Canon IS 18x50 (1 Viewer)

Well,

Carrying the 18x50's last weekend on a well known birders site let me experience a social aspect; other birders carrying scopes+tripods ignored me. In my scopecarrying days I'd be frequently asked " Anything interesting about? ", but seemingly the lack of true twitchers' gear automatically ranks me as a common birder now, in their eyes. Not that I care much. I politely ask whether there's good birds around as I did before.
The answers are shorter, I noticed, even blunt sometimes.
Now I've never been much of a twitcher anyway, and I've never become part of the incrowd, but still it strikes me as odd that scope people don't talk to bins people.
The Long-Billed Dowitcher was still there, showing magnificently while foraging; my second record only, reasonably close this time. Since I was being ignored I could find it all by myself, that was a joyful experience. And much more rewarding than being told where the bird is, even before you've started looking for it.

Later in the afternoon I climbed the three story hide that is newly established overlooking the marshlands; a small party of birders some distance away looking through scopes muttered excited phrases so I asked in a most polite way what they were looking at. " Red-Breasted Goose " was the downright blunt answer. OK, I started looking more closely among the thousands of Barnacle Geese, elbows leaning comfortably on the ledge and IS engaged. Apparently the RBG did not show because I could hear the scopies giving each other clues like " It's in a small ditch now", "You can only see its head", "I lost it" and "It's behind a small growth of grass, oops, now it's gone again".
I kept looking patiently, and hey, there it was! Walking in front of the Barnacles, quite some distance away, but I could see it clearly through my 18x50's.
On the way back to the parking lot I managed to ID a Goshawk in a tree almost half a kilometer away. Unfortunately the White-Tailed Eagles did not show but from the vantage point of the hide I had been able to locate their nest, a huge platform hidden half in the trees. Even the mast with the webcam on top I could see clearly, several meters from the nest it stood out from the trees.
Next spring I'll know where to look for the eagles.

Ronald

Good grief, posted that twice. Sorry.

KorHaan said:

Good grief, posted that twice. Sorry.

Click to expand...

That's OK. It's worth reading twice.

I have just about decided to jump into IS and am trying to determine which would be more useful to me; 12 x 36 or 15 x 50. The 18x seems a bit too long for my locality. The 12 x 36 seems a little too close to my 10 x 42 SE. But being able to use it without a tripod is very tempting. And the 15 x 50, requires a rather big bite of cash and I'm sure a small tripod and/or finn stick would be a welcome accessory. I won't be doing an awful lot of maritime viewing unless we vacation at the Jersey Shore once in a while, so I would also like to use the 15 x 50 for casual astronomy. I think they would be good for that too.

Did you choose the 18x because of the nature of your local birding? And have you had opportunity to try it out on the stars?

Cordially,
Bob

I had the 15x50IS and like it so much I bought the 18x a year later. Along with my 8x30EII I haven't really needed anything else either for astronomy or day use.

cheers,
Rick

KorHaan said:

I tried the Canon 18x50's on my new monopod, mixed feelings about this setup. The horizontal movement is quite annoying.

Click to expand...

The fix for this (which monopod photographers with long lenses already know) is to use one hand (a flat palm or a hand gripping the sunshield) at the end of the len to damp/stop the rotation whilst the other holds the monopod.

I've not seen this mentioned by birders (or hunters) but I suspect a scope+monopod users already know it.

I picked up on it when watching F1 racing and noticed a couple of photographers doing it. Next time out I tried it and it's a big improvement.

The downside is it works well when you have a bit of a "level arm" like a long lens or spotting scope but IS bins might be too short to get the correct placement but it's worth a try.

The other technique I've seen mentioned an tried too is to use a tilt head and lean over the monopod (bracing it against a back foot). I think this is used by some hunters too.

ceasar said:

That's OK. It's worth reading twice.

I have just about decided to jump into IS and am trying to determine which would be more useful to me; 12 x 36 or 15 x 50. The 18x seems a bit too long for my locality. The 12 x 36 seems a little too close to my 10 x 42 SE. But being able to use it without a tripod is very tempting. And the 15 x 50, requires a rather big bite of cash and I'm sure a small tripod and/or finn stick would be a welcome accessory. I won't be doing an awful lot of maritime viewing unless we vacation at the Jersey Shore once in a while, so I would also like to use the 15 x 50 for casual astronomy. I think they would be good for that too.

Did you choose the 18x because of the nature of your local birding? And have you had opportunity to try it out on the stars?

Cordially,
Bob

Click to expand...

Bob,

Thanks for that twice thing.

