Does anyone here have and use them? I'm looking at Fujinon 14x40 and Canon
15x50 and 18x50. Input and experiences appreciated.

I've used the Canon 15x50 and they work just fine on land or if the boat is
relatively stable, eg on the ICW -- good optics and sharp images - I like
them a lot. Offshore, forget about it unless it is almost a flat calm --
out there I still prefer plain old 7 x 50's, any decent brand. Is it
Fujinon that has a model with much more active stabilization designed for
rougher conditions? That might be worth a try but I would like to try them
out before laying out that kind of $$$!
Scott
"just me" wrote in message
. ..
Does anyone here have and use them? I'm looking at Fujinon 14x40 and
Canon 15x50 and 18x50. Input and experiences appreciated.

"scott" jsodellatgmail.com wrote in message
...
I've used the Canon 15x50 and they work just fine on land or if the boat
is relatively stable, eg on the ICW -- good optics and sharp images - I
like them a lot. Offshore, forget about it unless it is almost a flat
calm -- out there I still prefer plain old 7 x 50's, any decent brand.
Is it Fujinon that has a model with much more active stabilization
designed for rougher conditions? That might be worth a try but I would
like to try them out before laying out that kind of $$$!
Scott
"just me" wrote in message
. ..
Does anyone here have and use them? I'm looking at Fujinon 14x40 and
Canon 15x50 and 18x50. Input and experiences appreciated.

I've had my Fujinon 14x40 "Techno-Stabi" for several years, and do find them
useful at sea. I haven't tried the Canons, but the stabilizer on the Fujis
works well enough under most conditions. I still reach for my unstabilized
7x50 binocs most of the time, but if I want higher magnification the Fujis
have been useful. The optics are quite good, and the stabilization handles
the boat motion, even in fairly rough seas. There have been times when the
motion was too much for them, but there is some operator technique involved
as well. They do burn through batteries pretty quickly (the 4xAAs last for
a few hours of active use).

If my budget were tight, I would really consider how much I needed them
before spending the considerable cash. Depending on where and how you sail,
they might be just the ticket, or they might be an expensive plaything (not
that there's anything wrong with that!). The stabilization is good, but it
won't work miracles.

Regards,
Paul

"just me" wrote in message
. ..
Does anyone here have and use them? I'm looking at Fujinon 14x40 and
Canon 15x50 and 18x50. Input and experiences appreciated.


I've had the Canon 12X36 model for quite a few years now and really like
them.

just me wrote:
Does anyone here have and use them? I'm looking at Fujinon 14x40 and Canon
15x50 and 18x50. Input and experiences appreciated.




I've used a Canon 10x30 IS as my primary helm station binoculars for 6
years and have liked them a lot. The stabilization combined with
light weight allows me to read buoy numbers much further away than
normal 7x50's. Actually, the nicest thing is being able to see the
moons of Jupiter or Andromeda Galaxy.

I'm a bit of an optics junky and own the Canon 15X50 IS model. They are
very nice...but the optics on my far less expensive Fujinon's are a bit
nicer. My feeling is that a good pair of Fujinon's will serve MOST
people perfectly well.
Here are some things to consider:

1) Unless you buy the larger 50mm size Canon's you'll still need a
larger standard objective binocular for use in failing/low light. Even
Canon's 10X42's are not as bright as a good pair of 8X50's.
2) Many folks can hold a 10X50 binocular very steady on board. I know I
can with both hands. But with the Canon's you can almost hold them
one-handed and keep the image steady. Impressive.
3) Avoid the non waterproof versions of the Canon's.
4) Anything smaller than the 10X42's will be less effective in failing
light. The few people I know who owned the smaller models traded them
back.

You can go nuts with all of the high end optics out there. But the
truth is that high quality optical manufacture has trickled down to the
low end. 150 dollar binoculars, such as the rebadged Boat US model I
bought a year ago, are at least as good as my Fujinon's (cuz that's
what they are!). As for the Steiner's....I don't like them.
In the end the Canon IS 10X42 or 15X50 are very nice gadgets if you
want/need them. But NO ONE can give you the final word on this because
everyone's eyes are different. Try them for yourself.

Good luck,


Robert B
Beneteau 35s5
NY

Hi Capt. Rob:
What is it that you don't like about the Steiner's? Is
it a paticular model, or Steiner in general.

--

SeeYaa Harbin Osteen KG6URO

When American Citizens with dual citizenship pledges allegiance
to the flag, to which flag do they pledge allegiance too?

-
"Capt. Rob" wrote in message oups.com...


Snip....Snip..
You can go nuts with all of the high end optics out there. But the
truth is that high quality optical manufacture has trickled down to the
low end. 150 dollar binoculars, such as the rebadged Boat US model I
bought a year ago, are at least as good as my Fujinon's (cuz that's
what they are!). As for the Steiner's....I don't like them.
Snip....Snip...

Good luck,


Robert B
Beneteau 35s5
NY

You can go nuts with all of the high end optics out there. But the
truth is that high quality optical manufacture has trickled down to
the low end. 150 dollar binoculars, such as the rebadged Boat US
model

There are many things that go into quality commanding a higher price.
Optics is one. Design features of compactness and lighter weight while
still rugged is another. Shock resistance to being dropped and kicked?
Quality of sealing resistance to water is yet another. Resistant? How
much? Waterproof? What does that mean? A dunking or submerging for
several hours? A combination of the foregoing and more to be MilSpec?
Warranty of a couple years, a few, 5, 10, 30?

There are times when one really gets what one pays for. Now and for the
next 30 years through very harsh conditions and treatment. For 27 years
from now the MilSpec Steiners bought this Xmas will be replaced or
repaired under warranty.

Practical Sailor recently did a review of image stabilied binoculars.
Fujonon came out on top.

Peter
s/v Now or Never!

What is it that you don't like about the Steiner's? Is
it a paticular model, or Steiner in general.


Twice I've been given Steiners as gifts and twice I returned them.

1) Optics are average by today's standards. I prefer the Fuji's and
even a 300 dollar pair of Orion Savanah's I own are better. The BoatUS
model made by Fujinon is an even match optically for 1/3rd the price.

2) Big problem-Inter-ocular design is poor. The eyepieces are set too
far apart for many users at the closest setting, especially younger
folks and some smaller ladies.

3) Handling is okay for my larger hands (though NOT comfortable), but
my wife found them hard to hold.

4) Finally...I don't like a Binocular without a center-stem focus. It
means constant adjustment for more than one user. With a center focus a
second user can at least get one side quickly focused!

5) With most of these binoculars being weatherproof and rugged, the
Steiner survives on their name more than anything else.


Robert
35s5
NY