As a serious wildlife photographer who has used many Canon image-stabilized lenses over the last decade, I appreciate how good IS is, and how very good it has become over the last several years on camera gear.
I have also owned Canon IS binoculars (10x30 IS, 12x36 IS, 10x42 IS L and most recently the 10x32 IS binos. The new 1032 IS binos have excellent image-stabilization (two types) but appear to have a rather large collimation problem; the image in the right eyepiece is misaligned higher than the image in the left eyepiece, and slanted a bit.
I was checking by looking at a straight roofline about 50 yards away then pulling the binos back from my face, and also just using double vision with the binos to my eyes. I also tried looking at them with the mirror test.
I then went back at looked more rigorously at my 10x30 IS and 10x42 IS L binos. They both showed collimation errors, although to a lesser extent.
A few years ago, I had a pair of Canon IS binos (12x36 IS?) that had collimation problems. I sent them back to Canon for repairs and Canon returned them saying there was no problem and the binocs were performing to specifications. I took them to a binocular repair expert in San Francisco, who tested them formally, and wrote a letter I sent back to Canon, saying that YES the binoculars definitely had a collimation problem. Canon then fixed them.
I suspect that collimation becomes more difficult with all the moving parts of IS systems. This may explain why other manufacturers (Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss) have either not produced IS binos or done so in very, very limited ways (Nikon, Fujinon).
Any thoughts?
I have also owned Canon IS binoculars (10x30 IS, 12x36 IS, 10x42 IS L and most recently the 10x32 IS binos. The new 1032 IS binos have excellent image-stabilization (two types) but appear to have a rather large collimation problem; the image in the right eyepiece is misaligned higher than the image in the left eyepiece, and slanted a bit.
I was checking by looking at a straight roofline about 50 yards away then pulling the binos back from my face, and also just using double vision with the binos to my eyes. I also tried looking at them with the mirror test.
I then went back at looked more rigorously at my 10x30 IS and 10x42 IS L binos. They both showed collimation errors, although to a lesser extent.
A few years ago, I had a pair of Canon IS binos (12x36 IS?) that had collimation problems. I sent them back to Canon for repairs and Canon returned them saying there was no problem and the binocs were performing to specifications. I took them to a binocular repair expert in San Francisco, who tested them formally, and wrote a letter I sent back to Canon, saying that YES the binoculars definitely had a collimation problem. Canon then fixed them.
I suspect that collimation becomes more difficult with all the moving parts of IS systems. This may explain why other manufacturers (Swarovski, Leica, Zeiss) have either not produced IS binos or done so in very, very limited ways (Nikon, Fujinon).
Any thoughts?