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

I didn't find any mention of these binoculars in the Canon IS binoculars thread and I thought this news might be interesting enough to deserve its own thread. Isn't L series glass used in Canon's professional camera lenses? If so, I'll be interested to see if the quality combined with the IS makes this a serious birding binocular. Has anyone else got more info about these?

Available in March 2005

The much-anticipated 10x42 L IS WP is the first waterproof binocular to incorporate Canon's exclusive Image Stabilizer technology for steady, shake-free viewing. The high quality L series optics, featuring 2 Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) lens elements (on each side), deliver excellent correction for chromatic aberration. With a large lens diameter and a 4.2mm exit pupil diameter, this binocular provides an exceptionally bright view, even in low-light conditions. The 10x42 L IS WP binocular offers both the desired brightness and excellent waterproof capabilities, making it ideal for a host of activities including marine use, stargazing and wildlife observation - just to name a few.

Canon's first waterproof IS Binocular.
High performance L Lens with 2 Ultra-low Dispersion (UD) elements on each side.
Doublet Field Flattener Lenses for sharp, distortion-free images edge-to-edge.
Bright field-of-view from a 4.2mm exit pupil diameter, the largest of any Canon IS Binocular.
Wide angle rating from an apparent angle-of-view of 65&deg.
One touch IS usage.
Body components feature metallic coating to prevent fogging.
Distinctive, easy grip design.

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=11092

Hi Dreamseason. The original thread got lost in the crash. This bin. is now listed at Anacortes at $1195 roughly equivalent to £660 (UK pounds). I think at this sort of price and if it's as good as it has the potential to be it could really shake up the market. As has been noted in other threads the limiting factor in top high power bins is the ability to hold them still which the IS overcomes. So has anybody seen them yet? Can't find any reviews on the web so far. Don't know when they're due for release in the UK but I for one can't wait to try a pair. I tried to email Canon UK but I don't think they got the message, also it wasn't listed on their product page the last time I looked. May have to wait for the Bird Fair!

dipped said:

Hi Dreamseason. The original thread got lost in the crash. This bin. is now listed at Anacortes at $1195 roughly equivalent to £660 (UK pounds). I think at this sort of price and if it's as good as it has the potential to be it could really shake up the market. As has been noted in other threads the limiting factor in top high power bins is the ability to hold them still which the IS overcomes. So has anybody seen them yet? Can't find any reviews on the web so far. Don't know when they're due for release in the UK but I for one can't wait to try a pair. I tried to email Canon UK but I don't think they got the message, also it wasn't listed on their product page the last time I looked. May have to wait for the Bird Fair!

Click to expand...

Any tech data around? Min focus and weight might be critical. I can't find anything at the Canon site.

Field of View 340 ft./1000 yds.
Eye Relief 16 mm
Close Focus 8.2 ft.
Weight 36.8 oz.
Dimensions (HxW) 6.9 x 5.4 in.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=19&purch=1&pid=4213

Bill Atwood said:

Field of View 340 ft./1000 yds.
Eye Relief 16 mm
Close Focus 8.2 ft.
Weight 36.8 oz.
Dimensions (HxW) 6.9 x 5.4 in.

http://www.eagleoptics.com/index.asp?dept=1&type=19&purch=1&pid=4213

Click to expand...

I hear a few BF'ers complain about the weight of the Nikon Venturer old HG 8x42, 36 oz. How are people going to feel comfortable hanging this around their neck all day? Are people willing to sacrifice weight for view. It seems from what Nikon did- HGL, they weren't?


These look like a real fun pair of bins. For pelagic trips.

Carlos

I have the 10x30 IS bins and they are pretty good, also not too heavy. Tried the larger mag models at the birdfair and they were like having a car battery hanging round your neck with the weight.

