• 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.
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia

Just received a 10x42L (1 Viewer)

F88

Well-known member
F88 wrote:
Perhaps you had a brief encounter and your preconceived ideas got in the way?“

Hahaha - good one 😁
I have actually a lot of experience with Canon IS binoculars in general (I own seven different models and have written a number of reviews) and with the 10x42 IS WP in particular (which I own since 2017), so please stop making assumptions that are far from the truth.
You have your opinion about the ergonomics of the Canon, and I have mine.
Okay?
Calm down snowflake. I must admit that I haven't read any of your reviews and honestly I'm not looking out for them.
I'm completely okay with you not being able to hold your Canon binoculars (must be tough when you have seven of them). I however will happily continue to use mine, also happy with different opinions.
 

4 The Birds1

Active member
F88 - you've obviously got it utterly wrong with your speculation about Canip's lack of experience.

I would have thought that your follow up post might have contained an apology or acknowledgement to that effect. Failing that, you could have said no more. What you have chosen to post instead, seems really quite uncalled for.

As far as the Canon's are concerned : Optics / detail recognition are brilliant. Ergonomics are clearly not brilliant. And if I take off my glasses, then the eyecups are uncomfortable for me too. (Disclosure: I have owned my pair longer than you, and they are my go-to bins if I want to see stuff)
 

etudiant

Registered User
Supporter
I really don't think you have any experience with this binocular. Perhaps you had a brief encounter and your preconceived ideas got in the way?
Granted the design is different- I'd imagine that its form was a necessity to fit in the electronics and so on. Either way my experience does not mirror yours and I can hold them very comfortably and I don't even find them particularly ugly either.

I must say that I had been apprehensive for quite a while before my purchase with somewhat similar expressions to your own along with the extra complication of design and electronics.

Bottom line for me is that I believe the view they provide excels and considering I can hold and view through them as comfortably and easily as a standard binocular.

I can understand why seemingly so few sing praise of the Canon and equally that those in the know do.
For me, I'm just glad I got over any misconceptions I had regarding ergonomics or blasphemous designs both internal and external.
After all, I look through them not at them but even then I'm happy and need not imagine.
Hi F88
Imho your assumptions were off base and caused you to get off on the wrong foot.
Canip has reviewed Canon glasses on other sites and is a man whose opinions I very much respect.
He definitely has the experience and I think he is correct that aspects of the 10x42 ISL ergonomics are unappealing.
The massive eye cups for example are not easy to fit into some physiognomies, the IS switch is poorly located and the glass is indeed a brick.
That said, Henry Link posted a cutaway of the glass some years back which showed that the lenses involved dictated the eye cup size and that there was no excess space left anywhere in the package. So it is a functional design, albeit not graceful.
That does not alter the reality that this is the most capable birding glass in the world right now and has been so since its introduction in the early years of the century.
 

F88

Well-known member
Hi etudient,

Fair comment and I agree that I was some what dismissive towards canip. However, I did find his approach leant towards an amount of arrogance and rudeness so I treated him in return.

Once again I'll reiterate that I disagree about the ergonomics, IS button placement and also not bothered by the eye cups. It seems that you, and to a greater extent canip, are aggravated by the fact that I don't take or have an issue with the Canons ergonomics.
I appreciate your ability to make comment politely without the need to chastise me or get upset.

We can agree on the view.
 

F88

Well-known member
F88 - you've obviously got it utterly wrong with your speculation about Canip's lack of experience.

I would have thought that your follow up post might have contained an apology or acknowledgement to that effect. Failing that, you could have said no more. What you have chosen to post instead, seems really quite uncalled for.

As far as the Canon's are concerned : Optics / detail recognition are brilliant. Ergonomics are clearly not brilliant. And if I take off my glasses, then the eyecups are uncomfortable for me too. (Disclosure: I have owned my pair longer than you, and they are my go-to bins if I want to see stuff)
No apology required or given. If that's the case then perhaps it should be going two ways?
I'm actually surprised by how fickle some of the fraternity are.

Another partial agreement.
 

F88

Well-known member
Without anyone else getting upset, I think it's fair to say that most who have experience with the Canon agree that its optics and combined IS make it optically the best thing around.
Most would also agree that they are displeased with the ergonomics- form, eye cups and so on.

I may well be in the minority of those who easily adapted to the ergonomics and handling.
 