I chose the 18x because I wanted the best magnification; my local patch is a wide stretch of marshland, and my outings elsewhere are mostly in spacious areas too. My 10x30's I keep as back-ups since I became accustomed to the 18x's. I don't do much twilight birding nor early dawn birding, so the small exit pupil isn't a problem. I do want the 15x too for the bigger FOV and brighter image. It's identical in appearance to the 18x and I've grown fond of the bulky body of the 18x. It is heavy, but you can balance it on the palms of your hands after you press the IS button which you do not need to keep pressed down all the time when viewing, like the 12x36's require.

The specs of the 15x look good on FOV: 79m/1000m, while the 12x is only 4 meters wider on that distance. I'd choose the 15x over the 12x, the first is more waterproof too. My 18x50's have endured rain and drizzle, and sand blown over them in strong winds on the coast.
As you already own a good 10x42 it would be logical to choose a complementary bin like the15x50 and not the more competitive 12x36.
The 15x's will show more detail than the 12x's.

For stargazing, I don't know. I'm a complete nitwit in astronomy. I enjoy looking at Jupiter and its 4 brightest moons through the 18x, but that's about it. I have to buy a Sky Scout someday to tell some stars and constellations apart, but I never seem to get round to it.

I can't decide for you, both 12x and 15x are enjoyable with the IS system, I think you owe it to yourself to try both side by side and take your time for the comparison.
I hope you'll like the IS as much as I do, it's really a great experience the first time you press that IS button.

Good luck!

Regards,

Ronald

Kevin Purcell said:

The fix for this (which monopod photographers with long lenses already know) is to use one hand (a flat palm or a hand gripping the sunshield) at the end of the len to damp/stop the rotation whilst the other holds the monopod.

I've not seen this mentioned by birders (or hunters) but I suspect a scope+monopod users already know it.

I picked up on it when watching F1 racing and noticed a couple of photographers doing it. Next time out I tried it and it's a big improvement.

The downside is it works well when you have a bit of a "level arm" like a long lens or spotting scope but IS bins might be too short to get the correct placement but it's worth a try.

The other technique I've seen mentioned an tried too is to use a tilt head and lean over the monopod (bracing it against a back foot). I think this is used by some hunters too.

Click to expand...

Kevin,

Thanks for that. I used the small Gitzo 2180 head on my monopod for a while as a tilthead, and leaning the pod toward my body gave better results. Is that what you meant?
The bins are too short for a grip you describe, I tried that and it didn't help much. I owe Hermann some credit when he suggested the Monostat earlier in this thread, he's right that that would be a much better solution to the problem. A tilt head on a Monostat could be just the right thing.

I once tried an angled 80mm Swift Nighthawke scope on a monopod with a small video head, but found that combination awkward and tiresome. I remember grabbing the scope at the objective's sun shield, but angled versions aren't to be used with a monopod IMO.

Regards,

Ronald

Ronald, Kevin and other IS fans....you´ll be pleased to know that today, I took my 5 remaining "top-class" binos out in the field for a test. The line-up involved:

1. Nikon EII 8x30 (current price 406 euro)
2. Nikon EII 10x35 (current price 434 euro)
3. Zen-Ray ED2 7x36 (current price 273 euro plus import duty)
4. Swarovision EL 8.5x42 (current price 2,000 euro)
5. Canon IS 10x30 (current price 342 euro)

You can imagine the results. Briefly, all were superb. Each had certain advantages. But I could discern the greatest amount of detail on distant birds (Fieldfares, Woodpigeons, Linnets, Pheasant), at about three-quarters of a kilometre, with, yes you´ve guessed it, the Canon IS 10x30. They weren´t the brightest, or the sharpest, or the widest, but they were best...I could see more of any bird with them, because the image was rock-steady.

Now, my Canon IS 10x30 are not the perfect bino for close work in cover. But I think I´m going to sell off all the excess and go for a pair of Canon IS 18x50, as I´ve been threatening to do for years!:t:

That is a very interesting conclusion for us non-is users. I just try to avoid the issue by thinking that they are not totally waterproof, that the warrenty is too short and that a bin that has electronics that can´t be trusted in the long run. But im not sure how long I can stay away from buying a IS..

Sancho said:

yes you´ve guessed it, the Canon IS 10x30. They weren´t the brightest, or the sharpest, or the widest, but they were best...I could see more of any bird with them, because the image was rock-steady.

Click to expand...

Sancho said:

Ronald, Kevin and other IS fans....you´ll be pleased to know that today, I took my 5 remaining "top-class" binos out in the field for a test. The line-up involved:

1. Nikon EII 8x30 (current price 406 euro)
2. Nikon EII 10x35 (current price 434 euro)
3. Zen-Ray ED2 7x36 (current price 273 euro plus import duty)
4. Swarovision EL 8.5x42 (current price 2,000 euro)
5. Canon IS 10x30 (current price 342 euro)

You can imagine the results. Briefly, all were superb. Each had certain advantages. But I could discern the greatest amount of detail on distant birds (Fieldfares, Woodpigeons, Linnets, Pheasant), at about three-quarters of a kilometre, with, yes you´ve guessed it, the Canon IS 10x30. They weren´t the brightest, or the sharpest, or the widest, but they were best...I could see more of any bird with them, because the image was rock-steady.

