I liked the previous (version II)
iteration of Canon’s 12x36 IS binoculars, but the stabilisation was too slow
and clunky. Recently, they’ve released an updated IS III version. In this
review I find out if it’s any better (spoiler alert: it is).
Canon 12x36 IS III
Review
The first pair of Canon’s 12x36 IS
I owned were great in some ways, but flawed in others. I sold them, with some
regret afterwards, almost a decade ago. Since then
I’ve flirted with another pair, because I recall them being excellent for
astronomy. So recently (2020) I decided to get a pair of the latest spec’ (IS
III) to see if I still liked them and what (if anything) has really changed.
I’ve left the original review for
reference or for those shopping used. You can read it here.
At A Glance
|
Magnification |
12x |
|
Objective Size |
36mm |
|
Eye Relief |
14.5mm |
|
Actual Field of View |
5° |
|
Apparent field of view |
55.3° |
|
Close focus |
7m |
|
Width x Length |
150 x 174mm |
|
Weight (my measurements) |
650g w/o batteries (~700g with) |
Data from Canon/me.
What’s in the Box?
The packaging for the IS III
version has changed subtly. It’s still a depressingly basic box, though, if
you’re used to deluxe packaging from Swarovski and Zeiss. Good for the
environment, I guess.
Design and Build
The
Canon IS range has no less than five different groups:
·
8x25, 10x30 and
the 12x36 on test here, which share a similar non-waterproof design, are light
weight and fairly cheap
·
Premium 10x42s
which are fully waterproof, have special lenses and are mainly aimed at birders
·
Larger, more
expensive binoculars of semi-waterproof design, with ED lenses: 15x50 and 18x50
·
Recent small and
light-weight ‘pocket’ binoculars in 8x20 and 10x20 sizes
·
A new range of
32mm models featuring a different type of IS derived from their camera lenses
Both
these and the 18x50s I reviewed a few years ago are still made in Japan; I
don’t know about the others.
It
might sound as if Canon have parked the existing models and these 12x36s do look
the same as my original pair almost a decade ago. But close examination reveals
that these say ‘IS III’ whereas the originals ‘IS II’: there has been a whole
new stabilisation release since my last pair. As we will see, the stabilisation
on these is indeed much improved.
All
Canon’s original IS binoculars (like these) work on the same principle: a
computer detects movement and alters the shape of a special flexible optical
element to compensate and cancel the jiggling your hands induce. You activate
this system by simply pushing a button. The most recent 32mm models have a
different system derived from their cameras lenses that features a dual-action
stabiliser with an ‘IS light’ option; I haven’t tried them yet.
Body
All
the Canon IS binoculars use a type of porro-prism (not the roof prisms more
commonly found on high-end binos), but their design
looks nothing like other porros, partly because these are Abbe-Porros (Porro
II).
Not
only do the Canon IS 12x36s look different from other porro-prism binoculars,
they work differently too. Instead of the whole body pivoting to accommodate
different eye spacing, just the eyepieces pivot. The hinge-less plastic body has
the appearance of an electronic gadget rather than fine optics, more like a
Canon camera in fact.
I
weighed the 12x36s at just less than the claimed 660g dry (~700g with 2xAA
batteries): a little heavier than the Canon 10x30s and about the same as
Nikon’s conventional 10x35 EIIs. This is in 32mm birding bino’ territory and is
a big plus point.
The
12x36s are some 24mm longer than the 10x30s, too – due to the longer objective
housings to accommodate their longer focal length lenses. Nonetheless, like the
10x30s, these are a very compact binocular, as compact as many 10x42s.
Unlike
the more expensive models, these don’t offer any special sealing against water
ingress (the 50mm models are basically splash-proof, the premium 10x42s fully
waterproof). Their composite body is covered with a thin black rubbery armour
that helps grip, but isn’t a fluff-magnet like some.
The
objective housings are rubber and so should offer good protection for the
glass.
Stabilisation
is powered by two AA batteries which should last several hours of continuous
use.
Focuser
is small, but smooth and fast!
Dioptre
adjustment is simple but effective.
Focuser
Most
porro-prism binoculars like these focus by means of moving eyepieces, but on
these it’s the objectives that move. The focusing action is super smooth, light
and accurate, though: better than most binoculars, but not quite as fast as
some birding roofs. There is plenty of travel past infinity too, to cater for
diverse prescriptions.
