Customer Reviews

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

5 star:		(63)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

These binoculars are spectacular. Point them at Jupiter and you see a bright dot wandering around in the field of view. Press the image stabilization switch and the planet and its moons instantly become visible. While they can't subtract all movement they do get rid of the little shakes that make hand held viewing so difficult. 15x is enough magnification that Saturn is obviously not round.

A complaint about earier versions of the Canon IS line was that your finger went to sleep holding the IS switch down. Now you can press it briefly to turn on the IS circuitry which will automatically shut off in 5 minutes. If you press and hold the switch it shuts off as soon as you release it.

I haven't had my pair long enough to comment on battery life but do see a problem changing them when they are mounted on a tripod. Unlike most binoculars where the tripod mounting is at the objective end where the two barrels rotate on the Canons it is at the bottom of the binocular near the center of the tubes which don't rotate. And the battery compartment is just in front of it so you can't get to it if the binoculars are on a tripod of have a quick release plate attached.

Since the lens barrels don't rotate intra-ocular distance is adjusted by actually moving the oculars. They are kind of stiff but that is good because they stay in place once you get them set.

The tripod mount is lower than the highest part of the lens barrels so if you have a big quick release plate like that of the Manfrotto (Bogen) 410 geared head (highly recommended) it presses against the bottom of the barrels and not the flat between them.

For some reason Canon doesn't seem to fell that the objective lenses need any protection as they don't ship lens covers for them. They do provide lens covers for the oculars but they pop off a lot because the eye cups are so soft. It looks like you need something like 69mm lens caps. They don't tell you in the manual but Canon sales says they are threaded to accept 58mm filters so you can buy solar filters for them.

I can use the binoculars with my glasses on due to the 15 mm eye relief but it is really easier to use them without the glasses.

They are heavy, ~2,5#, but if you support them on the heels of your hands very stable.

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!

I've had these binocs (Canon 15x50 IS) for two weeks now and am regretting my purchase . . . . regretting that I didn't buy them years ago, that is!

So far I have put them to work for aircraft spotting, watching hawks soar high overhead, looking at the moon, and general observation of distant terrain. These are by far the best optical instrument I've ever had the pleasure to use. The Image Stabilizer feature is truly outstanding. It allows you to really reach in on astounding views, and enjoy them with rock solid stability.

For example, to focus in on a Boeing 747 that is still 5 miles out on final appoach, and clearly watch it extend its landing gear in all its glory of doors opening, wheels articulating, and doors closing . . . then enjoy watching it float through the air until WHOOOOOOSH it's upon you, is awe-inspiring! And fun!

Another pleasant surprise. The binocs came with two years of extended warranty from Canon free -- three years in total. I wasn't expecting that, but it was in the box when it arrived. Cheers to them!

Prior to buying, I compared the Nikon 14x40 Stabileyes and Canon 15x50 and 18x50 IS binocs and tried them extensively, back to back to back, indoors and out. The Canon's seemed a bit brighter than the Nikon's (as they should be at 15x50 vs. 14x40), sharper, they are more compact although perhaps a bit less robust, and thanks to more heavy discounting and the rebates, they cost about $350 less. The Canons are more highly regarded in the various enthusiast sites as well (both the birders and the astroheads love 'em). The Canon 18's cost $200 more than the 15's, and seemed just a bit "jitteryier" (is that a word?). I am planning to use these for daytime aircraft spotting as well as the night sky, so the 18's just seemed a "bit much" for my needs. The 15's seemed perfect.

Great price from Amazon . . . . $799, before a $100 mail in Canon rebate and a free $50 Amazon gift card. Net cost of $650 is a great deal -- enough so that I justified overnight shipping!

Cheers to Canon for a job well done!

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.

I bought these binoculars (along with "The Backyard Astronomer's Guide", "Touring the Universe Through Binoculars," and Starry Night software) to learn some basic astronomy. This has turned out to be a winning combination.

While these binoculars weigh 2.6 pounds, they have a very natural, comfortable fit in the hands and are easy to handle.

The image stabilization is amazing and really improves my ability to resolve stellar objects and surface details of the moon.

It does seem a little odd that Canon did not include front lens caps. However the 15x50s are threaded for 58 mm filters, so one can easily purchase standard lens caps. I bought a pair of 58 mm Canon lens caps which fit, although the heavy rubber armor leaves minimal clearance to operate the lens cap release buttons. With filters installed the lens caps fit exactly as they would on a camera lens with plenty of clearance to remove, even if wearing gloves.

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.

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

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.

Most of the reviews I see for IS binoculars are by and for plane spotters and other non-birders, so I wanted to add the wildlife viewing perspective to the mix.

I have owned 2 different pairs of the 12x Cannon IS Binoculars, one pair of the 15x Cannon IS binos and I have tested the 10x42 L series (high-end, geared towards birders). I will cross-post these comments for all three. For any of you birders out there trying to decide which is the right choice for you, here are my observations.

First, general comments that apply to all three:
1) Image stabilization is great! There is nothing not to love about it. Why all birders on earth don't use these things is a mystery to me. For the money, I would prefer to spend an extra $200 on image stabilization vs spending an extra $1000 for a comparable improvement in optics quality.
2) These binoculars are heavy and bulky. The grip, the feel and the ease of use are different than those of "normal" high-end binoculars. The human factors of the engineering range from acceptable (12x) to incomprehensibly bad (10x). I suspect that experienced birders may pick them up for the first time and not like them because they "don't feel right." Here's my thought: it is worth the 1-2 hours it takes to get used to them, because it will change the way you bird. For example: YOU DO NOT NEED TO CARRY A SCOPE in many circumstances, which is huge. They may be slightly heavy for binos, but they are much lighter than binos plus a scope and tripod!
3) it is easy to underestimate the benefit and power of IS until you have used it for a while in the field. For example, when you are looking for a bird that is mostly hidden in leaves, and occassionally pops into view, these guys are great. The slight vibration in your hand means that you need to see an image longer for the brain to decipher the image. When it is stabilized, you can see it in a flash. You will be able to scan a flock of shorebirds at distance in a fraction of the time it takes someone with a scope. You can see details on a bird moving 100ft above in the canopy that are utterly impossible with normal binoculars.
4) THink of them as ELECTRONICS, not optics. These will not be passed on to your grandchildren. They will last 3-5 years depending on how hard you use them. Don't bother trying to get them fixed because it is uneconomical outside of the warranty period. Don't buy them if you are uncomfortable with the cost because you may need to replace them in the not-to-distant future. That said, reliability has been okay for mine. I have dropped them, gotten them throughly wet for hours, taken them to high altitudes, and exposed them to a wide range of temperatures without any issues. One 12x pair developed a rattle and subsequently a hiccup in the IS. When I openned them up (not recommended) I found that a couple of screws fell out. I don't know where the screws came from and don't really care because now they work fine again.

Here is a comparison of the various models:

12x: the normal "rule of thumb" for birders with conventional binoculars is that 8-10x is about right in terms of image stability, weight, field of view and magnification. With IS binoculars, the equation is a little different. You can have image stability at any magnification, so it comes down to weight, field of view and magnification. For me, the winner is the 12x. You will have a little extra trouble finding a fast-moving bird, especially at close range due to the smaller field of view vs typical 10x. However, it is strong enough to allow me to leave my scope at home for most purposes -- it is equivalent to about a 15-18x conventional scope. The eyepieces are comfortable and the field of view is acceptable. My primary compaint is that the close limit of focus is too far for comfortable use in close quarters like dense rainforest. These binos seem rugged and reliable.

15x: optimal for pelagic birding, gulls and shorebirding, but the field of view and range of focus don't work well for normal birding. On a boat, nobody else will be able to see the stuff you see, period. It is like having a scope when everyone else is using 8x bins. In these circumstances the relatively limited field of view is not an issue and the extra magnification is great. These are much larger and heavier than the 12x and you wouldn't want to carry these on a 10 mile hike (although it would beat hiking 10 miles with a scope!). My main complaint -- and it is a big one -- is that the eyepieces are attrociously uncomfortable for my eyes. Presumably they must be comfortable for someone, like the engineer who designed them, but not for me. I had to replace them with eyepieces of my own because they are intollerable.

10x: These are fantastic. Pros: smaller, lighter than the 12x. Wider field of view and better close focus. Cons: 1) very expensive; 2) eyepieces that are as bad or worse than those on the 15x, which is why I don't own a pair. I think perhaps Cannon made these because they found in their market surveys that birders want 10x binos. I suspect they haven't sold many at the $1,100 price point given the Human factors issues. I personally would advise birds to not buy these unless they are willing to replace the eyepieces -- and better yet just get the 12x. Hopefully the next version will address these issues, because the IS technology and the optics are great.

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.