Celestron SkyMaster 25X70 Outdoor Astronomy Binoculars

Mein erstes Fernglas mit diesen Werten 25 x 70, welches auch wirklich über diese Leistung verfügt !!!

Habe nun einige Ferngläser zwischen 40€ und 450€ ausprobiert, und bin nun bei diesem hier von Celestron und bei einem weiteren kleineren
Glas zur nahen Beobachtung geblieben,….in meinen Rezensionen kann man auch von diesem genannten kleinen Glas nachlesen, nun aber zu diesem Überfllieger hier.

Direkt aus der Packung geholt und in die Ferne geschaut, ohne jegliche Nachjustierung !
Was soll ich sagen, da kam sofort die volle Begeisterung hoch, in Form
eines leichten automatischen Grinsens, was für ein starkes Glas !
Die Vergrößerung ist der Hammer, dabei klar und farbtreu bis in die Ränder, keine Schleier oder Nebelbildungen bei allen getesten Wetter und Lichtbedingungen.
Die Schärfe ist einfach nur überragend ebenso die Helligkeit, ich bin wirklich voll überzeugt von dem Glas, ein Traum ! 👍👍

Keines der von mir noch getesteten Gläser kann diesem hier das Wasser reichen, obwohl da einige deutlich teuere bei waren.

Auch die äußere Material und Verarbeitungungs Prüfung ergab eine glatte 1, da ist nirgendwo ein Grund zum meckern zu finden, aber auch nicht der Kleinste, jedenfalls nicht an meinem Glas hier.
Die gesamte Haptik und Optik der Aussenhaut ist vorbildlich, kein Geruch der Materialien feststellbar.
Einzigster Minimakel ist der sehr dünne Schultergurt, ich denke das kann man aber bei meinem Kaufpreis von rund 130€ vernachlässigen.

Fazit : Fast wie eine Waffe dieser Superglotzer, ein wirklich feines Teil
zu einem unschlagbaren Preis / Leistungsverhältnis.
Wer gerne in den Himmel schaut, oder weiter entfernte Objekte
aller Art beobachten möchte ist bei diesem Qualitätsglas hier
genau richtig, und wird sicher nicht enttäuscht werden.
Es gab selten ein Produkt welches ich so sehr empfehlen kann wie
dieses hier !👍👍👍👀👀👀

I originally gave these four stars because the focus has play in it. I bumped them up to 5 stars because of the low price and the fantastic astronomical views. They stay in the focus you put them in, but the play occurs only during adjustment. My 16×50 is much better for daytime sight seeing.

1. The eyepiece lens is 23mm, vs 18mm for my Nikon Aculon 16×50, 16mm for my Celestron 10×50, and 13mm for my Tasco 7×35. Despite this, they have the same eye relief as the smaller binoculars, and also a moderately smaller apparent field of view.
2. I followed the exit pupil, drew a triangle, and quickly and accurately measured the apparent field of view of the Celestron 25×70 to be only 57.5 degrees, and that is the maximum no matter where your eye is. My Nikon’s are 61 degrees, my Celestron 10×50 is 60 degrees, and my Tascos are 58 degrees. Visual observation confirms these math measurements.
3. They are noticeably heavier than my other binos, but not a lot.
4. They are easy to hand hold very steady in the day time, without resting my elbows on anything. At night it is much better to have something to brace my elbows on.
5. They look like they are good quality, other than the thin strap.
6. They are 10.4 inches long, and 8 inches wide.
7. There depth of focus is less than that of lower powered binoculars, so I really have to adjust them as I aim around at stuff terrestrially at different distances. These are better for astronomy than for birding. My 10x and lower did not need to be adjusted much unless I looked at something really close. My 16x is in between, but still pretty forgiving.
8. The focus is smooth but has a short lag, and requires diopter adjustment of the right eye to compensate for the lag. In cold weather, the focus wheel is tighter than any of my other binos, but still reasonable enough to turn.
9. I am a bit near sighted, so I get a closer near focus at around 50 or 60 feet instead of the advertised 75 ft. My nikons near focus at 18 ft, not their advertised 28 ft.

As many other reviewers already said, the eyepiece barrels seem too big around, and pinch my nose if I try to get closer to the eyepiece. However, if I carefully measure the interpupilary distance, I can place them so I see the full field of view without the pinch. It just does not come as naturally as with my 10×50. I separated them to see if getting one eye closer would give a bigger field of view, but it did not. I guess how close I get is close enough. It just feels weird them being that far out on my nose and making that third point of contact like that. Edit: next day: I’m getting used to the new feeling.

The correct place to hold these binoculars is by the barrels in front of the prisms. That is how to get steadier views. Better yet, slouch down in a chair and put your elbows on the arm rests. Then all you’ll see is your heart beat.

I looked at a distant light, and compared its size to the Nikon’s 16x. I find it very believable the Celestrons are 25x.

The field of view is not as wide as advertised. The apparent field of view is 57.4 degrees, not 61. The belt of Orion just barely fits in the view. The moon is 30% of the view. The true field of view is 2.4 degrees, not the advertised 2.7 degrees.