Well I've just visited Warehouse Express and these babies are priced at a staggering £1099! It will surely be cheaper to import these from America for UK buyers. Of course the price may come down in due course as did the Nikon Hi grades after they were introduced. I was expecting £600-£700 range. They will have to be something special to tempt most birders at that price though I see a lot of Swarovski scopes about of which the HD versions are in the same price range.

Canon 10x42 L IS WP

Hi,

in another thread of the Swarovski forum the winding path of discussion finally led to the new Canon 10x42. Further discussion fits better to this thread so I hope it´s ok to copy some msgs to let you know what has happend so far and to go on here with this topic.



Steve





Steve,

Not to take this thread veering off course, but I am quite interested in the new Canon 10x42s. I have unable to find much info so far but it seems that you might have some insights. Is there anything you can share?

Thanks,

Tony
_________________________________________________________________

Hi Tony,

I wasn´t online around the weekend (because of birding of course ; ) but now here comes the answer. If this is too off topic the admin may move my msg to the Canon forum.

I had a short opportunity to try the new 10x42 IS WP L Canon in a shop. As you probably know the possibilities of testing a piece of optics in a shop are quite limited but I found my own methods. Nevertheless I was very impressed by the view the new Canon was offering. In short words: the optics of this bino are superb and a real challenge for every high end binocular of the 10x42 range. The red rings around the tubes near to the objectives are indicating something special like we know for example with the Nikon ED scopes and some other Japanese high quality photo equipment. I saw bright, contrasty Images, very good sharpness over almost the whole field of view, great fov, good sharpness at the edge. I compared it with a demo Leica 10x42 Ultravid but the Leica must be a lemon (often a problem with demo binos) since the Canon was much sharper. So the optics seemed to be first class ones but additional to that the IS mechanism works in a way that let the view comes to an outstanding experience. BTW the colour of the objective coatings are others than with the big 15/18x50 IS which have a kind of bluish coating. The colour of the coatings so far as visible has turned to green with the 10x42, while the oculars seemed to be quite neutral.

The shape of this 10x42 looks like a little brother of the known 15 or 18x50 Canon IS binoculars. Like with them a tripod mount is included on the bottom side. It is still bulky and a bit heavy but with modern twistable eyecups and as I said before very good accessoiries being on the level we know with recent series of Zeiss, Leica and Swarovski, like a good case, caps for the objectives and eyepieces etc. Remember, these are only first impressions. I´d realy like to compare the Canon with the other kings of the hill ( for example Zeiss Victory FL and Nikon HG) of the 10x42 range.


____________________________________________________________________

Steve,

Thanks for your comments.

A couple of quick questions, but perhaps, if you can be bothered, you could post your answer on the Canon 10x42 thread so this branch of the discussion could continue there.

First, what is the price in Germany?

Secondly, when you say that the Canon was much sharper than the Leica, do you mean centerfield sharpness also, or only edge sharpness. Off-center sharpness in the 10x42 Ultravid is not spectacular, and Canon's field flatteners should easily provide much better off-axis performance. Dead center there could be a noticeable difference also, but if the difference is dramatic, then the Leica must indeed have been a lemon. Leica is very rugged, though, so simply being a demo should not compromise its performance. Any binocular which stands up well to the Ultravid in sharpness, brightness and contrast is definitely top-class.

Kimmo

hinnark said:

Thanks for your comments.

A couple of quick questions, but perhaps, if you can be bothered, you could post your answer on the Canon 10x42 thread so this branch of the discussion could continue there.

First, what is the price in Germany?

Secondly, when you say that the Canon was much sharper than the Leica, do you mean centerfield sharpness also, or only edge sharpness. Off-center sharpness in the 10x42 Ultravid is not spectacular, and Canon's field flatteners should easily provide much better off-axis performance. Dead center there could be a noticeable difference also, but if the difference is dramatic, then the Leica must indeed have been a lemon. Leica is very rugged, though, so simply being a demo should not compromise its performance. Any binocular which stands up well to the Ultravid in sharpness, brightness and contrast is definitely top-class.

