Bought the Canon 10x30 IS today - new world opening up (1 Viewer)

Guys,

Thanks for all the fine comments. Being new to IS is like being in a learning process, even though I use binoculars for 40 years now. ( Yes; this year I'm celebrating I was given my first pair of bins at the age of 13. )

I learned a few things today.
The little green indicator light did not flash up since yesterday, meaning low battery power. Since the IS worked fine I gave it no attention. It was mentioned in the instruction booklet.
Today, when I watched a Carrion Crow on its nest from my backyard, the IS stuttered somewhat and I knew new batteries had to be installed. To be honest, at first I thought something was wrong, after the stutter the IS didn't work anymore.
I removed the old batteries and installed my freshly charged rechargeables. Wrong. They got stuck. I realised they did not slide in as easily as the batteries I put in when I bought the Canons, but in a momentary lapse of reason I shoved them in and couldn't get them out anymore. I could kick myself at that moment, but with some patience and the aid of a pincer I was able to get one rechargeable out. The other one was clinched tightly in the battery compartment; I was unable to remove it.
I already got visions of returning the Canons and being without them for days or weeks, when my wife quietly went to the cupboard, took a crochet needle ( with a little hook ) out of her sowing basket, and removed the second rechargeable in a second.
On inspecting how this could have happened, I discovered the diameter of the rechargeables was a fraction wider than that of the old batteries. That's why they got jammed. I think they have a somewhat thicker plastic jacket.
I slid in a few fresh Alkaline AA batteries, shut the compartment and tried the Canons. All worked fine, IS was fine, little green indicator light flashed up again as it should when pressing the IS button.

Think I'm only going to use batteries, thank you, and no more rechargeables ( grinding teeth as I write this; couldn't find a smiley that adequately expressed the fierce emotions I experienced ).

Kindest regards to all,

Ronald

KorHaan said:

... A rock steady image in a handheld 10x bin; non-IS bins are obsolete for me now. I'm never going back...


Regards,

Ronald

Click to expand...

Hello Ronald,

Good luck with your new Canon IS!

After using a binocular with FL glass, I thought that all other binoculars were obsolete. It was not simply a matter of diminished chromatic aberration but the quality of the colour. I suppose that I may have to wait for an IS binocular with FL glass.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

KorHaan said:

On inspecting how this could have happened, I discovered the diameter of the rechargeables was a fraction wider than that of the old batteries. That's why they got jammed. I think they have a somewhat thicker plastic jacket.

Click to expand...

I can imagine the feeling when you couldn't get the batteries out.

KorHaan said:

Think I'm only going to use batteries, thank you, and no more rechargeables ( grinding teeth as I write this; couldn't find a smiley that adequately expressed the fierce emotions I experienced ).

Click to expand...

Or you could just use batteries that meet the AA/LR6 size spec, IEC60086-2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AA_battery

AA battery measures 51 mm in length (50.1 mm without the button terminal), 13.5–14.5 mm in diameter,[1] (1.97×0.56 inches).

Click to expand...

Unless Canon only designed for the lower diameter (so called typical) spec (I assume that was the large dimension rather than length). If that's the case don't use Energizer Alkaline cells either

http://people.msoe.edu/~tritt/trips/rabbitseason.html

Good luck (there are NiMH cells that meet those specs ... HR6).

Or perhaps we need to keep a micrometer around.

Did you measure the battery dimensions that you used (they hadn't swelled in use had they?).

Ronald,

Rechargeables differ in diameter, as you found out the hard way. I have had no problem with the Varta Power Accu 2700 mAh type and its predecessors, but with some Energizers the fit was a bit tight. It is possible that the battery compartment in the 10x30 is tighter than in the 10x42 and 15x50.

Arthur,

I have compared the 10x42 IS L side-by-side in the field with Zeiss FL's and concluded that the control of CA and color purity and vibrancy in the Canon is at least the equal of the Zeiss. There may be other reasons for you to dislike the Canon, but excessive CA is not one of them. The 10x30 does not utilize UD-glass, and is consequently a different matter.

Kimmo

Arthur:

What Kimmo doesn't make explicit is the 10x42 IS L uses ED glass.

FL is Zeiss' trademark for bins that use a fluoride doped (i.e. ED) glass.

Canon call it UD (such a proliferation of brandnames have sprouted from the original ED: FL UD, HD, etc, etc). Two elements per barrel ... one in the objective and one in the EP?

That's what the L in the product name signifies -- like the L photographic lenses they make. It also explains what might seem odd initially that the pricing for the 10x42 IS L is often more than the bigger 15x50 IS or the 18x50 IS.

So you can have your ED glass cake and eat the IS too

Kimmo:

I see you wrote a review of the 10x42 IS L for Alula back in 2001 but it isn't online (never has been?). Is there a any chance of getting the copy of a the review text?