The arms of the eyepiece adjuster also have some wiggle in them causing a 1/4 inch delay when turning the adjuster wheel. I have had to re-adjust the right diopter even when I did not touch the center wheel, indicating it might be moving a bit. But it does not take long to get back into focus. There is also a flare visible off to the side of the exit pupil, though I don’t see it during astronomy.

Despite these flaws, I can’t subtract a star at only $70 shipped. These binoculars are a league above my 10×50 for astronomical viewing, at least in terms of looking at individual targets. A telescope has many advantages, but these are grab and go. However, to see the phase of Venus, you need to stop down the aperture and sit down to brace your view.
————————-

I easily saw the correct shape of the Orion nebula on a half moon when my 10×50 could see nothing.
I could see the dark side of the half moon, whereas my 10×50 could only see the bright side. My 16×50 also saw the dark side.
Jupiter looks much bigger in the 25×70, but I may need to reduce the aperture to see the stripes. I can see bands on Jupiter 114mm f8 Newtonian telescope at 28x, but I can’t see bands at 25x in the binoculars.
The Pleiades look much better in the 25×70 than in the telescope or my other binoculars.
The double cluster in Perseus is clearly visible in the 25×70, and looks tiny with an almost stellar core in my 10×50.
Andromeda, M31, looks better, with M32 and M110 noticeable by it, and very hard to see in my 10×50.
I can see a tiny ring around Saturn at 28x in my telescope, but at 25x, I sometimes see a ring around Saturn and sometimes I don’t. On the day that I could see a ring, my 16×50 detected ears.
I can see M13 and other globular clusters as small fuzzy balls. I could find them in my 16x, but smaller. In my 10x, I can locate most of them, but they look like stars. Maybe I can detect a little fuzz on M13. In my 7x, I can’t locate most of them, but I can see M13 and maybe a few others, though I don’t remember.
All of my observing was hand held, unbraced.
I could point them at whatever I wanted and hit my targets just fine. I had trouble hitting Andromeda right away because I could not see it naked eye.
M82 and M81 are easy to identify in my 25×70 as I sweep over them. I can see the cigar shape of M82 in my 16×50 too, though I can’t find either one in my 10×50.
I can see a mountain range on the moon in the 25×70 when my elbows are braced. I’ve not yet found it in my 16×50.
Airplanes look bigger but take longer to find in my 25×70.
At 25x, you can’t tell where you are in the sky from the star orientations. You just have to point and look, and you know where you are when you see the object you are looking for. At 16x, I can pan around from bright star to bright star and figure out where I am by memory. At 10x, I can see some bright stars in the same field of view, but have to pan for others. And at 7x, you can easily see where you are.
I actually think my view of M31 was more enjoyable in a 15×70 than in these 25×70, though I know the Orion nebula is better at 25x. It keeps getter better even at 60x.
M33 can be located at lower power, but the 25×70 gave the best view, giving maybe a hint of spiral structure.

My interest in enjoying long-distance viewing, both terrestrial and celestial, had been on the rise as of late. So I decided to do some checking. The telescope that interested me looked to be well-suited to this activity, but I realized that I’d have to purchase a mount and tripod, at the least, and possibly some other accessories (lens, etc.). This, I figured, was going to run at least $500; not an amount I was ready to invest.

So as my research progressed, specifically in the direction of binoculars, I came across this Celestron SkyMaster 25 x 70mm binoculars. Touted as appropriate for both celestial and terrestrial viewing, especially given the less-than-$100 price tag, the binoculars seemed to me to be a good fit: not a huge investment and would also be a significant step up from my current binoculars. And the price was about 1/3rd that of the 25 x 100mm while still, in my opinion, providing a decent long-distance viewing experience.

I’ve had these binoculars for about a month now and I have to say that I really do enjoy them.

I should note that I ordered and use the “Barska Binocular Tripod Adapter” instead of the one that came with the binoculars. (Other reviewers recommended this upgrade due to the Barska seemingly being a bit sturdier than the one that came with the binoculars.)

In any event, I already had a modest tripod that is working well enough for me, although the little, almost imperceptible shake that occurs is quite obvious when looking at airplanes, satellites and other celestial objects. Still, I’m not disappointed with my setup.

Now, with these binoculars I can see Jupiter, and at least two of her moons, Saturn, including the “ring,” and, of course, many stars. In fact, aiming the binoculars in an area that seems void of stars when viewed with the naked eye reveals even more stars and whatnot. And the view of the moon is spectacular.

Passing airplanes stand out with these binoculars. And while I’ve yet to actually read lettering on planes (they’re usually at an altitude of 35,000-plus feet, moving at 500MPH or so, and miles downrange), I can clearly detect planes’ colorations, engines, winglets, etc. What fun!

For terrestrial viewing, again these binoculars provide me a good look.

The only thing I could say that would be even remotely critical would be this: trying to accurately aim the binoculars without the aid of a “finding scope,” especially at very distant objects, is challenging. Some times I actually get it right, but most times not. This is especially true of fast-moving objects (satellites, planes, etc.) But this isn’t a “problem” with the binoculars, but rather one aspect to consider when using/purchasing such high-powered binoculars.

Overall I’m very pleased with this purchase. I find the binoculars came usable and in great shape right out of the box.

Kolla på havsutsikt