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="BruceH" data-source="post: 3497135" data-attributes="member: 106398">Chuck .... One of the beauties of being a binocular enthusiast is that you can have a favorite (such as a Swaro EL SV for you) yet still enjoy using other models.  As you would never give up you Swaro for the Canon, I would not give up the Zeiss SF, but I still am glad to own the Canon and get a kick out of using it.  One of the best ways I know of to demonstrate the shake reduction is to take it out on a dark clear night and look at the stars.  The stars will show bounce or jitter with either a conventional binocular or the Canon with the IS turned off.  Turning the IS on settles the view and the jitters go away with the stars becoming near rock solid for me.  The same shake is there looking at detail in the daytime but it just is not as obvious with all the visual clutter.As a side note, viewing the stars is also a good way to see how much shake one really has.  I have done this with people who thought they had almost no shake with say a 10X and were surprised to see so much movement of the stars.  It is also an excellent way to judge the difference in shake between say a 6X and a 10X.  Do not rush to judgment.  Give yourself several days to get used to the Canon since it is quite different in feel and mechanics.  The bottom is thick and flat so that gives it a different feel in the hands.  As mentioned previously, the body does not bend so that may seem strange at first.  Also adjusting the IPD is quite different since just the eye pieces move rather than the whole body.  That may at first appear awkward but it becomes natural after doing it a few times.  The relationship of the alignment of the eye piece to the objective lens varies because the eye piece moves separately as compared to a conventional binocular.  The end result is that a person with a more narrow IPD setting should get more of a Porro effect compared to someone like me with a wide IPD (70mm) which is the same as the objective lens spacing.  <a href="http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=599539&d=1474735139" target="_blank">http://www.birdforum.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=599539&d=1474735139</a>Batteries:  Use of AA alkaline batteries is fine for your evaluation but I would not recommend them long term for the Canon or any other valuable electronic gear. The reason is they have a greater tendency to leak as compared to other types.  Two popular types are the Energizer non-rechargeable lithium AA (L91) which I am currently using and the Eneloop NiMH rechargeable AA batteries.  The advantage of the non-rechargeable Energizer is a large capacity, long shelf life due to a very low self-discharge rate, less likely to leak, and excellent cold weather performance.  The disadvantage is cost.  It also has a higher beginning voltage of just above 1.7 volts even though the specs show a nominal voltage of 1.5 volts.  I asked Canon what was the max allowable voltage and was told they did not have that information available but any AA should be fine. I like the idea of the low-self discharge and high capacity since I do not use the Canon on a regular basis, yet want it to be ready to go when I grab it.  <a href="http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/l91.pdf" target="_blank">http://data.energizer.com/PDFs/l91.pdf</a>I am looking forward to reading how the Canon works out for you.</blockquote>

Verification