Canon 12 x 36 IS III arrived

[IB20]

Any recommendations for batteries? The manual warns against Li AAs. 

[JeremyS]

I just use Duracell batteries.

[corso]

Just want to say thanks for the info, I ended up upgrading my Nikon 10x50 to the Canon 12x36 iii and the difference is incredible. You do lose some FOV, and certainly without IS the 10x50s pick up far more stars, but once you press that IS button it is incredible how much more you can pick up and you notice how much wobble there is even when you think you are rock steady.  Slight irritant that the button isn't locking, but if you can stretch the budget definitely recommend. 

[IB20]

19 minutes ago, corso said:

Just want to say thanks for the info, I ended up upgrading my Nikon 10x50 to the Canon 12x36 iii and the difference is incredible. You do lose some FOV, and certainly without IS the 10x50s pick up far more stars, but once you press that IS button it is incredible how much more you can pick up and you notice how much wobble there is even when you think you are rock steady.  Slight irritant that the button isn't locking, but if you can stretch the budget definitely recommend. 

Congrats! One of my best Astro purchases. Insanely good, will never go back to non stabilised bins.

[corso]

i know, inclined to agree, even for birding - which is a worryingly expensive precedent!

[Second Time Around]

I've now sold all my other bins and just kept the 12x36s. I find the 12x magnification and the light weight the perfect combination for image stabilised binoculars. Despite my hands not working properly, I have no problem holding the button down.  I soon got used to it.

Cloudy Nights member Pinac has done field tests on lots of binoculars including measurements of actual vs claimed eye relief. Here are the claimed and measured useable eye relief for many of the Canon IS range. As you can see some are actually underestimated!

8x20 - claimed 13.5mm - measured 13mm

10x30 II - claimed 14mm - measured 15.5mm

12x36 III - claimed 14mm - measured 15.5mm

10x42 - claimed 16mm - measured 12mm

10x32 - claimed 14.5mm - measured 13.5mm

12x32 - claimed 14.5mm - measured 12.5mm

14x32 - claimed 14.5mm - measured 13.5mm

I can't quite see the full FOV with glasses but with my deep set eyes I rarely can anyway!

Unlike the 10x30s you can fashion a dewshield to fit.

The only thing I don't like is that the minimum focus distance is 6m/20ft. That's not a problem of course for astronomy, nor for my own birdwatching as it's over water or open country.

However, I am considering a pair of Pentax 6.5x21s for dragonflies etc as they focus as close as 0.5m/20ins.

Edited October 21 by Second Time Around

[corso]

useful detail, thank you

[Shimrod]

On 21/10/2024 at 22:45, IB20 said:

Congrats! One of my best Astro purchases. Insanely good, will never go back to non stabilised bins.

Same here, and they've enabled me to grab quick observing sessions when I have been unable (or unwilling) to set up my telescope. In fact most of my observing has been done with these binoculars in the last year.

[Space Hopper]

I have a pair of 15x50 is that are over 20 years old  now.

I purchased them to watch the transit of Venus (June 2004 + homemade filter) and i still use them today and are still going strong !!

[corso]

18 hours ago, Space Hopper said:

I have a pair of 15x50 is that are over 20 years old  now.

I purchased them to watch the transit of Venus (June 2004 + homemade filter) and i still use them today and are still going strong !!

do you find the reduced FOV frustrating for star hopping, think i'd struggle with any less, though would be nice to have a bit more reach sometimes?

[Space Hopper]

34 minutes ago, corso said:

do you find the reduced FOV frustrating for star hopping, think i'd struggle with any less, though would be nice to have a bit more reach sometimes?

........I also have a pair of 10x30is !