[HN Gopher] The button on Canon's image-stabilized binoculars un...
___________________________________________________________________
The button on Canon's image-stabilized binoculars unlocked
superhuman sight
Author : Tomte
Score : 107 points
Date : 2022-12-30 18:31 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.theverge.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.theverge.com)
| fmajid wrote:
| I have the Canon 10x42L IS, the Kite 16x42 APC and the Japan-only
| Nikon Stabilized 10x25. The latter are surprisingly compact and
| highly effective, but eat through the crackpot CR2 batteries like
| popcorn.
|
| The stabilized binocular to beat is the Fujinon TSX1440, but it
| weighs a whopping 2kg.
| riedel wrote:
| Funnily my wife bought just bought a stabilized monocular from
| kite optics (12x25 [1]) today . It really cool how to see how
| much more one can see with stabilization turned on.
|
| [1] https://www.kiteoptics.com/en/nature/products/stabilized-
| opt...
| messe wrote:
| Has anybody used these for stargazing and able to comment if
| they're suitable for it?
| davidcuddeback wrote:
| I haven't personally, but they were getting a lot of praise on
| the forums at cloudynights.com last time I researched
| binoculars (several years ago). I think the consensus was that
| the optics are good, and the image stabilization makes it
| feasible to hand hold at a higher magnification than without.
| ghaff wrote:
| For what it's worth, I've seen Jupiter's moons through a pair
| of these. As I recall, it still helps to stabilize yourself
| against something.
| spdustin wrote:
| I have, and they are! I bought their 18x50 image-stabilized
| binoculars back in 2004, and still use them to this day.
|
| The first number refers to the magnification (18x) and the
| second is the size (50mm) of each objective lens, or the lens
| pointed at the _object_ you're looking at. The larger the
| objective, the more light they can gather.
|
| At night, your pupil is probably 6-7mm in diameter. The 50mm
| objective can gather much more light than your unassisted
| pupils! Those binoculars also weigh over a kilogram, so they're
| best for short handheld sessions if you're standing. If you're
| sitting or lying down, you won't tire as quickly.
|
| They're wonderful for looking at globular clusters and nebulae,
| as well as for viewing Saturn or Jupiter; the Galilean moons
| are easy to spot! For lunar viewing, the stereoscopic view
| actually feels _almost_ 3D.
|
| Keep in mind, though: most binoculars aren't specifically
| designed for astronomical observation. You won't be able to
| attach ND filters, polarizers, or emission filters. So your
| best bet is to use them from dark skies with good "seeing"
| where you can just lay back and enjoy the view as you scan
| around trying to do a Messier Marathon. :)
|
| Edit: it does have a standard tripod screw on the bottom, so a
| monopod with an added trigger-ball grip can make extended
| observation sessions more comfortable. Many binoculars require
| a bracket to mount to a monopod/tripod, but image-stabilized
| binos aren't hinged; their relatively flat bottom means that
| larger image-stabilized binos often have a tripod screw.
|
| 2nd edit: I tracked ISS across the sky (with the stabilization
| on) last year, and I could clearly make out its shape.
| irrational wrote:
| There is another comment on here that says
|
| > Perfect for observing birds, planes, double stars, nebulae,
| satellites, and planets. I can't resolve Saturn's ring, but
| Jupiter and its moons and the Hercules cluster are not to be
| missed.
| germinalphrase wrote:
| Cloudynights.com would be the place to ask.
| nullc wrote:
| I have a pair of the 10x42 stabilized canon binoculars. I think
| they're very good though over-priced (esp compared to the price
| of an IS supertelephoto canon lens). I didn't get them for
| astronomy but they get used for that some.
|
| I also have zhumell 25x100 binoculars (which also get oemed
| under a number of other brand names). These are huge and must
| be used on a tripod.
|
| The canon are easy and convenient to use. As a result they get
| used more often. That said, for astronomy the big binoculars
| are obviously better. E.g. A couple weeks ago I looked out the
| window with the 25x100 and the blue glow of the Orion nebula
| h-beta emission was quite obvious to me, but I couldn't really
| see it with the canon. Juipter's moons are always nicely
| visible on the big binocs but harder to see with the canon. On
| the astro binocs jupiter almost always gets a "wait! are those
| moons?!?".