Close
focus is a real weak point at 4m or more. That’s much more than almost any
decent birding bino’. You wouldn’t buy these for insects, flowers or watching
birds at close range. However, close focus to infinity is much less than a
turn.
To adjust dioptre, you just twist the right eyepiece, but it
is (and has to be) quite stiff to avoid moving it by accident.
Optics - Prisms
As I have said, the Canon 12x36s use porro prisms, albeit
with a slightly different geometry Canon refer to as ‘Porro II’ (aka
Abbe-Porro). These are basically the type in your Grandad’s old binos’, but they have serious advantages over the roof
prisms found in most modern birding binoculars. For one thing, porro prisms
don’t need mirror coatings, so they transmit more (and scatter less) light. For
another, porro prisms don’t need special phase coatings to deliver high
resolution. Thirdly, porros typically deliver tighter star images with fewer
‘spikes’ than roofs.
Despite poorer coatings (see below), the Canons are actually
brighter than a pair of premium 12x birding binos I
reviewed recently - Meopta’s 12x50 HDs - during the
day, due to those high-transmittance porro prisms.
Optics - Objectives
The objectives look to be conventional air-spaced doublets,
with no special dispersion elements, combined with a focusing lens.
Canon boasts of its ‘Super Spectra’ coatings and this is
supposed to be an area of upgrade over the old IS II model. The coatings – of a
bluish green hue - do deliver a cool, neutral tone to the view, but are simply
more reflective than the best (see comparison with premium Meopta
coatings below).
Behind those objectives, though, lies all the IS magic – the
real-time-deformable lenses that work by altering the light path to provide
image stabilising.
Canon’s ‘Super Spectra’ coatings look more reflective (i.e. worse) than the Meopta’s.
Internals feature concentric ridges to provide baffling
against stray light. No anti-flare baffles in front of the lens rings though.
Optics - Eyepieces
The
eyepieces are a fairly simple design, but they do incorporate a doublet field-flattener.
They have a pretty standard field of view of about 5° true, 55° apparent –
same as Nikon’s 12x50 SEs - but it’s pretty flat and usable to the edge thanks
to those flatteners. Modern premium birding 12x50s usually have about another
half degree field width.
Eye
relief is stated by Canon as 14.5mm, which is what I measured from the rim of
the eyeguards. This is enough to make them quite
comfortable if you view with specs on, but perhaps not enough for everyone to
see the whole FOV with glasses.
Unfortunately,
the fold-down rubber eyecups are less convenient for glasses-wearers than the
click-stop type, especially if like me you share them with someone who doesn’t
wear glasses. They are also a magnet for fluff.
Those
pivoting eyepieces may also be less accommodating for eye separation than more
conventional designs. If you have a narrow IPD (inter-pupillary-distance) you
should try before you buy.
Rubber
eye cups are fiddly to fold, absolute magnets for fluff and dust.
Accessories
The
10x36 IS come with a decent zipped fabric case and a thinner-than-most strap. There
are no objective caps, just individual ones for the eyepieces.
A
couple of niggles. Those strap lugs making fitting the strap near impossible: I
had to use medical tweezers in the end. Meanwhile, the strap for the case isn’t
removable at all.
The
required two AA batteries are included and supposedly last about four hours in
continual use.
Accessories
are pretty basic at this price point.
In Use – Daytime
Ergonomics and Handling
The Canon 12x36s are surprisingly light weight and generally
very easy to handle, once you get used to the unusual, all-in-one, body shape.
I found them much easier and less tiring to use than the big and weighty
18x50s.
The focuser falls easily to finger and though the knob is
quite small, the action is very smooth and fluid. Focusing is perfectly
accurate with no slop or play, no nasty shifts when changing focus direction.
Focus ‘snap’ is probably the most absolute I’ve ever experienced in a binocular
– optical quality is supreme (this is Canon, after all, makers of some of the
finest camera lenses and the objectives for Takahashi telescopes).
The
binoculars are easy to hold and with the eyecups folded away they are
comfortable for me with glasses on. Like many longer eye relief eyepieces, they
are a bit sensitive to blackouts as you shift eye position, but not as bad as
the Nikon SEs, for example.
These
aren’t a big pair of binoculars, but their black-plastic Sony Walkman looks aren’t
going to get you any compliments at the local hide.
No
admiring glances for these Canons 12x36s when I’m out birding on the local
prom’, but they’re unobtrusive to wear.
