Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Fujinon new 12x28 vs Canon IS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old Friday 13th September 2019, 20:21   #26
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by kabsetz View Post
I have looked through one Fujinon 12 x 28 and a couple of the Kenko versions of this IS binocular, and none of them gave anything close to what I would call a sharp and high-quality image. Stabilization worked very well, but that was not of much use when the view was so dismal otherwise.
I looked trough two Fujinons. Both were lemons.

End of story.

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 02:09   #27
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermann View Post
I looked trough two Fujinons. Both were lemons.

End of story.

Hermann
The Binomania Review disagrees. They say they are" light and incredible" and a "small jewel of electronics" and I agree mine are fantastic! Binomania said it was years said they had so much fun with a pair of binoculars! There must have been some bad samples in the beginning. The Fujinon's also correct image shake to 3.0 degrees versus only 1.0 degree in the Canon's meaning you can really shake them and they will still be stabile and also they will work better on a boat or in a car. IMO the optics and stabilization are superior to Canon's.

https://www.binomania.it/recensione-...e-incredibile/

Last edited by [email protected] : Saturday 14th September 2019 at 05:06.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 04:34   #28
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
The Binomania Review disagrees. They say they are" light and incredible" and a "small jewel of electronics" and I agree mine are fantastic! Binomania said it was years said they had so much fun with a pair of binoculars! There must have been some bad samples in the beginning. The Fujinon's also correct image shake to 3.0 degrees versus only 1.0 degree in the Canon's meaning you can really shake them and they will still be stabile and also they will work better on a boat or in a car. Optically they are way superior to Canon's.

https://www.binomania.it/recensione-...e-incredibile/

Binomania's biggest problem is that it is written in Italian.

I'll keep my Canon 12x36 IS 3. I'm satisfied with it after using it for 6 months.
How technically sophisticated does a binocular have to be anyway?

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 06:28   #29
18000bph
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 90
Denco, I am really looking forward to your review.

I have the Canon 14x32 and the optical performance and IS blow me away. Unfortunately, the ergonomics leave much to be desired. I am certain the Fujinon is an improvement in that department (especially eyecups) so if the optical and IS performance is even halfway decent I am going to give them a try. I really want the 16x, but the 12x would meet my needs if they prove to be significantly more usable.
18000bph is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 09:03   #30
kabsetz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,502
I will believe in Cherry Fujinon/Kenkos when I see one. Until then, I remain sceptical.
kabsetz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 14:17   #31
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
The neat thing about the Fujinon's is that they are so small and light. They are fun like Binomania says. It is nice to have a 15 oz. binocular that you can throw in your pack or put in your jacket pocket and pull it out and have a 12x tripod like view at a moments notice. I like the stabilization better than the Canon's and as you said the Fujinon's have excellent adjustable eye cups that come out a long ways to match the eye relief and are very comfortable. The ergonomics are really nice with a perfect tension focuser. I get the 16x28's tomorrow so I will write a mini-review. With a 64 degree AFOV they could be more impressive than the 12x. An 18 oz. binocular with a tripod like 16x view sounds like a lot of fun. You can REALLY get close to those birds. Forget 8x.

Last edited by [email protected] : Saturday 14th September 2019 at 14:24.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 14th September 2019, 21:48   #32
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,842
From the picture of the Fujinon 12x28 in the Binomania website (with the hand holding it) It appears to be about the same size as Swarovski's 8 and 10 x 25 CL Pocket binoculars.

https://www.swarovskioptik.com/birdi...-8x25-p5393126

Does the Fujinon 12x28 actually have reverse porro prisms? That would certainly help keep it smaller.

The next question is "What are the actual FOVs as opposed to AFOVs of the Fujinon 12x28 and the Fujinon 16x28?

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 05:00   #33
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceasar View Post
From the picture of the Fujinon 12x28 in the Binomania website (with the hand holding it) It appears to be about the same size as Swarovski's 8 and 10 x 25 CL Pocket binoculars.

https://www.swarovskioptik.com/birdi...-8x25-p5393126

Does the Fujinon 12x28 actually have reverse porro prisms? That would certainly help keep it smaller.

The next question is "What are the actual FOVs as opposed to AFOVs of the Fujinon 12x28 and the Fujinon 16x28?

