennis and some members,
but I think that it shows a lack of respect for BirdForum---just my opinion.

edj

swarovision 10x42 vs canon 10x42 is (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Attachments

Registered User

Well-known member

Well-known member

Registered User

Well-known member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Moderator

Moderator

Eurasian Goldfinch

Well-known member

Moderator

Moderator

Well-known member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread