Canon IS Zoom Bins? (7 Viewers)

[brocknroller]

Yes, folks, you asked for it, you got it.

No longer be torn between buying a spotting scope with a zoom EP or a fixed power Canon IS bin, when you can have both!

Here's the new Canon 12-60 x 50 mm Porro Binoculars:
http://www.smarter.com/binoculars/canon-12-60-x-50-mm-porro-binocular/pd--ch-6--pi-9158.html

Mmm... I'm think that .8mm exit pupil at 60x might be a tad dim.

And for carrying into the field they now have a Canon 12-60 x 36 mm Binocular, which appears to be built on the older roof design:
http://www.smarter.com/binoculars/canon-12-60-x-36-mm-porro-binocular/pd--ch-6--pi-16470.html

Wow! If you thought that .8mm exit pupil was dim on the 50mm IS, the .6mm exit pupil on 12-60x36 model might be usable only for solar observing.

But I guess you can't have everything.

 

[Sancho]

That´s a bit mad. Just for a moment there my heart stopped..........

 

[brocknroller]

That´s a bit mad. Just for a moment there my heart stopped..........

Zoom bins have a bad rep, however, the Nikon 8-16x40 XL Zoom was excellent, and I'm still kicking myself for selling mine - wait a minute, it's time for another boot..... OUCH! (got to remember to put on the square toed boots, not the fancy line dancing pair with the metal points).

Of course, there's a trade off in TFOV at lower powers (e.g. in the XL Zoom, at 8x the FOV is only 5.2*, but at 15x, the FOV is 4*, which is on par with most 15x bins. Also, it's sharp from edge to edge.

It seems that spotting scope owners don't have any problem with the trade-offs in FOV with zoom EPs, so why not a Canon Zoom IS?

Even the Duovid's lower power FOV isn't that great, but better than the XL zooms (5.2* @ 10x, same as the zooms at 15x - 4*).

Allegedly, Canon uses the same vari-angle prism for its 10x30 and 12x36 IS models.

Could Canon make a vari-prism and accompanying IS electronics to handle a 10/15 dual power IS bin?

But the bigger question is- would anybody buy one?

 

[Sancho]

But the bigger question is- would anybody buy one?

God knows I probably would. A fool and his money are easily parted.

 

[KorHaan]

But the bigger question is- would anybody buy one?

I think I would; if it combines all the good stuff of the 10x42 L IS and the body of the 15x50 IS - why not?
I'm sitting on my money since I got that beautiful 18x50 brick; I wasn't even tempted to buy the Nikon 8x30 EII I tried yesterday in a store, go figure...

Kind regards,

Ronald

 

[Sancho]

wasn't even tempted to buy the Nikon 8x30 EII I tried yesterday in a store....

You saw one in a store? Good Lord, where? I can´t believe you weren´t tempted, even just a tiny bit.....(and remember, I´m an IS fan too!)

 

[Paskman]

I went looking for a 10x42 se last weekend at an optical event. I then made the mistake of trying an 8x30 EII - guess what I ended up buying............go on go on you were tempted weren't you?

Paul

 

[KorHaan]

Gentlemen, gentlemen,

OK I WAS tempted by the little Nikon, I admit it, the wide FOV is great and the close focus about 2.2 meters, and yes, incredibly sharp image, and the price being 699.- euro was no dealbreaker.

But!

Oldfashioned rubber eyecups;
Stiff focus action ( how would that turn out on really cold days );
Not waterproof;
Still hand tremors, which I'm not used to any more;
Bit dim.

I'd rather spend 100 euro's more on Canon 15x50's; remember I once owned the fabulous 7x42 Zeiss FL, which in the end ( being after 20 months ) I found not to my liking.

Regards,

Ronald

 

[Sancho]

Gentlemen, gentlemen,

OK I WAS tempted by the little Nikon, I admit it, the wide FOV is great and the close focus about 2.2 meters, and yes, incredibly sharp image, and the price being 699.- euro was no dealbreaker.

But!

