Canon IS 18x50 (1 Viewer)

kellmark said:

KorHaan (Ronald)

I am also happy with a pair of 18X 50 IS Canons that I bought maybe 5-6 years ago. They are my preference when I want the highest magnification to see the greatest detail. The IS is a great invention. I can literally read signs more than a mile away although I cannot even see the sign itself with the naked eye. It is amazing.

I use them for aviation work and watching boats from shore. They are excellent for that.

I do find that they can get heavy after awhile.

I started with the 10X30s just as you did, about 10 years ago. They were among the first IS bins issued. I still use them on occasion.

Then a couple of years ago I found what I felt were the best compromise of magnification and light weight that I have encountered. The Canon 12X36 IS. The new version of them. I wound up getting them as well. I just came back from a 3 week trip in Europe with them, (I live in the US, in Florida). They were excellent. Not as heavy as the 18X50s but more powerful than the 10X30s.

What I will say is that the segment that Canon is lacking in is quality IS compact bins. I know they have the 8x IS version, but it is not really all that compact and has that weird battery, and when I tried a pair it just did not feel good to me. So for good quality compact bins I use a pair of Leica 8X20 Ultravids. They are excellent. I carry them all of the time. But if Canon made a pair of 10X IS compact bins I think I would go for them.

So for me, if I travel, and I have the room, I take a great combination. The Leica 8X20s, and the Canon 12X36 IS. But if I am in my home city, I use the 18X50 IS for the greatest detail/magnification.

If I am weight/space limited I just take the little 8X20 Leicas. Oddly I have found an interesting use for them. When I am in a strange city and trying to read street signs and find my way while driving, when I stop at a stop light, I can use them to see what the street signs are several blocks away. I did that in Rome last week, and it was very helpful. It is such a crowded city and the street signs are hard to see as they are grey on grey. It makes it much easier. Of course, people look at you funny, like you are a spy or something, but what the heck.

But for the best detail at high magnification, you have the best with the 18X50s. They are just heavy for me to carry around a lot.


Allan

Click to expand...

Hi Allan,

Maybe some day I will go for the 12x36 IS II as well, but at this moment I couldn't be happier with the 10x30's + 18x50's combination.
You're so right that IS is a great invention. With all the improvements in binoculars to make the optics still better, the observer has become the weakest link, as handshake spoils a good deal of the image.
People forget about that aspect too easily, or they just don't care, I don't know. But image stabilisation improves the observer, and that is its unique achievement.
I knew a guy once who liked to go birding with our group, a nice fellow with a serious handicap. He was missing his right arm. He carried 8x42 binoculars and seemed happy to use them with his left arm. When we were having a chat he told me he lost his right arm at a very early age, and had since accustomed to use his left arm. When I suggested that IS bins might be just the right thing for him, he shrugged and said his 8x42's were OK for him. Maybe we like what we know, and are conservative. Otherwise I can't explain why non-IS bins are getting more popular to this day up.

What is the market share of IS bins? I don't know. 1 % ? If there are 10 to 20 models to choose from, made by a few manufacturers, in a binocular universe of 1000 to 2000 different models, made by a host of international manufacturers, then the IS bins fill a modest niche.
Come to think of it, I wouldn't have a clue how many different binoculars there are on this planet. 2000? 10,000?
Maybe 1% is still too high an estimate for IS bins on the market.

I think and hope that IS will be the future in binocular development, so we can have more to choose from. As far as Canon is concerned, I can live with the full sized models. A compact IS binocular is probably an impossibility to make; the IS system needs room which isn't there in a compact bin.
And getting used to the 18x50's I can honestly say that I see my 10x30's as compacts, now. :-O
I take these with me on my walk to the supermarket, because you never know when a bird appears. A birder I know never took his bins with him when he went shopping and he saw an eagle last month. Too far off to ID without bins, but he feared it was a Lesser Spotted Eagle. That's a mega in the Netherlands. Lesson to be learned from this: always carry bins.
People react on me carrying bins in the supermarket, joking. I always explain to them that I use them to read the prices on the upper shelves.
On a neighborhood barbecue a few years ago, I not only brought my bins but my scope and tripod as well. You get interesting conversation, I can tell you.
After nightfall people queued up to watch Venus and Jupiter through the scope, and I went searching for my Zeiss 7x42 FL's I let the children play with for hours. It was a fun evening.

