18X or 15X Canon Is ? (1 Viewer)

[wachipilotes]

Hello,
I am looking for ingormation on best Canon model for estuaries or seawatching, 18X or the 15X canon Is model?
Thanks
Wachi.

 

[Binastro]

. Both binoculars are excellent if you get good ones.
They are not waterproof but are best described as water resistant.
The 15×50 is one of the best general-purpose binoculars made in my opinion.
Star images are immaculate and even at the edge they are excellent.
You have to get to know how to use them. If the star images smear you are probably at the end stop of the variable prism range. You then need to unlock the button centre the image and relock it. With experience this takes a couple of seconds. Probably for terrestrial use you may not even notice and if you do take the same action.

The 18×50 is more specialised but has better resolution but a narrower field it would be more useful for distant views.
the fields of both are a bit wider than marked giving 69° apparent field of view in old measure.

Generally the 15×50 might be the one to go for.
I don't wear glasses so I don't know how they are for people who wear them.
I have used the 18 x 50 almost daily for 10 years and it has been faultless however it is not being used in a harsh environment.

 

[wachipilotes]

there is much variability in these binoculars?

 

[Binastro]

. Mine is excellent, but I've seen mention that over the years there may have been variability. It may be that they had to keep the price reasonable and they couldn't keep the quality as high as they might want to.
Mine was fairly early and I think is as good as they come.
if anything they had more problems with the 18×50 than with the 15×50. I think that the 18×50 is pushing the limits of their technology at least to get a perfect example.
The 15×50 is probably easier to make and maybe the eye relief is longer I cannot remember. It is probably a better general-purpose instrument.

If you try a 15×50 and look at a star such as Polaris centrally it should be aberration free as long as your eyes are very good if necessary with glasses. this should apply to both barrels with the image stabiliser off and may be mounted on a tripod. The field is pretty flat and if you have some accommodation you may find that even the edge stars are perfect although I suppose there may be some slight aberrations right at the edge. It is really as good as nearly any any binocular with a 69° apparent field of view or larger. I think that it might have a doublet field flattener.

Some people quibble about the prismatic effects that these can be largely negated by re-centring. However, for birdwatchers it may be the colour representation is not as perfect as with some of the very best binoculars. For my use for astronomy, general use, and aircraft spotting both the 15×50 and 18×50 has no equals at that weight.
You have to go for something exotic and heavier to get better performance and even this has shortcomings.

Small stars in both binoculars are tiny points of light which is why the resolution is so good and why very faint stars can be seen. With a very bright object such as Venus the star image is very enlarged and very bright. It may be that with some binoculars Venus is more compact and the image better controlled.

I definitely would not buy a second-hand example of any of the Canon image stabilised binoculars as this is a complicated electrooptical instrument.
The other problem is that in the UK there was only a one-year guarantee. Although maybe say from John Lewis they give two years and you could buy extra insurance. They used to do fixed-price repairs at Canon I don't know if they still do this and for something at this retail price the cost repairs were reasonable.. However, for the 10×30 price of repair was a bit steep.

Hope this helps.

 

[RJM]

I had the 15x and later the 18x, primarily for astronomy and whale watching. The IS jitter artifacts where much more noticeable in the 18x. Both were nice instruments. Then I spent 2 weeks whale watching from our beach rental in Hawaii where I also kept a Nikon ED50 fieldscope set up. The difference in optical quality was most apparent around sunset with the ED50 noticeably brighter even at 20x. Running lights seen as glitter points on distant offshore boats were less sharp in the Canons too. Given the ED50 is about the same weight with a tripod and significantly cheaper, I sold the Canons a short time later and later bought a Nikon 12x50SE to fill the gap and satisfy my astro needs.

 

[wachipilotes]

Hello,
I find it very curious that a 50mm spotting with 20X more light than a 50mm binoculars with 18x ..., exemplary lemmon, damage, much higher quality than the Nikon ..?
A greeting

 

[Binastro]

. Spotting scopes are simpler than binoculars especially image stabilised ones.
The objectives usually have longer focal lengths than same aperture binoculars.
in addition you only have to align one barrel not two individual barrels and then collimate the two.

It does not surprise me that a spotting scope especially an ED one performs better than a good binocular.
however, the tripod must be very small so that the tripod and spotting scope weight is the same as the Canon 15×50 image stabilised binocular. I presume it is a tabletop tripod. A full height tripod would weigh more on its own than the binocular.

If you want to have a tripod mounted binocular many can equal the performance of the Canon image stabilised binoculars. The beauty of the image stabilised binocular is that it does not need a tripod to perform well.

 

[RJM]

IIRC, my Canon 18x50is weighed ~1400g including the OP/TECH bayonet strap and metal dew shades. The ED50 on modified Velbon Ultra Maxi L as seen in the attached pic weighs ~1550g. I can only guess the brightness difference is to greater transmission in the Nikon.

 

[Binastro]

. Dear R JM,
it looks like a nice viewing location.
I use the Canon 18×50 as is with supplied strap and no lens hoods so it is a bit lighter.
Say for following an airliner in-flight at about 2 1/2 miles it would be difficult to do this with a tripod. But with the Canon 18×50 with the stabiliser off the lit windows of which there are many look like a long ribbon of light. You press the stabiliser down Lock the button and Pan steadily and each individual window is clearly seen and even the shapes of the window. I think that the resolution is 2 to 3 times better with the stabiliser on in this situation.
also from astronomy I much prefer not to use a tripod.

 

[Binastro]

. The weight of the Canon 18×50 binocular is 1225 g in use with the strap, which I find comfortable i.e. both the strap and the binocular weight are comfortable for me.
Complete in its case it weighs 1350 g.