Now, my Canon IS 10x30 are not the perfect bino for close work in cover. But I think I´m going to sell off all the excess and go for a pair of Canon IS 18x50, as I´ve been threatening to do for years!:t:

Click to expand...

Hi Sancho,

Well, I'd be pompous and arrogant if I were to say "I'm not surprised at all by the outcome of your test!"

In fact, I AM a bit surprised by the outcome, but I think it shows that some of us are more prone to handshake than others. In which case a stabilized image will simply draw more detail, even in a field test with such very fine contenders. No doubt the optics of your 4 non-IS bins are better than those of the Canon 10x30 IS's.
The one thing IS-bins do, is make you think your bins are tripod-mounted.

I've just recently switched back to the 10x30 IS's, for no particular reason, but it's fun to be able to alternate between two bins so the 18x50 IS's stay home more often. Next spring will certainly bring them out again.

After months of using the 18x50's it's a delight to see how good these 10x30's really are. It's not that the 18x50's are bad, but the 10x30's are sharper, I can see that now I use them again. I saw a Stock Dove in a field, and through my 10x30's I could ID it with IS switched off, as it was lacking the white neck spot of Wood Pigeon, but then, as I "froze the frame", the black markings on the wing got visible. IS off, and they were gone. The bird was at a considerable distance from where I was standing, and I had to struggle a bit, but I saw those markings. With my 18x50's I'd seen all details in a split second, so these are easier if you really want to be close up to the bird.

Still, I must say the 10x30's are a joy to carry and to use.

If you choose the
18x's, remember what I said before: they are heavy!
Most ideal would be to try them against a pair of 15x50 IS's, for me the 18x's were the better buy, but you might feel differently.

I'm a bit curious: did you sell your 12x36 IS II's and kept the 10x30's?
And what are you going to use for close up woodland birding? The Swarovisions, I suppose? Not gonna sell those, are you?

During the cold spells here I used the 10x30's and 18x50's without any problems whatsoever, focus kept smooth on both and no fogging up inside, and perfectly useable with thick gloves on.

The only thing I'm still after is an outstanding pair of low light/owling bins,
but for daytime birding the two Canons cannot be beaten.

Best regards and please let us know what you've decided,

Ronald

kristoffer said:

That is a very interesting conclusion for us non-is users. I just try to avoid the issue by thinking that they are not totally waterproof, that the warrenty is too short and that a bin that has electronics that can´t be trusted in the long run. But im not sure how long I can stay away from buying a IS..

Click to expand...

Hi Kristoffer,

Yes, you're on the threshold...

I had those same thoughts, but looking back, I'm glad I finally could bring myself to buying one. I still do not care much about warranty issues, since I'm looking after them really well.

And I am without a scope, which is THE most important factor in the purchase of my 18x50's.

Best regards, and hope you're going to enjoy trying one out and sharing your thoughts here,

Ronald

The Bino Manager ( http://www.amazon.com/Stearns®-Mad-Dog-Gear®-Manager/dp/B000HDC09Y )
works well for me as a harness/protector for my Canon 10x42IS.
The shoulder straps are wide enough to spread the weight and the binocs are free when lifted out of the cover.
Not adequate protection for use in a downpour, but for food debris, branches and rain, very satisfactory.
Might ease the burden of the 18x50 for you.

Thank you for the link, Etudiant; any system that will ease the weight of the 18x's is worth considering.

The 10x42 L IS is stated to have JIS level 7 waterproofness, according to Canons website.
That's the highest level there is, which means the bins are submersible. Not nitrogen purged or nitrogen filled, though. Wonder how they do that, but it shows they are confident enough about the housing and the electronic wonders inside.

I've used my 18x50's in drizzle and rain/sleet and they are immune, it seems. I can do with a rainguard on the oculars. For the 10x30's a Bino Manager may be a good solution.

Best regards,

Ronald

Canon suggests cleaning the 10x42 under running water, so they must be pretty confident about the waterproof aspect.
The Bino Manager's cover is useful to keep off any fallout from runny noses or watering eyes, particularly in the cold.
The main benefit though is that shoulder straps rather than a neck strap take the weight of the glass.

KorHaan said:

Hi Sancho,

I'm a bit curious: did you sell your 12x36 IS II's and kept the 10x30's?
And what are you going to use for close up woodland birding? The Swarovisions, I suppose? Not gonna sell those, are you?


