12x36 IS III is on the way. A couple questions (1 Viewer)

[kabsetz]

The eyecups are problematic but useable for most (?) people. One adapts. I use the 10x42 L, my wife uses the 8x20 IS. She wears glasses and folds the eyecups down. She has never complained about the eyecups, and I have chosen not to tell her that they are considered a problem by many. When I use the 8x20, I don't wear glasses and have the cups up. Not the best but really not a problem either. Better for me than the eyecups on my Ultravid 8x20. With the 10x42, I have nowadays the eyecups mostly twisted in, with a couple of rubber O-rings keeping them in place, and it works fine.

I used to have the 15x50. With that, I mostly had the cups down although I did not wear glasses. I just pressed the flat eyepiece rims against my brow. Worked fine for me

With the 15&18x models and the 10x42, people with close-set eyes and/or large or thick noses might have more problems as the eyecup diameter is large. On the 10x42 it is 45 mm. This is why people often have the cups all the way down or do surgery on the rubber.

IS makes such a difference that I refuse to use anything else unless I happen to be somewhere without access to Canons. I've called non-IS binoculars muggle binoculars to make the point clear.

I'm not committed to Canon as a brand, but none of the other IS binoculars I have tried have worked as well for birding.

 

[Canip]

Once you use IS, all other binoculars are obsolete (handheld).
…………….
For $1500, you get binoculars so much better than the so called alphas.

Sure, that’s one way to see the world. Boy (girl), am I glad there are other ways as well …

 

[pbjosh]

IS bins are tremendous, particularly for pelagic birding. But the ergonomics are too limiting (weight, waterproofing, battery reliance, eye cups on all the Canons, time spent spinning up and stabilizing, etc) for me to use them for most of my birding trips. And for birding locally around home I favor light weight over all.

I would love a good ergonomics moderate weight waterproof pair of IS bins. But until then they are just for pelagic a for me.

 

[Bill Atwood]

I've seen a video where 52mm Sensei lens hoods were screwed into the objective filter threads to provide protection.

 

[rdnzl]

Guess what? I canceled my order. I don't think I'm ready for electronic gadgety binoculars just yet. I want my binoculars to outlive me, and not end up
in my closet full of non functioning electronics.

Plus, I have a great tripod, and most of my viewing is from a sitting position.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[takitam]

Guess what? I canceled my order. I don't think I'm ready for electronic gadgety binoculars just yet. I want my binoculars to outlive me, and not end up
in my closet full of non functioning electronics.

Plus, I have a great tripod, and most of my viewing is from a sitting position.

Thanks for the discussion.

Cancelling an order is fine. I would argue against the arguments you used though. It's easy to make a strong emotional judgement to convince ourselves that we are right, based on what we want to believe. It's better to make judgements based on experience, which is quite easy in case of binoculars. Btw, thanks a lot for your eyecup recommendations for the tiny Leica. I bought a set and they are a great fit for my little Nikons

 

[Paultricounty]

Guess what? I canceled my order. I don't think I'm ready for electronic gadgety binoculars just yet. I want my binoculars to outlive me, and not end up
in my closet full of non functioning electronics.

Plus, I have a great tripod, and most of my viewing is from a sitting position.

Thanks for the discussion.

Rdnzi, not sure , is in your name profile 😜🤣, sorry I couldn’t resist. All kidding aside , these IS bins are wonderful and unique pieces of optical equipment that really does enhance observing image detail. I was a sceptic myself for years until I really started to dig into many discussions on the forums. After trying a few of the Canon IS bins , I still was not impressed, but that was more because I was spoiled by all the high-end premium glass I was using at the time. But when I tried the Canon 10x42L, Canon’s top of the line IS, I was hooked. There’s a lot of people here that like the 30 mm, 32 mm and the 36 mm, they just didn’t do it for me. The 42L imo is amazing, the CA control is as good as almost anything on the market (if your sensitive to that) , they are sharp, very bright, excellent resolution and the IS works very well, other than a little image shift. Even though the ergonomics are an abomination, they balance very well in the hands.

I myself probably wouldn’t buy these for my only pair of binoculars but these definitely fit into a small collection of excellent binoculars. I know some people are concerned, myself as well as to how long the electronics will hold up. There is a great deal of positive feedback on these things lasting a long time. if this is not your first pair of binoculars, you may want to reconsider.

Attached photos show the camera lens covers and caps used for the Canon 10x42L IS.

Paul

 

[exup]

I was spoiled by all the high-end premium glass I was using at the time. But when I tried the Canon 10x42L, Canon’s top of the line IS, I was hooked

LOL - always knew you would turn to the dark side!

 

[Paultricounty]

LOL - always knew you would turn to the dark side!

Oh joy, exup is back. As usual you read between the lines and hear what you want. But they’re not alphas. What happened , people on cloudy nights get tired of you? How’s your villa doing in Europe doing 🤪

 

[William Lewis]

I'll get the popcorn.

 

[Elpha8888]

I found that the newer Canon IS binoculars and in particular the 14x32 were excellent in regards to the stabilization, they employ a second "power" button, this makes the view extremely rock steady, really very good.
The limiting factor for me was the 32mm objectives as I do enjoy astronomy, it would be nice to see a new model with this feature.
I have tried all the Canons including the 15x and 18x and while these are very good on the night sky and a lot of fun during the day they however do not compare to a Swarovski on a tripod, the Canon glass simply cannot keep up.

