On Sun, 8 Jan 2017 17:10:12 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

Image stabilization. To damp images in case of wind, or touching the scope to reduce or eliminate damp-time, using high-power eyepieces, taking images. Camera stabilization is reaching incredible quality, you can now (with some of them) take hand-held images with normal lenses with 1-4 second exposure times. Stabilization isn't needed on scopes all the time, obviously, since we have tripods and mounts, but sometimes it would be an advantage when looking at objects where critical resolution is required.
However, I wouldn't want it if it costs as much as the ridiculously overpriced stabilization in binoculars.

Image stabilization is routine with imaging setups. For visual, it's
problematic. Inertial stabilization (like that used on camera lenses
and binoculars) isn't sensitive enough to correct for the amount of
movement you get at high magnifications. And there isn't enough light
in most cases to use a reference in the field in order to optically
stabilize (as some cameras do, and all imaging adaptive optics).

Our eyes and brains are themselves excellent image stabilizers. All
you really need for visual use is a reasonable stable mount.