Oldfashioned rubber eyecups;
Stiff focus action ( how would that turn out on really cold days );
Not waterproof;
Still hand tremors, which I'm not used to any more;
Bit dim.

I'd rather spend 100 euro's more on Canon 15x50's; remember I once owned the fabulous 7x42 Zeiss FL, which in the end ( being after 20 months ) I found not to my liking.

Regards,

Ronald

OMG! 700 euro is a frankly outrageous price for EII 8x30. I got my (second) pair online from Clifton Cameras in the UK for about 400 euro. AFAIK, they still have them (and I don´t have any connection with the store). I´m surprised you found them dim, Ronald....they seem day-glo bright to me. And for 8x bins, I found when comparing them to the Canon IS 8x25, that there really was no advantage to the latter, I could hold the EII´s steady enough and the wide FOV, sharpness and 3D effect blew everything else away for use in woodland, etc. Still, I wouldn´t pay 700 euro for them.

 

[ceasar]

Sancho,
400 Euro's is also too much! I got both of my 8 x 30 EII's several years apart: 1 new, about 7 years ago for $235.00 and another very lightly used one a year or so ago for less about $210.00 US funds; and additionally a refurbished 10 x 35 EII for $250.00 US funds about 5 years ago. That is Three (3) EII's for less than $700.00! They were still available in the USA then and if they are available in Europe now, they should be selling at equivalent prices or the dealers who sell them are foolishly stiffing interested buyers to their own financial detriment! After all, Nikon has made no (NONE AT ALL! AFAIK) improvements on them, not even to their leatherette (rubber) covering which is always bubbling and working loose! They are still being sold in Japan according to a recent post by a BF member from Tokyo.
Bob

 

[RJM]

Sancho, That is Three (3) EII's for less than $700.00! They were still available in the USA then and if they are available in Europe now, they should be selling at equivalent prices ....They are still being sold in Japan according to a recent post by a BF member from Tokyo.
Bob

Nikon increased prices worldwide last year alone by 20%. I suspect a new pair of E2's would now sell closer to US$500 if they were still available in North America. In Japan they are 48,000 yen!

cheers,
Rick

 

[KorHaan]

Well!

That would explain why they were still in stock. Outrageous price indeed! They had them three years ago when I visited the shop, together with 10x35E II's. The latter were sold by now.

Hmm, yes, with the image through my Canon 10x30's in mind, I did find the Nikons a bit dim. I seem to have strange eyes. Or a strange brain.

Ronald

 

[Paskman]

I'll agree with you all on the price increase. However, that still does not stop them from giving one of the greatest views I have ever experienced through a pair of binoculars, whatever the price!!

Paul

 

[Sancho]

Hi Ronald, I just went to our attic-window, and looking over a stubble field and moorland at the top of our street, "brightness-tested" my Canon IS 10x30 against my EII 8x30 and EII 10x35. The EII 8x30 was brightest, the IS 10x30 was dimmest. Both EII´s were far sharper and obviously had wider FOV. And then....one of our local buzzards came gliding around the field at low altitude. So I looked at it with all three bins...and guess what, I could discern far more detail, and study the wing-patterns in a more relaxed fashion, with....the Canon IS 10x30. It beat the EII´s hands-down for the amount of detail I could actually see on the bird. Why, Oh Great Cruel and Heartless Binocular-God, can I not have everything in the same bin?

 

[spyglass]

Sancho, the answer is no, because then there would be only that binocular that everybody wanted, supply would not keep up w/demand and it would be a sellers' mkt, which would lead to interminable consternation among binoists (new word) everywhere, leading to a cyberoverload on all these blogs, server meltdown, leaving everyone isolated and having to resort to printed, round robin-type, newsletters, which would almost always be outa date.....as you all know that can lead to various types of mental anguish, yea, even breakdowns, withdrawal, and even potential demonstrations and violence at the factory where these absolute, pinnacle, leave-nothing-to-be-desired binoculars were produced, which would result in arrests and incarceration of some radical members of spyglass cults, who would not be allowed ANY binos at all (they could become weapons); that would lead to their friends trying to smuggle compacts or at least mini-quicks into the gaol during visits, they of course would be found out and incarcerated themselves, this phenomenon would continue until ALL true believers in magnification were locked away (without web access) and the whole movement would just fade away, leading to the demise of all the mfrs, so there wouldn't be anything of note to test, examine, talk about once the authorities decided it was ok to release everyone.....do you really want that? I hope not.....

 

[spyglass]

On the other hand, it would be nice to have to lug only one on outings.....

 

[Sancho]

LOL! Now I understad, Spyglass. If I ever really found that 650g, Image-Stabilised, Waterproof, Dual-Power 8 & 10x35 EII binoculars, the rest of my life would be meaningless.....

 

[Kevin Purcell]

Hi Ronald, I just went to our attic-window, and looking over a stubble field and moorland at the top of our street, "brightness-tested" my Canon IS 10x30 against my EII 8x30 and EII 10x35. The EII 8x30 was brightest, the IS 10x30 was dimmest. Both EII´s were far sharper and obviously had wider FOV. And then....one of our local buzzards came gliding around the field at low altitude. So I looked at it with all three bins...and guess what, I could discern far more detail, and study the wing-patterns in a more relaxed fashion, with....the Canon IS 10x30. It beat the EII´s hands-down for the amount of detail I could actually see on the bird. Why, Oh Great Cruel and Heartless Binocular-God, can I not have everything in the same bin?

Similar experience yesterday here.

Birding with 10x SE and hanging out for a Northern Shrike (a rarity here but seems to have made home at a local birding site). Nice views but to distance to see the field marks to differentiate it from the Loggerhead (aside from it being brown immature bird... which only Northerns are).

After getting the Canon 10x30 IS out of the pack and having it fly off (damn you bird) then waiting for it to return. Finally it returns and perches. I get another view. Still to far away -- really need a scope. Move rather closer in. Much nicer view. Click the IS too. And the slightly dirty white belly resolves into a a scaled white belly (a nice field mark) with the IS on. IS off and it disappears.

It's a good example of IS pushing down the limit of what you can actually see (you can get the same effect looking at type on paper but that's not as much fun!). WIth those type estimates I found I could see items perhaps 70% the size as with IS off.

Plus its much more relaxed to look at the bird.

The other clear difference (which is related to the original optic) is ABing the 10x30 IS and the SE 10x you could see the "magnification" illusion. The 10x30 images looked clearly larger and the SE 10x clearly smaller. Another of the reasons people use roofs (or rather close spaced objectives as the 10x30 IS are porros), I mused.

But is is an odd effect. The 10x30 IS suffer from a range of "problems" but they give very nice views.

And they are porros ... odd porros but still porros.

And they're "cheap" for what they are.

 

[KorHaan]

We seem to have highjacked the Son of Grilka's original thread here, hope he will allow us to apologize before he takes his Bath'let and kills us all in an honourable battle; rumour has it that the Members of the House of Kozak are particularly hot-blooded.

( I've got all the Star Trek Next Generation seasons on DVD )

Sancho, great comparison made there. I suppose you'll be selling your EII's now?
Hehehe.
Spyglass, you missed a career as a politician's speechwriter; what a tremendous effort!
Brilliant!
As a matter of fact... I lug only 1 around in the field: the 18x50 IS's.
It will probably break my back before my time but boy, is it wonderful!
B'rock, son of Grilka, my avatar is the ferocious Jaguar, well known for its keen eyesight, I'm not feline myself though the picture on your link does remind me of my late uncle.
It must be my brain after all and not my eyes ( not that I'm surprised, but still).
Oh, maybe it's got something to do with the field flattener lenses of the Canons, I don't know; they just seem so much more relaxed to my eyes..sorry, brain.. than any other bin I tried.

K'pla!

Ronald

 

[Paskman]

Sancho, great comparison made there. I suppose you'll be selling your EII's now?
Hehehe.

:eek!: