Canon 12x36 III vs 10x42 L IS Review (1 Viewer)

Apologies, Stan, for the intemperate language; foolish indeed of me to come on board a Canon forum and speak ill of them! Show me to the gangplank....
Mind you, the thing that keeps me thinking about Canons is what I said earlier...the view of the bird, once on it, is better than with any handheld bino. I think Kimmo said as much years ago. Feather detail that you simply cannot see with even the Alpha-iest of Alphas jumps out at you. I once used the 10x42L from a boat on the way to Cape Clear and it was a revelation. But some weeks later I went for a long walk with them around my neck (which admittedly was silly) and damaged my back (not Canons fault, it's a dodgy back anyway). I suppose it's the usual story...you have to consider the trade-offs. Less than ideal ergos/warranty in return for the best views available in any binocular. The waterproofing in the non-L Canons is, I suppose, a matter of prevailing weather where the user lives. Which Canons do you use, Stan?

Sancho said:

Kevin, I would not recommend buying them without trying them first. I've had 8x25, 10x30, 10x42L, 12x36II and 15x50. All deliver a 'better' view of the bird than hand-held binos. It's a personal thing, though, and the 10x42 and 15x50 were just too uncomfortable to carry and use, although the latter were great when seawatching (for a 'break' from a scope). The 8x25 are plasticky and 'jumpy'. The 10x30 are cute, but I think my favourite were the 12x36II. These were light and had enough reach to make it worth carrying a non-waterproof, not terribly ergonomic bino. At less than 12x, the advantages of IS are marginal, if you can hold a regular 8-10x bino reasonably steady. Eventually the hassle of batteries, and the milliseconds lost in the 'thought process' of getting on the bird, focussing and then pressing the IS button, made the whole thing too complex for me. Not great for getting onto a warbler flitting in a bush, for example. And all have fairly narrow FOV. Added to that, the Canon aftersales service was dismal at best, and the warranty is worthless.

Click to expand...

Good post Sancho. In your one paragraph you've reinforced my thoughts and concerns about these bins. I've gone through this once before and talked myself out of them. It's happening again. I'm sure your membership to the Canon Club is under review.

Though clearly in the heavy weight class, have you tried the Fuji/Nikon 14x40s? The magnification and 5 degrees of stabilization range are attractive to me.

Hi Kevin,
Basically, I think people either like Canon IS binoculars or don't.
I use them for observations needing good resolution and steady views, otherwise I use non stabilised binoculars.

I have used Canon IS binoculars for almost twenty years.

See my recent test of a secondhand Fujinon Techno-Stabi 14x40 binocular on the 'Others' thread.
Unless marine or helicopter use is intended I doubt that one will be more liked than a Canon IS binocular.

As with any binocular, try one first before buying.

Binastro said:

Hi Kevin,
Basically, I think people either like Canon IS binoculars or don't.
I use them for observations needing good resolution and steady views, otherwise I use non stabilised binoculars.

I have used Canon IS binoculars for almost twenty years.

See my recent test of a secondhand Fujinon Techno-Stabi 14x40 binocular on the 'Others' thread.
Unless marine or helicopter use is intended I doubt that one will be more liked than a Canon IS binocular.

As with any binocular, try one first before buying.

Click to expand...

I read your review/thread on the Fujis. Thank you for that comprehensive report, it is very useful to me. I think I'll be checking the Fujis off my list.

Speaking of lists, I'm mostly down to the 12x36 Canons now, based on my own preferences and Sancho's comment. The advantages of IS aren't fully realized in the lower power Canon bins, I think, and the higher power bins are a bit too much of a handful.

Since I don't know of any place where I can A-B-C these things I'm relegated to ordering online. I'm not one who's inclined to order multiple bins to compare with the intent of returning what I don't like. It seems unfair to the seller I think, so if I take the plunge it will most likely be the 12x36IIIs.

Any thoughts on the new 32mm series of Canon IS bins?
They clearly are charging a premium for them and yet have a reduced aperture. What is the carrot?

Methinks the Canon 32mm binoculars are probably an attempt to go upmarket.
I saw them on a Springwatch?? T.V. programme dangling unused from the presenter's neck. I think a present from Canon.
I haven't been tempted because of cost.
The Canon 10x30 IS II sample here has wonderful IS, as steady as a tripod if held steadily, so definitely IS works even at 10x and even a good 8x25 IS.

I would have thought that the 12x36 IS III might be the most useful for many folks.
I have the 12x36 Mk1 and Mk2.
I also don't buy multiple binoculars and return them.

All binoculars are some sort of compromise.

Great comments on this thread. I too have a history with the Canon IS line. I have an original 10X30 IS, an 18X50 IS and a 12X36 III IS. And some alpha compacts.

What I have found is that of the three, my favorite is the 12X36 III. Its is 12X and has an IS that is absolutely rock solid. It is not waterproof, but I use them in an environment that it it doesn't matter. I pack them in plastic to protect it. And I have a pair of alpha compacts that are waterproof when I need them.

The 10X30 Is are ok, but not as good. The 18X50 are very powerful, but they are heavy, and the view through the 12X is better for me. I also recommend that you try them for your personal fit and feel. My one complaint about them(and the 10X30) is the eyecups. They are the flexible rubber two position folding type. Without glasses you use them extended. With glasses you use them folded. In my case I use them with glasses and folded. But I need a little more extension, so each time I use them I have to extend the position of my glasses to a bit further away from my face than normal. Then it works, but it is very annoying. Why in the world can't they utilize eyecups that simply twist up and down? Several of my other bins have these and they are much easier to work with. I can set them so that they are set exactly where my eyes need them. But even so, I use them and enjoy them greatly. They have the finest stabilizer system I have ever seen. It is like they are on a tripod. The clarity and detail while hand holding is stunning.