Bob
Bob. The Fujinon 12x28 is about an 1 1/2 inch longer than the Swarovski 8x25 CL-P but a 1/2 inch narrower when the Swarovski is opened and the height is about the same. The Fujinon uses a hybrid prism system consisting of a roof prism and a penta prism called an auxiliary prism. The roof prism is phase coated. The actual FOV of the 12x28 is 4.2 degrees and 218 feet and the 16x28 is 4.0 degrees and 210 feet. The FOV of the 16x is almost as wide as the 12x. The Fujinon is light partly because the body is fiberglass reinforced plastic and the objective diameter has been reduced from 32mm to 28mm. All the lenses are FMC for high transmission. One advantage it has over the Canon is the IS works WHILE you are focusing so you don't seem to get those artifacts like you do with the Canon. The IS uses less energy than the Canon also with the CR2 battery giving almost 14 hours of use. Because it uses a smaller, lighter CR2 battery than the AA in the Canon it allows the body to be designed more ergonomically with a place to put your thumbs underneath the binocular. It is not like holding a big square brick like the Canon 10x42 IS-L nor does it have the huge uncomfortable eye cups like the Canon. The eye cups on the Fujinon fit your eyes perfectly and are comfortable. Ergonomically it kills the Canons. I do a CA test on all my binoculars and I was amazed that there was very little CA with these even though they do not have ED glass.

Last edited by [email protected] : Sunday 15th September 2019 at 05:39.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 14:14   #34
ceasar
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NE Pennsylvania
Posts: 11,842
Thanks for the information on the Fujinon 12x28 and 16x28 Dennis. It answers a lot of questions.

Bob
ceasar is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2010 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 23:23   #35
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
I got the Fujinon 16x28 and it is not any bigger than the 12x28 except for the eye cups which probably have to be bigger for the higher magnification oculars. To cut to the chase I really like it. The 12x28 is slightly lighter and has slightly easier eye placement because it has a 2.5mm EP and the 16x28 has a 1.8mm EP. They both have remakably easy eye placement for such a small EP I think because the IS stabilizes the view and makes it easier to keep your eyes centered over the EP. Outside of that the 16x is in another world. I really can't believe how much detail you can see at 16x! I can read the names of the Doctor's on the door of a medical building that I can not read with the Fujinon 12x28 or SV 12x50. If you really want to see something in detail 16x is where it is at as long as you have IS. I tried using the 16x28 without the IS and I couldn't BELIEVE how much I was shaking. You could never hold 16x without IS or a tripod. The Fujinon 3.0 degree IS handles the shake incredibly well even at 16x. The AFOV of the 16x is 64 degrees so it is much more immersive than the 12x28. It sucks you into this incredibly close up view. You can see detail you never imagined with an 8x binocular. I had the Canon 15x50 IS and I don't feel in the daytime it was as good as the Fujinon's 16x28. You don't need a big exit pupil in the daytime at least if you have IS stabilizing the binocular. The Canon's at almost 40 oz. would be intolerable for birding, whereas, you could actually USE the Fujinon 16x20 for birding because it weighs less than 18 oz. I think these little, light high power IS binoculars will be a game changer for a lot of people.


Fujinon12x28 next to the Fujinon 16x28(Notice the bigger oculars on the 16x28)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	P9150001.jpg
Views:	35
Size:	250.0 KB
ID:	704958  

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 16th September 2019 at 03:03.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 15th September 2019, 23:55   #36
18000bph
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 90
How does the size of the eye cups on the 16x compare to a typical 8x42? Something like a Nikon Monarch or Zeiss Conquest.
18000bph is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 00:20   #37
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
Exactly about the same size. Both the 12x28 and the 16x28 eye cups are very comfortable though. I am amazed how good the CA control is on these Fujinon's. I see hardly any CA. They must use high quality achromatic lenses since it is not ED glass. I am also impressed with the glare control on these and how well they do in low light for such a small aperture. I had them both out tonite watching seagulls after sunset and they performed very well even the 16x28. High transmission maybe? The compact size of these make the big old heavy Canon's especially the 10x42 IS-L seem like dinosaurs. Maybe these will force Canon to update their binoculars. With the 16x I could the Seagulls winking at me.

