Is IS for the birds? (1 Viewer)

[[email protected]]

With the half price offering when I bought them, and no local availability, I violated my "Try before you buy" policy. Fortunately, I was not disappointed. Folded down, the eye eyecups are perfect for my glasses. (Although I rarely use them without glasses, folding the inner halves down makes them quite agreeable without glasses.)

I had both for a few months before giving the 12x36 to relatives. I did find the new IS provided improved stabilization. It wasn't a big difference, but was obvious. The ergonomics, fit and feel, are also an improvement.

I like having them stay on after pushing the button more than expected. With the 12x36 the button was right under the end of a finger, so having to hold it was not an issue. The new location did take some getting used to.

Having excellent close focus is a big improvement over my 7x42s and 12x36s. It was surprising how often I was just a bit too close with those.

I had hoped to try the 14x32s at a trade show in the spring, but it was, of course, canceled. For me, I think the 12x versions provide the best balance between magnification and true field, but I have a 15x50 I use for astronomy and keep where I can see the back yard and bird feeders. The 12x32 stay on my desk, where I can see the bird houses and front yard, and go with my when I'm out and about.

Clear skies, Alan

"Folded down, the eye eyecups are perfect for my glasses. (Although I rarely use them without glasses, folding the inner halves down makes them quite agreeable without glasses.)"

I think I am going to need to do that when I get the Canon 14x32 ISs because I don't wear eyeglasses but I don't really understand how you do it. Could you post a picture of your binoculars with the eye cups folded down? Thanks!

 

[[email protected]]

Your right I. I have the FLIR Scout III Handheld Thermal Imaging Monocular and it is awesome for spotting stuff. It just reads the thermal image of the object. The Pulsar Thermal Scopes are similar to the FLIR.

https://www.amazon.com/FLIR-Scout-III-Handheld-Imager/dp/B07TWP5QBJ

The Thermal Imaging market is getting larger and Leica and Zeiss have decided to enter it with two new Thermal Imaging Monoculars. The Zeiss DTI 3/35($2999.99) and the Leica Calinox($3999.00). Competition for FLIR. They look nice but as you would expect pricey!

https://www.zeiss.com/consumer-products/us/hunting/thermal-imaging/dti-335.html
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/prod...527010_0000_000_dti_3_35_digital_thermal.html
https://us.leica-camera.com/World-of-Leica/Leica-News/Global/2020/NEW-Leica-Calonox
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1552333-REG/leica_50502_calonox_view.html

 

[AlanFrench]

"Folded down, the eye eyecups are perfect for my glasses. (Although I rarely use them without glasses, folding the inner halves down makes them quite agreeable without glasses.)"

I think I am going to need to do that when I get the Canon 14x32 ISs because I don't wear eyeglasses but I don't really understand how you do it. Could you post a picture of your binoculars with the eye cups folded down? Thanks!

Here's a photo with them half down. I only did it to see if it worked - pushing the face into the eyecups when they are fully up is torture.

I don't know if they will stay in this position during extended use, or whether it will work well for everyone.

Clear skies, Alan

 

[pbjosh]

Here's a photo with them half down. I only did it to see if it worked - pushing the face into the eyecups when they are fully up is torture.

I don't know if they will stay in this position during extended use, or whether it will work well for everyone.

Clear skies, Alan

I have the 12x32 III. Agree the eyecups are horrendous. I can barely/uncomfortably get more or less the entire FOV with the cups down and my glasses on, but I have to really mash the bins into my glasses and my glasses into my face. I greatly prefer not removing my glasses, but if I do, I can comfortably get the full FOV with the eyecups in this half up / half down position as you've demonstrated. With the eyecups all the way down I have to kind of hover the bins against my eyebrows. With the eyecups fully extended the bins are completely useless.

A question - I saw someone make a reference to the eye cups on these being replaceable? If it's possible to get a replacement set I might do so, then experiment with gluing down the eye cup on one side in order to make it a bit more permanent of a setting, or at least easier to get setup each time I remove them from the case.

 

[AlanFrench]

I suspect, with their short eye relief, many people wearing glasses can not see the entire field with the eyecups down. Fortunately, I can, but I'm sure I could not have with my older, larger glasses, which sat farther above my face.

I don't think the factory eye cups are easily replaced, unfortunately.

Clear skies, Alan

 

[[email protected]]

Here's a photo with them half down. I only did it to see if it worked - pushing the face into the eyecups when they are fully up is torture.

I don't know if they will stay in this position during extended use, or whether it will work well for everyone.

Clear skies, Alan

Thanks! I will try it when I get mine although it looks like it might be kind of hard on the eye cups. I am going to keep one or the other when I get the Fujinon 14x40 TSX and Canon 14x32 IS. Not both.

 

[AlanFrench]

Thanks! I will try it when I get mine although it looks like it might be kind of hard on the eye cups. I am going to keep one or the other when I get the Fujinon 14x40 TSX and Canon 14x32 IS. Not both.

You're quite welcome.

I hope you find one of them to your liking.

Clear skies, Alan

 

[[email protected]]

You're quite welcome.

I hope you find one of them to your liking.

Clear skies, Alan

So do I!

 

[[email protected]]

I received the Fujinon 14x40 TSX and there are a lot of nice improvements over the older TS. The eye cups are adjustable, and they are more comfortable and the binoculars are more rounded, so they are more comfortable to hold. They now have 6 degrees of stabilization instead of 5 degrees, so they will counter even bigger motion. The stabilization feels even more stable than the older model and there is no softening of the image or artifacts at all and the image seems sharper and clearer than the older model. CA is very low and much lower than the Canons in general. They have a lot of nice improvements and it will take a lot for the Canon 14x32 IS to beat them. I get the Canons tomorrow and I will compare them. The Fujinon has a big aperture advantage. The Fujinon 14x40 TSX virtually takes you into another world of detail that no normal binocular can match. I like my Swarovski NL 8x42 for it's WA view but it can't compete with the Fujinons when it comes to seeing detail.

 

[bockos]

I received the Fujinon 14x40 TSX and there are a lot of nice improvements over the older TS. The eye cups are adjustable, and they are more comfortable and the binoculars are more rounded, so they are more comfortable to hold. They now have 6 degrees of stabilization instead of 5 degrees, so they will counter even bigger motion. The stabilization feels even more stable than the older model and there is no softening of the image or artifacts at all and the image seems sharper and clearer than the older model. CA is very low and much lower than the Canons in general. They have a lot of nice improvements and it will take a lot for the Canon 14x32 IS to beat them. I get the Canons tomorrow and I will compare them. The Fujinon has a big aperture advantage.

for you this is very good binoculars

 

[AlanFrench]

I received the Fujinon 14x40 TSX and there are a lot of nice improvements over the older TS. The eye cups are adjustable, and they are more comfortable and the binoculars are more rounded, so they are more comfortable to hold. They now have 6 degrees of stabilization instead of 5 degrees, so they will counter even bigger motion. The stabilization feels even more stable than the older model and there is no softening of the image or artifacts at all and the image seems sharper and clearer than the older model. CA is very low and much lower than the Canons in general. They have a lot of nice improvements and it will take a lot for the Canon 14x32 IS to beat them. I get the Canons tomorrow and I will compare them. The Fujinon has a big aperture advantage.

They sound very nice, and I was encouraged to look at the specs, but the 60mm minimum IPD is a deal breaker for me, even more so for my wife. I also suspect the 13mm eye relief may not be enough, but the numbers have fooled me before.

Based on my experience with the Canon 12x36 IS II, the 5m close focus would be problematic for me.

Clear skies, Alan

 

[[email protected]]

They sound very nice, and I was encouraged to look at the specs, but the 60mm minimum IPD is a deal breaker for me, even more so for my wife. I also suspect the 13mm eye relief may not be enough, but the numbers have fooled me before.

Based on my experience with the Canon 12x36 IS II, the 5m close focus would be problematic for me.

Clear skies, Alan

I am worried about the eye cups on the Canon 14x32 IS. I believe I tried the Canon 10x32 IS and I returned it because the eye cups were so uncomfortable. We will see tomorrow.

 

[[email protected]]

I received the Canon 14x32 IS binoculars and compared them to my Fujinon 14x40 TSX and to make a long story short I am returning the Canons. The Canons eye cups are a JOKE! If you don't wear eyeglasses they are way too long for the eye relief and I have shallow eye sockets! To see the full FOV I had to fold them down and then you have to float the binoculars in front of your face to avoid black outs and get the full FOV. They need to make the eye cups about 1/2 as long to match the eye relief. Then there is the IS. On Normal IS the Canons IS is very poor with a lot of shaking still going on and even on Powered IS the Canon still has micro jitters that drive you crazy. The Fujinon 14x40 TSX is rock steady with no micro jitters and is a LOT more relaxing to observe with because it doesn't have those nervous jitters that the Canon does. The Fujinon is sharper on-axis also. It has an almost unreal clarity and transparency. Even though the Fujinon is heavier and has a smaller FOV I kept it and returned the Canon.

 

[AlanFrench]

I received the Canon 14x32 IS binoculars and compared them to my Fujinon 14x40 TSX and to make a long story short I am returning the Canons. The Canons eye cups are a JOKE! If you don't wear eyeglasses they are way too long for the eye relief and I have shallow eye sockets! To see the full FOV I had to fold them down and then you have to float the binoculars in front of your face to avoid black outs and get the full FOV. They need to make the eye cups about 1/2 as long to match the eye relief. Then there is the IS. On Normal IS the Canons IS is very poor with a lot of shaking still going on and even on Powered IS the Canon still has micro jitters that drive you crazy. The Fujinon 14x40 TSX is rock steady with no micro jitters and is a LOT more relaxing to observe with because it doesn't have those nervous jitters that the Canon does. The Fujinon is sharper on-axis also. It has an almost unreal clarity and transparency. Even though the Fujinon is heavier and has a smaller FOV I kept it and returned the Canon.

I certainly agree about the eyecups, but the IS on my 12x32s is solid and free of jitters. I thought it better than the Is on the 12x36 IIs, which I had been quite happy with. Perhaps it's the additional power, but it seems unlikely - if it's a general problem it should still be detectable at 12x.

At any rate, I am glad you are happy with the Fujinons. Enjoy!

Clear skies, Alan

 

[pbjosh]

Indeed, I have not complaints on the IS on my 12x32, though I've not used a Fuji for comparison. I'm keen to. I'm curious how long you used the Canon's for before returning?

I agree the eyecups are very poor.

Cheers!

 

[[email protected]]

Indeed, I have not complaints on the IS on my 12x32, though I've not used a Fuji for comparison. I'm keen to. I'm curious how long you used the Canon's for before returning?

I agree the eyecups are very poor.

Cheers!

You can't see the difference in the Canon IS and the Fujinon IS unless you side by side them. I always thought Canon IS was the best IS but I have never tried any Fujinons. If you read the reviews on Fujinons it is repeated and again by people that have both the Fujinon and the Canons that the Fujinon IS is superior. You don't realize the Canon IS has jitters until you see a truly stable IS image as produced by the Fujinon. The Canons do have more jitters as you go up in magnification because my Canon 8x20 IS with Shift Image IS is almost as good as the Fujinon IS but the Canon 14x32 IS has more jitters. I think it is because the Canon IS only stabilizes to 1 degree, whereas, the Fujinon IS stabilizes to 6 degrees so when you get to the higher magnifications it takes a higher degree of stabilization to counteract your movement and the Canon begins to reach its limit while the Fujinon easily stabilizes the image with its more effective IS system. It is interesting that the Canons eye cups are too long for the eye relief and it probably the only binocular I have encountered with that problem. Most binoculars' eye cups are too short for the eye relief so you have to float them in front of your eyes to see the full image. I can see why some people are cutting and trimming the Canons eye cups down to make them shorter. It took me one day to decide to return the Canon 14x32 IS. I don't see any easy solution for the too long eye cups and the Fujinon has superior IS, so I just kept it. Of the IS systems I have tried the Canon Variable Angle Prism is the worst and their Image Shift or Powered IS is better but the Fujinon has the best IS system. Below is excerpts from reviews on the Fujinon 14x40.

"I have owned the less expensive Canon Stabilized Binoculars and while they are helpful as compared to non-stabilized binoculars, they do not even come close to the stabilization range of the Fujinon Stabilization System."

"Better than my Canon for stabilization"

"I am one of them that if I am going to spend a lot of money on something I want to be sure I got the best bang for the buck. So I ordered the Techno-Stabi 14x40 AND a pair of Canon 15x50. No comparison.... The Techno is by far a much better stabilizer binoculars hands down! With the Techno you can even hear the gyro compensating and the image is incredibly clear and stable not that the Canon's are not clear but I purchased a pair of Stabilizers just for that reason, to keep everything from shaking and seeing what I want to see at a distance, simple. The focus knob is also off to the right and in a better position then the Canon's. You can tell the Techno are made much better however, a little heavy and not as sleek but wow what a value for the money. Even the case is "nuts" take a look at the lens caps!!!....... both the same price so today the Canon's are going back. One thing Amazon get these to me in 2 days! Nice going Amazon"

"INSANE Image Stabilization, I mean insane. You turn on the IS and things get VERY stable at full zoom (which is unheard of at 14x optical zoom). Canon IS isn’t nearly as good, trust me. I’m a Canon fan and these are better than any of the Canon IS Binocs. These correct shake from hand muscle tremor like no other."

