Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
ZEISS Summer Savings - Experience unique moments of nature. Save up to £250 on selected ZEISS Binoculars - limited time only!

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 Tuesday 17th September 2019, 08:38   #51
typo
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 3,838
As far as know all of these new IS binoculars use the same IS technology. I had a quick look at the Viking and Opticron version. The stabilisation on both worked better than I was expecting, and for me at least, better than the Canon technology. Though the short power up period was a bit disconcerting. Optically, the Opticron was the better of the two at 10x producing a decent gain in detail. For the 12x Opticron at least, the stabilisation advantage was becoming somewhat neutralised by a softer image for my eyes, but I imagine others will find it more beneficial.

David
typo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 09:06   #52
Roberto72
Registered User

 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Pavia
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by kabsetz View Post
Even at 8x, a stable image is a huge benefit over hand-held.- Kimmo
This is my feeling, as not-skilled birdwatcher
Roberto72 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 14:06   #53
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18000bph View Post
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.
I don't think it is mediocre for it's size but keep in mind it is a 16x28 not a 12x50. That is only a 1.8mm exit pupil.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 17th September 2019 at 14:42.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 14:11   #54
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Dave View Post
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.
The difference between the 12x28 and the 16x28 is the 16x with it's smaller 1.8mm exit pupil is little more finicky with eye placement than the 2.5mm exit pupil of the 12x28. But the 16x28 has a bigger AFOV so it has the immersive view you were looking for and it is 16x which brings a lot more detail to the table.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 14:15   #55
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hermann View Post
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
I am really surprised you got two lemons. Did you purchase them right when they were introduced? Where from? They are MIC and we all know if there isn't stringent QA by the manufacturer there can be inconsistency problems.

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 17th September 2019 at 15:17.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 14:17   #56
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by typo View Post
As far as know all of these new IS binoculars use the same IS technology. I had a quick look at the Viking and Opticron version. The stabilisation on both worked better than I was expecting, and for me at least, better than the Canon technology. Though the short power up period was a bit disconcerting. Optically, the Opticron was the better of the two at 10x producing a decent gain in detail. For the 12x Opticron at least, the stabilisation advantage was becoming somewhat neutralised by a softer image for my eyes, but I imagine others will find it more beneficial.

David
I think the softer image could be the higher 12x magnification versus lower magnification. I have always noticed 12x seems softer than 8x.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 14:23   #57
[email protected]
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,022
"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."

That was my error on the 32mm Fujinon. I corrected it. According to John's graph there is a benefit with stabilization even at 6x but the benefit of course increases with higher magnification. Your correct according to the graph there is a 30-35 % improvement in available detail with IS versus handheld at 10x,
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	Efficency vs Magnification, Vukobratovich.jpg
Views:	6
Size:	62.5 KB
ID:	705108  

Last edited by [email protected] : Tuesday 17th September 2019 at 15:16.
denco@comcast.n is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 17th September 2019, 15:12   #58
Binastro
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: S.England
Posts: 4,520
Post 48.

It tells us that N is a whole number.
Hopefully.

Regards,
B.
Binastro 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 0.13304400 seconds with 22 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 23:08.