Kimmo

Click to expand...

Kimmo,

as you can see on Canon´s German website the official price in Germany is 1599,- Euro:
http://www.canon.de/for_home/produc...al_image_stabilisation/10x42l_is_wp/index.asp
While the price in the store where I tried the 10x42 Canon was 1600,- Euro I saw a much more favorable offer of about 1300,- Euro on a German internet photoshop.

What I ment by sharpness was mainly off-center sharpness as well as sharpness at the edges. I only had a few minutes to compare the mentioned bins. So I think it´s necessary to do some more testing. But my first impression as a whole while trying the Canon was just: wow! These are amazing sharp and bright bins. To verify these impression I asked the salesman to give me another high class 10x42 bino and so he gave me the Ultravid which didn´t impress me like the Canon. I didn´t make any further investigations in center sharpness comparing both binoculars. This could be an interesting task for the next Alula review of 10x42 binoculars (but please including the 10x42 Nikon HGL) .
The difference between the Leica and the Canon was indeed quite clear. I have some more reasons to believe that the Leica was a lemon. I also tested some other binoculars at this day like the Canon 15x50 and 18x50 IS. With the 15x50 the
batteries had lost their power and need to change. For some reason they didn´t want to fall out of the housing first, so the salesman knocked very hard on the binocular to get them out. If this is they way they tread their binoculars I thought I should be very careful when planning to buy something there. Anyway while the Leica was probably a lemon I´m pretty sure that the 10x42 is a top-class binocular.

I´m sorry that I can´t give your more exactly informations but I just wanted to share my first impressions because Tony asked me for that. BTW this is the way I try optics: To try it again and again against different comparing models in shops and in the field under different circumstances of light.

Regards

Steve

Available NOW!!

hinnark said:

Kimmo,

as you can see on Canon´s German website the official price in Germany is 1599,- Euro:
http://www.canon.de/for_home/produc...al_image_stabilisation/10x42l_is_wp/index.asp
While the price in the store where I tried the 10x42 Canon was 1600,- Euro I saw a much more favorable offer of about 1300,- Euro on a German internet photoshop.

What I ment by sharpness was mainly off-center sharpness as well as sharpness at the edges. I only had a few minutes to compare the mentioned bins. So I think it´s necessary to do some more testing. But my first impression as a whole while trying the Canon was just: wow! These are amazing sharp and bright bins. To verify these impression I asked the salesman to give me another high class 10x42 bino and so he gave me the Ultravid which didn´t impress me like the Canon. I didn´t make any further investigations in center sharpness comparing both binoculars. This could be an interesting task for the next Alula review of 10x42 binoculars (but please including the 10x42 Nikon HGL) .
The difference between the Leica and the Canon was indeed quite clear. I have some more reasons to believe that the Leica was a lemon. I also tested some other binoculars at this day like the Canon 15x50 and 18x50 IS. With the 15x50 the
batteries had lost their power and need to change. For some reason they didn´t want to fall out of the housing first, so the salesman knocked very hard on the binocular to get them out. If this is they way they tread their binoculars I thought I should be very careful when planning to buy something there. Anyway while the Leica was probably a lemon I´m pretty sure that the 10x42 is a top-class binocular.

I´m sorry that I can´t give your more exactly informations but I just wanted to share my first impressions because Tony asked me for that. BTW this is the way I try optics: To try it again and again against different comparing models in shops and in the field under different circumstances of light.

Regards

Steve

Click to expand...

HI Gang...

Looks like these are finally available in the US. Hopefully we will get some reviews soon. BTW... I' m in no way associated with this listing. Just informing the members.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=50538&item=7512833004&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

Don

Canon 10x42L IS WP's vs 12x36 IS II's

I just received the 10x42's today and the rain is about to start but I had a quick comparison with my 12x36's. The view looks much better under dark cloudy skies since they have a 4.2mm exit pupil and 65° AFOV vs 3.0mm and 60° AFOV for the 12x36's. I will still keep the 12x36 IS II's for their lighter weight and higher power. I will do more testing after the weather clears up.