It's great to read you still love the 18x50's after 5-6 years. I'm using them for only 3 weeks now, but I wouldn't be without them. Every bird is a joy to watch, next time when I go birding on my local patch I'll bring a comfy camping chair to enhance my joy in birding even more.
I can't wait to go out seawatching with them, tripodmounted. I sat in the garden in my comfy camping chair this afternoon, 18x's on tripod right at my eyes, leaning back and enjoying the view. 10x30's hanging from their strap on the armlayer, just in case of high flying birds.

I might go looking for a Fujinon eyepiece rainguard after all, what Kimmo suggested earlier on this thread. Canon states that the 18x50's are All Weather bins.
How would you say your experience is, did you use them in the rain in the 5-6 years you've owned them? I really want some confirmation that they can stand more than a little rain, before I get them soaked on a seawatch.

Oh, BTW, the weight has not been much of a problem. The original Canon strap is OK. If necessary I can attach a longer strap onto the Canon strap, so I have the instant possibility to take them from my neck and wear them bandoleer-style on the longer second strap.

Best regards,

Ronald

andrej 4153 said:

Hello.
This is a very interesting thread about IS binoculars. I am new in these forum and i am trying out birding.
I like to ask the birders with more experience some questions to the IS binoculars:
They seems to be very good for details. Is this also correct for difficult light situations? What about the true colors of birds? No CA?
Thanks for your answersm and sorry for my bad english.I am from switzerland.

Click to expand...

Andrej,

I can't speak for the 10x42 L IS's but the 18x50's yield good detail in even deep twilight. The image is not bright, due to the 2.8 mm exit pupil, but the magnification PLUS the stabilized image make up for that shortcoming admirably.
The image in the 18x50's and in the 10x30's has a slight yellow bias, which I find extremely pleasing, in contrast to purely colour-neutral bins where the colours are true but cold. I find the colours in the 18x50's true as far as I can judge.

Kind regards,

Ronald

I agree with you, Ronald, that IS bins are confusingly rare...I don´t know why more birders don´t use them. Here in Ireland, I have never seen, in the field, another pair apart from my own 12x36 (although I do know one expert birder who has a pair....).
I assume the reason for their paucity is a) they involve batteries, electronic gizmos, and look odd, and b) they come with only a 1-year guarantee, and Canon hasn´t distinguished itself in terms of Customer Service. Which is why, on the "Desert Island Bins" question posed recently on another thread, I reckoned I´d take my Swaros, not my Canons.

Kellmark said:

I started with the 10X30s just as you did, about 10 years ago. They were among the first IS bins issued. I still use them on occasion.

Click to expand...

I think the 10X30 were the start of the second wave of Canon IS bins. They Porro 2 wave which all seem to share the same "back half": same 3mm exit pupil size with the same EPs, prisms, and stabilization wedge.

The first wave were roof prism based: 15x45 and the (original) 12x36

Sancho said:

I agree with you, Ronald, that IS bins are confusingly rare...I don´t know why more birders don´t use them. Here in Ireland, I have never seen, in the field, another pair apart from my own 12x36 (although I do know one expert birder who has a pair....).
I assume the reason for their paucity is a) they involve batteries, electronic gizmos, and look odd, and b) they come with only a 1-year guarantee, and Canon hasn´t distinguished itself in terms of Customer Service. Which is why, on the "Desert Island Bins" question posed recently on another thread, I reckoned I´d take my Swaros, not my Canons.

Click to expand...

I think part of it is looks. They do look weird. That's the problem with Porro 2 bins with the EPs on stalks.

