Image stabilized binos?

[analog_peninsula]

A while back I had a pair of entry level Canon stabilized binoculars. They were great for sporting events, but were lousy in low light with mediocre glass and something like a 3mm exit pupil. Is anyone familiar with the more recent models? How do you rate them, and what’s the good, bad, and ugly?

 

[Cooposo]

I got the the SIG SAUER ZULU6 HDX 16x42 after a debate this spring in which I was trying to decide between image stabilized 15x+ binos vs non IS 15x+ binos on a tripod vs a spotter on a tripod. I’ve used them a decent amount hunting rock chucks and spring bear here in Idaho.

Overall I’d rate them extremely highly.

The great: The IS technology works well and consistently. At one point my dad was driving about 40 mph on a graded gravel road and I could comfortably still observe pronghorn in a meadow a few hundred yards away. This with hand held 16x binos! I consistently found more rock chucks with the Sigs than I do with my Swaro EL 8.5 x 42 just because the IS helps so much with helping me pick up movement. Mine are also lightweight, which helps for long sessions. During dedicated glassing sessions I find myself fiddling with tripods enough it eats into my glassing time- with my Zulu 6 I’m wearing my Swaros on my chest and using the Zulu 6 for all my long range work. No tripod needed. I don’t miss a spotter, but I am not worried about counting rings on a sheep or measuring tines on a big elk or deer either.

The good: Glass quality and low light performance. No companies (as far as I know) are putting true alpha glass in IS binos. But my Sigs have good glass, and that combined with the IS technology makes it a great package. Having said that, my eyes have always gotten along well with Sig glass, so your mileage may vary. Low light performance is acceptable- if I could no longer resolve an animal in my Sigs it would probably be too late for me to want to shoot it. Exit pupil is fine. I have to do a little more work to get a full field of view with my Sigs than with my Swaros, but it’s not too bad.

The bad: Glare. I don’t know if it’s the tech or the lens coatings, but glare can be pretty bad in mine.

Overall: My 16x42 Sig Zulu 6 HDX and my 8.5x42 Swaro ELs are different tools for different jobs, and I love having both of them on me. The decreased glass quality of the Sigs is largely made up for by the impressive IS tech. I’m excited to take both to Africa, where my wife or brother will carry one and I’ll carry the other.

For extreme detail at close ranges, for close to moderate range area scanning, and for run-and- gun hunting / thick vegetation I’m reaching for the EL 8.5s and their superior resolution and light transmission. For observing animals at moderate to long ranges, for glassing at longer range, and for any time I’m in a vehicle (even stopped but with the engine running) I’m using the Sigs for their IS. Regardless of which Bino I’m using at any given time, no tripod is involved, and that is a big bonus. I’m happy to answer any questions. My experience led my friend and hunting partner to buy some Sigs as well, and he is just as happy as me.

I could see 8x or 10x IS binos being an amazing tool, but be careful about field of view and exit pupil. Something about IS tech makes it so you might not gain much field of view going from16x to 8x or 10x or 12x. I don’t understand it but the published numbers are there for you to see.

 

[chase0109]

Cooposo did a great review! My thoughts will be much shorter.

I use a pair of Zulu 6 10x30s. Got them specifically for Africa, now they’re my exclusive bios I carry on my chest. The IS is a game changer. The alpha glass will have better light transmission, and better glass overall. But I would not trade the image stabilization for any other features.

I really like the 10x30s for size. Easy to glass one-handed. I have the non-pro HDX version. I’ve not heard good things about the pro version so I would probably stick to the non-pro version if you decide to go with Sig.

I’ve also heard rumor That SIG will be coming out with an IS Bino that also does rangefinding. If they do that, I’ll definitely be getting a pair of 12x42 or 10x30 depending on offering. When that happens, I’ll sell all my other binos and use nothing but sig image stabilized going forward.

 

[analog_peninsula]

Has anyone looked through the Kite ED glass? It’s supposed to be the best IS glass on the market, but it’s hard to find an impartial review.

 

[gillettehunter]

I haven’t seen the kite binos. If you’re interested but cautious I’d suggest buying them on Amazon. Then return them if you’re not impressed. Amazon makes returns easy.
Bruce

 

[steve white]

Never looked through any, but ya'll just convinced me to do so.

 

[MacJenkins]

I’ve played with the Sig. Very cool, but the glass was no where near what I’m use too.

 

[Cooposo]

I’ve played with the Sig. Very cool, but the glass was no where near what I’m use too.

This brings up an important question- when it comes to spotting game, is clarity and resolution more important, or is eliminating and isolating movement more important? That second aspect is not really able to be evaluated well with a few quick looks through the IS binos. But it was startling how much the IS helps with finding game as soon as I was trying to find an animal that didn’t want to be found.

Take, for example, three sources of movement when I’m trying to find a rock chuck out in the Idaho prairie. One source is me- my own slight trembling and movement as I hold the binos. The second movement is that of the grass and bushes and weeds the rock chuck is using for cover. The third movement is the scurrying of the rodent himself. Even with the obvious downgrade in glass quality of my Sigs vs my Swaros, when my own movement, and the movement of binos due to wind etc, was virtually eliminated- the scurrying of the rock chuck as he darted from rock to rock became OBVIOUS. With the movement of the picture nearly eliminated due to the IS tech, those little twitches, flinches, darting movements, ear twitches, etc of animals become a lot more noticeable. In a way that might be superior to the advantages of just having better glass.

What we don’t have yet is a combination of great glass quality and IS tech. When that happens, a whole new glassing world will be opening up. And it will be interesting to see how the legacy brands respond.

I can easily see my ELs being replaced by 8x or 10x IS binos as my chest binos in the next generation or two. All I would need is 25% better glass quality and a little bit more light transmission along with some fix that improves the field of view. From what I understand of the IS tech, these fixes might not actually be as easy to achieve as one might think.

 

[rookhawk]

A while back I had a pair of entry level Canon stabilized binoculars. They were great for sporting events, but were lousy in low light with mediocre glass and something like a 3mm exit pupil. Is anyone familiar with the more recent models? How do you rate them, and what’s the good, bad, and ugly?

About 20 years ago I played with a friend's Canon image stabilized binos. I was impressed for use birding which is what we were doing at the time. (bird banding, actually)

What I'll say is that binos have various use cases. As a hunter, I want a bino that is going to give me range, temp, pressure, firing solution, etc. The Leicas are probably the best at this duty cycle due to their patents. Yes, swarovski glass is better, but they cannot due the technical features a Leica can do which is why most of the members have Leicas.

Would I use canon image stabilized binos hunting? No. I don't think they have the durability of the Leicas (or swaros) for the rough conditions we encounter. The canon glass isn't bad, but it is nowhere near as good as the Leica or Swaro.

 

[mrpoindexter]

I have the Sig Saber Zulu's in 20x42 power. They have a new pair that is 18x50, which I think would be even better, although they weight a little bit more. Very happy with my Sig.

 

[Finprof]

Mine are Fujinon. 14x40 for spotting birds while fishing. Seagulls will feed on baitfish pushed up by fish so finding birds means finding fish. The glass is great and is is much better than my buddy’s Canons.
Stabilization is needed on a boat but on land I can hold 10x with no problem.
The only problem is they are heavy.

 

[Red Leg]

After reading this thread last month, I decided to purchase the Sig 20x42 Zulu6 image stabilized binos. I am sold on them for hunting whitetail and roe deer. In those situations, I am not worried about range estimation, but I do want to be absolutely sure about the age of the animal, and if in Europe, that plus the weight or measurements of the antlers. This technology is simply amazing.

The only other which I had played around with a bit was the Zeiss S Model belonging to an acquaintance. I will concede that image clarity is a bit better than the Sig - sort of like comparing Viper imagery to Zeiss. BUT, the Zeiss binocular is large and heavy enough that it probably should be mounted on a U-Boat rather than protruding from a chest pack. They also run about 10 grand new.

In contrast, the Sig weighs almost nothing and the stabilization works beyond expectation. I was using them at first light this morning looking at a group of deer at the feeder at a range of 180 yards. I could have easily determined the shooter animal. They will be my companion this fall out back and next year in Croatia.

 

[Muskox]

The Zeiss 20x60 still exist, it is a mechanical image stabilized binocular. They have not updated it in a long time. Probably over 20 years. Is it worth $8000-10,000 street price, probably not.

 

[Red Leg]

The Zeiss 20x60 still exist, it is a mechanical image stabilized binocular. They have not updated it in a long time. Probably over 20 years. Is it worth $8000-10,000 street price, probably not.

You can get your very own right now - though you have to provide your own optics bearer to carry it.

https://www.basspro.com/p/zeiss-s-image-stabilization-binoculars?hvarAID=shopping_googleproductextensions&ds_e=GOOGLE&ds_c=BPS%7CShopping%7CPMax%7CHunting%7CHunting%7CNAud%7CGoogle%7CNMT&gclsrc=aw.ds&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=19856022628&gbraid=0AAAAAD1Tgtf-gARzdIJKuCdZ3_1jeJliB&gclid=CjwKCAjwz5nGBhBBEiwA-W6XRK22H5wdtKZaF_s-BfMyZ-OC31YmelVErUVbwzf6bBtdTEvrAXxk_hoCi78QAvD_BwE

 

[rookhawk]

To the gents that have owned both. What is better, IS moderate quality glass, or non-IS range finding Leica or Swaro glass?

 

[Red Leg]

To the gents that have owned both. What is better, IS moderate quality glass, or non-IS range finding Leica or Swaro glass?

Good question. I see the IS optic for a fairly specialized purpose, which is judging game for management or a size/cost evaluation. In other words deciding whether a buck on the feeder is really a 5 1/2 year + animal with spindly antlers or a 3 1/2 year old with promise. In areas like Hungary or Spain they would be great at determining whether a roe buck would be worth a stalk. For almost anything else, I think I would prefer my RF Leicas.

 

[Scott CWO]

You can get your very own right now - though you have to provide your own optics bearer to carry it.

https://www.basspro.com/p/zeiss-s-image-stabilization-binoculars?hvarAID=shopping_googleproductextensions&ds_e=GOOGLE&ds_c=BPS%7CShopping%7CPMax%7CHunting%7CHunting%7CNAud%7CGoogle%7CNMT&gclsrc=aw.ds&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=19856022628&gbraid=0AAAAAD1Tgtf-gARzdIJKuCdZ3_1jeJliB&gclid=CjwKCAjwz5nGBhBBEiwA-W6XRK22H5wdtKZaF_s-BfMyZ-OC31YmelVErUVbwzf6bBtdTEvrAXxk_hoCi78QAvD_BwE

I’ve had a pair of these for many years. I do not carry them in the field. They are a great truck binocular for evaluating deer or pronghorn at long range when deciding whether to get my spotting scope out to look at the animal. A quick look with these 20x binoculars tells me if I need to get out my spotting scope for a better look or to keep moving. I got mine for $2500 years ago!