KorHaan
Well-known member
Hi all,
I recently had an opportunity to try out the biggest of the Canons, the whopping 18x IS. I really must say first I had little confidence in its optical qualities beforehand, thinking the 18x magnification would compromise the other important factors like brightness, sharpness and FOV.
But to my surprise, I found the specimen I tried to be the best performing of all IS models I've tried before, including the 10x42 IS and 15x50 IS from Canon. Despite its 2.8 mm exit pupil the view was bright and quite sharp, and the stabilized view was more satisfying than on the lower mag models. It was an unbelievable and stunning experience to actually see fine details on Jackdaws on a lawn 200 meters away. Truth is, the FOV was not great, but still much better than I had anticipated.
The sheer "wow " factor of these things blew me off my socks, ideal for my kind of birding, sometimes out in the field leaving the scope at home I could carry these Canons as a booster whenever necessary.
I googled the 18x50 IS and read a lot of reviews. Most of them in high praise, so my confidence to purchase this model grew.
Then I read a less favourable review, to say the least; one owner had a bad experience with his specimen, concerning the build quality.
As he described, when he pulled them out of the bag one eyepiece broke off completely. The strap lugs on the 18x50 ( and 15x50 as well ) are placed ON THE EYEPIECE parts, not on the body of the binocular itself. The bag has no strap and the bino hangs on its strap in the bag. Apparently ( from what he described ) the eyepieces are attached to the body by three screws for every eyepiece, but two of the three screw sockets were broken after the incident. He sent them in for repair, which alledgedly cost him $350 even when the binoculars were 3 weeks in his possession and still under guarantee.
Understandably he was angry, but he warned all owners of 18x and 15x models to handle their bins with great care.
The term he used was "design flaw", but is he right?
When you look at these bulky binoculars, it is odd that the strap lugs are placed on the more vulnerable part i.e. the eyepieces. I'd like to think that Canon knows what they're doing making these heavy binoculars durable!
I'm a bit put off by this story, more so because I really saw myself owning these binoculars as a perfectly portable alternative for a scope.
Are there any owners of 18x50 IS and 15x50 IS Canons who have ever experienced problems of this kind?
Is it better to use the binoculars without a strap, say carrying them in a bag?
Or is there perhaps another method to carry them safely, without the threat of damaging them by putting too much strain on the strap?
Any suggestions are most welcome, because I think I need the 18x binoculars and may purchase them anyway, for the sheer joy they provide.
Thanks in advance,
Kind regards,
Ronald
I recently had an opportunity to try out the biggest of the Canons, the whopping 18x IS. I really must say first I had little confidence in its optical qualities beforehand, thinking the 18x magnification would compromise the other important factors like brightness, sharpness and FOV.
But to my surprise, I found the specimen I tried to be the best performing of all IS models I've tried before, including the 10x42 IS and 15x50 IS from Canon. Despite its 2.8 mm exit pupil the view was bright and quite sharp, and the stabilized view was more satisfying than on the lower mag models. It was an unbelievable and stunning experience to actually see fine details on Jackdaws on a lawn 200 meters away. Truth is, the FOV was not great, but still much better than I had anticipated.
The sheer "wow " factor of these things blew me off my socks, ideal for my kind of birding, sometimes out in the field leaving the scope at home I could carry these Canons as a booster whenever necessary.
I googled the 18x50 IS and read a lot of reviews. Most of them in high praise, so my confidence to purchase this model grew.
Then I read a less favourable review, to say the least; one owner had a bad experience with his specimen, concerning the build quality.
As he described, when he pulled them out of the bag one eyepiece broke off completely. The strap lugs on the 18x50 ( and 15x50 as well ) are placed ON THE EYEPIECE parts, not on the body of the binocular itself. The bag has no strap and the bino hangs on its strap in the bag. Apparently ( from what he described ) the eyepieces are attached to the body by three screws for every eyepiece, but two of the three screw sockets were broken after the incident. He sent them in for repair, which alledgedly cost him $350 even when the binoculars were 3 weeks in his possession and still under guarantee.
Understandably he was angry, but he warned all owners of 18x and 15x models to handle their bins with great care.
The term he used was "design flaw", but is he right?
When you look at these bulky binoculars, it is odd that the strap lugs are placed on the more vulnerable part i.e. the eyepieces. I'd like to think that Canon knows what they're doing making these heavy binoculars durable!
I'm a bit put off by this story, more so because I really saw myself owning these binoculars as a perfectly portable alternative for a scope.
Are there any owners of 18x50 IS and 15x50 IS Canons who have ever experienced problems of this kind?
Is it better to use the binoculars without a strap, say carrying them in a bag?
Or is there perhaps another method to carry them safely, without the threat of damaging them by putting too much strain on the strap?
Any suggestions are most welcome, because I think I need the 18x binoculars and may purchase them anyway, for the sheer joy they provide.
Thanks in advance,
Kind regards,
Ronald