Canip

Well-known member
Hmm ... is the entire hype in this thread perhaps due to F88 utterly misunderstanding my first post (perhaps because I was not very clear, since my communication capabilities may be somewhat under-developed)?
All I intended to say, in perhaps a bit sibyllinic terms, was that if Canon were to put their 10x42 into a body that had the ergonomics of an NL, Canon might dominate the 10x42 market and Zeiss, Leica, Swarovski and Nikon could all pack it in. Because, as F88 states in his last post, „its optics and combined IS make it optically the best thing around.“ No disagreement from my side on this.
Canip
 

pbjosh

missing the neotropics
Switzerland
Agree completely with Canip. If the 10x42 received a modernization and achieved the ergonomics of Canon's top telephoto lenses, it would kill the market. It may be that the now long-in-the-tooth design uses every inch of the space inside the bulky body, but that does NOT mean that a modern design cannot greatly improve on the ergonomics (and likely the stabilization and other things along the way).

Nikon, Sony, and Canon are all capable of producing a modern, lighter weight, more ergonomic, waterproof alpha binocular. I would LOVE to see one of them do it.

I agree that we can argue about the differences between the NL, NV, and SF all day long, but none of them has the most important modern advancement. It's like discussing which solid axle vehicle provides the best ride 20-30 years after the invention of independent suspension.
 

F88

Well-known member
Canip,

You made your point quite clearly and there was no misunderstanding on my part. It was the delivery that I responded to.

Moving forward, I have no interest in creating further conflict.

I have expressed that I'm handling the ergonomics just fine, and aware that I'm likely in the minority.
The Canon has a look and feel which draws similarities to a DSLR camera somewhat from my perspective.
However you look at the Canon, is a different animal of sorts by virtue of capability and of course form- which requires it to be handled differently.

So it seems many are fond of this Canon and although it shouldn't have surprised me how good it is, it really has.
Most even willing to put up with the handling of which they akin to a brick.

I would agree with you all that if Canon or any other company manufactured a binocular with the view of the 10x42L in a more familiar form with possibly less weight that it would be a hit.

As crazy as I may be, I'm happy to wield my heavy electronic brick for the time being and that I got over my prejudice to get there.
 

SUPPRESSOR

Well-known member
England
As I wrote somewhere some time ago, Swarovski / Zeiss / Leica / Nikon all should send a case of champagne every year to Canon with a letter, thanking Canon for putting their excellent optics and IS mechanism into an ugly brick-shape body the ergonomics of which I consider appalling, with eyecups that are impossible for people with narrow IPD like me.

Just imagine Canon coming out with a bino that combines the wonderful optics and IS of the 10x42 L with the ergonomic body of an NL ....
I have had a pair of the 10x42L and your summing up of them is about right.
Pete.
 

edwincjones

Well-known member
My experience is with the Canon 12x36 1 and the Fujinon TS-X 14x40.
The optics may be a little sub alpha, the ergonomics are poor,
but they are FUN FUN FUN and the IS allows higher mag and more detail.
 
Last edited:

Oscar56

Well-known member
Great review by Kimmo. It appears the review was conducted in 2006. Has Canon made any changes to this model since then? Specifically the ER and eye cups.
 

kabsetz

Well-known member
ER and eyecups have not been changed. Coatings have improved, and an undersized internal field stop has been corrected so that the true aperture now is pretty close to 42 mm whereas in early units it was truncated to about 39 mm.

IS algorithms have probably been improved over the years also, but this is harder to know for sure. In any case, current units tend to have better functioning IS than the very early ones.
 

Dave3006

Member
United States
The purpose of binoculars is to see things clearly at a distance. The Canon 10x42 IS do this better than any other 10x42 in the world. Hands down, no contest. Not even close. You can whine about the buttons and how your delicate hands don’t like to hold them. Don’t be a snowflake. They work. Nothing can compete.

Man. People love to complain about the dumbest things. 300 years ago, the Canon IS binoculars would have been nothing short of a miracle. Today people cry that their delicate fingers don’t like them.
 

Canip

Well-known member
Exactly right!
People complain about everything.
Why can‘t they just see the positive side of things, instead of criticizing things they don‘t like?
That would make discussions in forums like this one much shorter, much more efficient.
 
Last edited:
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia
ZEISS. Discover the fascinating world of birds, and win a birding trip to Columbia

Users who are viewing this thread

Top