Kevin,

You are right, the Canon 10x42 IS L review has not been on the net. The webmaster at Alula and now at Lintuvaruste has promised to put it on the site for a good couple of years now, but I'm still waiting. Perhaps I'm too soft on him. I think I'll give him until May, and then post it on the reviews section on Birdforum if needed.

Kimmo

Well this is really good info; i now have rechargables set into the 30. dont recall the brand but i think it's energizer. am interested when i get home to see if i can extract the little buggers. have never had a problem w/ the 42's.

checked out the handling and size of the 12X36's, and optically and cosmetically they seem to be clones, very similiar view but close focus is way too far off for the kind of birding i do. think i will skip these in the line, but am looking closely at the 15's for long range shorebirding, and esp for the local hawkwatch this fall.

contacted Canon service today about the "dont take them to high mountains/bubbles in the prism" caveat and the original tech seemed not to have fielded the question before. was put on hold while she spoke w/ a "sr tech", whose response was something to the effect "avoid quick changes in temperature or pressure; it's not so much the extremes that matter, but rapid changes in pressure that could generate air in the prisms". that's a loose quote, but the concept does make sense. however i got the impression it's a sort of off the cuff answer, but, then again, maybe not. idea i suppose then is not to stash them in a plane's cargo hold, which i had no intention of doing anyway! i dont have the manual in front of me, but i do seem to recall the wording here might truly indicate "not to take them to high mtns", period, as opposed to rapid changes in air pressure. anyway, they promised to check even higher up the tech chain and if anything else comes up they are going to email that info. they also promised to look into the wording in the manual.

Kevin Purcell said:

Arthur:

What Kimmo doesn't make explicit is the 10x42 IS L uses ED glass.

Click to expand...

Hello Kevin,

Should I replace my 10x32, I must examine the 10x42 IS L.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Kevin Purcell said:

I can imagine the feeling when you couldn't get the batteries out.


Did you measure the battery dimensions that you used (they hadn't swelled in use had they?).

Click to expand...

Ehm.. no, I didn't measure them; and no, they hadn't swelled because they were not used before. Just thicker plastic jacket, it seemed.

The alkalines AA that I'm using now are Duracell.

Regards, Ronald

Pinewood said:

Hello Kevin,

Should I replace my 10x32, I must examine the 10x42 IS L.

Happy bird watching,
Arthur

Click to expand...

I think you'd have to ask Kimmo that.

But this fact (and the rest of its spec) only dawned on me this week. And I went from thinking "Wow! that's really expensive for a non-alpha 10x42 and those other ones with bigger aperture and high magnification are cheaper" to "Wow! That might be a very interesting birding bin". Very good close focus. A 6.5° FOV that's good for a 10x and even better sharp to the edge. Oh, and it has IS too!

It does use a field flattener that (I think) might compromise the DOF. Do any 10x42 users have any comments on that?

And the internal optics are porro (correct me if I'm wrong) avoiding developing an alpha class bin with a roof prism with phase coating, mirror coating and clever choice of AR coatings choices. One of the few ED porros still on the market.

Another reason to have Kimmo's review on the net

Oh, and I ordered a 10x30 IS yesterday that should arrive on Friday as that seems to be the "gateway bin" for birders. We'll see if I become another member of the Cult of Canon IS.

DoF on the 10x42 seems less, but I'd thought it was a feature of the design. It does allow tracking a bird into bushes surprisingly well. The nearer branches melt away visually as they go out of focus.

KorHaan said:

Hello all,

Well, finally did it: I fell for Image Stabilisation.

Click to expand...

Hi Ronald

Congrats on your new bin and welcome to the club. I have not been on Birdforum much lately so I only just noticed this thread. I am happy for you. I am glad I could help you out on trying my Canon 12x36. You sure took your time making your mind up which IS to buy but I am sure you have made a wise decision. Have fun .

cheers Peter

etudiant said:

DoF on the 10x42 seems less, but I'd thought it was a feature of the design. It does allow tracking a bird into bushes surprisingly well. The nearer branches melt away visually as they go out of focus.

Click to expand...

It's a consequence of the design and I suspect they way optics designers at a "camera company" designs a bnocular (as camera lenses need flat fields much more than bins though in this case I think it's the IS that needs it otherwise the field will do the hula as a IS moves around).

So that field flattener gives a smaller DoF and leads to a more photograph-like "bokeh".

It can be an advantage (as you point out you loose forground and background branches at the cost of contrast) but very close in (where the absolute DOF gets rather small) it can be more of a problem.

But then again I can see the argument being made that these are high magnification bins (10x and up)whose primary use it not for close birding. It would seem that only the 10x42 with an 8 feet close focus might actually show this sort of problem with a bird down the line of sight with it's beak in focus but tail out of focus. Another reminder that all bins are compromises.

