• 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.

The new crop of 30mm Image Stabilised binoculars (1 Viewer)

D

dipped

Well-known member
Along with Viking, Opticron, Vixen (another brand I can't remember), Kite have now entered the fray with a slightly tweaked and on first check more expensive model in 10 and 12x power. These are the Angle Power Control (APC) models.

These Kite models promise automatic detection and turning on in the horizontal position and off in the vertical position amongst other "refinements". They still have the main slider on/off switch. I've seen a price of £769 for the 10x model https://www.harrisoncameras.co.uk/p...gnification--30mm-lens-diameter--615g_apc1030

I'd be interested to see one of these versions properly tested and opinions on their usefulness compared to the Canon IS binoculars.

For the moment I've had a look at the Viking Scout 12x30 IS and on my brief acquaintance to quote from a Housemartins CD "now that's what I call quite good".

Currently I think their main usefulness would be in open habitats but not for woodland and I think I'd struggle to use one as a main birding binocular.
 
Dipped,

I did see the Viking, Opticron and Kite versions on the same day at Birdfair in August, but to be honest I didn't do much more that check how stable they were and how the apparent sharpness compared at the two magnifications. I think they all share the same stabilisation technology, which seems to work better for me than the older Canons (I haven't seen them recently), though they all showed some strange oscillations on start up. None of them were what I would call sharp at 12x, but the 10s were OK though the image quality of the Opticrons and Kites were noticably better than the Vikings. The sleep function on the Kite seemed useful and it may have had different coatings to the Opticron, but I couldn't be sure without a direct comparison.

David
 
Last edited:
I've tried the 12x Vikings and Opticrons. I preferred the Opticrons, but like David I just couldn't get them totally sharp. In a way I was quite pleased because I'm no longer tempted by them. I'd be interested to try the new Canon 32s at some point though as I've not heard complaints about sharpness.
 
typo said:
?....
.....
.....
None of them were what I would call sharp at 12x .....
.....
......
Click to expand...

I fully concur, David.

Based on my looking at

Vixen Atera H 12x30
Fujinon Techno-Stabi 12x28
Kenko VcSmart 10x30
(I haven‘t seen the Kite nor the Opticron)

I would even expand your statement to „None of them are what I would call sharp - full stop.“

I was actually quite a bit disappointed, because I had hoped a very compact IS bino would be useful (I don‘t know why Canon makes theirs into such monsters in terms of ergonomics). Non of them provided a satisfactory image, stabilization was okay but not perfect.

The named three are all essentially the same instrument, with Kenko going for 10x only and using larger eyelenses with better eye relief. But none of them is anywhere close to any of the newer Canons both in terms of image quality and stabilization effectiveneness (I have not seen the new small x20 Canons yet, but expect them to again be better than Vixen/Fujinon/Kenko etc.)

Canip
 
[email protected] said:
The Canon 10x42 IS-L is still the best IS binocular for a birder. There is nothing that really touches it's performance.
Click to expand...

True, but it‘s also the heaviest of all 10x42s I know (I do know a few), so holding 1’200g for extended periods can become tiring. Canon seems to be aware of that and equipped the 10x42 with a screw hole for mounting (which somehow defies the purpose of an IS binocular, doesn’t it?). And: ergonomics are not the strong side of the Canon binos. That‘s a real pity, given the quailty of the optics and IS system.
 
Last edited:
I don't know if anybody else including Swarovski could make an IS binocular like the 10x42 IS-L with better ergonomics and less weight. There is a LOT of technology packed into it and it's form follows function. You are never going to get a binocular with the weight and ergonomics of a 10x42 EL with IS. Not until technology improves.
 
Last edited:
Canip said:
True, but it‘s also the heaviest of all 10x42s I know (I do know a few), so holding 1’200g for extended periods can become tiring. Canon seems to be aware of that and equipped the 10x42 with a screw hole for mounting (which somehow defies the purpose of an IS binocular, doesn’t it?). And: ergonomics are not the strong side of the Canon binos. That‘s a real pity, given the quailty of the optics and IS system.
Click to expand...

A Finn stick will help ease the Canon weight issue.
Use a QR plate on a ballhead with a folded monopod. It really works very well, the glass is supported by your body while the IS does its magic.
The Velbon Super 8 with a Kakafoto 25 ballhead makes an inexpensive but robust lightweight combo that works well for me.
 
I have the Kite APC 10x30s. My main binoculars are Swaro 10x42 ELs. The Kites are obviously worse in terms of field of view, and depth of field is very shallow, making them quite twitchy on the focusing. Ergonomically they are pretty nice although the IS lever would be better as an on/off button and located closer to the focus wheel. The image stabilisation is really excellent, and I find myself taking the Kites into the field more often than my Swarovskis at the moment, if the light is good and I'm concentrating more on birds in trees and bushes than the sky. Certainly if Kite do a 10x42 IS in the future and it's better ergonomically than the Canon 10x42 brick I can see myself ditching the Swarovskis.
 
Winterdune said:
I have the Kite APC 10x30s. My main binoculars are Swaro 10x42 ELs. The Kites are obviously worse in terms of field of view, and depth of field is very shallow, making them quite twitchy on the focusing. Ergonomically they are pretty nice although the IS lever would be better as an on/off button and located closer to the focus wheel. The image stabilisation is really excellent, and I find myself taking the Kites into the field more often than my Swarovskis at the moment, if the light is good and I'm concentrating more on birds in trees and bushes than the sky. Certainly if Kite do a 10x42 IS in the future and it's better ergonomically than the Canon 10x42 brick I can see myself ditching the Swarovskis.
Click to expand...

I heard Kite is planning a stabilised 10x42 or something in that range. I have to admit I don't remember the timeframe they told me (this or next year?). I guess the stabilisation should be (at least) as good as in their 10x30. I'm curious about the optics. The stabilisation in the 10x30 did impress me when I briefly tested them. However, I did only test them briefly out of curiosity for the stabilisation and because of the seller recommending to try it out, and I didn't scrutinize the optics. A stabilized 30-32mm is just not something that interest me very much personally (30-32mm binoculars are all about great optics in handy size at 8x as main binoculars for me personally), but a stabilized 10x42 might interest me in the future if the optics are great (not necessarily alpha) and build quality and warranty too. (I will still have to be convinced and I won't buy new bins in the comming months, but who knows some day in the future... ;) )
 
Last edited:
Winterdune said:
I have heard too (from Kite) that they are doing a top end IS binocular to be released in 2021. Can't wait!
Click to expand...

Sounds interesting. It will have to go something to compete with the Canon 10x42 but if it gets close at a sub 800gm weight it could win me over.

If Kite are doing it ie Kamakura or whoever, presumably other companies will be doing their equivalents.
 
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.

Similar threads

L
IS Binocular Comparison: Kite 16x42 vs Fuji 12x28
Replies
4
Views
3K
fazalmajid
fazalmajid
F
Kite APC 16x42 … gimmick, replacement or addition? (my report)
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
fazalmajid
fazalmajid
yarrellii
Canon vs Kite stabilized binoculars
2
Replies
24
Views
5K
DRodrigues
D
yarrellii
Allbinos review of the Canon IS II 10x30
Replies
16
Views
2K
henry link
H
Troubador
Zeiss SFL 10x40: A Field Review
2 3 4
Replies
60
Views
18K
Dyrlege
D

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top