Canon 10x42 L is WP Image Stabilized Binoculars

Second revision after 1.5 years of use and on pelagic birding trip: No longer a pain in the neck and comfortable in my hands. Now the 44 oz. (versus 24 oz. of previous binoculars) feels normal. VIEWS ARE STILL FANTASTIC. Very useful in all birding conditions (from rain forest to open seas, and especially in windy conditions). With image stabilization on, no one will have a better view through binoculars. I’d pay several hundred dollars for an image-stabilized spotting scope if someone made one—seems silly since scopes are on tripods, but I typically use mine at the windy coast where shaking is often annoying.Revised one year after purchase: I raised the rating from 4 to 5 stars since going on a birding trip in the tropics. I also gave up the binocular harness as too annoying (too many straps and too elastic) and used the binocular strap provided by Canon—hence the 44 oz pain in the neck when combined with a camera and a satchel across a shoulder. BUT WOW, when seeing so many new and rarely seen birds, I made full use of the 90-100% stability compared to no image stabilization, which provided viewing opportunities previously afforded only through the guide’s spotting scope. Yes, previously on birding trips I’d always been first in line at the spotting scope, but on this trip anything within about 100’ was just fine through the binoculars WITH THE IMAGE STABILIZATION ON. Of course this is with top quality glass and 10x (some folks used 8x, but they didn’t even bother looking at the distant birds that were well within the range I had). After about 2 weeks of constant use on the trip, the neck pain diminished and the hefty binoculars felt comfortable in my hands. Normally I only use the image stabiliation a few seconds at a time, about a total of a minute per hour of active birding, but on this trip I used it more frequently and longer since I wanted to carefully study and savor the birds, but there is still plenty of AA battery left—I assume (battery life isn’t an issue, but unfortunately I don’t know how to predict when they will give out, so I took along a spare pair of batteries). Not only were the binoculars great in the dense rainforest, but they were also outstanding on big and small boats or after hurrying to see a bird that might soon fly away. I haven’t tried them on a pelagic trip, but I expect they would be even more useful there, even though complete image stabilization would be unlikely. So if someone tells you they looked through them once and weren’t impressed (as my guide did), take it with a grain of salt. See my original review (unchanged except the rating of 4 going to 5) below:Original unchanged review: This is a long review since it’s very difficult to find much about image-stabilized binoculars for serious birding. BOTTOM LINE: because of the image stabilization, the very high optical quality, and the reasonably high magnification (10x) no birder will have a better binocular view. But there are two big considerations: 1) extra cost and 2) heavy and ergonomically challenging handling. I believe the latter issue is why these are difficult to find to try out or even to see reviewed in birding circles. But image stabilization revolutionized bird photography, and once the kinks get worked out (mainly weight and bulk) it should revolutionize birding binoculars. Binocular manufacturers have reached the point of diminishing returns on optical quality, leaving wide-open much potential for improvement using image stabilization.Many years ago I had a binocular epiphany. At a roadside pull-off in Yellowstone National Park, I saw a man using 8x compact binoculars on a tripod to view a distant grizzly bear. Overcoming my surprise over tiny binoculars on a tripod, I was amazed that the view through his little binoculars was at least as good as what I had with my larger 10x binoculars. Since then, I have been acutely aware of how much vision is improved when there is complete stability. I’ve come to realize that few birders have looked through their binoculars with complete stability (e.g., resting them on a flat surface and not touching them at all). The view is spectacular, and I’d say it’s worth a couple of extra powers of magnification and quite a bit more money.Ever since then, I’ve been wondering what it would be like to have image-stabilized binoculars, but reviews for and by serious birders are very hard to find—hence this review. There are several brands available (but very hard to find to test), but since none seem to cost less than $700 for binoculars that would otherwise go for less than $200 (based on the descriptions), I figure $500 is for the image stabilization feature. These Canon 10x42s are pretty much the only top quality ones out there (outstanding glass, waterproof [inadvertently tested and confirmed], fairly close focus, etc.). Almost every review says they’re heavy (yes, 42g vs 23g for Eagle Optics 10x42 Ranger ED binoculars—my previous standard). But they all say that the view is spectacular, especially for viewing the night sky. Another serious issue for me from the reviews was the limited warranty and high cost of repairing the image-stabilization feature. With all of this in mind, I decided to take a chance and get a pair 6 months ago and am ready to render an opinion for other serious birders.Not only are they heavy, requiring the use of a harness rather than a simple strap, but more importantly they are bulky and have a different (clumsy) feel in the hand. The housing for the two AA batteries for the image-stabilizer fills the gap between the two barrels, just where I’d like my thumbs to go. On the plus side, there’s also a screw hole to readily attach a tripod (but of all binoculars, why would you want to?). Also the objective lenses are perilously exposed in these distinctively shaped binoculars. (This is easily, but annoyingly, corrected by buying two UV filters [52mm threads] and two ¾” wide sunshades [also 52mm threads], totaling about $40. Then throw away the rubber objective covers [which, as everyone says don’t fit anyway] and the binocular case [which all birders already do]).Now to the image stabilization, which is operated by a button using the right middle finger. YES, IT WORKS, removing most of the shake, often giving glorious total image stability. The shake reduction seems comparable to that of image-stabilized DSLR cameras.WITH EXPERIENCE, FIELD USE IS GREAT. After several months of serious birding in a variety of conditions, my hands have finally adapted to the new feel and the weight. The image quality is indeed superb, and all other features besides weight and grip are fine (e.g., eye relief for eyeglasses, close focus, focusing knob, field of view). Since I only use the image stabilization feature for a few seconds at a time and for only a few times per hour of birding, I’m still way below the listed 2-8 hours of battery life (depending on AA battery type and temperature). It’s been great for 1) getting ideal looks at quality birds, 2) warblers high in trees, especially when I’m tired and have shaky arms, 3) waiting for birds to pop out from behind vegetation (here, I might keep the image-stabilizer on for up to 10-20 seconds), 4) coastal birding in strong wind (times when image-stabilizers would be useful for tripod-mounted scopes), and 5) eking out the last bit of magnification for identifying birds almost too distant for regular 10x binoculars (and definitely out of range for regular 8x). The image-stabilization is also useful for following birds in flight. Surprisingly, one-handed use is not just possible, but is actually quite good despite the size and shape of these “big boys.”So, because I knew about the value of a stable image, I took a chance. The binoculars have been rewarding. It has taken adjustment, perhaps not unlike that of bird photographers deciding to switch from an easily portable point-and-shoot high-zoom camera to a bulky 400mm DSLR camera. Anyone considering getting high-end binoculars for their optical quality should give serious consideration to the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars, which give much better views. I’ll go out on a limb here and propose ratings, with 100% being views which can’t be improved upon. I’ll say the highest quality lenses (at notably higher prices) are essentially at their maximum, hence a score of 95%—put them on a tripod or immovable surface and they’re at 100%. I’ll give my Eagle Optics Rangers ED ($350, alas no longer available!) a 92 or 93%, and the Canon binoculars a 94%. With image-stabilization on, they score about 98% of a perfect image, going well beyond what non-stabilized but otherwise perfect optics can do. I would love to see the high-end binocular manufacturers shrink the image-stabilization mechanism and improve the ergonomics. Come to think of it, high quality zoom (something that’s never been achieved in birding binoculars) would be nice, too.Note: I took a double chance and bought a returned pair of binoculars (“damaged box”) at a big discount from Amazon Warehouse. The binoculars had an annoying fine tremor when the image stabilization was on, but I could still often get total image stability for a second or two at a time. After several months of living with it, I called Canon to find out if this tremor was normal. They said “No”, so I shipped them back at my expense. Since the 3-year warranty was valid, they were quickly repaired (the image stabilization mechanism was replaced) and soon shipped back at Canon’s expense. So the support was excellent.In summary, I believe these give the best overall binocular views currently possible for birding binoculars (i.e. binoculars allowing sharp and quick focusing, quick bird-finding, waterproof, etc.), but the bulk (weight and poor fit-in-the-hand) plus the extra cost force a decision on what’s most important—like the decision to go from a high-zoom point-and-shoot camera to a bulky, more costly DSLR camera.

I own several pair of binoculars, from a tiny Minolta through a pair of vintage Bushnell Custom 9x36s. All decent glass, but I've always wanted a pair of image stabilized bins. It's the holiday season, so I thought I'd splurge and give myself a nice present: these Canon 10x42s.After reading every review here, and reviews by astronomy authors, I figured these would be a good compromise between size and features. I own a lot of top-end Nikon lenses for my D800, so I'm fussy about image quality. I know Canon's L series are first rate, despite the brand rivalry, and Canon has the best assortment of IS units. So I took the plunge.Others have covered the technical aspects of binocular optics better than I could, so I'll talk about my hands-on impressions. My first thought was that these are UGLY. Yeah, but who cares? They are bulbous and fairly heavy. The objective lenses are barely recessed, making them vulnerable to damage. I don't believe in putting a filter on a lens unless it provides some needed quality - like a polarizer. Each side of a filter reflects some light, and the possibility of flare from the sun hitting the glass at an angle is increased with a filter. However, the addition of some lens hoods makes lots of sense. They protect the front lenses and they cut glare. So, two of those and 58mm lens caps for them were ordered. The only drawback is that the binoculars are too long to zip up the case.Some have complained about the eyepieces being too hard or too large. I haven't found that to be a problem with my facial dimensions. Yeah, softer cups might be more comfy, but then they don't provide the stable connection between the back of the bins and the front of my face. Their diameter isn't a problem for me, either, but if your interpupillary distance is on the short side, it might be. The rotatable cups increase or decrease the distance between the eye and the rear lens, and they have detents to make symmetrical adjustment easy. Without my glasses, I found the first detent was about right for me. There were two more if I needed to move my eyes farther from the lens.The focus control and the push button for the stabilization don't fall immediately in place for my fingertips. I have to hunt a bit for them, but I suppose I'm at least minimally trainable, so I guess I'll get used to their positioning. I like that the IS stays on after a momentary push of the button, but it shuts off after five minutes. I would have preferred that it stays on as long as the binoculars are horizontal, but that would leave them vulnerable to running down the batteries if they were set down horizontally. The IS shuts off after a few seconds when they are pointed downward, as they might be when hanging around your neck, a good battery-saving feature.The right eyepiece can be adjusted to compensate for differences between the eyes. There is a collar that slides forward to allow adjustment and back to lock that setting in place. It takes only a little force to move this collar, so it might be inadvertently moved, allowing the focus for the right eye to move from its intended setting. I would have liked to see that catch a little more forcefully to maintain the setting.The case is well-made with two zippers and generous padding. With the supplied snap-in objective lens covers, which are a bit of a nuisance to put on and easily fall off unless positioned perfectly, and the eyepiece covers in place, the bins are a snug fit in the case. With the aftermarket lens hoods in place, the case is too short to zip up. Another inch in length for the case would solve this problem, but then the bins would rattle around inside without the additional hoods, so I guess Canon is damned if they do and damned if they don't.So much for the mechanics. Now to the optics.The binoculars work with or without the stabilization turned on. Either way, the image is stunning. With lesser units, you get the impression that you're looking through a tube, but not with these. Once you get the eye relief set with the adjustable eye cups, you'll be treated to a wide apparent field of view, akin to being in the front rows of a movie theater. This makes it easier to acquire your target, especially if stargazing. The image is pin-point sharp from edge to edge, and there is no visible barrel or pincushion distortion. When looking at high contrast edges, like a mountain ridge against a bright sky, there is only the smallest bit of green/magenta fringing near the edges of the field of view. There is no obvious chromatic aberration, and this results in a crisp, well-defined image. The focus is smooth and the depth of field is forgiving of minor focus errors. The focus mechanism is entirely internal, with no movement of the eyepieces as the focus is adjusted. The image is well-collimated so there is no appreciable eye strain. The interpupillary distance is adjusted by rotating the rear eyepiece holders, and they are stiff, so they hold your setting even when placed in the case.The real magic of these binoculars is the image stabilization system. While lying back in a recliner and watching the stars, one can brace the bins pretty well, but when the stabilizer is actuated, it's like you just snapped a photo on your smart phone - the image just sits still. It's one of those OMG moments! Of course, you can still pan to different views, and the pan is smoothed out as well, so it resembles watching a movie shot by a skilled camera operator. It's hard to describe the effect, but the result is vastly improved acuity. Try reading a sign at a distance with the IS off, then try it on. Huge difference! You will LOVE this feature. I haven't tried these in a moving car, but apparently the IS system solves the vibration problem there, as well.These bins are waterproof, not water-resistant. The manual suggests immersing them in a bucket of water to remove dirt and salt residue. That means you can take these out whale watching or fishing and not have to worry about ruining your expensive toy. The rubberized exterior coating also protects the rugged housing from dings and scratches. Because they are sealed, you won't have to worry about them fogging, either.Like any product, these binoculars have their quirks, as I've described above. You can call it "personality" if you're the optimistic type. Overall, I'm thrilled with my purchase. Visually, they are just stunning. Even though the objectives are "only" 42mm, the view of the night sky is amazing. I'm in the Phoenix area, at the NE corner of civilization, where the light pollution is pretty bad. I drove out of the area by about 20 miles to watch a pass of the International Space Station. Looking away from the city, the sky was fairly dark. Looking at Cassiopeia, Perseus, the Pleiades and the Hyades was a thrill. There are so many stars visible that it's hard to pick out the asterisms from the background stars. Some might prefer a higher power for sky viewing, but the wide field of these binoculars makes them a delight to use. The stabilization makes it much easier to study small objects like the Double Cluster in Perseus. The contrast was mind-boggling, even in our polluted skies. I've used these for some bird watching during the day, and I'm tempted to take up the hobby just for the astounding views. Awesome.So, I guess you can tell I like these. You will, too. Go ahead, splurge! You only live once.