Thoughts on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42?
- nisiprius
- Advisory Board
- Posts: 52216
- Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
- Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry
Thoughts on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42?
There doesn't seem to be any easy way to try them out without a long drive...
I am intrigued with the idea of image-stabilized binoculars. The Canon L IS WP 10x42 seems to mentioned a lot, and might just possibly be within my budget as a big-deal blowout toy. I would be using them for backyard astronomy, my wife for birding. From what I read they are pretty heavy, though. And they are very expensive, they'd better be really great!
I think I know what to expect from 10x42, optically--not ideal for comets and such but not impossible, either.
Anyone had any experience with this, or with image-stabilized binoculars in general?
One thing I don't quite understand. I think this model is a possibly-updated version of decades-old technology, and that it is an all-optical system with the stabilization being done by servo-controlled mirrors?
My camera does an amazing job of image stabilization. I can't believe the slow shutter settings it auto-sets and nevertheless produces really sharp images. And display resolutions are getting high, too. Aren't there any all-electronic image-stabilized binoculars nowadays... maybe with just a bit of light-amplifying night vision?
I am intrigued with the idea of image-stabilized binoculars. The Canon L IS WP 10x42 seems to mentioned a lot, and might just possibly be within my budget as a big-deal blowout toy. I would be using them for backyard astronomy, my wife for birding. From what I read they are pretty heavy, though. And they are very expensive, they'd better be really great!
I think I know what to expect from 10x42, optically--not ideal for comets and such but not impossible, either.
Anyone had any experience with this, or with image-stabilized binoculars in general?
One thing I don't quite understand. I think this model is a possibly-updated version of decades-old technology, and that it is an all-optical system with the stabilization being done by servo-controlled mirrors?
My camera does an amazing job of image stabilization. I can't believe the slow shutter settings it auto-sets and nevertheless produces really sharp images. And display resolutions are getting high, too. Aren't there any all-electronic image-stabilized binoculars nowadays... maybe with just a bit of light-amplifying night vision?
Last edited by nisiprius on Mon May 23, 2022 6:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
This review gave me pause.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... ml/reviews
I own another 3 Canon IS photo lenses with L optics and I can tell that this binocular is the same quality;I mean mechanicly and optically exceptional.The L lenses send this product above the similar price products in the market and the IS makes the difference even bigger to whatever else I have tried.On the top of all,the WP gives you a peace of mind when you use it and makes it easy to maintain and clean. On the other hand what negatively surprised me was the design/specs/manufacturing negligence with the electronics PCB's which,visible through the front lenses, have no finish on the contour edges and fiber glass filaments/burrs are exposed,allmost loose and ready to detach and contaminate the inner optics and mechnics,given the mechanical and thermal shock regime to which this kind of object is usualy subject to. The front caps are difficult to use. The rear caps are the worst design I ever have seen;they are too big loose and heavy. The bag is nicely sewn/good quality but not of real use;it has no pokets for accessories and there's not enogh room for the binocular strap. It is difficult to attach filters to the front lens because the plastic threads are not rigid enough and a bit loose in terms of fit tollerances;they start too deep and crossthreaded very easy with all filters I have tried.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/ ... ml/reviews
I own another 3 Canon IS photo lenses with L optics and I can tell that this binocular is the same quality;I mean mechanicly and optically exceptional.The L lenses send this product above the similar price products in the market and the IS makes the difference even bigger to whatever else I have tried.On the top of all,the WP gives you a peace of mind when you use it and makes it easy to maintain and clean. On the other hand what negatively surprised me was the design/specs/manufacturing negligence with the electronics PCB's which,visible through the front lenses, have no finish on the contour edges and fiber glass filaments/burrs are exposed,allmost loose and ready to detach and contaminate the inner optics and mechnics,given the mechanical and thermal shock regime to which this kind of object is usualy subject to. The front caps are difficult to use. The rear caps are the worst design I ever have seen;they are too big loose and heavy. The bag is nicely sewn/good quality but not of real use;it has no pokets for accessories and there's not enogh room for the binocular strap. It is difficult to attach filters to the front lens because the plastic threads are not rigid enough and a bit loose in terms of fit tollerances;they start too deep and crossthreaded very easy with all filters I have tried.
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
I've wanted one of these for a long time. Then I just happened to be at the Whooping Crane Festival where there was a vendor expo with a few optics companies. (Leica, Swarovski, Vortex, ...) None of them had brought their IS models. When chatting with them it seems that serious birders have tripods and spotting scopes and of course the big 600 mm lenses for their cameras. Thus, not many sales for the image stabilized things.
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
I've had (benign) essential tremor for years. When I wanted a pair of compact binoculars (with a lower magnification and wider field of view) for hiking, it became clear that I would need image stabilization. I simply can't use regular binoculars. My son bought me the Canon 8x20 IS. The image stabilization works. No doubt MrFlish's concerns are warranted, but for me it's a matter of using the Canon IS or not using binoculars at all.
I also use the Vortex binocular harness strap so I don't have to dig in my pack to pull out the binoculars when I see something. Not sure that's needed if the binoculars are going to be used for star-gazing.
I also use the Vortex binocular harness strap so I don't have to dig in my pack to pull out the binoculars when I see something. Not sure that's needed if the binoculars are going to be used for star-gazing.
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
They are heavy; birders aren't going to want to carry this IS rig around.livesoft wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 6:43 pm I've wanted one of these for a long time. Then I just happened to be at the Whooping Crane Festival where there was a vendor expo with a few optics companies. (Leica, Swarovski, Vortex, ...) None of them had brought their IS models. When chatting with them it seems that serious birders have tripods and spotting scopes and of course the big 600 mm lenses for their cameras. Thus, not many sales for the image stabilized things.
Don't trust me, look it up. https://www.irs.gov/forms-instructions-and-publications
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
It would be good to also research spotting scopes to see how they would compare to the binoculars for what you want to do. I have an inexpensive spotting scope that does surprising well for the price.
For backyard astronomy one advantage of a spotting scope is that many of them have an angled eyepiece which can make looking up at the sky easier.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2021 8:32 am
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
They’re super cool when used from a helo or other airborne platform. Unfortunately my employer (Uncle Sam) didn’t let me keep mine, so I switched to a fixed platform with a wider FOV that is easier to manually stabilize.
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
I have used mine like that from time to time. I have two scopes. The larger on (88mm objective lens) works better at night of course.Watty wrote: ↑Sun May 22, 2022 8:51 pmIt would be good to also research spotting scopes to see how they would compare to the binoculars for what you want to do. I have an inexpensive spotting scope that does surprising well for the price.
For backyard astronomy one advantage of a spotting scope is that many of them have an angled eyepiece which can make looking up at the sky easier.
But a scope has a more specific use in birding and would be useless for “general birding” if that is what is intended.
I’m not keen on dual use criteria in general. You often end up compromising on both.
Don't trust me, look it up. https://www.irs.gov/forms-instructions-and-publications
Re: Thought on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42
A family member has a pair of these. I have used them many times, and they are really nice. Much easier to see things than using normal binoculars.
Re: Thoughts on image-stabilized binoculars like the Canon L IS WP 10x42?
My research directed me to the Fuji 14x stabilized binos for around $1k but I happened upon a deal on some closeout Fuji 12x stabilized so I went that route. They are amazing. Larger and heavier than non-stabilized but not bad and of course that is the price you pay if you want the stabilization.
You could put some non-stabilized on a tripod but that would be much less convenient.
You could put some non-stabilized on a tripod but that would be much less convenient.