Are these better than the Celestron Skymaster 15 x 70??
1065726
I'm not familiar with the Skymaster, but these binoculars are terrible... Extremely large and very heavy...very narrow field of vission. Do not buy them!
162738
I am sorry, but I simply don't know. I reccomend you contact Celestron and get their reccos. Brgds, Geo
1981175
Exactly. But it's still worth it. The user interface on Celestron scopes is worse than archaic. It's actually inexcusable. This speeds up alignment a lot.
1440609
They are not 30x60 they are not night vision, I am not sure of the power As a pure estimate10x50 perhaps, They offer good magnification, when I bought them I was aware of the wishfulNumbers claimed by evading the feedback, one buyer had worked out the magnification specsHe commented the numbers claimed were rubbish, however they do have good power in my viewWell worth the price.
770255
I assume you are asking about the orion scope vs the celestron scope? I've no experience with the orion st, there's a comparison on cloudy nights' user forum. There is a lot of info there. I beive that is where I found a write up on what to expect from various size optics and focal lengths. I'm still happy with the astromaster. It has pretty good optics, but as many people have pointed out, the mount is a little flimsy.
85843
Sorry, I don't know how it compares to these other Binoculars. Mine is particularly bad. It arrived out of alignment and the chromatic aberration is extreme. Apparently it is a hit and miss with this one. I didn't expect much at the price but this example was horrendous. I would not buy again. I prefer not to play the lottery with optics. My suggestion is to try them first and then buy the same one you actually tried not take a chance that one in the box will be the same.
1469254
I use the 3 and higher for imaging Planets, thet 2X can be used for doubling the power at the eyepiece. The 127 eq is a great scope you should have lots of fun. I had a C5 at one time loved it.
445463
I'm a little late to this party, but I want to correct a little misconception. 7x35 binoculars capture *far* more light than the naked eye in addition to magnification, allowing view of not only more stars, but more detail. With 7x35s, you will be able to differentiate some star clusters and check out features of the moon, etc. For a comparison of how much more light binoculars grab, consider this: on a crystal clear, dark night, the naked eye can see around 3,000 stars, but a pair of binoculars like these allows us to see 100,000 stars. 7x35 binoculars are *great* for astronomical purposes. I own a telescope, but always take my 7x35s with me. Check out some magazines like Sky & Telescope or Astronomy for more information.
177101
You can see them fairly clear, i'll put a link at the bottom of my comment to a guy who takes photo's with his 4se. Keep in mind, when you're looking through the scope, the view is not as fuzzy as his photos and video. You can't magnify much more than 150x with the 4se but you can see Saturn with it's rings, and Jupiter very clearly. I'm not sure what the other person is talking about the motors jumping, mine tracks beautifully. This is a great starter scope, but, I also agree there are way better ones out there. For a first scope just to get you familiar with the sky and Astronomy, the 4se works great. If you're like me though, you'll probably want something bigger and faster within a year. I'm actually thinking about selling my 4se to step up to a much higher end scope for Astrophotography. May I ask where you're from? https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7LIfGL0G50jj7sP_aktkHA
2010916
I think the answer is that they have a slightly larger field of view and seem to also have less collimation issues. Reading reviews of all three I choose these and now that I have them in hand I am glad I did.
1692264
The standards for binoculars are higher for astronomical use then are for terrestrial use. These are fine for terrestrial use. True, you can see many celestial objects that you could not see with the unaided eye, but I believe the image quality was too low for serious astronomy. Low contrast and strong chromatic abberation are two problems I saw in these binoculars. That has nothing to do with the lens diameter or magnifcation.
1389667
each one does a 1.5x1.5 pretty good, I would recommend going with one of the MARS 2 units for a area that big,..save money and get better light.....I also have a MARS2-700w and a viper 450w, the 700 does a 4x4 area aWeSoMe....
1866548
I have not used Vortex. I have Celestron Regal M2 and I am happy that I have it. Its sharpness is really good
936066
I can't answer your question, but I can add that I tried the Celestron against this model and returned the Celestron. The Celestron had some difficulty stabilizing the image. Also, the software bundled with the AM Scope camera is pretty good.
1384028
Sorry, I don't know the answer to your question. I suggest calling Celestron. They have been most helpful to us in the past.
43019
In my opinion you need a better range of optics. There is very little light gathering ability difference between x40 and x42. I would recommend the 8x40 and 10x50's. I know, the 10x50 are heavier but they also are better in low light. You never know when you are going to see something that is a once-in a lifetime occurence. I think it is worth the weight.
636082
You can use them to look at stars and star clusters any time you have a clear night. The ocean is more likely to be cloudy, but it can be clear too. 16x binoculars are great for looking at specific smaller targets, like star clusters and nebula and galaxies. If you want to look at the constellations, a 7x35 would be better. If you want to see planets, you need a telescope. Each star will look brighter, but you won't see detail on them.