|
| But it's just not compatible in the sense that the canon gets
| used when the big ones often don't. You can just lay back in a
| lounge chair with the canon and gaze at the vastness of stars
| (which are much more visible through the 10x42 than the naked
| eyes). You're not going to do something like that with 25x100
| binos except with some kind of cantilevered balanced mount that
| looks like a dentist tortured device. :) (laying back is
| advised: the canon is still kinda heavy even if nothing
| compared t the astro-monster)
|
| I don't particularly enjoy eyepiece astronomy-- my interest w/
| astronomy is in imaging via telescopes.
|
| I have the astro binocs for the benefit of guests and I've
| found in general that guests don't have the intuition or
| patience to correctly focus them (and it's hard for me to do it
| for them because I'm -3 diaopter so if I focus for myself it'll
| be wrong, and even through my glasses I'm still at the wrong
| distance). This is a place where the canon beat out the astro
| binocs too, because the stabilization prevents shaking/blurring
| the frame when you adjust focus so it's much easier for an
| untrained person to get it right. Similarly, I find guests will
| actually manage to make the IPD adjustment on the canons while
| they tend to give up on the zhumell, as it takes a lot of force
| on those.
|
| So I would say that if you're considering the canon stabilized
| binos for other reasons and wonder if they'd work for astro
| too: Absolutely. If you're looking for astro binocs though
| there are better results at a lower price possible if you're
| willing to put up with the tripod. Without a tripod I don't
| think you can beat the stabilized binocs.
| bbbbb5 wrote:
| These are absolutely game-changing while driving, makes spotting
| cop cars a breeze.
| ReaLNero wrote:
| Wow, it lets you see behind trees and street corners? The
| device is practically paying for itself at that point!
| bbbbb5 wrote:
| No, unfortunately not. For that I just use an USRP to alert
| on nearby TETRA handsets, not super reliable though.
|
| There are UK companies with a similar commercial products
| https://www.targetblueye.co.uk
| https://www.pythondetectors.com
| aliqot wrote:
| Woah, didn't know these existed. Thanks!
| bbbbb5 wrote:
| This has been a really fun project to work on during the
| weekends, definitely recommend it. Next step for me will
| be to get automatic direction finding working, hopefully
| will finish that during the next year.
| ornornor wrote:
| Are you speeding while looking out for cops through binoculars?
| bbbbb5 wrote:
| Obviously the binoculars are for the passenger, I don't think
| you'd be able to continue driving for very long otherwise.
| codethief wrote:
| Reminds me of the war stories Arne Toman tells about his
| Cannonball Runs[0] from NYC to LA. Apparently, the front-seat
| passenger ("spotter") is _constantly_ (for hours!) on the
| lookout for cops using binoculars.
|
| Toman is this guy:
|
| > In May 2020, Arne Toman, Doug Tabbutt, and spotter Dunadel
| Daryoush set the new cannonball record of 25 hours and 39
| minutes in a modified 2016 Audi S6 disguised to look like a
| Ford Taurus police interceptor. Police-evasion modifications
| included brake light kill-switches, radar detectors, laser
| diffusers, CB-radio, and a roof-mounted thermal camera.
| Performance modifications included a trunk-mounted 67-gallon
| auxiliary fuel cell sourced from the car used in Toman and
| Tabbutt's 2019 cannonball run, modified turbochargers, an
| upgraded heat-exchanger, and custom ECU tuning that allowed for
| engine-mapping to be changed on-demand to suit either 91 or
| 93-octane fuel; allowing the car to generate an estimated 600
| horsepower. The run achieved an overall average speed of 110
| miles per hour (180 km/h) for the entire run, with average
| speeds upwards of 125 miles per hour (201 km/h) across some
| states, and which at no time exceeded 175 miles per hour (282
| km/h).
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannonball_Run_challenge
| ManuelKiessling wrote:
| These people are risking other people's lives for their
| stupid rich-people hobbies. It's disgusting, really.
| bbbbb5 wrote:
| I think you might be severely overestimating the risk,
| people doing these runs obviously do everything in their
| power to spend as much time on empty roads as possible.
| codethief wrote:
| I am a bit torn. I attended a talk by Toman and he
| mentioned that, apart from having a spotter on the
| passenger seat, they have many spotters along the entire
| way and also use drones and thermal cameras to spot cars,
| so they always know ahead of time what's coming. In
| particular, he said that they slow down to legal speeds
| whenever they get near another car.
|
| Given all that, I don't think the risk is _that_ crazy high
| anymore but I do see where you 're coming from.
