Customer Reviews

Canon 18x50 Image Stabilization All-Weather Binoculars w/Case, Neck Strap & Batteries

5 star:		(34)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Right out of the box, these binoculars, no doubt are one of the best pair of optics I have ever purchased. The Image Stabilization feature is what makes the bincoluars so attractive...and expensive.

They work great on the water or in situations that will reduce hand shakieness.

I own a pair of 10x30 Canon and wanted to upgrade having liked them.

With the 18x50 I got what I expected with the 10x30 model, but the weight of these bincolars is a bit of a draw back. At least they have a tripod hole for support if you need it.

The weight also creates another draw back.

**** Be aware, there appears to be a design flaw with the top eye peice portion. Due to the heavy weight of these 18 x 50 binoculars, one must be careful how you handle them.

These binoculars have a different method for their case carrying strap then the other Canon image stablization binoculars. Other models have a strap for the case and another neck strap for the binoculars themselves.

On the 18 x 50 model it uses the same neck strap, for both the bincoular and the case. Simply, the case has no strap and you place the binoculars in the case and pull neck strap out from the case, over the top case flap and use it as the case's carrying strap.

On first look, it seems like a better idea.

The neck strap attaches to the eye peice portion of the binoculars, while the other 'lighter' models have the neck strap attaching to the body itself. This causes the weight of the entire units to be supported on the eye piece portions.

Having only had these 18x50 IS binoculars less than three weeks from purchase, I pulled the binoculars out of the case when the top eye piece portion separated from the main body. This was with little pressure and being careful everytime I handled them.

I figured it was a simple fix, perhaps snapping pieces back in place. This was not the case. On closer inspection the fastening screws, which held the eye piece portion to the main body, were still in tack, but the screw holes, which kept the main body to the eye peice in place, appeared not to be strong enough to handle extra pressure.

The outer loop of the screw holes on two of the three screw holes broke away.

The screws are set too close to the outer part of the eye peice base for strong enough support and the material supporting the screw holes are too weak to support the existing body weight and pressure exerted on it over time.

This breakage came with little effort and pressure or from abuse.

I thought about repairing them myself, but figured it still was under warranty (only 3 weeks old) and the cost of $1,100 should be enough excuse to send them to Canon Repair for a quick fix.

BOY WAS I SADLY MISTAKEN. Canon Repair charged me another $350 to repair it and it's now over 4 weeks and I have not seen them yet. I've owned them less than 8 weeks and more than half of that time is in repair!

I just wonder if anyone else has had this problem as it certainly appears it's a design flaw because of the overall weight.

So to review them I would say great binoculars but becareful on how you handle these items, if you need a good pair of binoculars, I would say go with the lower models of the Canon IS series as they are more durable!

Actually two things. First, these are incredible. If you haven't tried IS binoculars, run don't walk to to the nearest store. A couple of reviews have noted that the binoculars do not have lens caps for the objective lenses. While this is a drawback, it is easily corrected. The lens casing is threaded, so buy a pair of 58mm UV filters and screw them in. ... The UV filters will protect the lenses and any snap-on lens cover will attach to the UV filters.

The problem with high power binoculars is that humans can't hold them steady, and that jitter makes it impossible to really look at something without a tripod. The image stabilization in this pair solves that problem and holds things rock steady. This is an expensive product that clearly distingues itself, and one of those products that technology makes seem a little magic.

I have only two small complaints: First, for a product this expensive they should pre-install the neck strap for you -- not a big deal, but it would be nice for the customer. Second, I wish the lens cap covers were higher quality and attachable to the unit so they wouldn't get lost. Again, not a big deal.

These are without a doubt the best binoculars I've ever used.

The optics and general quality are what to expect for binoculars at one third the price. But image stabilization changes everything. At 18X power, conventional hand-held binoculars, even thousand dollar ones, require support; either tripod or at the very least, elbows carefully resting on a car roof or on both knees when sitting on the ground. (The latter two methods rule out skyward viewing or sweeping views). The base is threaded for tripod use, which serves as a reminder of what you would need if you forgot to put in the two AA batteries. The Image Stabilizer feature is fingertip selective, so that fully comparing the IS image with the non-stabilized image is easy in all situations. The stabilization is not perfect, as there is still some need to hold them steady. But the residual image-shake is less than for 6X power unstabilized binocs, and the effect at 18X is very pleasing, even startling -- binocular Image Stabilization is no gimmick. One-handed viewing is nearly as good as with a two handed grip, something out of the question for ordinary binoculars. A limitation of the IS feature is that when attempting sweeping views, or when following moving objects like airplanes, there occurs minor blurring as the system tends to misunderstand the user's deliberate movement as jerkiness. Thus it is necessary to follow objects smoothly. These binoculars came without lens caps for the objective lenses, a remarkable omission since the objective lenses are not well protected in the shallow recess of the encircling frame ridges. Presumably this is to keep bulk to a minimum. The eyepieces have somewhat oversized fold-back rubber cups. While these cups are not ergonomically shaped, as they could be -- bumping the eye brow while still admitting light at the sides -- they fold back for eyeglass wearers, and offer good incidental lense protection when extended. The soft, padded, lightweight nylon carrying case is adiquit, but could use a waist belt loop for easy carrying. (A premium quality hard case would be a nice accessary.) The carrying weight is not bad, feeling about the same as ordinary 50 mm porro prism binoculars.

I have been an avid birder watcher for several decades. I've owned most of the top-of -the-line European binoculars (Zeiss, Leica, etc.) over the years. I purchased the Canon 12x36 IS binocs over 2 1/2 years ago and I love them. However, thinking that more magnification would be better, I ordered the 18x50 IS pair a year later. I have since sold them and use mostly the Canon 12 power. Here are a few reasons why they were not right for me:

* Bigger is not always better. The extra weight and size caused me to leave them in the closet and take the 12x36s, one of my other pair, or worst, no binoculars at all. Even the best optics are no good if you don't have them with you when you need them.

* Smaller field of view. It takes some practice seeing a bird with your naked eyes and then swinging the binoculars up smoothly so that you keep the bird (or any other small subject) in line with your vision. As experienced as I am at this I found it harder to accomplish with the narrow view of these powerful optics. Sometimes all you get is a few seconds to spot and identify a rare bird. Quicker is better.

* Shallower depth of field. With greater magnification the accuracy of your focusing becomes more critical due to a reduced range of focus. With distant objects I found myself fiddling with focus knob more than I would like to.

* Less than the best optical performance. Don't get me wrong, these are very sharp, high quality glasses, just not the best. When viewing objects against the sun you can get a color flare, or ghost image (chromatic aberration). Only the highest quality optical designs get close to completely eliminating this problem. When you are trying to tell one bird from another closely related species, color is often all than you have to go by.

I am still a big fan of the Image Stabilization technology and I still use my 12x36 IS binoculars daily, however, the idea that more magnification is always better, especially for birding, is misleading. I am planning to buy the Canon 10x42 L series binos. In the past this magnification has been my favorite and the added benefit of IS will make it an even better choice. The biggest reason for this decision is the superiority of the L class optics. I own several L lenses for my Canon digital SLRs and they are superb.

If you don't mind the size and weight, or you really need the extra power (like for astronomical observation) these are great binoculars to add to your collection. If you looking one pair to use on a regular basis and you want the best optical quality combined with image stabilization, I would go with the 10x42 IS L glasses and save yourself the time and expense of buying the wrong pair. But that's just my opinion. If you can, take a look at both of them in person before you buy one.

Canon 10x42 L Image Stabilization Waterproof Binoculars

To my knowledge there are only two image-stabilised binoculars on the market -- Canon's 18 x 50 or 15 x 50, and Zeiss' 20 x 60. In the UK the latter retail for just under 3,000 pounds.

Having looked both at the Zeiss and the Canon, my (admittedly not very expert) judgement is that Canon has by far the better image stabilisation system. The Zeiss system is not battery powered but rather mechanical and does not eliminate as much wobble as the Canon system. On the other hand Zeiss are world leaders in producing crystal clear, bright images. The Zeiss binoculars are marginally better than Canon's in producing a bright image -- especially at sunrise and dusk.

In the end, the Canon binoculars win because of the wonderful stabilising system -- and that fact that they are about 1/3 the cost of Zeiss.

The Canon binoculars are ideal for bird watching and back-yard astronomy (looking at the moon through these binoculars is a truly wonderful experience). Although hardly low-cost they are a fantastic buy -- a marvel of modern technology and a source of lasting pleasure.

These things are incredible! I received a pair of the Canon Image Stabilization Binoculars as a gift from a friend and was immediately blown away by how well they work. The fact that they don't shake makes it possible to read numbers and signs at great distances. I race on sailboats and the ability to read call letters and names on competitive boats is a real help. I also got the clearest view of the moon I have ever seen last night. The large lenses really capture a lot of light, so that you can see clearly at night as well. They are pricey, but you really get you money's worth with this product.

I've owned my 18x50 binocs for two years now, and have used them mainly for astronomy. Perhaps my expectations were too high, but...

(1) I found the image to be less stable than expected. It's certainly better than with no IS system at all, but not as solid as you'd get from using a good tripod. Of course, using a tripod near the zenith is a problem, but there are solutions for that, such as the Sky Window system (the binocs look downward, at a mirror). After an hour's observing, you'll definitely notice how heavy these binocs are.

(2) I found a large amount of residual color on bright objects...red on one side, blue on the other. I attribute this to the prisms used in the IS system.

(3) The maximum interocular distance is just barely wide enough for my eyes. The diopter adjustment has considerable stick and slip. I'd rather wear my glasses than mess with the diopter, but the eye relief isn't sufficient.

(4) The binocs come without lens OG lens caps, which is strange, considering how expensive they are.

I suggest you NOT buy this binocs online. Go to a store that will let you take them outside. Examine a star-like object, such as sun glint off a power line insulator. Check out the IS, the residual color, and the weight. See if the store will let you have them "on approval," and try them out at night.

And don't forget, you can buy a pretty good apochromatic telescope for $2000.

Roger Rensvold
Hong Kong

My ten years with a $1,000 pair of Steiners was a long and happy relationship. Few things on a boat last that long or work so well. However......in pitching seas I never really mastered their use and when I needed them most, they served me the least. Along comes a nifty boat show demonstration of the new Canon Image Stabilizers (in an 18x50 setup....excellent for open water) and voila, the Steiners become below-decks backups and the Canons rise to the bridge. They are magnificent, with great optics, very good balance and of course the incredible advantage of image stabilization that actually works in 6 foot seas!

First, I couldn't decide between Fujinon and Canon and then I was never able to take them outside and try them out and/or compare them. So, I finally just bought a pair of Canon 18x50s and hoped for the best when they arrived and I looked thru and pushed the IS button.
Boy, what a waste of several years. Why didn't I buy a pair when they first came out? I could have been using them all this time. Instead, I dithered over cost vs. results and really regret the fun I missed in the meanwhile.
The only difference in these versus regular binocs is one button. When you push it, there's a little click and from then on, WOW. After investing plenty in telescopes, computer tracking mounts, etc., these should have been a much higher priority. Oh yeah, they're light enough to take anywhere and the viewing fatigue is really that much less than with others (especially since my hands are really pretty shaky anyway and I drink plenty of coffee).