Apologies, Stan, for the intemperate language; foolish indeed of me to come on board a Canon forum and speak ill of them! Show me to the gangplank....
Mind you, the thing that keeps me thinking about Canons is what I said earlier...the view of the bird, once on it, is better than with any handheld bino. I think Kimmo said as much years ago. Feather detail that you simply cannot see with even the Alpha-iest of Alphas jumps out at you. I once used the 10x42L from a boat on the way to Cape Clear and it was a revelation. But some weeks later I went for a long walk with them around my neck (which admittedly was silly) and damaged my back (not Canons fault, it's a dodgy back anyway). I suppose it's the usual story...you have to consider the trade-offs. Less than ideal ergos/warranty in return for the best views available in any binocular. The waterproofing in the non-L Canons is, I suppose, a matter of prevailing weather where the user lives. Which Canons do you use, Stan?
Mind you, the thing that keeps me thinking about Canons is what I said earlier...the view of the bird, once on it, is better than with any handheld bino. I think Kimmo said as much years ago. Feather detail that you simply cannot see with even the Alpha-iest of Alphas jumps out at you. I once used the 10x42L from a boat on the way to Cape Clear and it was a revelation. But some weeks later I went for a long walk with them around my neck (which admittedly was silly) and damaged my back (not Canons fault, it's a dodgy back anyway). I suppose it's the usual story...you have to consider the trade-offs. Less than ideal ergos/warranty in return for the best views available in any binocular. The waterproofing in the non-L Canons is, I suppose, a matter of prevailing weather where the user lives. Which Canons do you use, Stan?