• 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.

Impressive youtube 10x42is video (1 Viewer)

I have tried a few IS binoculars. This video clearly shows the gain of stablization.
I seriously consider to get some IS model. Especially for astronomy they will be a huge advantage, avoiding dancing stars.

The question is if I should choose 10x or maybe 15x. And will it result in that I don't want to use non-IS binoculars any more? I hope not...
Anyway the important factors are if I find the IS-binocular comfortable enough to hold, and if the eye relief is adequate.
 
Swedpat said:
I have tried a few IS binoculars. This video clearly shows the gain of stablization.
I seriously consider to get some IS model. Especially for astronomy they will be a huge advantage, avoiding dancing stars.

The question is if I should choose 10x or maybe 15x. And will it result in that I don't want to use non-IS binoculars any more? I hope not...
Anyway the important factors are if I find the IS-binocular comfortable enough to hold, and if the eye relief is adequate.
Click to expand...

Comfortable use is the biggest challenge for the bigger Canon IS binoculars.
The 42 and 50mm models are all heavy, bulky and have neo-brutalist oculars, big and squared off at the ends. That works fine if the user is strong and wears glasses, otherwise the smaller 10x30 is definitely a more easily fielded design.
 
etudiant said:
Comfortable use is the biggest challenge for the bigger Canon IS binoculars.
The 42 and 50mm models are all heavy, bulky and have neo-brutalist oculars, big and squared off at the ends. That works fine if the user is strong and wears glasses, otherwise the smaller 10x30 is definitely a more easily fielded design.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I will try it out before a decision. By the way: do IS binoculars work equally well in a vertical position as horizontal?
 
Swedpat said:
Thanks. I will try it out before a decision. By the way: do IS binoculars work equally well in a vertical position as horizontal?
Click to expand...

They sure do. It is particularly useful when trying to follow a warbler flitting in the treetops overhead, but it also shines when looking up at night.
 
Finally got a brief chance to try out a pair of 10x30IS before my sister claimed them back.

Side by side with my (non-sv) 10x42ELs managed a quick comparison. A label on a plant at approx. 50ft was illegible with the swaros but not only could I easily read it with the Canons but I could also just make out the price which was in much smaller print. Four of us tried the comparison and all had the same result.

Interestingly once we knew the name on the label - "Christmas Cheer" we could fleetingly read half of it with the ELs with some effort. In this case though I think I was recognizing the "shape" of the word Christmas rather than being able to read the letters as "Cheer" remained indecipherable

I was also struck by how bright the Canons were, comparing favourably with the ELs.

The FOV was noticeably smaller though and would probably push me in the direction of the 10x42IS.

The 10x30IS are lighter than I expected and were favourites with both my wife and sister. My brother-in-law however prefers his conventional 10x42 bins, stating that the clunkiness of the Canons put him off (his dad said the same thing). I agree that the design is far from elegant but I loved the view.

The viewing experience is very relaxing - no holding your breath and straining to pick up fine detail - it's just all there all the time! I tried following gulls and a kite in flight and there was no problem - I had half expected some kind of lag when panning but was pleasantly surprised.

One thing I didn't like was the IS button which has to be held down in use, I'd prefer an on/off which I hope is the case with the bigger Canons?
 
. Nice review Torchepot.
It shows basically that some people like the image stabilised binoculars and some don't like them so much and prefer conventional binoculars.

I think that the 10×42 L, 15×50 and 18×50 have buttons that stay down for about six or seven minutes normally. The earlier, obsolete 15×45 and the smaller 8×25, 10×30 and 12×36 Mark 1 and Mark 2 have buttons that need to be held down. The 15×45 had an accessory that enabled the button to be kept down. I don't know if there were similar aftermarket devices for the other binoculars.
 
Torchepot said:
Finally got a brief chance to try out a pair of 10x30IS before my sister claimed them back.