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 16th September 2019 at 03:00.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 02:34   #38
james holdsworth
Consulting Biologist
 
james holdsworth's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ontario
Posts: 3,297
Do you have to flip that ''on/off'' switch to get the IS working? Looks finicky.
__________________
''serenity now....insanity later.'' - Lloyd Brawn
james holdsworth is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 03:01   #39
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
You just put your finger on it and pull it towards you. It is kind of raised like a cam. It is actually very easy and in contrast to the switch on the Canon 10x42 IS-L which you can't find it is in a good location. The battery box has a nice little metal screw on cap instead of that pop off cap on the Canon that breaks and then you have to throw the binoculars away.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	1516790811_IMG_934817.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	133.3 KB
ID:	704969  

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 16th September 2019 at 03:21.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 05:33   #40
Roberto72
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Pavia
Posts: 6
Very interesting post, thank you.
Do you know if Fujinon is planning a IS 10x too?
Roberto72 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 14:30   #41
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
I don't think so. I really don't see why you want a 10x with IS. The big advantage to these is having high magnification with a steady tripod view that you can carry in your coat pocket or easily with a strap. Why not have 12x or 16x. The FOV's are relatively large and they are not difficult for eye placement. I don't see why these wouldn't work for daylight birding in open areas where you don't need a big FOV or a lot of DOF to find the bird. When you are on the bird 16x is MUCH more impressive than 8x and you can see MUCH more detail. It is like sitting right next to them! The big reason birders don't use above 10x is shake but if you have a steady view why not use 12x or 16x? You get a better view of the bird. I think these new Fujinon's might change a lot of people's minds about IS binoculars because these are so user friendly and fun. It was very wise of Fujinon to reduce the objective size to 28mm to get the weight and size of the binoculars down to a normal size birding binocular. You don't need a 42mm aperture like the Canon 10x42 ISD-L in the daylight with IS because it makes eye placement easier and most people don't want to carry a big heavy 42 oz. brick like the Canon birding. That is why IS has never sold that well in the mainstream market. These Fujinon's could change that.

Last edited by [email protected] : Monday 16th September 2019 at 15:08.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 16:15   #42
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,571
How long will Dennis keep the Fujinon 16x28?

The lack of CA is probably because of the small aperture of 28mm.
If a 42mm binocular is stopped down to 28mm it will also have little CA.

I used to hand hold the specially made Soviet 20x60 for extended periods bracing where possible.
I could see things invisible with smaller binoculars.

I also had no trouble hand holding the Pentax 8x-20x24 binocular although only one of three was high quality optically.

If I could get a guaranteed high quality, non lemon, Fujinon 16x28 I would be interested, although I don't need it.
I certainly am unimpressed by the Fujinon 14x40 stabilizer, although the actual image is high quality.

The Bushnell 10x35 IS binocular I have is junk.

With the Fujinon 28 IS binoculars there is only one question. Are they all high quality or are they mainly sub standard.

Regards,
B.
Binastro is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 16:38   #43
Roberto72
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Pavia
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
The big advantage to these is having high magnification with a steady tripod view that you can carry in your coat pocket or easily with a strap.
Yes I agree but my main doubt is regarding FOV e.g. for flying birds. Canon IS 10x30 should have 105m, compared to 12x Fujinon 73m.
A 10x28 Fujinon could be in the middle...
Roberto72 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 16th September 2019, 20:37   #44
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
I really feel 10x can be handheld so the IS is wasted. I use 10x handheld all the time. I think that is Fujinon's thinking also. I had no trouble at all watching flying Seagulls soaring overhead with the 12x28 and 16x28 and the IS really worked well for that. But maybe trying to follow a Peregrine Falcon would be a different story. A lot of people use IS binoculars for plane tracking with good results also because you can stay on the target better. For really distant flying birds the 16x would be awesome. Both of my Fujinon's have been top quality with nothing wrong. I think they are a big improvement over the Canon's. They have fixed every problem people complained about with the Canon's. The ergonomics are much improved with comfortable adjustable eye cups and the stabilization switch is located where you can see and reach it easily. It stays on for ten minutes and then shuts off. The battery is a much lighter and more importantly smaller CR2 so it takes up less space making the whole binocular smaller and less bulky and the battery lasts much longer partly because the IS mechanism uses less energy. The battery door is a steel threaded round removable cap that won't break like the Canon's pop-up cap. The binocular is much lighter and smaller than a comparable Canon. The IS system on the Fujinon corrects to 3 degrees versus only 1 degree on the Canon and unlike the Canon it stabilizes the view while you are focusing so there are no artifacts like the Canon. Fujinon made the binocular very light by reducing the objective size to 28mm instead of 32mm and making the body out of fiberglass reinforced plastic. Neither the 12x28 or the 16x28 have a huge FOV but to do that would have meant a larger and heavier binocular with more complex eyepieces. With the small exit pupils these are day light binoculars but surprisingly they seem as bright in the daytime as say an 8x32 binocular. The difference between the 12x28 and the 16x28 is the 16x is a little more difficult for eye placement because of the 1.8mm exit pupil versus the 2.5mm in the 12x32. But the 16x32 has a bigger AFOV so the view is more immersive than the 12x32 and let me tell you 16x is a huge difference from an 8x or 10x binocular. You can see WAY more detail with a tripod like 16x view. I probably prefer the 16x a little more than the 12x although either is excellent. Finally, an IS binocular that a birder could use.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 17th September 2019 at 03:02.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 03:06   #45
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,106
"With the Fujinon 28 IS binoculars there is only one question. Are they all high quality or are they mainly sub standard."

I have purchased the Fujinon 12x28 and the 16x28 from two different places and both of them have been perfect in quality and performance. Not one problem or defect. So from my experience I see no quality problems. The sub-standard question frankly surprise me because I didn't see any problems on my samples.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 17th September 2019 at 14:12.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 05:21   #46
18000bph
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 90
I'm probably going to place an order for the 16x. I'm going to hope for the best but be prepared to return. I don't normally buy with the intent to return, but my new Canon 14x32 arrived as a very poorly packaged and dirty return so I won't have too much guilt.

If I get 16x IS with mediocre optics but in a more ergonomic design than my Canon 14x32 I will be very happy.

Thanks for your impressions, Denco.
18000bph is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 06:15   #47
Super Dave
Registered User
 
Super Dave's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kaneohe, HI
Posts: 169
18000bph, I'm looking forward to your review especially since you have the Canon 14x32 for comparison. I was originally more interested in the 16x Fujinon and spoke to the bino guy at Fujinon. He was really hot on the 12 power and that swayed me over. I don't know if he even had a chance to handle the 16x yet since it was before they were available.

In terms of quality. Time will tell. I'm still waiting for my refund...

The bigger question to me is on the optical quality and if a mediocre 16x view is worth it. I know Dennis thinks highly of the optics. My sense wasn't as favorable but I did have a bad pair. If someone had a specific need for that kind of power in a small package then it's a no brainer. But, I get as much enjoyment from the quality of the image vs what I'm actually looking at.

So, please buy them :) I'm very interested in a side by side comparison with the Canons.
Super Dave is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 06:25   #48
Hermann
Registered User

 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,884
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
I have purchased the Fujinon 12x32 and the 16x32 from two different places and both of them have been perfect in quality and performance. Not one problem or defect. So from my experience I see no quality problems. The sub-standard question frankly surprise me because I didn't see any problems on my samples.
So your sample is N=1 for both the 12x32 and the 16x32.

I tried two different 12x32s (N=2). Both were lemons.

What does that tell us about the quality of the Fujinons?

Hermann
Hermann is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 06:34   #49
Roberto72
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Pavia
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
I had no trouble at all watching flying Seagulls soaring overhead with the 12x28 and 16x28 and the IS really worked well for that.
Thank you
Roberto72 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 07:51   #50
kabsetz
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Finland
Posts: 1,502
Has the Fujinon magically become a 32 mm binocular now?

Let's hear from other Fujinon users how they find the image quality of the 12x28 and 16x28 stabilised. I have only seen poor ones, so has Pinac and Hermann.

As to the benefits of IS with lower magnifications, there is still a non-trivial ca. 30-35 % improvement in available detail with IS at 10x, not even mentioning the increased time that detail is available. Even at 8x, a stable image is a huge benefit over hand-held.

- Kimmo
kabsetz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon IS vs Fujinon / Nikon IS edwincjones Canon 2 Wednesday 24th July 2013 11:14
Canon 15x50 vs Fujinon 14x40 Super Dave Canon 1 Friday 10th June 2011 23:24
Fujinon FMTRSX Hogjaws Others 30 Monday 1st November 2010 03:17
Fujinon 7x 42 CD oleaf Others 31 Thursday 25th October 2007 22:11
Fujinon SHS 10X42 Bowman Binoculars 4 Monday 20th February 2006 23:03

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.17729592 seconds with 40 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:50.