Canon’s 12x35 ISIIs are great for
wildlife viewing and long range birding, whilst for those of an ‘aeronautical’
inclination, they’re are an amazing tool for plane
spotting and ... err ... similar activities:
The canons deployed at a scenic overlook not far from White
Sands, NM ;)
Blue Origin’s rocket test facility near Van Horn, Texas:
snapped through the Canon 12x36 ISIIIs with my iPhone.
The View
Initial
impressions (before pressing the magic button) are pretty good: a sharp,
bright, flat field of view with good contrast and excellent resolution, even
without the IS. The field of view is a bit narrow compared with Alpha 12x50s,
which can make tracking birds on the wing difficult, but is as good in other
ways. Flare is well controlled, false colour less so (more on that later).
To
delve into further into the view, we need to press the button ...
Stabilisation
To
activate stabilisation, you have to press a button on top and keep it pressed
(some of the other models just need one press for on and another for off). It
takes a few seconds for the stabilisation to really kick-in, it’s not instant.
Then, miraculously, all the micro-jiggling stops and you suddenly see more
detail, lots of it.
Compared
to the smaller 10x30 model, my previous 12x36s IS IIs took longer to settle
after hitting the button. But this IS III stabilisation seems much less
intrusive, certainly less noisy, than my original pair with IS II. Now the
stabilisation settles within a second or two.
The
original 12x36s didn’t take well to being panned, making a chattering noise and
giving a strange jerkiness to the edges of the view. Those faults have now been
rectified. These are mostly silent, so much so that the stabilisation no longer
gives an aural cue at all.
The
previous version suffered from some fade in and out of focus and cyclical
blurring, not these. Once settled, the stabilisation is close to perfect –
magically it’s like they’re tripod mounted, they’re that good. Only the
occasional slow drift or click reveals the IS in action.
Those
few remaining quirks are the price you pay, though, for much-improved
resolution - beyond anything hand-held 12x binoculars would reveal without a
support. Don’t under estimate this: resolved detail improves dramatically
when you push the button. You think you’re seeing all the detail, then when
you hit the button you realise how much you were
actually missing. Some examples:
There’s
a flock of small birds in a tree 200mm away, no idea what they are. Press the
button and they’re Goldfinches, showing all their plumage detail – orange heads
and yellow wing bars – far more clearly even than with unstabilised
bino’s at 18x.
I
can spot some birds way out on the bay sands and floating in the bright water.
They’re at least 500m away and I can’t make any kind of I.D. Hit the button and
they’re Pintail ducks.
A
plane glides slowly past the crescent Moon in black silhouette against a twilit
sky. It’s an aggressive delta in a steep turn, canted over. Looks like an old Saab
Viggen. Love that plane. But really? No, I push the button and now I see the
canards up front are small and the delta is a simple triangle without the
Viggen’s change of rake. So it’s a Euro Fighter.
A
plane flying in the airway at altitude overhead is a passenger jet of some
sort, I can just see that. Hit the switch and the orange and white livery, big
engines and wing shape clearly identifies it as an Easyjet
Airbus.
Flat field?
The doublet field flattener means these do have a fairly flat
field and the central sweet-spot is large. The very edge does soften a bit
after 70%.
The field of view is a bit narrow at 5°, but the field flatteners mean it’s all usable.
Chromatic Aberration
By
modern Alpha standards, false colour is the 12x36 ISIII’s only real Achilles
Heel.
High-end
Canon IS models use ED elements to control chromatic aberration. The cheaper models
like this one don’t. Consequently, under some circumstances, they do suffer
from significant purple and green colour fringing around the edge of
high-contrast subjects.
Under
normal use in temperate climes, it’s mostly only visible when viewing things
silhouetted against a bright sky (e.g. birds in high
branches). But then I took them to Yellowstone in winter to watch wildlife. In
brilliant snow-and-sun conditions – watching buffalo rootling in snowy meadows
– the purple blur became quite serious and very distracting.
If
you’ll be using binoculars for wildlife viewing in snowy conditions, or maybe
birding over bright water, you might want to choose a different pair.
The
false colour comes from both the objectives and the eyepieces and seems a
little worse with stabilisation active.
In Use – The Night Sky
Despite
their small aperture, Canon’s 12x36s work amazingly well for astronomy. You
expect them to be dim, but they’re just not.
The
flat field is great for extended objects and star fields. Stars do become
distorted by astigmatism, but only from 80% field width and not before; even
then the distortion is limited and asterisms are still recognisable at the
field stop.