Side by side with my (non-sv) 10x42ELs managed a quick comparison. A label on a plant at approx. 50ft was illegible with the swaros but not only could I easily read it with the Canons but I could also just make out the price which was in much smaller print. Four of us tried the comparison and all had the same result.

Interestingly once we knew the name on the label - "Christmas Cheer" we could fleetingly read half of it with the ELs with some effort. In this case though I think I was recognizing the "shape" of the word Christmas rather than being able to read the letters as "Cheer" remained indecipherable

I was also struck by how bright the Canons were, comparing favourably with the ELs.

The FOV was noticeably smaller though and would probably push me in the direction of the 10x42IS.

The 10x30IS are lighter than I expected and were favourites with both my wife and sister. My brother-in-law however prefers his conventional 10x42 bins, stating that the clunkiness of the Canons put him off (his dad said the same thing). I agree that the design is far from elegant but I loved the view.

The viewing experience is very relaxing - no holding your breath and straining to pick up fine detail - it's just all there all the time! I tried following gulls and a kite in flight and there was no problem - I had half expected some kind of lag when panning but was pleasantly surprised.

One thing I didn't like was the IS button which has to be held down in use, I'd prefer an on/off which I hope is the case with the bigger Canons?
Click to expand...

The IS on the 10x42 stays on after 1 push until the binocs are let down to hang, so there is no need to hold down anything. I believe that is also true for the larger models, but am not sure.
 
Yes, the 10x42 and the 15x50 & 18x50 have a switch which, when pushed down and held down, activates the IS unit until you release the button, or, if you briefly push the button, switches the IS on until you either push the button again to switch it off, let the binoculars hang vertically whereby they turn off in about 10 seconds, or have viewed with the IS on for 5 minutes, at which point a timer cuts it out but you can just re-start it again for the next five minutes.

Torchepot,

Your little test with the plant label is exactly the kind of thing that one sees with the Canons all the time. It remains a mystery to me how almost all birders manage to convince themselves that this advantage either does not exist at all or, if it does, is next to irrelevant in practice. The few minor artifacts remaining in the present vintage Canon IS systems are, in my view, insignificant when compared to the truly annoying image degrading artifact being constantly introduced by hand and body movement when viewing with normal binoculars.

Kimmo
 
kabsetz said:
It remains a mystery to me how almost all birders manage to convince themselves that this advantage either does not exist at all or, if it does, is next to irrelevant in practice.

Kimmo
Click to expand...


I think that for some the appearance of the Canons is more important than the performance, but maybe there's more to it than that.

Interestingly both the women in my family group weren't put off, but talking to the three male members they all preferred conventional bins. Two even didn't want to use the IS button - stating that they didn't think it was "necessary"!?
Even when my brother-in-law could clearly see the difference with the label comparison he still preferred the "conventional" bins.

There may be an element of "I wouldn't be seen dead wearing them" or possibly the herd mentality - wanting to fit in, maybe they just don't look cool enough.

The real puzzle for me is how such a big optical advantage is largely ignored. We agonize endlessly over tiny differences between alpha bins but won't adopt a binocular with such a big advantage in resolution.

Is this a case of "none so blind as they who will not see"?

My sister took the 10x30s on holiday so no chance to check them out further till they get back. I just noticed that my brother-in-law left his binoculars behind!! - an oversight - or is he coming round? ;)


Cheers,

Phil
 
Last edited:
etudiant said:
They sure do. It is particularly useful when trying to follow a warbler flitting in the treetops overhead, but it also shines when looking up at night.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the information!


Torchepot said:
The viewing experience is very relaxing - no holding your breath and straining to pick up fine detail - it's just all there all the time! I tried following gulls and a kite in flight and there was no problem - I had half expected some kind of lag when panning but was pleasantly surprised.
Click to expand...

I very much understand what you mean. Apart of that I have used binoculars a lot I have had been active with archery, and there is actually an essential similarity between binocular use and shooting; the act of concentration to hit/see the object is pretty much the same.