Joe

jogiba said:

I just received the 10x42's today and the rain is about to start but I had a quick comparison with my 12x36's. The view looks much better under dark cloudy skies since they have a 4.2mm exit pupil and 65° AFOV vs 3.0mm and 60° AFOV for the 12x36's. I will still keep the 12x36 IS II's for their lighter weight and higher power. I will do more testing after the weather clears up.

Joe

Click to expand...

Hi Joe and thanks for taking the plunge and being the first to actually buy these (on BF at any rate).

I'm sure you will but please, please let us know what you think of them. Weight issues and ergonomics as well as optics on flying and stationary objects. In the UK they are only available on mail order at present from WHexpress so I can't get to test them (though the Birdfair is in August and I'm sure they will be there). We need a shop like Eagle Optics which lets you buy, test and keep or send back the bins you don't want (at least for the high end stuff).

Thanks in advance.
PS Hope the weather clears up soon.

They could be the best 10x binoculars on the planet .

The weather today is mostly cloudy with 10-20mph winds and I tried them out today in my backyard . They are the sharpest binoculars I ever looked into and have no noticable chromatic aberration on axis and very little near the edge. The IS works best in five-minute mode so you don't have to hold the button down. I panned a few birds and planes and the IS works even better than my 12x36 IS II's since the lower power doesn't use up the maximum degrees of correction as much. Overall image has an APO look to it like my 80mm F6 Fluorite Triplet APO with Denkmier II binoviewer and a pair of 20mm Pentax XW's or 16mm Nagler eyepieces. My 12x36 IS II's have slightly better ergonomics when holding down the IS button and at the same time focusing but when using the five-minute mode with the 10x42's they are equal. The only con is the added weight over the 12x36's but since the 10x42's are waterproof and have much larger exit pupil I don't mind it.

The bottom line is the view is as good as it gets in a 10x binocular.

Joe

jogiba said:

The bottom line is the view is as good as it gets in a 10x binocular.

Joe

Click to expand...

Hi Joe
Thanks for that. They sound great. Perhaps the Leicas, they were compared to earlier weren't such lemons. I remember trying out the 10x and 12x IS Canon's at the Rutland Birdfair years ago and thinking this was the future-with the arrival of this model it would seem the future has become the present for birding purposes(at last).

I know you've only just got them but after you've had more time using them perhaps you'd consider putting a review in the review section. It would seem that these bins are worthy of wider attention from the birding community than has been the case for the Canon IS series till now.

I wonder if one of the more well known advocates of Canon IS bins has any comments at this stage?

With the trend toward lighter weight binoculars - a trend apparently welcomed by consumers - I fear the Canon 10x42 IS are not going to catch wide attention. I could be wrong. The IS feature may persuade people to put up with the weight, but I am skeptical. It certainly lessened my interest, although my preference for 12x was also a factor.

I had a superb 12x view of a male Pileated Woodpecker climbing down a tree and hopping along the forest floor to a small pool for a drink yesterday.

Clear skies, Alan

I have the Canon 15x50 IS. It is fine for "high power" astronomical observing. I seldom us it for birding. I prefer to take a lighter weight non-IS binocular and lug a spotting scope and carbon fiber tripod for high power views.

But, this new 10x42 L IS Canon certainly has my interest. I don't know if the eye relief, field of view and weight will be enough of a problem to off set the virtues of the IS feature.

Rich

Rich N said:

I have the Canon 15x50 IS. It is fine for "high power" astronomical observing. I seldom us it for birding. I prefer to take a lighter weight non-IS binocular and lug a spotting scope and carbon fiber tripod for high power views.

But, this new 10x42 L IS Canon certainly has my interest. I don't know if the eye relief, field of view and weight will be enough of a problem to off set the virtues of the IS feature.