Compared
to a premium pair of 12x50 birding bino’s these are just gonna
be so limited on deep sky, though, right? Uh uh. I
carefully compared them with Meopta’s excellent Meostar HD 12x50s by looking for the faintest stars I could
see in both the Pleiades and Orion’s sword. In both cases, the Meopta’s went deeper with the Canon’s IS off (though
not by as much as I was expecting). But press the magic button and the 12x36
went every bit as deep, maybe … and here’s the thing … deeper.
The Moon
The
12x36s show more detail on the Moon than about any other hand-held binoculars I
can think of (except the Canon 18x50s!) In some ways these show you more than premium
12x50 or even 15x56 birding/hunting binoculars, such as Leica’s 12x50 HDs or
Zeiss’ Conquest 15x56 HDs. Resolution is way better, but so too is contrast.
Mainly this is because the view is so much less jiggly, but don’t discount the
effect of the extremely sharp and high-res porro-prism optics.
There
I was, writing a review for some big scope when a three-day crescent winked at
me through the window. So I switched off the lights,
settled back in my armchair and set about learning some new crater names with
the 12x36s.
Sure,
like you I knew the big names - Petavius and Langrenus with their central peaks on the southern limb,
the mountainous edge of Mare Crisium with Cleomedes and Macrobius nearby. Atlas and Hercules and dark floored Endymion
in the north; huge Janssen in the south. But what about Isidorus north of Mare
Nectaris? Or Vlacq and Rosenburger
south of Janssen? If you love the Moon, but live in a city with nowhere to set
up a telescope this is exciting stuff: real exploration from a warm armchair.
A
few days later, I easily resolved the bright-rayed 27 km crater Menelaus. And
unlike normal hand-helds, I didn’t need careful
breathing to do it. Honestly, the clarity and detail astonished me.
To
be clear: the available detail was much more than with even the highest powered
hand-held, non-IS binoculars and felt like much more than just 12x.
Venus
If
you want to take an occasional peak at a planet with binoculars, Canon’s 12x36
IS IIIs win over un-stabilised designs, even premium ones. You can just about
make out Venus’ crescent phase (usually a tall order for binoculars) and the
brilliant platinum crescent generates no nasty flare or ghosts and just a trace
of false colour.
Mars
Near
the 2020 opposition at about 20” in apparent size, a brilliant and high Mars
surprised me by showing an obvious disc, again with no nasty flare or ghosts.
Jupiter
The
Canon 12x36 ISIIIs pass the “Jupiter test” with no flare or prism-spikes
whatever. Near opposition, the slightly flattened disc is perfectly sharp and
surprisingly large, just like the view through a small telescope. A suggestion
of a dark equatorial band marking the cloud belts? Maybe.
The
four Galilean moons are incredibly easy to follow as they change position from
night to night – way easier to track than with any ordinary hand-held binos.
Saturn
You
can make out Saturn’s rings as ‘handles’ (the way Galileo drew them) and easily
find Titan, which to my eyes has a more golden hue than a silvery white Jovian
moon.
Deep Sky
Theory suggests 36mm objectives are too small for deep sky,
but even with the IS off the Canons did well, finding all the Messier objects I’d expect to find with 12x50s. But with IS
enabled, they were actually better than a conventional pair of high-end 12x50s
in most cases, something that really surprised me.
The Auriga clusters and M35 nearby all showed their bursts of
individual stars with direct vision, the Starfish revealing its unusual shape.
The Double Cluster looked beautiful too. The 12x36s gave one of my best ever
binocular views of the Great Nebula in Orion: the extending arms of nebulosity,
the rear dark lane and the other patch of misty nebula around Nair al Saif. The
Pleaides were full of stars, both bright and glittering, faint and shimmering.
Stars are particularly point-like and intense.
Even the Andromeda Galaxy looked good and only its neighbour
M33 was a bit dimmer and less distinct than through the 12x50s.
Overall, though, I preferred the Canon 12x36 IS IIIs to just
about any other higher-powered hand-held binocular for astronomy. Say goodbye
to shakes and trying to steady the view, say hello to rock-steady high-resolution
views like a small telescope. And unlike the previous version, there just
aren’t the IS-downsides either.
Viewing the magnificent dark skies at McDonald observatory
with the 12x36s.
