The ideal IS bino design? (1 Viewer)

[Paultricounty]

The Canon correction angle is aimed at the natural jitter, nature is never at rest, just keeps tacking to try to get the best result.
So a hand held glass will jump around the aim point several times a second. The Canon IS is fast enough to correct that little less than 1* deviation.
Fujinon by contrast sought to eliminate the heave and sway of a moving ship, so they correct for a much wider swing, about 5* afaik, but I don't know how fast they adjust.
For my sedate birding style, either walking or riding on a boat in calm seas, the Canon works splendidly well.
I'd love to hear others experiences with IS glass in more challenging situations though.

Thank you. It is fast to focus, I do notice a little hunting when moving from one object in focus to another that’s at the same distance, where refocusing manually isn’t necessary. The binoculars seem to not stabilize Quite the same as when you’re observing an object and then hit the magic button. It’s still stable even when panning but I believe there is a difference. Only had about an hour with the 10x42 today.

 

[Hermann]

I do notice a little hunting when moving from one object in focus to another that’s at the same distance, where refocusing manually isn’t necessary. The binoculars seem to not stabilize Quite the same as when you’re observing an object and then hit the magic button. It’s still stable even when panning but I believe there is a difference.

That's a good description of how the stabilisation the Canon works, and it does take some getting used to. It's quite interesting to compare this behaviour with the purely mechanical stabiliser of the Zeiss 20x60S (or the 20x60S Mono) that is completely different. The Zeiss doesn't have this "hunting", however, the image always "moves" slowly. Quite different. I personally prefer the behaviour of the Canon.

I also think the stabiliser of the newer generation of Canons is somewhat different. I've got the 8x20, and I don't see this "hunting" at all.

Hermann

 

[Ted Y.]

I also think the stabiliser of the newer generation of Canons is somewhat different. I've got the 8x20, and I don't see this "hunting" at all.

Same for the Canon 10x30 Image Stabilization II: no "hunting".

It also allows to correctly focus when the stabilizer is activated.

 

[Hermann]

Same for the Canon 10x30 Image Stabilization II: no "hunting".

As far as I know both the 10x42 and the 10x30 share the same type of stabiliser ("vari-angle'), and I see this effect with the 10x30 as well. The thing is the effect I mean lasts only a split second and many people don't see it at all.

Interestingly this effect was IMO more pronounced in very early models, so Canon appears to have optimised the algorithms the stabiliser uses. When I first tried Canon IS binoculars more than a decade ago, I found this effect somewhat distracting. There must be some old posts here about the artifacts I saw. With today's 10x30, 12x36 and 10x42 I don't find these effects distracting anymore.

It also allows to correctly focus when the stabilizer is activated.

Actually, I find focusing with the stabiliser activated works correctly with the 10x42. No problem at all.

It will be interesting to learn what Paul thinks about this once he familiarised himself with how the Canon works.

Hermann

 

[Paultricounty]

Just kicking back with the 10x42 L’s the last few days, Beautiful weather, a little hot but it’s summer. Going to live with them for a week or so. Do some observing during sunny, cloudy, early evening and nighttime then start comparing more with the premiums, NL, EL, SF, Nocs, UVHD and some upper mid grade.

Certainly the L is nice glass, really good CA control, much better than I remember the 32 & 36’s. The focuser is sweet, lots of turns but the knob is small so it’s deceiving. Objective covers are horrible, but that’s nothing, I already fixed that with lens shades and Snap on lens covers.

One thing I’m noticing but not sure if it’s inherent or just weight. It seems when not using IS function they shake more than a non IS in the hand. I’ll revisit that painstakingly.



Paul

 

[Hermann]

Certainly the L is nice glass, really good CA control, much better than I remember the 32 & 36’s.

Yep. CA control is a lot better than in most other Canons. The only other Canon I know with good CA control is the 8x20 IS. Glare control is also excellent. IMO it's better than in many premium roofs.

Objective covers are horrible, but that’s nothing, I already fixed that with lens shades and Snap on lens covers.

I also use lens shades on the Canon. Being able to use standard screw-on lens shades is really nice, especially on rainy days.

One thing I’m noticing but not sure if it’s inherent or just weight. It seems when not using IS function they shake more than a non IS in the hand.

That's interesting. I find they actually shake less than standard 10x42 roofs, probably because of their weight. Go figure.

Looking forward to your findings.

Hermann

 

[Paultricounty]

I posted a little review of some non-IS compared to the Canon L IS in the discussion “Premium (Alpha) vs Image stabilized” Sorry didn’t know how to put the link in here.

Thank you

Mod edit: Link to mentioned post Premium (Alpha) vs Image stabilized