Nikon 12x25 Stabilised (1 Viewer)

[PatR]

Have a look at

Have a look at the new Fujinons 16x40 and 20x40. About 30% heavier than the 12x36 IS III but of course much higher magnification.

New Fujinon TS-L 16x40 and TS-L 20x40 Image Stabilised Binoculars

Fijifilm has just announced two higher magnification x40 IS binoculars, per PetaPixel at: Fujifilm's New Binoculars Have Image Stabilized 16x and 20x Magnification The press release can be found at: Fujifilm launches FUJINON BINOCULAR TECHNO-STABI TS-L 1640 / FUJINON BINOCULAR TECHNO-STABI...

www.birdforum.net

Their TSX-1440 is great but incredibly heavy, I wonder how the optical quality of the TS-L compares.

The Sig-Sauer Zulu6 HDX are very good (I have the 20x42) and quite light.

Thank you, I have seen a couple of reviews on the Fujinon's and they do look lovely. I haven't seen any listed in the UK but when they are available I shall have a close look.

I recently bought the Kite 18x56 but they were so far out of collimation that I had to return them. Apart from that they were rather nice, well built and the electronics came with a 5 year warranty.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Hope you have a stahlhelm handy Hermann! Be warned of incoming..............

I had a good look through some Canon 12x36 iii's yesterday and they are a stunningly good pair of bino's. Not as compact as the Nikon's, but the tactile feel was so much nicer, the optics far superior and the build quality streets ahead. I didn't feel or notice any shudders or jumps with the stabilisation system, unlike the Nikon's.

I was very impressed with them but the magnification difference between them and my wife's 10x30 iii, whilst obviously there, was not enough for me to buy them. But they really are good.

The trouble with the Canon 10x30 IS II and the 12x36 IS III is they have low transmission especially for a porro and poor contrast giving them a dull lifeless view especially compared to a regular binocular. I compared the Nikon 10x25 S to the Canon 10x30 IS II back to back and the Nikon had much better contrast and pop, although the Canon had a slightly bigger FOV. As Herman says above, the Canon 8x20 IS is very good optically and is actually better than either the Canon 10x30 IS II or Canon 12x36 IS III when it comes to contrast and the IS system being the newer lens shift system performs better also.

Canon 10x30 IS II - binoculars review - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

Canon 12x36 IS III - binoculars review - AllBinos.com

The best binocular tests on the net. The comprehensive database of binoculars with their parameters and users opinions. Interesting articles and comparisons.

www.allbinos.com

 

[Dennis Mau]

Thank you, I have seen a couple of reviews on the Fujinon's and they do look lovely. I haven't seen any listed in the UK but when they are available I shall have a close look.

I recently bought the Kite 18x56 but they were so far out of collimation that I had to return them. Apart from that they were rather nice, well built and the electronics came with a 5 year warranty.

All the Fujinon's IS, Kite IS and Sig Sauer IS are made by Kamakura except for the TSX-1440 and as fazalmajid says above they are very heavy and big. All the Kamakura IS binoculars are pretty similar, and I have tried most of them and for an IS binocular I prefer the Canon's because their optics are better IMO. The Sig Sauer HDX 16x42 and HDX 20x42 had a lot of weird glare that I didn't care for. These are reviews of the Sig Sauer Zulu 6 HDX 16x42 on Amazon.com.

Amazon.com

"Regarding the performance of the product, and as some other user such as AdAstra has already stated, it is stated that the optical quality of the binocular and its low level of chromatic aberrations are tarnished by a notable predisposition to flare and loss of contrast as soon as the unit is oriented slightly against the light and the vision is moved vertically upwards. This defect is increased if the 2 stabilization modes are used. Likewise, in a nighttime use with lights in the field of view, for example in a nighttime use in a cityscape with light sources in the observed area, continuous, annoying ring-shaped flashes occur around each light source at the edges of the viewing area."

"Was really excited about these, but regretfully returning them. Chromatic aberration is well controlled and sharpness is good, but even normal daytime sun is enough to provoke terrible veiling flare and huge contrast loss, even when almost fully perpendicular to the sun. Even the color balance between the sunward and shadeward side changes noticeably. The stabilizer appears to make the flare even worse, it resulted in misty flare ghosts that I could toggle on and off repeatedly. Also, the eyepiece lens caps are incredibly loose, such a cheap afterthought, and the objective lenses are not well shielded and come with no cover. The strap is nice and even has quick-releases, but the final attachment to the binoculars with cheap split rings is incredibly lazy design."

 

[Hermann]

The trouble with the Canon 10x30 IS II and the 12x36 IS III is they have low transmission especially for a porro and poor contrast giving them a dull lifeless view especially compared to a regular binocular. I compared the Nikon 10x25 S to the Canon 10x30 IS II back to back and the Nikon had much better contrast and pop, although the Canon had a slightly bigger FOV. As Herman says above, the Canon 8x20 IS is very good optically and is actually better than either the Canon 10x30 IS II or Canon 12x36 IS III when it comes to contrast and the IS system being the newer lens shift system performs better also.

Look Dennis, as soon as you start quoting Allbinos I'm out. That said, I don't agree with your assessment that the 10x30 and the 12x36 have a "dull lifeless view". Any comparison to a "regular" binocular makes no sense at all. Compare what you see through a 10x40 MHG and the Canon 10x30 with the stabiliser on, handheld of course, and check how much detail you get. But you know all this.

Hermann

 

[Montereyman]

I much prefer to read the dozens of reviews posted by customers on the BH Photo website as I get a greater range of perspectives. I also like that when I buy something that does not meet my expectations this company makes it very easy to do returns.

Even my 10x25 binoculars and my 12x50 ones work for me hand held. My wife will only use 8x binoculars and that works for her. The greater the magnification the more visible are shortcomings and at 12x I need the $1000 ones. At 8x a $500 binocular is good enough.

What I find interesting is that more companies are providing image stabilization and one company Sig Sauer has invested resources to minimize power drain on the single AA battery that lasts a year (I bought a paid last August and still using the same AA battery.

 

[Hermann]

What I find interesting is that more companies are providing image stabilization and one company Sig Sauer has invested resources to minimize power drain on the single AA battery that lasts a year (I bought a paid last August and still using the same AA battery.

From what I know most of the new stabilized binoculars on the market are made by Kamakura. That includes the Kites and the Sig Sauers and several others. What happens is that a company asks Kamakura to make a number of binoculars to a certain specification.

The other companies that make stabilized binoculars are (obviously) Canon, Nikon and Zeiss (the good old 20x60S). I think Fujinon made some stabilized binoculars as well that used a gyro for stabilization. Tried one a few years ago, and the whirring sound it made got on my nerves rather quickly. The two new Fujinons look like they're made by Kamakura as well. There are also some somewhat obscure Russian stabilized binoculars around. I had a chance to try one years ago. It didn't work properly.

On the subject of battery consumption: With my Canon 10x42 L IS the rechargeables (Eneloops AA) last several months with moderate use. I usually switch them out after two or three months, before they're empty. With the Canon 8x20 IS one CR123 battery lasts about half a year with my use. Or more.

Hermann

 

[Isthatascratch?]

From what I know most of the new stabilized binoculars on the market are made by Kamakura. That includes the Kites and the Sig Sauers and several others. What happens is that a company asks Kamakura to make a number of binoculars to a certain specification.

The other companies that make stabilized binoculars are (obviously) Canon, Nikon and Zeiss (the good old 20x60S). I think Fujinon made some stabilized binoculars as well that used a gyro for stabilization. Tried one a few years ago, and the whirring sound it made got on my nerves rather quickly. The two new Fujinons look like they're made by Kamakura as well. There are also some somewhat obscure Russian stabilized binoculars around. I had a chance to try one years ago. It didn't work properly.

On the subject of battery consumption: With my Canon 10x42 L IS the rechargeables (Eneloops AA) last several months with moderate use. I usually switch them out after two or three months, before they're empty. With the Canon 8x20 IS one CR123 battery lasts about half a year with my use. Or more.

Hermann

My Swarovski 12x50EL’s use a large 12V car battery for stabilisation (if I tie them to it!)

 

[Hermann]

Have a look at the new Fujinons 16x40 and 20x40. About 30% heavier than the 12x36 IS III but of course much higher magnification.

Please post about the Fujinons should you happen to have a chance to try them out somewhere. The 16x40 in particular looks quite interesting.

Hermann

 

[Hermann]

My Swarovski 12x50EL’s use a large 12V car battery for stabilisation (if I tie them to it!)

Get yourself a few of those batteries. You may be able to build a tripod for your 12x50s with them ...

Hermann

 

[tenex]

12x25, 20x40... these are 2mm exit pupils. What is the market for something like that? Even I draw the line somewhere around 3mm for a binocular.

 

[Isthatascratch?]

Get yourself a few of those batteries. You may be able to build a tripod for your 12x50s with them ...