 

[Paultricounty]

I found that the newer Canon IS binoculars and in particular the 14x32 were excellent in regards to the stabilization, they employ a second "power" button, this makes the view extremely rock steady, really very good.
The limiting factor for me was the 32mm objectives as I do enjoy astronomy, it would be nice to see a new model with this feature.
I have tried all the Canons including the 15x and 18x and while these are very good on the night sky and a lot of fun during the day they however do not compare to a Swarovski on a tripod, the Canon glass simply cannot keep up.

I did a comparison of multiple non IS bins, in different price categories against the Canon 10x42L IS a few months ago. I’d have to go find the post. My group and I all agreed the the premium options were superior in almost all ways when on a tripod, and still a nicer image hand held with excellent ergonomics and a nicer user experience.

That being said I would’ve liked to see 10x42 L version in a 12x42 and a L version in 14x50. Now that would be fantastic.

Paul

 

[Elpha8888]

I did a comparison of multiple non IS bins, in different price categories against the Canon 10x42L IS a few months ago. I’d have to go find the post. My group and I all agreed the the premium options were superior in almost all ways when on a tripod, and still a nicer image hand held with excellent ergonomics and a nicer user experience.

That being said I would’ve liked to see 10x42 L version in a 12x42 and a L version in 14x50. Now that would be fantastic.

Paul

Yes, that would be exciting if a new model was introduced, can't see it happening anytime soon.
I thought the L version was pretty decent but felt I wanted more magnification, probably because I had it after the 18x, the ergonomics were also so so.
I have read that the newer Fujinons are fantastic but on the other hand I've also heard of them having problems. Short warranties on these electronics are another negative as well.
Still, stabilization is amazing and im waiting for Swarovski to implement it!

 

[Paultricounty]

Yes, that would be exciting if a new model was introduced, can't see it happening anytime soon.
I thought the L version was pretty decent but felt I wanted more magnification, probably because I had it after the 18x, the ergonomics were also so so.
I have read that the newer Fujinons are fantastic but on the other hand I've also heard of them having problems. Short warranties on these electronics are another negative as well.
Still, stabilization is amazing and im waiting for Swarovski to implement it!

I agree, I doubt anything new is coming from Canon. A Swaro IS would be scary good. I looked into the Fujinon 14x40’s a bit , from what I’ve been told the IS is noisy and they’re not optically on the level of the Canon L’s. The electronics is my concern as well, I had bought another 10x42L for a gift for a client and it had an issue with the IS system , the replacement was fine. There are many membeers here that have been using these for over ten years with no issues.

Paul

 

[exup]

46mm objective covers I use. I chamfered the edges a bit to help them fit in tighter. Not perfect, as they can pop out, but ok for when leaving the bins statically for a period of time.

 

[rdnzl]

Better late than never.

I went ahead and bought them. They came today. They are great. Zero complaints. I love the eyecups. They fit my eye sockets perfectly and block out all extraneous light. Nice and sharp. Good colors. The IS works really well. I followed a Stellars Jay as he jumped between cedar trees, and never lost any detail. I followed some airliners coming in from the east as they descended towards Paine Field and I could easily read the numbers. The squirrel about 75 feet away showed fine detail on his fur, eyes, and claws as he skittered around looking for food.

They feel good in my hands. Not heavy, not light. Just right. They balance well on my palms.

The focuser could be a little larger, but is has a good feel to it. The diopter adjustment is smooth and not clicky, but it has enough resistance to remain in place.

The Canon case sucks. Canon could do much better. Other than that zero issues.

 

[[email protected]]

I have the Canon 8x20 IS, 10x20 IS, 10x30 IS II and your 12x36 IS III's and I like all of them. I find the eye cups more comfortable than the eye cups on the Canon 10x42 IS-L. The Canon 10x42 IS-L does have slightly better optics because of the L glass used, but for me, they are way too heavy at 42 oz. and bulky for birding, especially when you are hiking. The 12x36 IS III is excellent for seeing detail, and you can ID birds at long distances that you can't begin to ID with any of the alpha binoculars unless you use a tripod and by the time you set a tripod up the bird is in the next county!. If I had to pick one of the Canon's for overall birding, it would probably be the Canon 10x30 IS II. It is light at 22 oz., has good ergonomics, a pretty wide AFOV at 60 degrees, has excellent optics and at $550 it is relatively inexpensive. I could see way more detail with it than I could with my NL 10x42 when I compared them. Here is a hard case for the Canon 12x36 IS III if you don't like the supplied soft case.

https://www.amazon.com/Aproca-Protective-Travel-Stabilization-Binoculars/dp/B08GX1H8D8/ref=sr_1_3?crid=1T46Q76JCG4DY&keywords=canon+12x36+IS+III+case&qid=1683339847&sprefix=canon+12x36+is+iii+case%2Caps%2C128&sr=8-3

 

[rdnzl]

Thanks for the link!

 

[rdnzl]

These are now my favorite birders. I spent most of the morning on my back deck watching many different birds. These work wonderfully.

 

[etudiant]

Yarelli is right. Once you use IS, all other binoculars are obsolete (handheld).

Seriously, just get the 10x42L and be done. The eyecups work. You get near alpha glass. You press the button and IS stays on. For $1500, you get binoculars so much better than the so called alphas.

I won’t buy any other IS model until they fix the eye cups.

I don't think Canon can 'fix' the eye cups, if they are like those on the 10x42ISL.
Henry Link posted a cutaway of the 10x42 some years back iirc, showing that the eye pieces were totally stuffed with glass.
Short of redoing the entire optics, Canon is stuck with lumpy eye pieces.