Premium (Alpha) vs Image stabilized (1 Viewer)

[exup]

I fully agree!

But a mounted traditional bino is also a step up in terms of image stability. None of my 10 IS binoculars (7 Canon, 1 Fujinon, 1 Kenko, 1 Vixen) matches the image stability of any of my non-IS binos mounted on tripod (not even the optically fabulous 10x42 L which, I said it before, is unfortunately a pain to use for somebody with smallish hands and an IPD of 61 mm). And I generally still prefer a mounted large bino over a spotting scope for most uses.

Canip

Yes.

Do you mount x8 and x10 non-IS bins on a tripod?

 

[Canip]

Yes (and have been doing so for decades, even when I was in the army), depending on what I am observing. Funny learning: people joining me usually can‘t believe how much mounting enhances the observation experience.

 

[Hermann]

But a mounted traditional bino is also a step up in terms of image stability.

Sure, provided the tripod is up to the task, ie big and heavy enough. Not the sort of tripod you'd carry on a long hike.

None of my 10 IS binoculars (7 Canon, 1 Fujinon, 1 Kenko, 1 Vixen) matches the image stability of any of my non-IS binos mounted on tripod (not even the optically fabulous 10x42 L which, I said it before, is unfortunately a pain to use for somebody with smallish hands and an IPD of 61 mm).

Smallish hands and an IPD of 61mm? That surely makes using the 10x42 very difficult indeed, especially the IPD.

And I generally still prefer a mounted large bino over a spotting scope for most uses.

Agreed. However, I almost always need more magnification, so a large bino doesn't work for me. Even a 20x80 wouldn't work. I tried ...

Hermann

 

[Canip]

Sure, provided the tripod is up to the task, ie big and heavy enough. Not the sort of tripod you'd carry on a long hike.

Wrong. A camera tripod works fine with an 8x30 or 10x42, and I carry that for hours if needed.

 

[Hermann]

Wrong. A camera tripod works fine with an 8x30 or 10x42, and I carry that for hours if needed.

Ok. My mistake, I was immediately thinking of big, high-power binoculars.

Hermann

 

[exup]

Yes (and have been doing so for decades, even when I was in the army), depending on what I am observing. Funny learning: people joining me usually can‘t believe how much mounting enhances the observation experience.

Don't think you will have many disagreeing with you in terms of viewing on a tripod ....... a mounted bin is always going to be better.

However, personally, I don't want the hassle of tripod mounting a x8 or x10 bin.
A large x15+ mag yes, but even then it is too much of a chore if it needs to be relocated to another position.

My 25x70 and 100mm scope stay permanently on tripods aiming out of a window, but more often than not, I grab an IS bin instead.

As a matter of interest Canip, your 10 IS bins, what is your use case for them, if you are happy to carry a tripod for hours?

 

[MiddleRiver]

I predict as technology advances, the minutarization of servos/motors/electronics will improve. My one complaint about current photographic lenses is the sheer physical size. Compare a film era lens with its current autofocus, or worse yet, IS equivalent, and it's a world of difference. But yes, no one wants to lug a tripod birding or hiking, so when the IS binos go on a diet, this whole conversation will be moot.

 

[takitam]

A standard 10X42 (premium if you will) or even a 32 is more seamless, nothing to fiddle with. Its a part of your hand and arm. Bring it up to your face and your in. Balance, ergonomics, haptic, its all there in a neat little package.

Thanks for the great review. Like I have mentioned elsewhere, these bins are a compromise in a few areas. I appreciate that you have gone through an effort to make a valuable comparison. One of the areas where my experience differs from yours is in the quote. Because of how inter-pupillary distance is set in the Canon's, I actually find them more reliable to just bring to your face and use, compared to normal bins. Especially in the situation you mentioned, where you go for a walk and occasionally look at something. Normal bins sometimes bump on your chest and the distance between barrels changes, so they need to be set-up again. Same thing can happen when you put them inside the case or a harness. With Canons, it's set the ipd and (generally) forget. They have plenty of other quirks though.

 

[CharleyBird]

...the optically fabulous 10x42 L which, I said it before, is unfortunately a pain to use for somebody with smallish hands and an IPD of 61 mm)...
Canip

Why is an IPD of 61mm a problem when the specification says 57-75mm?

 

[forent]

Why is an IPD of 61mm a problem when the specification says 57-75mm?

I can't comment the specifications but that's my experience:

Some weeks ago I tested the Canon 10x42 IS for myself and found it simply impossible to adjust those giant eyecups to my face. (Rather narrow IPD / strong nose - still looking extremely handsome ). Moreover, these eyecups are pretty sharp-edged and pinched painfully into the alar wings of my nose. We definitely are a bad match, the Canon 10x42 and me. It goes without saying that I wasn't interested in its optical performance anymore.

 

[Canip]

Why is an IPD of 61mm a problem when the specification says 57-75mm?

Because of the enormous size of the eyecups - I have a rather slim nose, but still, can‘t find space for it between the eyecups (the eyecups on the new x32 series are not much better - why can‘t Canon equip all models with eyecups such as on their 10x30, 12x36 or 8x20 binos?).

I wrote some time ago in another thread that if Canon were putting their 10x42 optics and electronics into an ergonomically decent body they would totally rule the bino market. Still wonder why they don‘t do that and keep coming out with substandard ergonomics …

 

[CharleyBird]

Thanks for the replies.
Seems I may find the Canon 10x42 problematic too as my ipd is around 59mm.

For example, with the Leica 12x50 UV+ their ipd of 58-75 is only just enough. Even then, to make them work I have to move the objective covers' rubber barrel rings so they fit adjacent, in order to keep the ipd narrow enough for me.

 

[exup]

Yes (and have been doing so for decades, even when I was in the army), depending on what I am observing. Funny learning: people joining me usually can‘t believe how much mounting enhances the observation experience.

Here is an interesting Google translated quote from the Pinac Collection link for the Canon 10x42: (hope I am not breaking any forum rules)

"So I understand that some onithologists say that they can get a lot more out of ring counting if they have the Canon with them than if they have another 10x42 with them (in such cases, using a tripod is usually not a solution either). But of course, especially with birds in flight, the stabilization brings image details that I don't get to see with the EL SV....... if I follow the circling red kite with the glass more shakily than right. But even the shaking kestrels, which I saw yesterday, I could hardly have observed so calmly with an ordinary glass, I would assume that only the tripod (not the monopod) would have allowed an equally good observation, but before I did that set up, the shaking is usually over... "

I too find that I get better details.

Is the current trend to now use tripods and Alphas instead?

 

[Conndomat]

I wrote some time ago in another thread that if Canon were putting their 10x42 optics and electronics into an ergonomically decent body they would totally rule the bino market. Still wonder why they don‘t do that and keep coming out with substandard ergonomics …

I don't know if that's absolutely true?!

Most people will certainly buy high-quality and therefore expensive binoculars, expecting that they will be well looked after by the manufacturer even after the purchase, unfortunately that is not always guaranteed with Canon, I have had the dubious pleasure myself...
In addition, the short warranty period (2 years) on the electronics is a reason for many people not to buy IS binoculars.
For many people there are several reasons to decide for or against binoculars, good and reliable service from the manufacturer can also be an important criterion.

Andreas

 

[Paultricounty]

I agree whole heartily , it’s different if we’re spending $300 or $400 then it’s not a great loss after a few years of use. But at $1500 , and you have to worry if it’s going to be the same tool in five years is something to consider. Optically there going to help you pick things out more readily. The more I use the 1042 Canon the more the optics impress and the more the undesirable idiosyncrasies creep into the enjoyment. The more you use them the more the image shift becomes apparent as well as the weight. As I’ve said before in my review , although the ergonomics are horrendous they do balance extremely well, you have to give it to Conan for that, if they didn’t balance well, for me they’d be unacceptable.

It’s still nothing like picking up a Noctivid or an NL and seeing the barrel edge more defined , the image pop, the feel of the eyecups, the way the optics feel in the hand is just in another category. And knowing 20 years from now they’ll still be going strong.

Another thing that hasn’t been discussed too much in many reviews, is a persons own hand shake , each individuals ability to hand hold a non IS. The more individual shake , the more benefits from IS. Of course we’re talking about 10x here.

Paul

 

[exup]

And knowing 20 years from now they’ll still be going strong.

I think you might have mentioned in the past ...... the analogy with watches.

Some buy Rolex, that will be a family heirloom.

Some buy Apple or Garmin watches. No chance of lasting decades, but provide functionality not available in a Rolex

I buy Garmin and Canon.....with the acceptance that I will replace in ~10 years

Others buy Rolex and Zeiss (S, L), expecting decades of service and exceptional warranty.

 

[kimmik]

Another thing that hasn’t been discussed too much in many reviews, is a persons own hand shake , each individuals ability to hand hold a non IS. The more individual shake , the more benefits from IS. Of course we’re talking about 10x here.

Paul

This is what I’ve been pondering, what is the market size for 1. Shakey hands that want 8x bino, vs 2. Steady hands that want >12x binos/scope.

If I were to get a scope, it would have to be handholdable and backpackable. (Had a podmount type scope which i gave away due to lack of use). If it has IS, that would be an instant sell for me!

 

[Ted Y.]

In addition, the short warranty period (2 years) on the electronics is a reason for many people not to buy IS binoculars.

I am really unhappy with the 3 years warranty for the Canon IS. But, on the other hand, I have a laptop costing the same amount as the 10x42 IS and I accepted only 3 years warranty without any hesitation.
Hence the question: why differentiate? Canon knows how to manufacture IS.

 

[MiddleRiver]

My Sony 100-400GM camera lens (which has built-in IS and retails for about what an alpha bino does) is warranted for 1 year IIRC.
It's the price we pay for modern electronics and makes the typical bino warranty pretty incredible!

 

[Hermann]

Another thing that hasn’t been discussed too much in many reviews, is a persons own hand shake , each individuals ability to hand hold a non IS. The more individual shake , the more benefits from IS. Of course we’re talking about 10x here.

Absolutely true, no doubt about it. However, even people with "steady hands" lose quite a lot of resolution due to hand shake. That's undeniable, they only lose less resolution than people with less steady hands. The studies available all show that loss is on average more than 40% at 10x magnification, increasing further with increasing magnification. At 15x it's already over 50%. (Figures taken from Brunnckow, Reeger, Siedentopf 1944. All modern studies show similar results.) That's for handheld use, the figures are of course much better if you put the binoculars on a tripod.

Hermann