Canon 14x32is vs 10x30is binoculars tested with USAF resolution chart
Channel: Bartolomeo Montrucchio
Date: 2019-12-26

Canon 14x32is and 10x30is stabilization and performance test. Full HD video vision is suggested in order to better see details.

The purpose of this test is twofold:
1- to test Canon 14x32is stabilization in working conditions
2- to test with USAF test chart Canon 14x32is and Canon 10x30is.

Main results are reported also in the following lines, together with minute counts (links).

(00:00) Canon 14x32is vs 10x30is binoculars tested with USAF resolution chart

(00:34) setup with binoculars, Celestron #NexYZ and Samsung #S5

(00:53) panorama without binoculars (for comparison)

(01:00) #Canon #14x32is without stabilization and with #PoweredIS and #GeneralIS ; Powered IS seems slightly better than General IS (they have a different purpose); video recorded in 4K and enlarged using iMovie; 100 ISO; smartphone self-stabilization off; rolling shutter due to the smartphone; binocular (with NexYZ and S5) supported freehand; I am looking through the second eyepiece in order to center the target; please note that the stabilisation obtained in such a way is worse than the one obtained in common use, due to additional weight and unnatural position; 14x32is has a little exit pupil and at least in my case this is sufficient to fix my astigmatism; focusing done automatically by S5, sometimes not perfect;

(02:44) setup with #USAF EO 36275 test chart; example finding angle alpha subtended by Moon from Earth; target put at 9m from binoculars, supported as before freehand by me with NexYZ and S5; (I am looking through the second eyepiece in order to center the target as before); as an example, seeing a black bar of group 1-1 (thickness 0.25 mm) from 9 m (9000 mm) the angle subtended by black bar is alpha=atan(0.25/9000)x3600=5.73” ; I chose 9m in order to have sufficient distance for binoculars

(04:00) actual Edmund Optics EO 36275 USAF target with specification data written on the box (and on datasheets)

(05:02) resolution given the setup and computed as angle; please note that seeing a bar in group 1-4 means to see something subtending an angle of 4 arc seconds; both binoculars have a front lens of about 30 mm, and a telescope with a front lens fo 30 mm would have a resolution of 4 arc seconds (12 cm would mean 1”, four times more); BUT this resolution is considered seeing a double star whose components (with similar brightness) are apart 4”; therefore, considering here a square wave (with a duty cycle of 50%) as in USAF target, this would mean to see bars subtending 2” (in this way there would be 4” between the centres of two bars of 2”), while here we can see in the best case bars subtending 4”; however a greater enlargement would be required, normally 1.5 or 2 times the numbers of mm of the front lens = at least 45x or 60x, while the two binoculars are 10x and 14x; for these reasons I can not say anything about the behaviour of binocular near the theoretical (Airy) limit; this test shows what we can see with our eyes in the binoculars (05:55)

(06:48) Canon 14x32is left eyepiece

(07:54) Canon 14x32is right eyepiece

(08:33) Canon 10x30is right eyepiece; the left eyepiece is not shown, but it is identical; Canon 10x30is (first version), behaves like 14x32is; simply with a lower enlargement it is possible to see less details; 10x30is has less chromatic aberration, but of course it shows less things; e.g. Saturn’s ring can be seen clearly with 14x and only partially with 10x (for my eyes the main problem is a residual astigmatism of 0,5 diopters, almost completely compensated in 14x by the reduced exit pupil and the greater enlargement); the main advantage of 14x is the excellent stabilization, better than 10x; I was not able to see Jupiter’s gas bands even with 14x, while Galilean satellites were very well depicted; please note that USAF test has been done with high contrast (LED was powered with 9V 200 mA), while astronomical targets are usually low contrast ones; with the naked eye, seeing the USAF chart with both the eyes, it is possible to see:

            Canon 10x30is:  1-1 (5.73”) well, 1-2 (5.11”) badly
            Canon 14x32is:  1-3 (4.55”) well, 1-4 (4”) badly

this means that videos are very similar to what can be seen with binoculars and naked eyes; stabilization used in all the USAF tests has been (for 14x) Powered IS.