I reckon waterproofish ones might be an idea but other that i am a bit clueless. The curent ornery bins are fine but wobbly, hence stabilised ones mite be better. Or, you could all tell me that they're rubbish and save me loads of money...
They're great - far better than non-stabilised, so sorry can't save you any money They're easier to use for long periods as you don't get the eye-strain from the image constantly moving. On the boat, I can read things at a long distance or just make more sense of things rather than them bouncing around.
I've got the Canon 10x30 IS ones - work well, but not waterproof which isn't a an issue as we have an inside helm position. The waterproof ones were lots more wonga - dunno if thats still the case.
I tried out both and didnt find a huge difference between the expensive ones and the Canon type even though the latter arent supposed to have as good stabilisation. They certainly solve the problem of being able to see things like anchor balls / chains from a distance in a small boat.
Bought my Dad a pair for his birthday -Canon 10x30s...their really good...he wouldn't be without them...lightweight and easy to use. Their optical quality is above average but not as good as the Zeiss etc. but they're usefulness with image stabisation MORE than makes up for that.
Some swear by them for use on the boat but my experience is the reverse. While they are very effective for eliminating hand shake, they do nothing for the movement of the boat in anything but the calmest sea (Canon 10x30). I have retired them ashore for bird watching and switched to Steiner 7x50s
tried them, but with slightly dodgy eyes anyway (high alpha wave rate) , I couldn't get on with them at all. Not a patch on my Asahi Pentax military ones, nitrogen filled, 30 years old, no twiddling with central focussing 'cos they have enormous depth of field, or something. And I can use with specs, or without.
And they have those lovely graticules in the R lens for distance off.