Rich

Click to expand...

It has 16mm eye relief vs 15mm for the 15x50, 65° AFOV /340.6ft FOV @1000yds vs 67.5° AFOV / 236ft @ 1000yds for the 15x50 and a weight of 36.8 oz vs 41.7oz for the 15x50's. I don't think thats a big problem to get the best 10x view in binoculars.

Joe

jogiba said:

It has 16mm eye relief vs 15mm for the 15x50, 65° AFOV /340.6ft FOV @1000yds vs 67.5° AFOV / 236ft @ 1000yds for the 15x50 and a weight of 36.8 oz vs 41.7oz for the 15x50's. I don't think thats a big problem to get the best 10x view in binoculars.

Joe

Click to expand...

It sounds great and I will give one a try as soon as I can find one.

Rich

AlanFrench said:

With the trend toward lighter weight binoculars - a trend apparently welcomed by consumers - I fear the Canon 10x42 IS are not going to catch wide attention. I could be wrong. The IS feature may persuade people to put up with the weight, but I am skeptical. It certainly lessened my interest, although my preference for 12x was also a factor.

I had a superb 12x view of a male Pileated Woodpecker climbing down a tree and hopping along the forest floor to a small pool for a drink yesterday.

Clear skies, Alan

Click to expand...

Alan , I was just out in my backyard around 7pm and was looking at several species of birds in the trees and it was like I had a brand new pair of eyes, it was jaw dropping. I panned some jet airliners just to my east and the sharpness and IS combined to give me the best views ever with the passenger windows looking like a row of black dots. The detail I seen on the birds was the best I ever seen with sharpness equal to my 80mm F6 Fluorite Triplet APO with Denk II binoviewer and a pair of 20mm Pentax XW's or 16mm Nagler's.

I also have a pair of Canon 12x36 IS II's and fell in love with IS for handheld use and when Canon came out with the 10x42's I purchased the first pair available. I will keep my 12x36's for use when I want a lighter weight 23.3oz vs 36.8oz IS binocular.

Joe

Having used the 15x50 IS extensively, mostly for birding, over the last five years, I react with a mixture of great amusement and mild annoyance whenever someone says something alike to: "well, the IS is probably very nice, but isn't that thing rather heavy? And it needs batteries too?"

If IS binoculars had been the norm for the last hundred years and now some top brand would come out with a stunning new binocular which is 5-10% brighter, a tad sharper when tripod mounted (and, hopefully, we can nix these arguments with the advent of the 10x42), and a full 200-300 grams lighter, but as a tradeoff would lack the IS, birders would consider the concept ridiculous. To be honest, though, there is the issue of long-term durability which I admit weighs in the favor of pure optomechanics devoid of any bells and whistles.

As it is, there are so many preconceptions about the IS that I have thought that once I get the 10x42 under our ALULA test regime, I'll split the field tests into two parts: first a field trial without power - to evaluate just the optics and the ergonomics against the best 10x42 references - and the a second field trial with the same users but now with rechargeables inserted.

Joe, related to this, have you used the 10x42 with NiMh cells yet? I have used nothing but on my 15x50 after the first pair of batteries run out, but since the rechargeables have a nominal voltage of 1.2, I cannot be sure they work on each and every IS model. If they do, they pretty much obliterate the objections people have about environmentally unfriendly mountains of used batteries, and as a bonus they work extremely well in cold temperatures. I had thought that just about everyone would use rechargeables by now, but just the other day I met an extremely experienced birder who uses his 15x50 IS a lot and swears by it whenever he is abroad birding in rainforests (which he does a lot, as he also works as a bird guide among other things), but had never even thought of using anything but batteries.

Thanks, Joe, for sharing your experiences. I must admit a slight bit of envy. Spring migration is at its peak here, and it would be nice to combine binocular testing with watching real action in the avian world.

Kimmo