-
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.
Canon IS 12x36 - MkII v. MkI? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sancho
- Start date
Maybe I can help a bit. The Mk1's focus closer so more useful for birders. They are bulkier and heavier and the IS button is harder to reach hence there was an acessory clip that held it in for prolonged use. Definately worth considering.
There used to be an article on BVD about the Mk1's but it seems to have disappeared in the rejig of the site.
I tried out the Mk1's at the Birdfair when they came out and preferred them to the other IS models they had at the time - I thought they were the future of bins and I still think they are but am still waiting for a truly friendly birding version to arrive.
Nev
There used to be an article on BVD about the Mk1's but it seems to have disappeared in the rejig of the site.
I tried out the Mk1's at the Birdfair when they came out and preferred them to the other IS models they had at the time - I thought they were the future of bins and I still think they are but am still waiting for a truly friendly birding version to arrive.
Nev
Found this http://www.shoptics.com/ca-bi-9332a002.html specs for Mk1 ! version and picture though it says Mk11.
You should be able to get MkII specs from Canon website.
Nev
You should be able to get MkII specs from Canon website.
Nev
Sincerest thanks for that, Dipped! Of course if I´d just checked Canon´s websites I could have found the info myself, but I took tha lazy route and asked other BF members instead!
I had a look at the Canon Ireland website as you recommended, and they have specs for both models (the Mk I in their "archived products" section). The major difference seems to be that the older version doesn´t have Aspherical or UD lenses. I´ve no idea what difference that actually makes. The FOV of the older one is a little wider, although it is slightly larger and 120 grams heavier. I´ll go and have a look at the pair I´ve located, they may well be worth a whirl! Thanks again.
I tested a pair of 12x36 IS (mkII) bins a while back and was very impressed with how effective the IS was. However I was disapointed by the optical quality, they were noticebly poorer than similarly price standard bins. Given that you normally use top end optics I think you'll find the Canon bins don't delivery a good enough image. But they are definitely worth looking at it you get the chance.
Many thanks, Postcardcv...I´ll bear it in mind, especially as the version I´ll be looking at is the Mark I, and apparently glass isn´t as good as the Mark II. Cheers!
Thanks for the advice, I went to see the IS bins and it turned out they were Mark II. They were the last pair in the store, the price was brilliant, even 120 euro odd below the online stores, and I couldn´t resist. (Just when I thought I´d gotten over the Optics Neurosis...does it ever really go away?) In any case, I´m seriously impressed by the IS feature, although the optics as you say are inferior to my ELs. But with the IS in operation, I can see more, and better, with the Canons. Incredible. Great for moving targets too. I haven´t used them much in the field, but am looking forward to it. Cheers!
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
Just to resurrect an old thread I was looking at the difference between old 12x36 IS and newer 12x36 IS II models.
As the technical detail are missing from above discussion and you can find them on the Canon USA website I summarize them below for the optical geek
old 12x36 IS
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=8167
newer 12x36 IS II
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=9836
The older 12x36 IS:
uses a roof prism for image inversion rather than porro 2 prism
uses a more complex eyepiece (7 elements in 5 groups versus 5 elements in 4 groups) with a bigger 67 degrees versus 60 degree AFOV and a little more ER (15mm vs 14.5mm).
bigger AFOV leads to a bigger FOV (at the same magnification).
has a closer Closest Focusing Distance of 3.7 meters/12.1 feet rather than 6 meters/19.7 feet on the IS II
has older stabilization system with a smaller stabilization angle of 0.7 degrees versus 0.8 degrees. I wouldn't be surprised if other parts of the IS system hardware and software are different and the newer ones perform a bit better.
can use 43mm photographic filters in front of the objectives (for polarized filters, or color or neutral filters or even just UV or clear filters to protect the objective from dust ingress or damage or fingerprints. The newer one can't use filters (this is a loss).
has a smaller IPD range (60 to 70mm) than the newer IS II (55 - 75mm)
is heavier (without batteries but that's the same for both) at 890g/31.4 oz than the newer IS II 660g/23.3 oz
is bulkier versus 169 x 141 x 73mm/6.7 x 5.6 x 2.9 in. versus 127 x 174 x 70mm/5.0 x 6.9 x 2.8 in.
So it's a mixture. The filter feature was lost, EPs simplified reducing AFOV and FOV and close focus moves out whilst the bin gets smaller and lighter and perhaps has a better IS system.
Optically I suspect the porro 2 should beat the roof (just because it's much easier to get the latter right) but it would be nice to do a side by side comparison. Though I wonder if the EP design has a ED/UD/LaK element that was dropped in later design.
I believe the newer IS II shares it's EP design and it's porro 2 inversion system with the other more recent 3mm exit pupil IS bins. Rather like the Nikon SE family with a constant exit pupil and identical EPs.
I note on eBay the wrong pictures are used all the time. The original IS is more boxy with the EPs lower down. The newer IS II is more round with the EPs sticking up higher.
Old one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36is_586x225.jpg
New one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36isii_586x225.jpg
The obvious field mark is the button which is medial in the new design but offset on the right barrel in the old design.