Ronald

Click to expand...

Thanks for the explanations again, Ronald. The 12x36 IS suffered one of those idiotic "Dad leaves binos on hall-table, kids run through hall" accidents. Fell onto the floor and got knocked out of collimation. I sent them off to Canon, the repair wasn´t great so I sent them back, and they replaced the IS mechanism as well as correcting the collimation. Oddly, I´ve never been happy with them since...the IS doesn´t work as it used to, and "lurches" vertically a lot. I got the 10x30 IS in the meantime, and love them. Brighter, wider and more compact, and a bit sharper too. I miss the 12x36, but the 10x30 are more "all-round" binos. As regards the accident, it´s one of the downsides of the Canon IS - I wonder if they can be repaired at all. More importantly, kids and Dad´s fave binos don´t really mix!
I think your combination of 10x and 18x sounds perfect. The heartache now involves deciding what to sell in order to fund them....EII´s? ED50? ZR? The whole lot? (It´s at times like this I feel really silly for buying too many binos...)

Sancho said:

Thanks for the explanations again, Ronald. The 12x36 IS suffered one of those idiotic "Dad leaves binos on hall-table, kids run through hall" accidents. Fell onto the floor and got knocked out of collimation. I sent them off to Canon, the repair wasn´t great so I sent them back, and they replaced the IS mechanism as well as correcting the collimation. Oddly, I´ve never been happy with them since...the IS doesn´t work as it used to, and "lurches" vertically a lot. I got the 10x30 IS in the meantime, and love them. Brighter, wider and more compact, and a bit sharper too. I miss the 12x36, but the 10x30 are more "all-round" binos. As regards the accident, it´s one of the downsides of the Canon IS - I wonder if they can be repaired at all. More importantly, kids and Dad´s fave binos don´t really mix!
I think your combination of 10x and 18x sounds perfect. The heartache now involves deciding what to sell in order to fund them....EII´s? ED50? ZR? The whole lot? (It´s at times like this I feel really silly for buying too many binos...)

Click to expand...

Hi Sancho,

Sorry to hear about your tragedy with the 12x36's.
It is so sad that gravity just can't be a bit more forgiving for us binoholics, and the repair afterward not being to your satisfaction only makes it worse.

The decisions you have to make are tough. At least you've got optics to sell, that's the only good point I can see; I haven't, so I have to be happy with just two pairs and not enough money to get more quality optics.

The combination of 10x and 18x is great, yeah, but owling with the 18x50's as I did last month, was not a very pleasant experience ( to say the least). I need more light and definitely bigger exit pupil. It's very hard to line up your pupils with the exit pupils of the 18x50 ( or 10x30, for that matter) in near dark.

Of course I contemplate more than I'd like about what to acquire next, even if I can't afford it. The binoholic in me just refuses to cave in and buy a cheapish 7x50 porro, which would be the sane thing to do if I'm honest. After all, I could go owling tomorrow if I did that, and forget about anything else, but I wouldn't be happy. That's how it works, you build up the tension to a level when you actually start convincing yourself that you have a legal right to buy optics you can't afford, and then there's no way back.

So.... next month is my birthday. 5 more weeks to go, I feel I'm going to get something and it will be...

?

Best regards,

Ronald
the real

etudiant said:

Canon suggests cleaning the 10x42 under running water, so they must be pretty confident about the waterproof aspect.
The Bino Manager's cover is useful to keep off any fallout from runny noses or watering eyes, particularly in the cold.
The main benefit though is that shoulder straps rather than a neck strap take the weight of the glass.

Click to expand...

I suppose you never had any trouble with your 10x42's in downpours?
How are they doing in near dark BTW?

Ronald

KorHaan said:

Ronald
the real

Click to expand...

Huh?
How did that get there? This should not be there.

Ronald,
Have not had any trouble with them in the wet, either Peru (warm rain) or Ireland (less warm rain).
Only glitch was that when cold, the clear filters I placed over the oculars proved useless, as they fogged up.Once these were removed, the glass worked fine wet, even though its lenses are not LotuTech coated. I don't know if Canon has added that feature to the current production. Mine are 3 years old.
The binocs are decent in the dark, simply because they are very bright, despite the internal 37mm field stop. Still, I have no basis for comparing other than that they are noticeably in low light than my Zeiss 8x30 Classics.
I've not taken them owling. at dusk, but can say they serve very well for astronomy, while also building your biceps as long as you can stand it.
My guess is that while they are about as heavy and bulky as your 18x50, you're probably inured to that disadvantage.
I'm certainly very happy with them and frankly somewhat surprised by their modest acceptance, especially as here in NY they are half the cost of a Zeiss FL. Best kept secret in birding optics, imo.

Sorry : .. noticeably better....