Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1268
|
|
Hi Wes,
I would endorse the Canon IS binoculars any time. I feel that your statements are dead on.
I would never buy a Canon or Nikon camera, just because I am a former Minolta user with lots of glass (now SONY). But the binoculars are a "whole nother" story, you know.
Best regards,
Dave.
|
KerryR
sage
Reged: 12/05/07
Posts: 329
|
|
I have the 12x36 IS, which I absolutely adore. I really like the lightness. Their small size makes them very 'bring alongable'. I use them all the time and constantly blown away by what I'm able to see with them, despite the small aperture.
I'd opt for the 10x42's for the same reasons I bought the 36's. Less weight definitely means you'll spend more time under them a go. Smaller size makes them easier to stuff in a suitcase or duffle bag. The wider FOV also means the IS will be more effective. I also prefer wider views anyway.
However, if you want to spend time on binocular doubles, get the 15's-- I'm amazed at what going from 7x35's to 12x36's does for double stars.
I also could see the argument that as long as you're going IS, why not get the biggest binos that have a power that would REQUIRE mounting otherwise (sans IS). 'Course, I don't even really like hand holding 10x without IS...
--------------------
Kerry
|
doctordub
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/11/06
Posts: 908
Loc: New Rochelle, New York
|
|
I have the canon 15x50 IS binoculars and use the for astronomy and daytime use. I see no false color on axis when looking at the Moon or high contrast linear features during the daytime such as thin branches with a bright sky background. The IS removes handshake, wave motion on a Cruise Ship, as well as shakes from the Wild Asia Monorail at the Bronx Zoo! They are comfortable to hold even when viewing high altitudes. They are some of the sharpest and brightest binoculars I have looked through of this apperature.
CS
--------------------
Jonathan
TeleVue TV102 on Vixen SXW mount
Meade LXD 55 SN10/UHTC Modified
Jason 60mm F11
Canon 15x50 IS
Olympus E-510, 14-42, 40-150 Zuiko
Meade DSI, LPI
TeleVue:
Binovue & 2X Cor.
3x barlow, 2x 5mm, 2x7mm,
12mm, 17mm & 2-4mm Zoom Naglers,
2x24mm, & 27mm panoptics,
55mm Plossl & 3mm Radian
2" OIII & Nebustar filters
Siebert Power Mag wheel
Lumicon Filter selecter &
2" focal reducer
Celestron: 7 1.25" color filters
7.5mm, 26mm eps & 2X ultima barlow
|
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1268
|
|
Hi all,
Just a note. I, too, feel that the Canon IS optics are (some) of the brightest ones available, DESPITE the smaller apertures. I have to conclude that this is due to the very fine coatings that Canon has evolved.
Best regards,
Dave.
|
EdZ
Professor EdZ
Reged: 02/15/02
Posts: 12599
Loc: Cumberland, R I , USA42N71.4W
|
|
Quote:
Hi all,
Just a note. I, too, feel that the Canon IS optics are (some) of the brightest ones available, DESPITE the smaller apertures. I have to conclude that this is due to the very fine coatings that Canon has evolved.
Best regards,
Dave.
There's more involved in how bright a binocular appears than just how good the coatings are. Some of the things I measure that contribute to brightness are light beam transmission thru the binoculars which measures internal tilt of the optical axis, internal vignette and illumination of the exit pupil. My guess is these would have more to do with brightness than the coatings.
One might suspect differences in multicoatings from good to premium perhaps on the order of just a few percent. For instance from premium multicoatings to poor multicoatings may be a difference of 9% total transmission.
I sometimes see differences in optical axis beam transmission tilt from none to 25%. I've seen 5 mm exit pupil 6° binoculars that can transmit 100% of a beam over the entire area of the central 50% diameter of the objective and I've seen others that can only do that for the central 10% of the objective. I've see differences of illumination of 25%. I see internal vignette variances to 15%. And these are measured thru binoculars all having coatings that would be expected to produce equally bright image.
Add those things together and it could account for a difference in total transmission of 25%-50%. Coatings might account for 5%.
edz
--------------------
Teach a kid something today. The feeling you'll get is one of life's greatest rewards.
member#21
|
Denis
sage
Reged: 12/24/05
Posts: 225
Loc: Rennes, France
|
|
I consider my 10x42 IS as the best investment I've ever make in binoculars.
I use them every day on nature observation or astro when possible.
I also use two time some 15x50 from a friend and at each time, I observed some noticeable and near constant vibration of the image I never have on the 10x42.
Some others have spocken here of this phenomenom that didn't bother them too much, but for me used to the 10x42, it was very sensitive.
I tested the shockproof ability of the 10x42 two weeks ago :
They fall from a table to the concrete ground without any damage or effect  .
Waterproof has been tested from long time as I practice kayak very often with them 
I was waiting for them for a long time as I wanted some IS waterproof.
--------------------
Canon 10x42 IS binoculars.
Meade sc 4" on homemade fork equatorial mount.
homemade 10" an 14" dobsonian
Nikon photogear.
Edited by Denis (07/25/08 05:15 PM)
|
DJB
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/23/05
Posts: 1268
|
|
Hi EdZ,
I agree with everything that you wrote. The coating reference was just one parameter that I considered when I responded. I do believe that the Canon IS binculars are built to a different and higher standard than many.
Therefore, I suspect, some of the tests that you mention and do may well come into play here.
You see, I bought both online, never even having held one in my hands. But I can say that I was very pleasantly pleased with all aspects of the two binoculars. Excepting that bloody button which times out without using the finger for holding the unit on (10x30).
Thanks for your insights and clarifications.
Best regards,
Dave.
|
Daud
sage
Reged: 08/05/06
Posts: 250
Loc: AZ, Scottsdale
|
|
Thanks. Decision made. After watching this forum for several weeks bought the Canon IS 15x50 yesterday and Celestron Regal 8x42 today.
--------------------
WO ZS110 | Meade SN-6 | Johnsonian 16" goto | Celestron Regal 8x42 | Canon 15x50IS
|
Wes James
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/12/06
Posts: 2462
|
|
Daud-
You're going to have 2 fine pairs of binoculars there. I have both of them. They both are absolute keepers.
The original question was "Help me decide: Canon 10x42L or 15x50?" - The answer for me was- both!
Wes
|
Joe Ogiba
Post Laureate
Reged: 02/14/02
Posts: 3363
Loc: NJ USA
|
|
Quote:
The original question was "Help me decide: Canon 10x42L or 15x50?" - The answer for me was- both!
Ditto
--------------------
Pentax PF-80ED
Meade 102ED APO
Orion EON 72
120ST
Apex 127
C6 XLT
CR150
C9.25
XT10
Zeiss 7x42 FL
Canon 10x42L IS WP
15x50 IS
12x36 IS II
Garrett Optical 28x110 HD-WP Signature Series
Oberwerk BT-80 45
Apogee RA-88-SA
Denk II Power x Switch binoviewer w/13mm Ethos, 20mm Pentax XW's, 20mm Widescan III's.
|
|
5 registered and 20 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: EdZ
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1771
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