As the technical detail are missing from above discussion and you can find them on the Canon USA website I summarize them below for the optical geek
old 12x36 IS
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=8167
newer 12x36 IS II
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=9836
The older 12x36 IS:
uses a roof prism for image inversion rather than porro 2 prism
uses a more complex eyepiece (7 elements in 5 groups versus 5 elements in 4 groups) with a bigger 67 degrees versus 60 degree AFOV and a little more ER (15mm vs 14.5mm).
bigger AFOV leads to a bigger FOV (at the same magnification).
has a closer Closest Focusing Distance of 3.7 meters/12.1 feet rather than 6 meters/19.7 feet on the IS II
has older stabilization system with a smaller stabilization angle of 0.7 degrees versus 0.8 degrees. I wouldn't be surprised if other parts of the IS system hardware and software are different and the newer ones perform a bit better.
can use 43mm photographic filters in front of the objectives (for polarized filters, or color or neutral filters or even just UV or clear filters to protect the objective from dust ingress or damage or fingerprints. The newer one can't use filters (this is a loss).
has a smaller IPD range (60 to 70mm) than the newer IS II (55 - 75mm)
is heavier (without batteries but that's the same for both) at 890g/31.4 oz than the newer IS II 660g/23.3 oz
is bulkier versus 169 x 141 x 73mm/6.7 x 5.6 x 2.9 in. versus 127 x 174 x 70mm/5.0 x 6.9 x 2.8 in.
So it's a mixture. The filter feature was lost, EPs simplified reducing AFOV and FOV and close focus moves out whilst the bin gets smaller and lighter and perhaps has a better IS system.
Optically I suspect the porro 2 should beat the roof (just because it's much easier to get the latter right) but it would be nice to do a side by side comparison. Though I wonder if the EP design has a ED/UD/LaK element that was dropped in later design.
I believe the newer IS II shares it's EP design and it's porro 2 inversion system with the other more recent 3mm exit pupil IS bins. Rather like the Nikon SE family with a constant exit pupil and identical EPs.
I note on eBay the wrong pictures are used all the time. The original IS is more boxy with the EPs lower down. The newer IS II is more round with the EPs sticking up higher.
Old one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36is_586x225.jpg
New one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36isii_586x225.jpg
The obvious field mark is the button which is medial in the new design but offset on the right barrel in the old design.
kristoffer
Used Register
Just to resurrect an old thread I was looking at the difference between old 12x36 IS and newer 12x36 IS II models.
As the technical detail are missing from above discussion and you can find them on the Canon USA website I summarize them below for the optical geek
old 12x36 IS
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=8167
newer 12x36 IS II
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...lTechSpecsTabAct&fcategoryid=128&modelid=9836
The older 12x36 IS:
uses a roof prism for image inversion rather than porro 2 prism
uses a more complex eyepiece (7 elements in 5 groups versus 5 elements in 4 groups) with a bigger 67 degrees versus 60 degree AFOV and a little more ER (15mm vs 14.5mm).
bigger AFOV leads to a bigger FOV (at the same magnification).
has a closer Closest Focusing Distance of 3.7 meters/12.1 feet rather than 6 meters/19.7 feet on the IS II
has older stabilization system with a smaller stabilization angle of 0.7 degrees versus 0.8 degrees. I wouldn't be surprised if other parts of the IS system hardware and software are different and the newer ones perform a bit better.
can use 43mm photographic filters in front of the objectives (for polarized filters, or color or neutral filters or even just UV or clear filters to protect the objective from dust ingress or damage or fingerprints. The newer one can't use filters (this is a loss).
has a smaller IPD range (60 to 70mm) than the newer IS II (55 - 75mm)
is heavier (without batteries but that's the same for both) at 890g/31.4 oz than the newer IS II 660g/23.3 oz
is bulkier versus 169 x 141 x 73mm/6.7 x 5.6 x 2.9 in. versus 127 x 174 x 70mm/5.0 x 6.9 x 2.8 in.
So it's a mixture. The filter feature was lost, EPs simplified reducing AFOV and FOV and close focus moves out whilst the bin gets smaller and lighter and perhaps has a better IS system.
Optically I suspect the porro 2 should beat the roof (just because it's much easier to get the latter right) but it would be nice to do a side by side comparison. Though I wonder if the EP design has a ED/UD/LaK element that was dropped in later design.
I believe the newer IS II shares it's EP design and it's porro 2 inversion system with the other more recent 3mm exit pupil IS bins. Rather like the Nikon SE family with a constant exit pupil and identical EPs.
I note on eBay the wrong pictures are used all the time. The original IS is more boxy with the EPs lower down. The newer IS II is more round with the EPs sticking up higher.
Old one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36is_586x225.jpg
New one
http://www.usa.canon.com/app/images/binocular/12x36isii_586x225.jpg
The obvious field mark is the button which is medial in the new design but offset on the right barrel in the old design.
Thanks for this post, it cleared a lot of my confusion regarding mark II IS bins. I am currently investigating if a IS bin maybe could replace a low magnifaction scope and so far I see both postive and negative aspects of the idea.
Kevin Purcell
Well-known member
I think the 12x36 are in an odd place for this ... I get the feeling they are more high magnification bins rather than "a dual barrelled spotter" though perhpas paired with a 7x bin they might function well in the spotter role.
I suspect the 50mm (15x or 18x) Canons meet the dual barreled spotter requirement rather better.
That said with IS the 12x (or even the 10x that I use) seem rather more than a 12x or a 10x. More relaxing than a single barrel low mag spotter on a tripod (assuming the "low frequency movement" you make is not too bad).
They're the 10x or 12x for birdwatching rather than just birding (though to do work nicely for the few second glimpse of a rarity).
I've not seen a 12x mark 1 versus 12x Mark 2 review ... anyone out there got both.
I suspect the 50mm (15x or 18x) Canons meet the dual barreled spotter requirement rather better.
That said with IS the 12x (or even the 10x that I use) seem rather more than a 12x or a 10x. More relaxing than a single barrel low mag spotter on a tripod (assuming the "low frequency movement" you make is not too bad).
They're the 10x or 12x for birdwatching rather than just birding (though to do work nicely for the few second glimpse of a rarity).
I've not seen a 12x mark 1 versus 12x Mark 2 review ... anyone out there got both.
I´m in agreement...my 12x36 IS are superb long-range bins, but don´t replace a scope. But they make a great combo with the ED50/27xw.
