I bought a pair of secondhand canon 12x36 IS II off evilbay & over the next few days will do a comparison between these two..I bought the canon because when birding i would like to magnify a little deeper -i am also curious to test the Image stabilising function - which i have only ever used with d-slr (works well)
Overall ergonomics: even thought the canon is a porro - it looks much more like a roof imo. The mass i have not accurately measured but the binos feel about the same score = 0
. Holding in the hands the canon are bulky into the middle due to the electronics/battery compartment but they feel good & fit my hands quite well. The regal's actually feel skinny to me - I am 6'1/2" and while my hands are overly large the regals seem to have my fingers overlapping somewhat - in this respect the canon are much preferred by me. score 1 = canon
The neck straps are quite similar - neither being impressive (for long birding walks i will always take my bino harness (a good $15 investment)
The cases are both soft cases - neither would stop any sort of serious impact. the celestron feels quite nice - & hugs the binos. The canon feels flimsy in response - and is overly long, with a strange tilt at one end - the case is not rectangular but is longer on one long side..(i don't see why) score 1 = regals
The lens covers on the canon are invisible - the regals while having lens covers are totally in-adequate, both brands score = 0 for lens covers (these companies should do better for a $5 cover)
The regals have a nice single eyepice cover with bendable centre -it holds the ep's & does not fall off..it is attached to the neck strap. The canon have cheap pop on separated caps - fallen off first time i took them out of the case score = 2 regals.
The ep's themselves have about the same size glass - the regals have a green tint whereas the canons have a orange/brown tint. The regals have hard twist up eyecups - the canons soft flimsy eyecups - now that i wear glasses while observing i much prefer the soft rubber - which i can roll down - without glasses it is down to personal preference. The diopter adjustment on the regals is quite stiff, the canons quite smooth. score = 2 canon
I looked at the rubber lens covers i got from EO for the regals -they don't come close to fitting the canon's I don't understand why the lens housing is so big for only 36mm of glass - i presume it fits their 42mm bins as well.
Using my laser pointer subjectively i tested for reflections off the glass. he regals ep's reflected more light than then canon's. Off the objective lens it was fairly close..i checked a couple of times but i think the canon's had it just. score = 3 canon
close focus - no contest, regals = 3
It was almost dark by the time i got home, i had an opportunity to briefly check out the IS - firstly i (looking for shake) noticed how much shake there is at 12x - i was quite amazed as i have never used more than 10x hand held. The IS button needs to be presses for stabilising to take effect - it is not an ON/OFF button, but press for ON - the IS worked very well...comparing with my small shakes, the IS smoothed everything out.
For someone who has not looked thru the IS, i would say it is like the difference between a human having a fit...and a human doing the robot dance. The robot has definite slow movements compared with the jitters of the fit (not trying to offend anyone here)
I will report more optical comparisons when the weather clears - both day & night time views
I forgot - i checked the baffling..both seem quite well baffled - both had many tiny ridges..the regals had a larger pair - i will see if it makes any difference. Testing the reflections on the trotting track lights 1/2 mile away I would say on axis looking directly at light source the canon was ahead, the regal had 2 clear diffraction type spikes - the canon had virtually none. Off axis (light just outisde the fov) the regal appeared a fraction better - but the extra mag of the canons i think was amplifying the stray light slightly more.
score canons = 4
I tested this afternoon during overcast conditions - the regals were not really noticeably brighter. Looking at the sharpness the canons clearly had the edge
score = 6 canons (2 for sharpness). I could see more detail..it was like using a macro lens compared with a normal lens for close shots (the extras mag i think contributed)
i also thought at distance i detected a hint of CA in the regals, the slightest green tinge..the canons had none.
I also tested the close focus..i managed slightly better than 5m..i guessed maybe close to 4m looking at a small bird in a tree
Tonight thru the clouds got a brief look at the stars - the regals are very good out to 80%, fair from 80-90% then poor last 10%. The canons i feel were excellent to 80%, v good to 90% then fair last 10%...I am really surprised how well the pinpoints in them were- on axis then right to the edge..better than the fuji 16x70 at the edge of the field
score = canon 7..a clear winner & i'll be keeping them (anyone know where i can get a soft WP case for them to protect them)
it is extremely useful at night - for pointing out astronomical features in the sky.
They're not illegal in the UK, but their power is restricted. Mine strobes to keep the average power output down.
Hi dannat,
You've discovered the Canon IS, imo the best kept secret in binocular technology today.
You can probably save your money about the WP case, the glass is pretty weather resistant.
I cannot understand why this palpably superior technology has not become a basic standard for any high end binocular.