Then the strap attachment to the EP. Heck that's going to break. Clearly.

Until you use them. Then they make sense.

They also hold funny with the eye's above the objectives I find they knock of my sense of targeting for other bins (or my other bins targeting muscle memory doesn't transfer directly). This would be bad in a store: "Heck, I can't point them. Must be broken".

BTW, the miltary or thumbs up grip I find works very well for pointing these in the same way as my non-IS bins.

I've seen two Canon IS 10x42 L in the field in Seattle but no other 10x30. Perhaps there's a more geeky population here. I saw my first SE (well, other than mine) around the neck of a birder yesterday.

My 10x30 IS are now my preferred bin (even over my Zen Ray and other more expensive bins) despire the small exit pupil. Well it's (mostly) dry now. I keep having to resist getting the 10x42 ... but I suspect that will last until it start raining because I will "need" them to be waterproof.

Do they work in real life? Heck yes. I was out hunting rare (for this location) birds yesterday and for canopy birds especially flitty ones the 10x and IS works great. Great view of a distant Indigo Bunting on the top of a tree singing and a very very flitty Least Flycatcher (I know it was because I could see it singing ... and I could hear the song) in a canopy. And even a very flitty pair of American Redstarts (which don't really come to the PNW!). So for any sort of "semi-distant" views they really do help because the bird stops moving around and you can easily see the little details. Another example, Red Crossbills ... yes, they're really crossbills I can see the tip of the bill (on a distant bird).

One can also see the FOV versus magnification trade off pretty clearly. Magnification isn't all especially in a lot of environments I'm in. So make the decision carefully.

The one other bin I can see needing along side the 10x IS bin is a very good 7x for times when the 10x FOV is just too narrow. Close in forest work. Or close in flitty birds that need to be tracked.

Thank you for your answers!
I ha ve some optical instruments. I have digital cameras. there it was easy for me to take canon. I know that canon is very good for digital cameras. For bins its not so easy. There are the big ones, like swaro,zeiss and leica. there are the others like kowa and docter. they dont have an IS.
So finally, for binoculars its not so easy to decide. if i read what you write about the canon is, its interesting for me.

I can take the 10x30 or the 12x36 and the 15x50 or the 18x50 to have a good combination.
But: they are not really cheap to buy. the bigger ones are a bit heavy for longer walks. its not easy to test them (to get a good one). If i have to pay a lot for bins i really like to have good ones.
Not easy to decide...

Sancho said:

I assume the reason for their paucity is a) they involve batteries, electronic gizmos, and look odd, and b) they come with only a 1-year guarantee, and Canon hasn´t distinguished itself in terms of Customer Service.

Click to expand...

Well, maybe there's another reason. Quite a few people I know tried the Canon's in the field and found them difficult to use because of the artifacts introduced by the IS. Other people don't "see" these artifacts at all, so it's apparently somehow dependant on how you individual eye-brain system works. Lots of individual differences there, it seems.

BTW, I'm one of those whose eyes unfortunately don't work with the Canon IS binoculars, and believe me, I tried hard.

Hermann

KorHaan said:

I might go looking for a Fujinon eyepiece rainguard after all.

Click to expand...

An update on my 18x50 IS's.
I ordered a Fujinon SMTRX rainguard some ten days ago. Received it today.
To say it fits over the oculars doesn't do it justice; it swallows the oculars half. It is huge, the biggest rainguard I've ever seen. But easy to remove and put back on, and that's what counts.

Haven't had the time to take the 18x50's out much, lately. But I'm still very much in love with them. The 10x30 IS's I don't use much. Only in dense woodland, and this time of year I'm not spending much time there.

