Image stabilised binoculars.
Discussion
GetCarter said:
I can read number plates at 1500 yards... try that without IS.
I have the previous generation Canon 12x36 IS binoculars, I bought them for wildlife, but I would say 95% of the time I've used them for astronomy. Have you looked skywards with yours? Your night skies must be pretty special.nellyleelephant said:
I have the previous generation Canon 12x36 IS binoculars, I bought them for wildlife, but I would say 95% of the time I've used them for astronomy. Have you looked skywards with yours? Your night skies must be pretty special.
I have a telescope for the sky. It does get bloody dark here in winter. Not proper dark at all at the moment.My father bought a set of 10x30 I think Canon IS at least 15 years ago to use on a boat. I was using them recently again after many years not having picked them up. Astonishingly good still.
While expensive at the time, I don't think they were relatively anywhere near as much as they cost now which is interesting. New tech at the time, so perhaps sold at much less than cost to build market share or profile.
While expensive at the time, I don't think they were relatively anywhere near as much as they cost now which is interesting. New tech at the time, so perhaps sold at much less than cost to build market share or profile.
sgrimshaw said:
peterperkins said:
Intrigued went and Googled = £1500 
"Only" £1199 at Park Cameras if it helps 
Wonder what the new Leica phone is going be like as a camera. It has 1-inch 20.2-megapixel CMOS image sensor and f/1.9 aperture combination, with electronic image stabilization and low-light time-of-flight autofocus with 6x digital zoom. Tad more expensive as $1700!
https://newatlas.com/mobile-technology/leica-leitz...
I bought Canon 14x32 IS bins last year and love them. I have had Minox and Swarovski ... whilst the Swarovski are awesome my hands shake even with 8x so the fact I can use the Canon 14x is brilliant !
I was warned off IS binoculars a few years ago as heavy and a gimmick. They are neither heavy (the newer ones anyway) and defo not a gimmick.
I was warned off IS binoculars a few years ago as heavy and a gimmick. They are neither heavy (the newer ones anyway) and defo not a gimmick.
I had a sort of spotter's post for Chas and Di's wedding. I was given gyroscopic binoculars. It was the first time I'd used them and I found them very difficult to use against an individual, especially in a crowd. A slight movement of anyone I was looking at resulted in precession, with one 'side' going down and the other up. We had a tripod with us - a rifleman was with me - and I used that with the gyroscope(?) switched off and they were superb. Clever though they probably were, a tripod made everything crystal. I could read lips.
Derek Smith said:
I had a sort of spotter's post for Chas and Di's wedding. I was given gyroscopic binoculars. It was the first time I'd used them and I found them very difficult to use against an individual, especially in a crowd. A slight movement of anyone I was looking at resulted in precession, with one 'side' going down and the other up. We had a tripod with us - a rifleman was with me - and I used that with the gyroscope(?) switched off and they were superb. Clever though they probably were, a tripod made everything crystal. I could read lips.
Check out the latest. Old tech was (as we all know) crap.GetCarter said:
Blimey... what a difference.
I've had a pair of Canon 12 x 32 for about 6 months now and am still amazed at the difference (hand held obs).
I can read number plates at 1500 yards... try that without IS.
...not that I use them to read number plates of course, I'm not that sad.
I bought a pair a few years ago - great things.... the depth of field always looks superb too. I forget what I paid - it was a lot.I've had a pair of Canon 12 x 32 for about 6 months now and am still amazed at the difference (hand held obs).
I can read number plates at 1500 yards... try that without IS.
...not that I use them to read number plates of course, I'm not that sad.
GetCarter said:
Check out the latest. Old tech was (as we all know) crap.
I had to almost sign away my life in order to be allowed to use them as they'd cost a lot and were brand new. I carried them, the tripod and my chair (plus sarnies and thermos) from the nick to a building overlooking St Paul's forecourt. They were heavy. Dirty great object lenses; for daylight! As my rifleman and I crossed the already crowded Ludgate Hill, the crowd suddenly started cheering. I looked around to see why, and someone called out, 'They're cheering for you, you silly buggers.' My colleague and I played to the crowd, raising our arms (arm for me as I couldn't move the one carrying the binoculars and tripod) to generate more cheering. As we got to the other side, a chap, with an East End accent said, 'Don't get cocky boys; they cheered the Corporation s
t van as well.' Best put-down ever.The binoculars were so heavy as to be impractical. The only way to use them was to prop my elbows on the low wall around the flat roof, which more or less rendered the gyroscopes pointless. I turned them on Di as she came away from St P's in the open coach, zooming in, and she looked directly at me. Quite unnerving. It was as if she was remonstrating with me for not checking the crowd (doing my job in other words).
I've used stabilised ones at a GP, and found them great for follwing the action. Not much point for me, though. Still a little heavy for a prolonged period. On the upside, it meant that my mate let me borrow them a few times.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff