skysurfer
25-03-2016, 07:48 AM
In the past I had cheap 15x70 which were optically OK, but mechanically a PITA. I replaced it by a Celestron Skymaster 15x70 which were optcally not so good which I returned.
Decent 15x70s (Fujinon, Nikon) are way too heavy (over 2kg) which is more a reason than the price to withhold me from buying.
During my South Africa trip I missed binos and I saw in a shop these ones for a reasoable price and tested it out. Mechanically rather good, and ergonomically good for the price ($129) and rather lightweight (900g). So I purchased it.
Same night (and subsequent nights) I used it under the South African skies. It was surprising good, sharpness was good pinpoint stars until 2/3 field, Eta Carinae and M42 were really amazing. Fainter clusters in Sagittarius like M69 or some faint open clusters near Alpha Centauri were no problem. Omega Centauri was almost possible to be resolved. Despite its only 50mm aperture, the 16x power indeed goes deeper than 10x50s. Jupiter showed a nice small ball with the moons and our Moon was crisp. Holding ity steady was not a big problem as it is rather lightweight.
I compared it with a Canon 200 f/2.8L with a Nagler 13 attached (http://skysurfer.eu/telephotoscope.php) (a 15x70 monocular) and I saw that the latter did not show more stars than the 16x50 (but it was with one eye). The Canon was better with edge sharpness, thanks to the Nagler as well: pinpoint to the edges.
Terrestial viewing is also very good. It can focus as close as 5 meters, so I watched birds in the garden.
Back in Holland now, it has to be used under the northern sky yet (cloudy since a week). In the meantime I sold my Vortex Vulture 10x56 after comparing it with the Nikon. Despite its over $300 price tag, it shows more color errors than the Nikon.
Do others have experience with 16x50 class binos under the stars ?
Decent 15x70s (Fujinon, Nikon) are way too heavy (over 2kg) which is more a reason than the price to withhold me from buying.
During my South Africa trip I missed binos and I saw in a shop these ones for a reasoable price and tested it out. Mechanically rather good, and ergonomically good for the price ($129) and rather lightweight (900g). So I purchased it.
Same night (and subsequent nights) I used it under the South African skies. It was surprising good, sharpness was good pinpoint stars until 2/3 field, Eta Carinae and M42 were really amazing. Fainter clusters in Sagittarius like M69 or some faint open clusters near Alpha Centauri were no problem. Omega Centauri was almost possible to be resolved. Despite its only 50mm aperture, the 16x power indeed goes deeper than 10x50s. Jupiter showed a nice small ball with the moons and our Moon was crisp. Holding ity steady was not a big problem as it is rather lightweight.
I compared it with a Canon 200 f/2.8L with a Nagler 13 attached (http://skysurfer.eu/telephotoscope.php) (a 15x70 monocular) and I saw that the latter did not show more stars than the 16x50 (but it was with one eye). The Canon was better with edge sharpness, thanks to the Nagler as well: pinpoint to the edges.
Terrestial viewing is also very good. It can focus as close as 5 meters, so I watched birds in the garden.
Back in Holland now, it has to be used under the northern sky yet (cloudy since a week). In the meantime I sold my Vortex Vulture 10x56 after comparing it with the Nikon. Despite its over $300 price tag, it shows more color errors than the Nikon.
Do others have experience with 16x50 class binos under the stars ?