| mellavora wrote:
| I usually don't have binoculars up to my face while driving. It
| interferes with the peripheral vision.
| _caw wrote:
| I own a pair of the 10x42s and they are indistinguishable from
| magic. When you press that button, the wobbly image becomes rock-
| solid and allows you to perceive and enjoy way more detail than
| would otherwise be possible.
|
| Perfect for observing birds, planes, double stars, nebulae,
| satellites, and planets. I can't resolve Saturn's ring, but
| Jupiter and its moons and the Hercules cluster are not to be
| missed.
|
| A tripod doesn't solve the same problem. You can walk around,
| pass these to other people, take it on a hike, use them in a car.
|
| Some downsides: expensive, battery maintenance, and heavy (not as
| much a problem with smaller pairs.)
| tobr wrote:
| This piece is not actually about the button, but about the image
| stabilization. It's just part of an article series called "Button
| of the month".
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| What a button effects is core to the very concept of "a
| button".
| password4321 wrote:
| At those prices I'd see how close I could get using a tripod
| first.
|
| Very cool technology though for sure!
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| No you wouldn't, because you're not carrying a 5kg tripod with
| you (and you'd need one, because any less bulky and you don't
| get a stable platform, you get a wobbly one) just to look at
| some birds at a random moment during a walk without
| inconveniencing the people you're walking with because you had
| to set up your rig. Over and over.
|
| You just carry binoculars, and the image stabilization makes
| that experience immeasurably better. Good glass costs money,
| the cost of the image stabilization only tacks on a small
| amount compared to the rest of the cost of a pair of high
| quality binoculars.
| password4321 wrote:
| I'm pretty sure I would, for what it's worth. I do appreciate
| your willingness to guarantee frustration.
|
| I'm thinking more pre-planned stationary observation for sure
| though.
| yadaeno wrote:
| I had these for whatever reason growing up. At the level of zoom
| they stabilize, there wasnt much shaking to begin with. If you
| are using more powerful binoculars you might as well just get a
| tripod.
| LarryMullins wrote:
| The article says they're available from 8x to 18x. 18x is
| fairly substantial, I bet the stabilization is very useful at
| that level of zoom.
| a9h74j wrote:
| FWIW, I find just looking at the world through binoculars can be
| consciousness-changing, as might be putting on glasses for the
| first time by someone with poor sight.
| johndhi wrote:
| This weirdly makes me sad. Having grown up with a dad working on
| microscopes and studying them in college, I have significantly
| above average ability to look through a lens. It's sad to think
| my son won't be able to feel the satisfaction of getting that
| right, as I have.
| fortyseven wrote:
| Why do people always feel bad that their offspring won't suffer
| the way they did?
| Espressosaurus wrote:
| There are image-stabilized cameras and lenses around, and they've
| been around for awhile. Modern mid to high end cameras all have
| image stabilization on the sensor, and most longer lenses have
| stabilization as well to achieve between 3 and 5 stops of
| achieved stabilization.
|
| You're not going to get a camera in your binoculars, but you can
| get a stabilized camera with some long lenses. If you pay enough.
| stinos wrote:
| _You 're not going to get a camera in your binoculars_
|
| Sure you can, that is actually a thing, though image quality
| isn't all that from what I heard and it's also not offered by
| the major brands (I think). Probably because it's really hard
| to make something high quality.
| porphyra wrote:
| For something high quality, I have heard great things about
| the Kowa Prominar 500mm f/5.6 FL, which can either be used as
| a spotting scope or mounted to a camera as a lens.
| Apparently, the image quality is amazing, but then again it
| is also rather expensive (can be found on ebay for around
| $1000-1500 but retailed for more when new).
| porphyra wrote:
| Hmm, the binoculars cost $800. For that amount, you could buy a
| budget APS-C or micro four thirds body with IBIS and pair it
| with a vintage telephoto prime if you wanted to do some image-
| stabilized photography. Obviously, this combo would be less
| portable and less suitable for just looking at stuff.
| rscrawfo wrote:
| Honestly, you probably don't even need a vintage lens. If you
| look for a deal the Panasonic 100-300mm lens if fairly
| affordable and very stable with sync is.
| haswell wrote:
| Having shot extensively with this lens on an Olympus OM-D
| camera with IBIS, I can confirm this is a great option.
|
| It's an incredible kit for the size and price.
| pkaye wrote:
| I found an video showing off the image stabilization.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsy4SMrsT4
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-30 23:01 UTC)