Hermann

Genius!

 

[Jinac]

12x25, 20x40... these are 2mm exit pupils. What is the market for something like that? Even I draw the line somewhere around 3mm for a binocular.

Fujinon 16x28 has 1,75mm exit pupil but if it's a sunny day in open ground it's very usable but indeed utilisations are very restreints.
For raptors, moon and water birds it's probably one top notch companion.

But i think it's a magnification to sell because of dreams that create...

 

[Dennis Mau]

Look Dennis, as soon as you start quoting Allbinos I'm out. That said, I don't agree with your assessment that the 10x30 and the 12x36 have a "dull lifeless view". Any comparison to a "regular" binocular makes no sense at all. Compare what you see through a 10x40 MHG and the Canon 10x30 with the stabiliser on, handheld of course, and check how much detail you get. But you know all this.

Hermann

Nah, Allbinos is very accurate. Regardless of what anybody says, they know what they are talking about. Why can't you compare an IS binocular to a regular binocular? The Canon 10x42 IS-L is as good optically as almost any regular binocular, outside of maybe the alphas. Allbinos is correct on the Canon 10x30 IS II and Canon 12x36 IS III. They have a dull, lifeless view because of their extremely poor 88% transmission, which is sickening for a porro. C'mon, if Swarovski can give the Habicht porro 96% transmission, why can't Canon do the same. They are cheeping out on their coatings. The extremely high transmission of the Habicht is what gives it the sparkling, bright view everybody likes so much.

No doubt you can see more detail with IS, but the view of the bird isn't as nice as with a normal 8x42 because of less contrast and brightness. One time I was looking at a Robin with my HG 8x42's, and I was taken aback by the beauty of such a common bird, but then I looked at him with my Canon 10x30 IS-II's and I thought what happened? The Robin was steady, but I couldn't see the contrasting colors and bright red breast on the bird's under belly that made him so beautiful through the HG 8x42's. What you gain in detail with an IS binocular, you lose in the quality of the view.

 

[Dennis Mau]

Please post about the Fujinons should you happen to have a chance to try them out somewhere. The 16x40 in particular looks quite interesting.

Hermann

The Fujinon's 16x40 IS and Sig Sauer HDX 16x42 IS are all about the same because they are both made by Kamakura. Kamakura makes a pretty good IS system, but they are a little behind Canon when it comes to optics. The Sig Sauer HDX 16x42 has some weird glare problems. Avoid them. From Amazon.com reviews.

Amazon.com
"Regarding the performance of the product, and as some other user such as AdAstra has already stated, it is stated that the optical quality of the binocular and its low level of chromatic aberrations are tarnished by a notable predisposition to flare and loss of contrast as soon as the unit is oriented slightly against the light and the vision is moved vertically upwards. This defect is increased if the 2 stabilization modes are used. Likewise, in a nighttime use with lights in the field of view, for example in a nighttime use in a cityscape with light sources in the observed area, continuous, annoying ring-shaped flashes occur around each light source at the edges of the viewing area."

"Was really excited about these, but regretfully returning them. Chromatic aberration is well controlled and sharpness is good, but even normal daytime sun is enough to provoke terrible veiling flare and huge contrast loss, even when almost fully perpendicular to the sun. Even the color balance between the sunward and shadeward side changes noticeably. The stabilizer appears to make the flare even worse, it resulted in misty flare ghosts that I could toggle on and off repeatedly. Also, the eyepiece lens caps are incredibly loose, such a cheap afterthought, and the objective lenses are not well shielded and come with no cover. The strap is nice and even has quick-releases, but the final attachment to the binoculars with cheap split rings is incredibly lazy design."

 

[Dennis Mau]

12x25, 20x40... these are 2mm exit pupils. What is the market for something like that? Even I draw the line somewhere around 3mm for a binocular.

An IS binocular with a small 2mm EP actually works pretty good in the daytime because the IS system helps keep the EP centered over your retina. They are not near as finicky as say a UV 8x20. The Canon 10x20 IS is quite good in the daytime and is not as finicky as you think it would be with a 2mm EP.

 

[gweller]

An IS binocular with a small 2mm EP actually works pretty good in the daytime because the IS system helps keep the EP centered over your retina. They are not near as finicky as say a UV 8x20. The Canon 10x20 IS is quite good in the daytime and is not as finicky as you think it would be with a 2mm EP.

Dennis, I think this is incorrect. The only thing the IS does is to damp down vibration and shake. When you think about it, how can the IS alter the position of the exit EP relative to your pupil???