"I’m very pleased with these and I think you’ll be too. I shopped Binocs for a long time and settled with these. I was going to buy the 18x50 Canon IS Binocs but I wasn’t impressed with the IS. More important that raw optical zoom and big lenses is IS, if the image you’re looking at isn’t properly stabilized, zoom and image quality don’t mean as much. Not to say the Canon’s aren’t good because they are, but these are honestly better."

"I purchased these a couple/three weeks ago and couldn't be happier with them. The image stabilization is great the best I have ever experienced and I own the Canon 10x42 which are also wonderful. But these smoke them in the corrected vibration range which is a little under 1% with the Canons and 5% with the Fujinon."

"Ok. Maybe not the lightest bins, but certainly the best in image stabilization. Far ahead from Canon."

"This is Truly a Remarkable binocular. The clarity & stabilization are just fabulous. I'm saying this as a current owner of a Canon 12x36 IS II which also offer an excellent view but in my experience this product is worthy of much higher marks."

"Magnification is about perfect and the stabilization is significantly better than my Canons."

 

[AlanFrench]

Now I'm confused.

First you wrote "Then there is the IS. On Normal IS the Canons IS is very poor with a lot of shaking still going on and even on Powered IS the Canon still has micro jitters that drive you crazy. The Fujinon 14x40 TSX is rock steady with no micro jitters and is a LOT more relaxing to observe with because it doesn't have those nervous jitters that the Canon does."

It sounds like a pretty large, obvious difference.

Now you write "You can't see the difference in the Canon IS and the Fujinon IS unless you side by side them."

Clear skies, Alan

 

[pbjosh]

As well, the deluge of other peoples' opinions doesn't really answer questions. I'm still curious how long your had the 14x32 Canons?

I don't mean to offend but I have the impression you might have only had them for a day or two at most.

An analog is the Monarch HG 8x30 which you had for an afternoon or a day, didn't like the eyecups / eye relief, so returned. But then you spent a year or two posting authoritatively about them when you had barely used them, and suggesting they were little or no better than the M7. The vast majority of opinions run counter to your assertion.

I really don't mean this as an attack, so I apologize in advance if I manage to offend. I just think your reviews and opinions would carry more weight if you spent more time with the bins and posted about your longer term impressions.

Cheers!

 

[Hermann]

Now I'm confused.
First you wrote "Then there is the IS. On Normal IS the Canons IS is very poor with a lot of shaking still going on and even on Powered IS the Canon still has micro jitters that drive you crazy. The Fujinon 14x40 TSX is rock steady with no micro jitters and is a LOT more relaxing to observe with because it doesn't have those nervous jitters that the Canon does."
It sounds like a pretty large, obvious difference.
Now you write "You can't see the difference in the Canon IS and the Fujinon IS unless you side by side them."

Alan: You're not confused.

Definitely not.

Hermann

 

[[email protected]]

As well, the deluge of other peoples' opinions doesn't really answer questions. I'm still curious how long your had the 14x32 Canons?

I don't mean to offend but I have the impression you might have only had them for a day or two at most.

An analog is the Monarch HG 8x30 which you had for an afternoon or a day, didn't like the eyecups / eye relief, so returned. But then you spent a year or two posting authoritatively about them when you had barely used them, and suggesting they were little or no better than the M7. The vast majority of opinions run counter to your assertion.

I really don't mean this as an attack, so I apologize in advance if I manage to offend. I just think your reviews and opinions would carry more weight if you spent more time with the bins and posted about your longer term impressions.

Cheers!

I only had the Canon 14x32 IS for a day. That is all it takes to see that the eye cups are too long for the eye relief and the IS isn't as effective as the Fujinon 14x40 TSX. I don't see any reason to keep a binocular when it doesn't work at for me. I have had the Nikon HG 8x30 and the Nikon M7 several times and I have compared them many times to make those judgements.