To make things a little easier in the field I bought a Giotto monopod. I can screw it into the 1/4'' thread underneath the 18x50's. When standing it is tall enough to look comfortably through the Canons.
But I have my doubts about its usefulness. It seems harder to hold steady especially the horizontal movements are a little frustrating. It does a good job in taking the weight of the bins, but to go seawatching with the Canons on a monopod is perhaps not a good idea. Still got a good tripod for that, fortunately.
Maybe it takes getting used to, I'll try the monopod out on my next outings.

I bought a new walkstool that is a little higher than my old one, so I can sit and rest my elbows on my knees. This is by far the most comfortable way to use the 18x50's, giving prolonged, effortless and steady views without a tripod.

I changed the strap a few days ago, by a longer and wider carrying strap.
It is more easy to wear the bins in a diagonal bandoleer-style.
I will probably go and find some harness system instead of a strap, but for now it's fine.

The rechargeables I use will work for about four or five days ( depending on their capacity, the newer ones haven't yet reached full capacity loading).
That's better than the Duracell alkalines I had to change every other 1 and a half days.

Regards,

Ronald

I think I may have mentioned this before but I'm using a Nikon Venturer rainguard on my 10x30 IS. Quite deep and fit very nicely so they don't fall off but thye're aloose fit so they come of easily when you need them off.

If the bigger bins have similar sized occulars these Nikon rainguards may well work there. And perhaps not be so oversized.

Kevin,

I would not dare using the 10x30's in the rain, so I haven't equipped them with a rainguard. Yet I might buy one just to 'complete the picture' so to speak. I have the bins on a short leash, high on my chest for immediate access, which poses a bit of a problem if I want to tuck them away under my coat in the rain. They are too big for that.
I suppose the bins are OK to use in the rain, as long as they won't get soaked?

The Fujinon rainguard on my 18x50's is a good thing, though it is a bit oversized. It is deep so it doesn't fall off even if I hold the bins upside down. Yet it is easily removed with one hand. I have connected the rainguard to the strap with a keyring, this way I can put the rainguard back on without having to grab it from in between the strap lugs.

Regards,

Ronald

Rainguards aren't only for use in the rain ... they protect the eyepieces from: water drops; pollen grains; drink splashes; food debris and so on.

BTW, I wouldn't get them really wet (or immerse them!) but I have used them in drizzle with drops on the outside of the case with no issues (as have others). The rainguard kept the drops of the oculars too

I wear mine on a harness and I can wear the harness under one layer so the bins can hide behind the zip.

I also have a 10x42 SE that I plan to use in the same way in fall and winter to see how much you need to baby them.

After all this is what people did before we had waterproof bins.

Kevin Purcell said:

Rainguards aren't only for use in the rain ... they protect the eyepieces from: water drops; pollen grains; drink splashes; food debris and so on.

BTW, I wouldn't get them really wet (or immerse them!) but I have used them in drizzle with drops on the outside of the case with no issues (as have others). The rainguard kept the drops of the oculars too

I wear mine on a harness and I can wear the harness under one layer so the bins can hide behind the zip.

I also have a 10x42 SE that I plan to use in the same way in fall and winter to see how much you need to baby them.

After all this is what people did before we had waterproof bins.

Click to expand...

True.
Maybe we baby them too much, I will go and find a good harness for the little one. I had one from Swarovski which I didn't like much, all too elastic.
And I had a French bino harness, a flimsy thing of black rope that kept creeping up my neck. The Swaro harness did that too, BTW.

My experience with bino's in the rain is biased toward disaster, that is, with porro's. I vividly recall my very first quality pair of porro's, Optolyth Alpins 7x42, fogged up in light rain. And a pair of Optolyth Alpins 7x50 fogged up too.
And several Russian porro's. Even in cold weather, from the warmth of my hands.

Rainguards are indeed good to keep of food debris. I ate a hamburger once with too much sauce and bits, I wish I'd had a rainguard then! After cleaning the bins the fragrance of onion and tomato ketchup lingered on for weeks.

Thanks for your advice, Kevin.

Regards,

Ronald

So these truly rival the ed50 scope? You wont need a tripod so it is less to carry and it can be used even easier hand held. Most ed50 users seem to use the 20x eyepiece so similar magnification too. I need a another scope for my girlfriend, not good to share This might be it.

kristoffer said:

So these truly rival the ed50 scope? You wont need a tripod so it is less to carry and it can be used even easier hand held. Most ed50 users seem to use the 20x eyepiece so similar magnification too. I need a another scope for my girlfriend, not good to share This might be it.

Click to expand...

Kristoffer,

When handheld the Canons will show more detail than the ED50 at 20x handheld. And you won't need a tripod. That's true.

However, I feel I have to add that in comparison to a scope on a tripod the Canons are far less comfortable to use for prolonged viewing, unless you can sit and rest your elbows on your knees ( which I do often). Otherwise they are a strain to the arm muscles and a scope on a tripod is a more comfortable way of viewing.

You can let her use the scope every so often while you yourself build up muscle power using the Canons, and vice versa.

Or you get her an ED 50 with a lightweight tripod, so you can both scope at the same time.

That is the way I see it; the Canons are outstanding if you don't want a tripod. Otherwise, a scope and a tripod will outperform them.

Regards,

Ronald

Or a monopod for support ... with a Canon IS to take out the jitter that might be ideal for distant relatively stationary birds.

I could imagine people having the same problems shore watching with the 10x42 IS L ... it's a bit on the heavy side.

KorHaan said:

Kristoffer,

When handheld the Canons will show more detail than the ED50 at 20x handheld. And you won't need a tripod. That's true.

However, I feel I have to add that in comparison to a scope on a tripod the Canons are far less comfortable to use for prolonged viewing, unless you can sit and rest your elbows on your knees ( which I do often). Otherwise they are a strain to the arm muscles and a scope on a tripod is a more comfortable way of viewing.

You can let her use the scope every so often while you yourself build up muscle power using the Canons, and vice versa.

Or you get her an ED 50 with a lightweight tripod, so you can both scope at the same time.

That is the way I see it; the Canons are outstanding if you don't want a tripod. Otherwise, a scope and a tripod will outperform them.

Regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

Yeah I bet it is quite heavy to hold for long periods. But it is easier to carry then a scope and tripod and perhaps it would be a good backup for a scope. Maybe can use it to look once the scope handler found something interesting.

Kevin Purcell said:

Or a monopod for support ... with a Canon IS to take out the jitter that might be ideal for distant relatively stationary birds.

I could imagine people having the same problems shore watching with the 10x42 IS L ... it's a bit on the heavy side.

Click to expand...

I tried the Canon 18x50's on my new monopod, mixed feelings about this setup. The horizontal movement is quite annoying. The pod lacks a cupshaped rubber foot, it has a simple little rubber cap underneath. If I can screw the lower section into the sand or loose soil like a spear, it might be better. On a hard surface the pod is utterly useless, it only serves to take the weight off your arms. And another thing that is annoying me, is that my Gitzo 2180 head I installed on the monopod is clumsy and too heavy. It's a fuzz to screw on the quick release plate and click it into the head; with the bino's being lumpy there's hardly place to get them on the head.
A small ballhead without qr plate might work better. Or a tilthead, but I haven't seen one without a qr plate.

Regards, Ronald

I've been on a seawatch with my Canon 18x50's recently.
Put them on my tripod at the observatory post on the southern end of the Hondsbossche Zeewering, an immense seadike.
We were a party of five, my birding buddie and me, plus three regulars.
The guy next to me had Swarovski 15x56's on a tripod, the guy on the far left had Zeiss 15x60's on top of his 65 mm Diascope on a tripod, the third guy had a 80mm scope in a green stay-on case ( brand unknown) and my birding buddie had his Televid 32x77 on a tripod. The guy with the Swaro15x56 was calling birds passing at 3/4 range to the horizon. I had trouble ID'ing birds at half range with my 18x's. But I suspect the Swaro guy had much more experience, I don't do a lot of seawatching. It took me an hour to "get my eye in", so I kept quiet for some time. The regulars were calling birds all the time and slowly I got better in ID'ing them too.
Only Gannets were no problem close to the horizon.
The view was very relaxing, though, much better than the one-eyed scope image.
FOV was quite satisfying, np problems to pick up birds and tracking them.
The 18x magnification, though, is not sufficient for serious seawatching. Not for me, that is.
The site is well known among birders, but the birds tend to pass at great distance normally. That day there was a mild breeze blowing from the west, 4 Beaufort. Not the best circumstances for good seawatching.
No Yelkouan Shearwaters we'd hoped to see, so after some 5 hours we gave up and went to check out the flooded bulb fields for waders and Gull-Billed Terns.

Here the Canon 18x50's excelled once more; scanning a field from the car I had no trouble ID'ing waders like Ruff, Dunlin, Greenshank, Common and Green Sandpiper, and even Little Stint. My birding friend had to get out of the car to get his scope.
The Gull-Billed Terns did not show, unfortunately, and we dipped out on the Buff-Breasted Sandpiper, that was reported the day before, as well.

All in all it was a day spent well, we had fun and saw some good birds.
Next time I'll try seawatching from one of the piers at IJmuiden, a two mile long concrete finger that sticks out into the North Sea. That'll be interesting.

Regards, Ronald

KorHaan said:

I tried the Canon 18x50's on my new monopod, mixed feelings about this setup. The horizontal movement is quite annoying. The pod lacks a cupshaped rubber foot, it has a simple little rubber cap underneath.

Click to expand...

If you ever have the chance, try a Monostat. That's the one with the cup-shaped rubber foot. Makes quite a difference IME.

Hermann

Just returned from a week's holiday on the beautiful island of Texel, a birder's heaven during migration time. Pity the weather was foul for most of the days, with prolonged drizzle and strong winds.
I brought my 18x50's as my only bins; they did very well as expected. During a seawatch one morning I used them when standing behind a small container, that was just tall enough to comfortably lean my elbows on. I saw Great Skua, Gannets and scoters pass by on the southeastern wind that reached gale force eventually. The sweetest moment came when a juvenile Sabine's Gull swept through my view at close distance; the remarkable colour pattern immediately made me recognise it, and I could call it confidently before the others in our small party. A Fulmar passed by only minutes later, at even closer distance, great views through the 18x's: long stretched wings, pale inner primary patches sharply showing. What a joy to watch, even when the fine sand kept sweeping continuously over me... That's the trouble with sandy beaches in a gale.
I was becoming slightly worried my weatherproof binoculars would not be going to survive this harsh treatment, let alone the cleaning of the salt-swept objectives.
The fine sand particles tended to stick to the lenses, and I used my personal cleaning technique: blow off most of the sand, then lick off the remaining particles and salt spray, then wipe with a hanky. This on several occasions during the morning. It went well, no scratches whatsoever. In fact, when I got home last night I cleaned the bins with a damp cloth and they look as good as new. They survived hours of rain and drizzle, salt spray and sand and are really tough.
This holiday brought me two lifers for my Holland list as well; American Golden Plover, in a meadow in a group of Common Golden Plovers, showed all the detail I could wish for at a distance of 80 meters. And second, and more importantly, I could finally tick off my worst bogey bird, a Barred Warbler. A skulky juvenile bird my friend and I had to watch from within the car as it showed briefly twice in a hedge row. At 10 meters distance, the bird came into full view, I could make out the pale pink base of the lower bill easily, as well as the pale fringes on the coverts. It was a moment of great relief. I have tried this bird three or four times before in my life and never got good views on any occasion, so I was thrilled I could finally nail its ID without a shadow of a doubt! Sunday morning, the 4th of October, thank you, Canon engineers, for the fine piece of equipment I got from you. My holiday was a great success, long days and lots of birds, and confident ID's on most of them.
Great bins, I really love them.

Regards,

Ronald

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