That said I've been using my 10x30 more and more for birding. And I'm impressed. I even find the small exit pupil to be less of an issue than I'd suspected (though it's certainly smaller than I'd like). Eye placement is a bit more critical than I like but the view is very nice. And the grip on the bins is so good so I find I can hold 10x much more steady and my couple of 10x porros and even more steady than my token 10x roof.

In fact this has made me reexamine compact 10x32 bins in general whereas previously I'd seen them as "too shakey with a tiny exit pupil" and so not very useful now I'm not so sure.

But of course chasing a passerine (a warbler or vireo) in the canopy, pressing the IS button and actually concentrating on the tiny field marks (light lores or spectacles?) is quite a revelation. It really does take the bins out of consideration: more like looking at a slowly drifting picture of the bird.

I think I've joined the cult

Peewee said:

Hi Ronald

Congrats on your new bin and welcome to the club. I have not been on Birdforum much lately so I only just noticed this thread. I am happy for you. I am glad I could help you out on trying my Canon 12x36. You sure took your time making your mind up which IS to buy but I am sure you have made a wise decision. Have fun .

cheers Peter

Click to expand...

Hi Peter,

Thanks man, I'm ever so grateful I could try your Canons. Great to actually test them in the field, it was the Mistle Trush in the meadow that I saw in great detail that did it for me that day.
I really had my mind set on 12x36's and was a bit surprised to find I prefered the 10x30's in the store. But I must say, now I'm getting more and more used to them, I like them better every day. The eye placement is less and less of an issue, now I practice with them on all of my birding trips.
I need new batteries every 6 days. Is this normal? I tend to use the IS button
very often, for prolonged periods of time - minutes rather than seconds - so
it may not be a surprise to renew the batteries so soon. It's just great to scan the sky for distant birds, especially when I'm sitting on a low stool and can rest my elbows.
I have to find a good padded bag, too. The Canon bag that came with the bins is too flimsy, and strangely shaped ( a-symmetrical with the zipper running on the side ).
Next month I'm planning to buy a bigger magnification of the Canon IS's,
as I've sold my scope I need more mag without the hasle of tripod lugging in the field. A monopod will do, then. Still got my CF tripod, but only use will be seawatching - or even then a monopod will do.

This week my wife and I will be going on a short holiday to the Veluwe. 10x30 IS's will go with me. I will enjoy them thoroughly, I'm sure.
The non-IS roofs will stay at home.

Best regards,

Ronald

Kevin Purcell said:

It's a consequence of the design and I suspect they way optics designers at a "camera company" designs a bnocular (as camera lenses need flat fields much more than bins though in this case I think it's the IS that needs it otherwise the field will do the hula as a IS moves around).

So that field flattener gives a smaller DoF and leads to a more photograph-like "bokeh".

It can be an advantage (as you point out you loose forground and background branches at the cost of contrast) but very close in (where the absolute DOF gets rather small) it can be more of a problem.

But then again I can see the argument being made that these are high magnification bins (10x and up)whose primary use it not for close birding. It would seem that only the 10x42 with an 8 feet close focus might actually show this sort of problem with a bird down the line of sight with it's beak in focus but tail out of focus. Another reminder that all bins are compromises.

That said I've been using my 10x30 more and more for birding. And I'm impressed. I even find the small exit pupil to be less of an issue than I'd suspected (though it's certainly smaller than I'd like). Eye placement is a bit more critical than I like but the view is very nice. And the grip on the bins is so good so I find I can hold 10x much more steady and my couple of 10x porros and even more steady than my token 10x roof.

In fact this has made me reexamine compact 10x32 bins in general whereas previously I'd seen them as "too shakey with a tiny exit pupil" and so not very useful now I'm not so sure.

But of course chasing a passerine (a warbler or vireo) in the canopy, pressing the IS button and actually concentrating on the tiny field marks (light lores or spectacles?) is quite a revelation. It really does take the bins out of consideration: more like looking at a slowly drifting picture of the bird.

I think I've joined the cult

Click to expand...

Hi Kevin,

In comparison to my Minox 8x32 BL's the DOF of the Canon 10x30 IS's is less, but the flat field is something I definitely like on the Canons. Even without IS on, the image I get is more gentle on my eyes.
The close focus of 4.2 meters has not been a problem ( though the Minox BL's focus down to 1.2 meters ), and I don't have to reset the IPD of the Canons like I do on the Minox.