Canon 12x36 IS vs Canon
15x50 IS
If you want a pair of stabilised
binoculars with a middling magnification that’s more general purpose than the
18x50s, you’ll probably consider these two options. Let’s compare them point by
point:
·
The 12x36s are much smaller and lighter to carry or
travel with
·
The 12x36s are a lot cheaper
·
The 12x36s use ‘ISIII’ which feels more fluid and
less intrusive
·
The 12x36s have more eye relief for spec’s wearers
·
The 15x50s claim waterproofing, whilst the 12x36s
are just splash-resistant
·
The 15x50s have an ED element in their objectives
and suffer (slightly) less from false colour fringing
·
The 15x50s have a very useful permanently-on mode;
the 12x36s don’t – you have to keep the button pressed
·
50mm objectives do capture a lot more
light for deep sky than 36mm ones
If you own other bino’s and just want a single-minded extreme
distance viewer, buy the 15x50s (or the 18x50s). For general use, the 12x36s
are much more user friendly – I regularly travel with them and use them as my
only bino’s, taking them hiking and sight-seeing as well as to dark sky sites
(see above); I wouldn’t do that with the 15x50s.
Canon 12x36 IS III vs Meopta Meostar 12x50 HD
The Meoptas are in some ways state
of the art for high-power birding bino’s and are close to the best in most
areas. I’ve mentioned them many times in this review. Direct comparisons with
the Canons are surprising.
·
The
Canons’ field is narrower but flatter
·
The
Canons are a little brighter by day, probably due to the higher transmittance
of their porro prisms (Canon’s coatings appear worse)
·
Resolution
is equal without IS enabled. With IS enabled, hand-held resolution is
enormously higher in the Canons
·
The
Canons have slightly too much false colour in some circumstances, the Meoptas almost none under any and all.
·
The
Meoptas focus much closer
·
The
Canons are about 430g lighter and shorter too
·
The
Meoptas are fully waterproof, the Canons are not
·
The
Meoptas offer a more conventionally lovely view by
day and offer a macroscopic function the Canons can’t
·
The
Meoptas have a 30 year
transferable warranty. The Canons are an electronic appliance and have only two
(but will reportedly take some 10 years of hard use)
For general birding and nature viewing, the Meoptas would likely be your choice, especially over snow
or water due to the Canon’s false colour problem. For long-range birding,
wildlife, spotting and especially for astronomy, the IS gives such a giant
advantage you’d choose the Canons.
Summary
The
previous-version 12x36 IS IIs were an excellent binocular compromised by
stabilisation that was sometimes slow, jerky, noisy and intrusive. Not this new
IS III model. Now, the stabilisation is as subtle yet effective as the 10x30s,
perhaps more so. It’s also completely silent in most cases. Activation is
immediate and there is none of that intermittent fuzziness you used to get. It
just works, seamlessly and near perfectly.
In
terms of the basic optics, it’s good news too: sharp, bright and very high-res,
with good suppression of stray light. Their only real fault is more false colour than the latest HD designs.
Handling
is good too. They are light and very wieldy; the focuser is super-smooth and
accurate. The eyepieces offer a reasonably wide flat field and plenty of eye
relief, with the old-fashioned fold-down eyecups the main negative point.
For
me these 12x36 IS IIIs are now the best compromise between the slightly
under-powered (for astronomy) 10x30s and the much heavier (and costlier) 50mm
models with their clunkier stabilisation.
For
birding I would be hesitant to recommend them, though, despite their huge power
to ID at distance: they aren’t waterproof, don’t focus close and have too much
false colour for birds in high branches or on the wing, or when viewing in the
snow or over bright water.
But
for astronomy (or spotting), they are simply outstanding. If I had to be without
a telescope again, I would rely on a pair of these for quick looks at the Moon
and planets; surprisingly (given their modest aperture) for DSOs too.
The
only troubling thing for me is just how unappealing the shakes are in normal
bino’s once you’re used to these. I find myself reaching for a button on every
pair now.
I
was so impressed I’ve kept the Canon 12x36ISIIIs for myself, mainly for travel,
but for quick looks between the clouds too.
Despite
too much false colour in very bright conditions, the Canon 12x36 IS IIIs get my
highest recommendation for outstanding ease of use and resolution. No
un-stabilised hand-held binoculars come as close to a telescopic view. This
makes a difference by day, but is a killer-app for astronomy.
OR Buy Canon 12x36 ISIII from Wex here:
