Image stablised v monopods

[osbourne one-nil]

Could a pair of binoculars on a monopod match the image stability of a similar pair of binoculars with in-built image stablisation? You'd have thought a monopod would be at least as good, but having had a mess around yesterday with my 8x42s resting on fence posts, etc, I'm wondering if it takes a tripod to provide a similar level of stability.

I really really really.....really like the night time view through my 8x42s, but I just wish they'd stay still. I really like the IS feature on my 12x36s but I wish they were optically as pleasing as my 8x42s. Happy to invest in a monopod but if the image is still not going to hold at least as steady as an IS binocular then I wouldn't think it worthwhile and it might be better simply to kill two birds with one stone and think about a paid of 10x42 Canons. 

The fact that it's my birthday soon is pure coincidence. 

[PeterCPC]

Use a tripod.

Peter

[osbourne one-nil]

Yes, that would certainly solve any stabilisation problems but my worry is I'd lose some portability and freedom issues. Of course, I wouldn't really as they're still portable and you I could move it around just as freely as a monopod. I just want to be able to go out within a mile radius of the village and enjoy the night sky, like I did last night. I imagine the right tripod would prove no obstacle to that. 

[JTEC]

I much prefer a monopod over a tripod. Very steady with my 7x50s and much more flexible in use, standing, seated or lying down. A tripod is fine for just staring at one thing - if you feel like carting one about - but no good for sweeping around, which is one of the things bins are best at. 

[osbourne one-nil]

So the 8x42s on a monopod should be pretty rock steady too? What have I got to lose!

[jetstream]

7 hours ago, osbourne one-nil said:

I really like the IS feature on my 12x36s but I wish they were optically as pleasing as my 8x42s.

I'm looking for binoculars and was wanting to try Canon IS- how are they on the stars and objects like M31/M81/M82?

In what way are they not as good as the Leica?

I had a VG pair of old Pentax but they broke unfortunately so in the market now.

[osbourne one-nil]

They're not as expensive so they can't be as good! In reality, I just really like the field of view the 8x42s give me and with no mechanical interference, I find the view to have a real "wow" factor with the image essential perfect. The Canons are great, truly remarkable, but I'm always aware that there's a little bit of something going on behind the scenes. Of course, when looking through the Leicas I'm always aware that they don't have image stabilisation, so I'm just looking to provide them with a little bit myself. 

I've not actually tried the Canons on Andromeda yet, but on M81 and M82, you can definitely make them out. They're there....tiny, but there and this is where I am starting to really appreciate binocular astronomy because it makes me feel like a kid again when the thrill was just in actually seeing something and trying to comprehend what it was, without worrying about tracking or making sure you're getting every little bit of detail. I'm hooked!

[jetstream]

15 minutes ago, osbourne one-nil said:

They're not as expensive so they can't be as good! In reality, I just really like the field of view the 8x42s give me and with no mechanical interference, I find the view to have a real "wow" factor with the image essential perfect. The Canons are great, truly remarkable, but I'm always aware that there's a little bit of something going on behind the scenes. Of course, when looking through the Leicas I'm always aware that they don't have image stabilisation, so I'm just looking to provide them with a little bit myself. 

I've not actually tried the Canons on Andromeda yet, but on M81 and M82, you can definitely make them out. They're there....tiny, but there and this is where I am starting to really appreciate binocular astronomy because it makes me feel like a kid again when the thrill was just in actually seeing something and trying to comprehend what it was, without worrying about tracking or making sure you're getting every little bit of detail. I'm hooked!

You have excellent binoculars

I know what you mean about some optics grabbing the attention. I want a pair of IS binos for the boat, wild life observing and the sky. I seem to have a hard time getting rock steady views free hand.

On the other hand I really like top views. Question- which Canon IS version should I buy? I have zero experience and zero knowledge re IS

ps- I tried Leica and Zeiss binos out in a store onetime.... and ran out before I bought a pair lol! they were both stunning, better than my good Pentax.

[osbourne one-nil]

I had a pair of 10x30 which I loved but after 10 years some of the lubrication seemed to be leaking onto the prisms. I opted for the 12x36 as their replacement because Argos had a good deal on at the time and from what I read, the price/performance combination was good. It is! Had I not just got the Leicas I probably would have gone for the 10x42 Canons but I think for the sort of price they are, I'd want perfection and it seems like they're not perfect. They're very very good, but some seemingly silly things like uncomfortable eye cups and their weight (which isn't a silly thing) kept gnawing away at me. 

[jetstream]

1 minute ago, osbourne one-nil said:

I had a pair of 10x30 which I loved but after 10 years some of the lubrication seemed to be leaking onto the prisms. I opted for the 12x36 as their replacement because Argos had a good deal on at the time and from what I read, the price/performance combination was good. It is! Had I not just got the Leicas I probably would have gone for the 10x42 Canons but I think for the sort of price they are, I'd want perfection and it seems like they're not perfect. They're very very good, but some seemingly silly things like uncomfortable eye cups and their weight (which isn't a silly thing) kept gnawing away at me. 

I wonder which IS is needed, I see II's, III's and then other systems. I'm kind of reluctant to get the most expensive ones as they might see hard use, well actually they will. Theres button push ones and ones on all the time I think etc.

I too wonder about the IS price and if a smaller pair might be all I need.

[JTEC]

Here’s how I use the monopod with my Nikons. It’s a Manfrotto.  You get a lot of stability.  Not that I wouldn’t like some IS bins as well ... 😊

[jetstream]

5 minutes ago, JTEC said:

Here’s how I use the monopod with my Nikons. It’s a Manfrotto.  You get a lot of stability.  Not that I wouldn’t like some IS bins as well ...

Excellent!

I've never seen a monopod before and now understand how it will add rock solid stability. Hmmm, maybe a pair of small IS for the boat, trekking and conventionals with monopod for the stars.

Great images JTEC, thank you.

[osbourne one-nil]

Not sure I'd get up from the lying down one. Do you have a head on top of the monopod? Of course, my Leicas seem to need a strap type adapter...all seem to be unavailable at the moment. 

[JTEC]

6 minutes ago, osbourne one-nil said:

Not sure I'd get up from the lying down one. Do you have a head on top of the monopod? Of course, my Leicas seem to need a strap type adapter...all seem to be unavailable at the moment. 

😊 There’s no ball head or similar on there. You could, of course, include one.  But I find enough range without and not having one, I think, makes for greater simplicity and directness. It’s nice to just point the ‘unit’ without having extra knobs to fiddle with. It does take hand wobble out of it - a bit like a long putter in golf. There is an L shaped angle that screws straight onto the monopod top and, at the other end, screws into the front of the central bar of the bins. 

[osbourne one-nil]

We think along similar lines....as far as binoculars go anyway. I've been wondering whether a separate head is really necessary, particularly if I got something like this - https://www.3leggedthing.com/trent

Now I either need to find a tripod adapter for my binoculars. 

[JTEC]

Here are a few pics of the adapter etc.  The bins are Nikon Action Shoreline 7x50s  6.4degree.  As you can see, they have a screw hole at the front to accept fittings; it had a plastic cover but that’s lost.  The adapter is marked ‘Opticron 31005’. It has a choice of two holes on its short side that fit the monopod top end. That has a standard thread to fit the base plate of,  for example, a DSLR or to receive a head of some sort. Fully extended, the monopod measures 64 inches. Extended, it remains very solid. Hope that’s some help 👍🏻

Edited April 9, 2020 by JTEC

[JTEC]

I don’t think the ‘three legged thing’  would be so good because it wouldn’t allow you to angle and move the support about as freely - the monopod is such a good combination of stability with flexibility. If you were going for three legs, a normal tripod would be more stable than the item in the link, as far as I can see. But then you lose the flexibility. 😐

[osbourne one-nil]

Thanks both...I posted the wrong link as I'd just get the monopod itself. The foot element of it is just an add on, although it would allow the monopod to pivot round still, but I wouldn't go for that configuration. I like the fact that the monopod is 2m tall so would allow viewing standing up and also gives me scope for a growth spurt. 

As for the tripod adapter, alas the Lecias don't have a screw thread like most do. I'm guessing because they're only 8x42s that is considered superfluous. 

[Stormbringer]

1 hour ago, osbourne one-nil said:

Thanks both...I posted the wrong link as I'd just get the monopod itself. The foot element of it is just an add on, although it would allow the monopod to pivot round still, but I wouldn't go for that configuration. I like the fact that the monopod is 2m tall so would allow viewing standing up and also gives me scope for a growth spurt. 

As for the tripod adapter, alas the Lecias don't have a screw thread like most do. I'm guessing because they're only 8x42s that is considered superfluous. 

Yeh but at our age only growth spurt will be sideways 🤣

[osbourne one-nil]

Nonsense...mirrors just get more distorted as we get older!

This looks ideal actually. I love their stuff anyway and this has a built in head for vertical movement. They do a universal binocular holder too. 

https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=257&sprache=english

[JTEC]

2 hours ago, osbourne one-nil said:

Nonsense...mirrors just get more distorted as we get older!

This looks ideal actually. I love their stuff anyway and this has a built in head for vertical movement. They do a universal binocular holder too. 

https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=257&sprache=english

Does look to be just the ticket! assuming it will attach well to your bins. I had a Berlebach tripod - all excellent quality kit, as you say.

[DaveL59]

awaiting the arrival of this one, Giottos M5570 monopod with tripod foot option. Hopefully it'll be more useable than the shorter Slik monopod that I already have.

[PeterW]

I was pleasantly surprised with my 12x36 on M44/45 recently. Sharp and pleasing result, binoculars enable you to detect fainter stars.  You still need to hold them steady so the IS can take out the fine scale vibrations. I have recently started to take offence at the stars going off rubbish near the edge of the field, which could get expensive!

 

I prefer to lie on the ground looking up (like JTEC!), the bins pressing into my head, with a pillow you can then look lower. Much away from zenith adding a monopod to help add some stability. The views reclining  a camp chair and a monopod can be quite stable too. Tripods have the fatal flaw that you can’t get under them and parallelograms have long arms that can wobble. I have a cheap trigger ball head on the top of my monopod that I have glued thin foam strips to so my hands don’t freeze on the metal parts! Those opticron L adapters are as solid as a rock and cheap too.

 

I’d recommend the 12x36 IS  as a good compromise as a not too heavy or expensive. The 15/18x have some following, but are quite heavy, the 10x is very well regarded and robust but much more costly. I keep my 12x in a peli 1150 (IIRC) case and make sure I take good care of them. The III version has even better stabilisation I understand. (Mine are II and probably >15yrs old). For daytime use I now more regularly use a Nikon 8x30E2, wider field and easy to use.

The Leica/zeiss/swaro might technically be optically better, but try hand holding a 12x and the wobbles will reduce what detail you can see. With IS you can get a perfectly steady view holding them with one hand… showing off.

 

Peter

[jetstream]

50 minutes ago, PeterW said:

try hand holding a 12x and the wobbles will reduce what detail you can see. With IS you can get a perfectly steady view holding them with one hand… showing off.

Great info Peter, yesterday a buddy gave me an old set of binos to use and get me in the game. I'm looking at trading some astro stuff in on the Canon 10x42L, we'll see. I used to always have binos, usually cheaper ones laying around but not now. My Pentax were good in the daytime but were lacking at night.

Lawnchair observing is gonna take a step up over here soon I hope.

[Stormbringer]

6 hours ago, osbourne one-nil said:

Nonsense...mirrors just get more distorted as we get older!

This looks ideal actually. I love their stuff anyway and this has a built in head for vertical movement. They do a universal binocular holder too. 

https://www.berlebach.de/?bereich=details&id=257&sprache=english

Ahh its the mirrors fault lol 🤣

that monopod really looks the part tho 🍻