And when it comes to the gain of support I can confirm: even with my excellent moderate magnification Vortex Viper HD 6x32 a support is the difference of discerning a detail or not. When I handheld can't read, for example a car license plate number(but it's close), with support I can read it.
 
Last edited:
kabsetz said:
Yes, the 10x42 and the 15x50 & 18x50 have a switch which, when pushed down and held down, activates the IS unit until you release the button, or, if you briefly push the button, switches the IS on until you either push the button again to switch it off, let the binoculars hang vertically whereby they turn off in about 10 seconds, or have viewed with the IS on for 5 minutes, at which point a timer cuts it out but you can just re-start it again for the next five minutes.

Torchepot,

Your little test with the plant label is exactly the kind of thing that one sees with the Canons all the time. It remains a mystery to me how almost all birders manage to convince themselves that this advantage either does not exist at all or, if it does, is next to irrelevant in practice. The few minor artifacts remaining in the present vintage Canon IS systems are, in my view, insignificant when compared to the truly annoying image degrading artifact being constantly introduced by hand and body movement when viewing with normal binoculars.

Kimmo
Click to expand...

Kimmo,

I think you are right about the "heads in the sand" attitude to IS binoculars. If you look at the camera market, there are very few people who would buy a camera with a telephoto lens without stabilization. So why should binoculars be any different.

I dream of my Nikon EDG binos with stabilization. Perhaps this might turn out to be more than a dream, given that Nikon already have a scope and some specialist binos with it.

Maybe I should look at the Canon 10x42L IS.

Stan
 
Stan,

I hope you are right and Nikon would come out with stabilized EDG-style bins. As none of the European makers seem to be challenging Canon, it would be good if someone did, and Nikon does have the technology in their lenses. True, they also already have a line of stabilized binoculars, but these seem to be outsourced from Fujinon and use a different stabilization system which is not that good for birding, and on top of that those binoculars are even heavier and more cumbersome than the Canons.

As long as Canon is not directly challenged, they unfortunately have little interest to further develop their range. As good as it is, there is certainly still room for improvement, even for simple and non-costly improvement.

Kimmo
 
I think many look at the Canons the wrong way. As reading this forum confirms, most binocular users find optics important, but [in the end] ergonomics trump all - ease of use, eye relief, weight, etc.

The Canons [like the 10x42 ISL] should be considered excellent optical devices but terrible as field binoculars. Weight, bulk, eye relief, eye cup shape and size, focus ease, portability, perceived fragility, complexity, poor warranty and the general lack of suitable ergonomics dooms the Canons, not users ''head-in-the-sand'' mentality or ignoring something that is ''obviously'' better.

Now, a 10x42 ISL packaged in something akin to 2015 ergo.s, and not 1980, might just turn the tide.
 
james holdsworth said:
I think many look at the Canons the wrong way. As reading this forum confirms, most binocular users find optics important, but [in the end] ergonomics trump all - ease of use, eye relief, weight, etc.

The Canons [like the 10x42 ISL] should be considered excellent optical devices but terrible as field binoculars. Weight, bulk, eye relief, eye cup shape and size, focus ease, portability, perceived fragility, complexity, poor warranty and the general lack of suitable ergonomics dooms the Canons, not users ''head-in-the-sand'' mentality or ignoring something that is ''obviously'' better.

Now, a 10x42 ISL packaged in something akin to 2015 ergo.s, and not 1980, might just turn the tide.
Click to expand...

Agree that the Canon's technical merits are diluted by the graceless packaging and the derisory warranty period.
That said, the user sees no complexity, push a button and the image stabilizes, nothing else. At worst, it is a clunky but excellent 10x42 binocular.
Eye relief is adequate, focus is smooth, the glass is rubber armored and quite robust, as well as waterproof.
For half the price of the alphas, the Canon offers comparable optical quality plus the uniquely useful stabilization feature. Maybe 'head in the sand' is not that far wrong.
 
When and if Canon comes up with a version of the 10x42 IS L with 2015 ergonomic design, I'll be among the first to upgrade to it. However, the current one is far from being a terrible field binocular. It is just like Etudiant says, clunky, and weight wise about the same as most 50mm premium roofs. The balance is good, the eyecups are okay once you realize that they should not be twisted out but rather supported against the brow fully or almost fully in, the focus is smooth and precise (very smooth, and fine in freezing cold as well) but rather slow, and it has something (beside the IS) that no other alpha has: a tripod attachment thread at the the balance point under the binocular body, whereby a Finnstick can be used without any adaptors whatsoever.

I have used a Canon 10x42 in the field extensively since 2007, and every time I use something else I miss the Canons, that's how terrible they are.

Kimmo
 
One factor that may very well influence their rarity in the field - at least in the UK - is how difficult it is to find anyone who stocks them. I went to the West End of London today to try out the Nikon P900, the Panasonic GH4 and the Canon 10x42ISL. I phoned around before I went and the Canons were not easy to find with almost any optics supplier. Most can order them but they are certainly very low profile.

When I did find them I had a good chat with the owner of the store and he said that a lot of customers don't seem to really understand the benefit of the IS. Strange when so many cameras and long lenses are equipped with it.

I am personally persuaded and if I could afford them I would have bought them today (knowing my luck - if I had - the new 2015 super sexy model would be announced tomorrow ;)

The optical qualities of the 10x42s have been extolled extensively on BF already, I agree - they are remarkable.

Two small observations - the IS switch is much more of a "clunk" than with the 10x30s.

Another customer looked at them while I was there and mentioned something that I heard from my family too, the objectives are at a set distance apart and to adjust IPD you move the eyepieces apart - he really didn't like this and it does feel "unnatural" - I kept trying to "break" the binoculars apart to adjust IPD, but I guess it's something you'd get used to.
 
Last edited:
Kimmo,

Regarding using the 10x42 IS L without the eye cups extended:

I don't wear glasses. I had a chance to use a 10x42 IS L at Cape May, NJ on the deck at the lighthouse 2 years ago. The gentleman next to me had a new one. It might have been the first binocular he ever used? He was wearing glasses and he was thrilled with it. He used it wearing his glasses and with the eye cups not extended.

We discussed it and he told me his wife, who was nearby, did not like it. She had to hold it away from her eyes to use it. She did not wear glasses. I told him that the eye cups could be extended for her and she tried using it that way and was completely satisfied with it.

I then tried it and compared it with my Nikon 10x32 EDG I which I was using. I also had to use it with the eye cups fully extended. I was very impressed with it. I found that I had to brace my elbows on the bannister on the deck when I compared my Nikon to it to get a view that would come close to matching its sharpness. I compared them on birds and photographers across the inlet.

I did not particularly like the overall ergonomics of the Canon but since then I have been thinking seriously about getting either a 12x36 or a 15x50 for occasional long distance use. I remember reading an interview in the New York Post with the man who calls the Horse Races at New York's Belmont Race Track. He was pictured in his observation booth holding what looked like a 15 or 18 x 50 Canon IS L. There was also a backup one showing on a shelf behind him. I figured if he could follow Thoroughbred Horses racing on the track below him with those binoculars while calling the race they could also be useful for birding.

Bob
 
. Hi Torchepot,
. Try the Nikon P 610, I think that you would prefer it.
There are a few optics shops that stock the Canon image stabilised binoculars, but maybe not many.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 9 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.

Similar threads

blackrose
Help Identifying Ducks, Southern NJ USA, spotted today
Replies
3
Views
484
raymie
raymie
yarrellii
Canon vs Kite stabilized binoculars
2
Replies
24
Views
5K
DRodrigues
D
M
Hooded Merganser/Harle Couronné - Nest box - 2024
Replies
0
Views
209
Meinadigitalworld
M
binomania
What should I do with my 300 video reviews? Request for advice
Replies
7
Views
749
tenex
tenex
M
No black ring please
Replies
10
Views
863
BOKEH
B

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top