• 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.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Canon's new 14x32 IS (2 Viewers)

Super Dave

Well-known member
Hi everyone,

I've owned the 15x50's for 7 years and for the most part have been very happy with them. I just sold my 14x40 Fujinons and was thinking about ordering a second pair of the 15x50's to keep in a second location. The Fujinon's stabilization was great but they took too long to get warmed up and in viewing mode (about 8 to 10 seconds). That was too long to spot a plane or boat cruising by.

The Canon tech guy I spoke to today said the new ones are brighter compared to the older ones due to their construction (he compared it to a SLR lens...but I'm not a camera guy). The 14x32 has a narrower FOV than the 15x50 and I've got to think it won't be as bright. It's a lot lighter and the image stabilization sounds a little better. The weight isn't an issue for me. A great view is what I'm after. On paper, the 15x50 still looks like the winner.

What do you folks think?

Has anyone had a chance to view the new 14x32 model? I'd like to know how it compares to the 15x50.

Thanks,
Dave
 

Attachments

  • Canon and Fujinon copy.jpg
    Canon and Fujinon copy.jpg
    174.2 KB · Views: 601
Hi Binastro,

In good daylight it is plenty bright enough.

Have you hand the new 14x32 IS? I'd like to get more info on it. I have not found anyone who has handled one including Canon tech support in the US.

Thanks,
DF
 
No Dave.
I was thinking of getting one until I found out the price.

The 10x30 IS MkII, which I have, has superb IS, at least this sample, and I have used the18x50 IS for over 15 years.

I really want a 25x or 30x IS binocular. I am pretty sure Canon are up to the job now, but maybe few people would buy a high powered binocular with a field of 2.3 to 2.8 degrees. The eyepieces would need to be clever to give reasonable eye relief at least for non glasses wearers.

For astronomy and aircraft spotting 25x or 30x would be ideal.
 
No Dave.
I was thinking of getting one until I found out the price.

The 10x30 IS MkII, which I have, has superb IS, at least this sample, and I have used the18x50 IS for over 15 years.

I really want a 25x or 30x IS binocular. I am pretty sure Canon are up to the job now, but maybe few people would buy a high powered binocular with a field of 2.3 to 2.8 degrees. The eyepieces would need to be clever to give reasonable eye relief at least for non glasses wearers.

For astronomy and aircraft spotting 25x or 30x would be ideal.


I agree and something like this would go a long way to replacing a spotting scope in the field - something that would appeal to many birders tremendously. Most birders are loathe to take a scope travelling but a high powered IS bin would be ideal.

I would use a 25 or 30x IS bin for lake / seawatches as well as shorebirds and raptors - far more comfortable to view with both eyes and far more flexible for spotting and tracking flying birds.
 
Last edited:
Most birders are loathe to take a scope travelling but a high powered IS bin would be ideal.

Don't you have Twitchers in Canada? Over here in the UK at rare bird hot spots you can see hordes of twitchers who have travelled by road, rail, air and sea to get a rare bird tick and many take their scopes.

See the pic below of a 'twitch' on the Isles of Scilly in the Channel Islands between the UK and France, where literally hundreds went by ship or helicopter to see a Black-billed Cuckoo.
Lee
 

Attachments

  • Black-billed Cuckoo 2.jpg
    Black-billed Cuckoo 2.jpg
    141.4 KB · Views: 766
Lee,

Lovely photo. Was that in the eighties? Quite a number of draw-tube scopes there, almost no angled scopes.

Kimmo

Kimmo
Not my photo but yes I have checked and it was 1980s, well spotted!

This one is right up to date...

Lee
 

Attachments

  • birdwatchers-or-twitchers-line-up-on-sea-wall-in-devon-looking-for-bcmad7.jpg
    birdwatchers-or-twitchers-line-up-on-sea-wall-in-devon-looking-for-bcmad7.jpg
    84.8 KB · Views: 641
Unbelievable photos Lee.

I think that I have just been able to hear some sound with the IS binoculars right up against my ear, but I'll check. I think less sound means less energy consumption.

My cricket correspondent didn't take either of his 8x25 IS to follow the barmy army.
He took the waterproof 6x18, which means he didn't have to search for camera type batteries.

The hotel room prices of £400 at Adelaide meant he stayed in Melbourne.
First day 35C 83% humidity, next day 13C and torrential rain.
A local cricket match had 500 spectators in a stadium that takes 110,000.

