It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 1:04 pm


Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 10:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:33 pm
Posts: 3
I've had a pair of these for a few months now and am generally very pleased with them, however during some preparation I noticed that there was a noticeable amount of chromatic aberration / colour fringing when looking at high contrast objects such as a bird on a wire against a daytime sky.

My questions really are : does anyone else own this model and have any experience of this ? Also, am I being a bit fussy and maybe should expect some fringing on extreme contrast like that ? I might expect it on lower end binoculars, but these were £400.

Any comments/help appreciated.

_________________
Derek


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Posts: 5117
Derek.
I have had the Canon Mk II 10x30 IS for several months.
This example has the best stabilisation of all the many Canon IS I have used.
They vary sample to sample.

Your £400 was an absolute bargain if it is as good as mine.

The new 10x32 IS is currently £1299.
I don't know if the 10x30s will be dropped.

The CA is perfectly reasonable. They don't have L glass.
The very steady, high resolution image shows aberrations more easily.

Regards,
David


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:05 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:33 pm
Posts: 3
Thanks, that's interesting.

These are the ones I bought :

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00XX6A9XQ/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I found this discussion on Cloudynights :

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/569778-anyone-use-a-canon-10x30-is-for-astro/

Seems like there are some very differing opinions about these binoculars, including CA experiences.

You may have a good point about the CA being more obvious when stabilised. As you say, the stabilisation is very good. I'll assess them again over the weekend.

_________________
Derek


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:05 am
Posts: 4762
Location: Lancashire
As you will know David, there are electronically stabilised binoculars and mechanically stabilised ( using an internal gyroscope ) that Ziess and the Russians have produced.
Do you know if the latter need batteries to activate the gyroscope? Or is there some sort of windup spring mechanism, like in the old Edison phonographs?

_________________
brian


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:25 am
Posts: 5117
Brian.
The Zeiss use a magnet. No batteries. Mechanical.
There is a Russian one 50mm aperture but only effective 35mm as the stabiliser moves the part of the objective used. Mechanical no battery.
Then a Russian military crazy giroscope one that takes about a minute to get up to orbital speed. 4 (or 8??) batteries from memory. Sounds like demented foxes at night.
Something similar used by British military maybe rebranded name.
Fujinon 4 batteries?
Nikon batteries.
Bushnell 10x35, batteries.

There are also gyroscope platforms. I suppose using batteries for cameras? or binoculars?

Then several monoculars using batteries. Opticron and others.

Williamson medium format hand held camera uses a spring wind. Later Agiflite electric I think.
Leningrad camera spring wound.
Robot camera spring wound plus many other sprung wound camera different formats.
None stabilised jut use motor springs.

Regards,
David


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 7:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:33 pm
Posts: 3
Just to complete the story - I couldn't persuade myself that the amount of CA was acceptable, so sent them back. I'd had them 7 months but Amazon accepted the return with no quibble and refunded the money straight away.

_________________
Derek


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Sep 16, 2017 1:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 11:05 am
Posts: 4762
Location: Lancashire
Thanks David for the interesting information. If you want binoculars for astronomy Derek, you'd be better off with 8X40 or 10X50 bins, as they collect more light and give a brighter image

_________________
brian


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 17, 2017 9:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:32 am
Posts: 204
Location: New Farnley, Leeds lat 53.8N long 1.6W
I agree about 8x40 and 10x50 bins over expensive stabilised ones with smaller effective apertures - certainly for astronomy. And, you know for 30 to 50mm bins you can adapt to and tolerate the lack of stabilisation, up to point, when hand held. I routinely make my brighter variable star estimates in seconds simply with hand held bins in this class. If I want more stability I rest my elbows against a solid structure, eg the edge of the hut roof, and I can use 15x70s in that manner too. Obviously prolonged views demand a steady platform, but patience and practice will make ordinary 8x40s serviceable. Kind thoughts bob.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group