-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Anyone use Canon 15 x 50 Image Stabil BINOS?
- Thread starter Milf Dots
- Start date
I've used older sets of 10x extensively. The IS is quite good, if you need IS. If you're not using them out of a plane/helicopter/speeding truck you probably don't need IS, you need a good tripod.
And as I always tell guys, Don't put them to your face without the IS engaged. Green light engaged, not orange. If you engage it while looking through them, they 'snap' and you'll make yourself sick.
And as I always tell guys, Don't put them to your face without the IS engaged. Green light engaged, not orange. If you engage it while looking through them, they 'snap' and you'll make yourself sick.
I had a 15x50 pair years ago. Might have just been my eyes, but I could never truly get a "clear" picture with the IS turned on. Holding them as still as I could, I could always detect a small amount of image blur and fuzziness around objects. I never got used to them and sold them for a traditional pair of 15X Meopta binos which I much prefer.
I have had the 10x42 L for about a year now and they are my go to!
The 10x are the only L glass variant so can not attest to the other models but they are as good if not better than my steiners plus they have IS so it is a no brainer! Wish they would make an L variant of the 15x.
The 10x are the only L glass variant so can not attest to the other models but they are as good if not better than my steiners plus they have IS so it is a no brainer! Wish they would make an L variant of the 15x.
Attachments
Your opinion on quality of glass, and usefulness of IS when on land and not at speed in a vehicle. thnx
Optical quality for the Canon 15x50 is pretty dang good in my opinion. Definitely better than the non-HDX 16x42 Zulu6 that I had previously. The Zulu had more CA but was still very usable and the Canon is not completely free of CA. The Canon 15x and 18x have one UD (ED) lens while the 10x has two UD lenses. Some regard the 10x with those two UD lenses to be at or near the premium level of optical quality, for whatever that is worth.
I think that my ED50 spotting scope with 16x fixed EP has better resolution than either but that might not be a fair comparison. I have not seen the new HDX though.
I have only directly compared the Canon 15x50 to the SLC 15x56 one time and it was indoors at an expo center. However, I used a textured grid pattern as an optical target to get a rough idea on resolution. The thing that was most noticeable was how much brighter the 56mm was. But with that brief viewing, using tripods, I couldn't see any extra detail with the SLC than the Canon. Obviously not a exhaustive test but I was pleasantly surprised.
Of course the Canon brings IS to the table compared to the SLC. I have used the Canon standing freehand to spot impacts at shooting matches, and just finding targets. It's awesome for that. And on a tripod it works really well too. Some people wonder why one would use a tripod with IS but they compliment each other. High wind and bumping the tripod have minimal effect on IS. So you might get away with a lighter tripod with IS.
The Zulu stabilization is even better, but the Canon works fine. I used the Zulu to watch bucks at one and two miles seated with no tripod. One mile is pushing it, but they are lighter than the Canon.
My suggestion would be to try the Canon or Zulu HDX, or both, and see what you think. To me, 15x or 16x with IS is something that I don't want to be without although I would still like to rent 15x SLC for a better comparison!
I think that my ED50 spotting scope with 16x fixed EP has better resolution than either but that might not be a fair comparison. I have not seen the new HDX though.
I have only directly compared the Canon 15x50 to the SLC 15x56 one time and it was indoors at an expo center. However, I used a textured grid pattern as an optical target to get a rough idea on resolution. The thing that was most noticeable was how much brighter the 56mm was. But with that brief viewing, using tripods, I couldn't see any extra detail with the SLC than the Canon. Obviously not a exhaustive test but I was pleasantly surprised.
Of course the Canon brings IS to the table compared to the SLC. I have used the Canon standing freehand to spot impacts at shooting matches, and just finding targets. It's awesome for that. And on a tripod it works really well too. Some people wonder why one would use a tripod with IS but they compliment each other. High wind and bumping the tripod have minimal effect on IS. So you might get away with a lighter tripod with IS.
The Zulu stabilization is even better, but the Canon works fine. I used the Zulu to watch bucks at one and two miles seated with no tripod. One mile is pushing it, but they are lighter than the Canon.
My suggestion would be to try the Canon or Zulu HDX, or both, and see what you think. To me, 15x or 16x with IS is something that I don't want to be without although I would still like to rent 15x SLC for a better comparison!
Last edited:
A lot of it depends on your use case, if you are running them on a stable tripod most will not compare well at all to high end bino glass optically. That said in wind etc. even tripods can induce quite a bit of shake and IS can help with that. The other place they tend to fall short is light gathering, so if dawn/dusk is a big factor for hunting etc. the non-stabilized binos have a big advantage. The other downside of course is you can't get a rangefinder/ballistic solution if you care about that. Also only a couple versions are waterproof if I remember right, so some are not really hard use/rain sealed etc. I really wish Canon would make an L series 15x version.
If you are hand holding them, or of course moving/hiking etc. and you don't want to carry a tripod, then they can be nothing short of amazing. The stabilization more then makes up for the loss of glass quality in many situations. For example I do a lot of 3D archery shooting and I've owned the big $ binos, Zeiss, EL's, Leica's etc. and a 12-15x pair of canon's were MUCH better at trying to see if an arrow cut a line than high end bino's were without stabilization due to handshake. In fact pretty much everyone that has looked through them that use high end binos offhand are amazed how much detail they can resolve. Not because they are better optically, because they take out handshake.
A great test is reading license plates, you can read a license plate much further/better with a 15x pair of canon's handheld than a set of 12x EL's. On the flip side if you tripod mount them at dawn/dusk the EL will win easily.
If you are hand holding them, or of course moving/hiking etc. and you don't want to carry a tripod, then they can be nothing short of amazing. The stabilization more then makes up for the loss of glass quality in many situations. For example I do a lot of 3D archery shooting and I've owned the big $ binos, Zeiss, EL's, Leica's etc. and a 12-15x pair of canon's were MUCH better at trying to see if an arrow cut a line than high end bino's were without stabilization due to handshake. In fact pretty much everyone that has looked through them that use high end binos offhand are amazed how much detail they can resolve. Not because they are better optically, because they take out handshake.
A great test is reading license plates, you can read a license plate much further/better with a 15x pair of canon's handheld than a set of 12x EL's. On the flip side if you tripod mount them at dawn/dusk the EL will win easily.
