-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Humm next on the list (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Briggz
- Start date
Canon IS 8x20. Very handy little bino for walks. I use mine a lot.
Canon 8x20 IS: Initial impression
First impression: Canon 8x20 IS When I hear “8x20” in connection with binoculars, I tend to think of pocket devices such as Trinovid 8x20, Ultravid 8x20 or Monovid 8x20. There has been, and still is, much talk about the benefits of such pocket glasses. Are they "full" binoculars, or are they...
www.birdforum.net
Very thanks.
Hi,
if you want to go high mag, I would have a look at the 15x50. It usually gets more love by those who have tried them all than the 18x50... i.e,
garyseronik.com
The 18x50 is hampered a bit by the tiny true field and exit pupils and the fact that the stabilization gets to its limits at that magnification....
Your 12x36 has 5 deg true field and a 3mm exit pupil, the 15x50 has 4.5 deg and a 3.3mm exit pupil and the 18x50 has a 3.7 deg field and a 2.8mm exit pupil which comes uncomfortably close to the 2.5mm I do not like for lack of brightness and more importantly, difficult eye positioning - at least in binoculars... with a scope I am usually less in a hurry, so take the time to get the one eye correctly placed...
The new 14x32 with a 2.3mm exit pupil is well beyond the 2.5mm limit and the field is true field is a tad narrower at slightly less magnification at 4.3 deg at 14x. Also seems to be not too great at suppressing CA and are not waterproof... on the plus side the minimum focus is a lot closer at 2m vs 5m (although you might need to close one eye at that range) and the more neutral colors on the 14x...
Sure, 780g vs 1200 for the 15x50 is nice, but I really don't like my pair of Conquest pocket 10x25 a lot for their tricky eye placement - part of which might be caused by the finicky double hinge though...
Here is a very good comparison of 14x32 vs 15x50 in a thread about those two...
www.birdforum.net
Joachim, who would probably lug around the 15x50 - if he could be convinced to leave the scope at home...
if you want to go high mag, I would have a look at the 15x50. It usually gets more love by those who have tried them all than the 18x50... i.e,
Review: Canon’s Image-Stabilized Binoculars - Gary Seronik
Over the years I’ve tested virtually every affordable image-stabilized binocular on the market for reviews appearing in Sky & Telescope magazine. Canon is the clear leader where astronomy is concerned. The company offers several models, each with something to interest the backyard stargazer...
garyseronik.com
The 18x50 is hampered a bit by the tiny true field and exit pupils and the fact that the stabilization gets to its limits at that magnification....
Your 12x36 has 5 deg true field and a 3mm exit pupil, the 15x50 has 4.5 deg and a 3.3mm exit pupil and the 18x50 has a 3.7 deg field and a 2.8mm exit pupil which comes uncomfortably close to the 2.5mm I do not like for lack of brightness and more importantly, difficult eye positioning - at least in binoculars... with a scope I am usually less in a hurry, so take the time to get the one eye correctly placed...
The new 14x32 with a 2.3mm exit pupil is well beyond the 2.5mm limit and the field is true field is a tad narrower at slightly less magnification at 4.3 deg at 14x. Also seems to be not too great at suppressing CA and are not waterproof... on the plus side the minimum focus is a lot closer at 2m vs 5m (although you might need to close one eye at that range) and the more neutral colors on the 14x...
Sure, 780g vs 1200 for the 15x50 is nice, but I really don't like my pair of Conquest pocket 10x25 a lot for their tricky eye placement - part of which might be caused by the finicky double hinge though...
Here is a very good comparison of 14x32 vs 15x50 in a thread about those two...
Canon's new 14x32 IS
I haven‘t, but I did test the 12x32 and found its brightness okay in broad daylight but unsatisfactory under more demanding lighting situations (dawn, dusk, woods with thick foilage, etc). Even under overcast skies, the brightness wasn‘t impressive at all. Sharpness and contrast are fine in the...
www.birdforum.net
Joachim, who would probably lug around the 15x50 - if he could be convinced to leave the scope at home...
Last edited:
