BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Theo98" data-source="post: 3496015" data-attributes="member: 132099">Dennis,We both agree on the exemplary merits of the 10x42L. I'm keeping mine, but stated that I'm Not getting rid of the 10x50 SV. To "my eyes" set on a tripod and compared to the non-stabilized Canon, the 10x50 is sharper, has a noticeable wider AFOV, presents an easier eye placement, is bright and sharp all the way to the edges, presents an instant easy-on-the-eyes very immersive view, doesn't tick my RB funny bone and will last through the next 5+ generations of family! I've not yet encountered glare issues that were bothersome, but maybe one day I will. My go-to resolution test are 1\2" letters\numbers on a licenses plate 100m away. BTW, mine has a smooth and even focuser to boot at a nice 1.5 turns, perfect speed without overshooting my subject!You are right, as hand held 10X can't touch the Cannons IS for details of sharpness and resolution. However, I'm not normally glassing with a tri-pod, thus the Canon 10x42L IS's have a prominent place in my bino harem! No use trying to convince me...I'm there! Possibly, can it be that we "see" a little differently...nah, we're both Homo Sapiens!!! :eek!:  :king:Merry Christmas to You & Yours,Ted</blockquote>