He had a close encounter with a spider in his hotel room climbing up the wall, which meant fear. He managed to wrap it in a towel and deal with it.
The hotel receptionist asked if the spider had white eyes. He said it may have had white eyes but he wasn't sure.
They do have antidote and they don't kill that many people.

What with crocodiles, great whites and snakes in Perth, I prefer to stay here. It was suggested he tried surfing in Perth. He said what about the sharks? 'Oh don't worry about them'.

Australians are apparently very friendly everywhere, buses, trams etc.

The only thing I regret is that I never saw the southern sky.

I really would like a 25x50 IS or perhaps lightweight 30x56 Canon IS.
 
Don't you have Twitchers in Canada? Over here in the UK at rare bird hot spots you can see hordes of twitchers who have travelled by road, rail, air and sea to get a rare bird tick and many take their scopes.

See the pic below of a 'twitch' on the Isles of Scilly in the Channel Islands between the UK and France, where literally hundreds went by ship or helicopter to see a Black-billed Cuckoo.
Lee

Of course we do - the point is, would you prefer to take a single bin on a plane rather than a very inconveniently bulky scope and tripod? Same goes with being in the field - would you prefer to view with two eyes and be able to scan and pan freely without the limitations of a tripod head? Would you prefer to keep your hands free rather than having to pick up and carry your scope throughout the day?

An Ontario birder has long used a Zeiss 20x60S as a scope replacement. I can tell you he gets on birds far faster than the rest that are on their scopes.
 
Last edited:
Chromatic aberration comments from Canon

I have the new Canon 14X32 IS binoculars and they are great in many respects, particularly the near focus distance of about 6-8 feet instead of 18-20 feet as is the case for Canon's 12X36 IS model. And the IS stays on for 5 minutes without holding down the button. But these binoculars display purple fringing (chromatic aberration - CA) when the focus is even minutely off. With a very minor turn of the focus dial, the metallic green head of a male Mallard will turn purple. I can imagine all sorts of quirks this could trigger. The green gloss of a Greater Scaup might change to a purple gloss more commonly seen in a Lesser Scaup. And the CA is noticeable on twigs and wires and the edges of almost everything. But when in perfect focus, no CA is seen.

I sent the binoculars to the Canon Factory Service Center and they returned them promptly with this note: "Your product has been examined and it was found that the product performed according to specifications. The optical assembly was inspected. Product functions were confirmed. Note: The color fringing will disappear when optical axis parallelism and focus are correct (object in good focus). This is normal."

Well, to me, this is not normal. I have used all sorts of other binoculars including Nikon's best, Leicas, Swarovski, Zeiss, and even the Canon 10X30IS, and none of them show purple fringing.

So I called Canon, and was told my concern would be forwarded to an engineer. I got this reply: "I consulted one of our engineers regarding your inquiry. He advised since the Canon Factory Service Center determined the binoculars are working within specifications, the chromatic aberration would be considered normal operation."

Again, I disagree that CA is normal. All that said, these are wonderful binoculars but certainly quirky.
 
Thanks Crow for some useful information and an answer that responds to the OP's question.

Though my brow was raised already by the small exit pupil of the 14x32s, after reading your report I will steer clear.
 
CA is normal.
It depends how much.
It also depends partly on the objectives used.

It will be interesting to hear other reports. Whether there is variation between samples.

But clearly for bird watching most people require as little CA as possible.

I dislike my early Nikon 8x42 HG because it has excessive CA off axis and arcs of ghosting, partly due to shiny black internal paint I think.

They delayed import of these Nikons into the U.S.A. saying there were minor tweaks, but I suspect that they were not so minor.
 
My Canon 12x36 IIs are my main birding binocular. When I first had them I sometimes noticed some distracting CA. It turned out it was a problem when I had the IPD set incorrectly. My wife noticed the same thing, and getting the IPD right cured the problem.

Clear skies, Alan
 
Hi, everyone

I recently compared the 14x32s with my 15x50s. Got a good impression in bright daylight. Could actually discern more detail with the 14x32s. So I'm thinking of buying a pair.
However, I'm a bit worried about the small exit pupil and how good the binos are in winter/dark cloudy days/twilight. Is the brightness decent?

Anyone who has tried them out in more demanding situations?

Cheers
Wolf
 
Warning! This thread is more than 4 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top