As to 10x32 bins in general, I dare to disagree with you there; even my 8x Minox BL's are noticeably shakey now since I'm blessed with the IS factor of the Canons. They're pretty good for quick glances of flying birds, but I wouldn't use them for prolonged viewing.
On the other hand, I once tried the Swarovski 10x32 EL's and found the image quite steady, due to the ergonomics of the spacey open bridge which provided a tremendously good firm grip. The ergonomics of the 8.5x42 were not that good for me.
I wonder how the 10x32 EL's would look like now I'm spoiled with the IS.
I've been contemplating a bit over the likeliness I would ever go back to non-IS bins, should the Canons turn out not to be the summit in my binocular career - heaven forbid. I think I will be restricted to 6x or 7x mag bins in that nightmare scenario -d'oh!

Still an apprentice to the cult of IS, but a happy one,

Ronald

KorHaan said:

I need new batteries every 6 days. Is this normal? I tend to use the IS button
very often, for prolonged periods of time - minutes rather than seconds - so
it may not be a surprise to renew the batteries so soon.

Click to expand...

Hi Ronald

The rechargeble batteries I use (2600mAh) usualy last some weeks but hat does not mean much because it does not say how extensive I use them. I find it hard to say how long I have pressed the botton before changing batteries. I always take some spare batteries with me. If you are thinking about buying rechargeble batteries I can say that I second Kevin's advide. I use the Sanyo eneloop for my compact camera and they last quite some time.

Enjoy your Canon and let us know what you think of the bigger mag Canon as soon as you get them.

Cheers Peter

ceasar said:

There was a picture last June in one of NYC's tabloid papers (Post or Daily News?) of the man who calls the Races at Belmont Racetrack. In his hands he was holding either a 15 x 50 Canon IS or an 18 x 50. There also was a spare one visible on a shelf in the background.
Bob

Click to expand...

I saw a brief extract from a lousy movie with Angelina Jolie (Lara Croft Tomb Raider....honestly, I wasn´t watching it, my wife was channel-hopping with the remote....). In one scene Ms. Jolie was looking through binos, and I´d swear it was a pair of Canon IS 12x36 or 10x30. You couldn´t quite see the logo. When the stupid movie switched to her bino-view, of course, it was all digital with funny symbols displayed in the outer field to make it look very high-tech. But when it switched back to Ms. Jolie, there she was again with the Canon IS (I think). If any of you can bear having to sit through the idiotic movie, rent it out and check.

In the first season of Murphy's Law (first or second episode) there a climax scene where the two senior officers are watching the proceedings through Canon IS bins: a 12x36 IS 2 and a 10x30 IS.

I think prop wranglers like them because they look futuristic on the outside. And one can't avoid the possibility of product promotion too.

I've mentioned that Romulus Whitaker (croc and snake guy in India and Africa) regularly uses 10x30 for survey work.

Yes, I notice bins in films and documentaries!

Maybe I have unusually shaky hands, but after nearly a decade of using IS bins as my personal birding (and other viewing) tools, I must say that if I were surveying anything where I didn't want to miss details or where I needed to count something, I would always choose an IS were it an option. The only exceptions are viewing butterflies, where less magnification, better DOF and quicker focus are overriding priorities and where Canon's IS cannot quite keep up, and very quick situations in birding, where the slight IS lag prevents its effective use and a premium 7-8x can momentarily be better for securing an ID than the slow-focusing and somewhat cumbersome 10x42 IS L I currently use. Of course, the 10x30 is not cumbersome...

Kimmo

Once again i absolutely agree!

just returned from 9 days of combat birding on the e. slope of ecuador, and in addition to adding immeasurably to the overall enjoyment of the birds, IS was critical on a number of occasions not just in making the ID, but in seeing the critters at all! staring into a dark bank of jumbled vegatation, i found eliminating most every trace of hand shake vital in picking out the bird, even when the guide was circling it with a green laser. would've missed both a perched, singing rufous-vented tapacalo and one of the gnateaters had it not been for IS. those weren't the only ones. a displaying male white-backed fire-eye, trying to arouse his harem i guess, when viewed thru IS was one of the trip's highlights! i wanted to tote the -30 to save room, but was put off by the Canon reps remarks about "bubbles forming in the prism when rapidly changing altitudes", a comment i couldnt find in the enclosed lit that came w/ the -40 L's. That plus the -30's are not waterproof. No problems up at Antisana (around 13K feet), or descending rather quickly to Guango lodge with the L's. Yep, they were heavy, but after awhile i just didn't notice the wt., only the view!

one night while at wild sumaco lodge, the skies cleared and i got a chance to do some star gazing, with Scorpio right side up, overhead, and both hemispheres of the galactic hub clearlly visible, along w/ stunning views of degree upon square degree of dark material, Omega Centarui, M6, M7 and the highlight of the evening, NGC 6231, the "sword of scorpio" I think it's called... essentially a near religous experience...

chalk up another one (or two...) for Canon IS!!!

kind regards to all,
UTC