70mm Astronomy Binoculars & Tripod Setup Advice

This BinoWizard question is from a reader who is looking to set up a pair of good quality binoculars on their porch for star gazing and some wildlife observation:

Answer

Firstly thank you for sending in your question to the BinoWizard and it really helps me in that I can see that you have already conducted a lot of research and know in general which binoculars for astronomy are best. Thus hopefully I can offer you some more personal advice and possible some recommendations to further fine-tune your options.

Binocular Comparisons

As always I find that a great place to start is to create a table that contains the most important features and specifications of a number of binoculars that I feel may be of interest. In this way, I find it makes it much more simple to quickly see which instruments are worthy of further investigation. For more details on this process, you can take a look at my article on how to choose between different binoculars.

highlighted in green are the features or specifications that I feel are either strong points or aspects that are above and beyond what I would expect to find in this price range.
highlighted in red are weaker aspects when compared to the others on the list. Note: this does not mean that this is bad, only that in this area they not quite as good as the best.

Cheap vs Expensive Astronomy Binoculars

In the table above I have purposely added a selection of the MUCH cheaper Celestron Skymaster binoculars for comparison as you do ask why they cost so much less in your question. There are a number of reasons for this price difference:

Quality of Body Components
The more expensive options are built up of parts that are of better quality. For example, all Celestron Echelon and Fujinon Polaris binoculars have an aluminum chassis, whilst the cheaper Skymaster most certainly has a polycarbonate plastic one. These are far cheaper to manufacture and whilst they are more lightweight, they are not as strong and just don’t feel as luxurious.

This theme generally continues throughout the instrument, with higher-end binoculars usually using metal eye-piece housings and focus wheels (not relevant in this case), whilst cheaper ones will keep prices down by employing mass molded plastic ones wherever possible.

Quality of Optical Components & Coatings
Here is usually where we can easily find out the biggest differences between cheap and expensive binoculars, however with Porro prism devices like these differences are not always that obvious.

To achieve the best results, the best roof prism bins use a number of specialized coatings on the prisms to increase the reflectivity and to correct distortions that occur. Cheap ones will either not use these or use lower quality materials and thus don’t deliver anywhere near the same quality of the viewable image.

However the Porro prism design does not need either of these, so in theory, cheap Porro prisms will perform as well as expensive ones and as good as the best roof prisms. However, here is where the actual quality of the glass used becomes a factor. You will often see the very cheapest binoculars use BK-7 (fine borosilicate crown) glass which costs far less than BaK-4 glass to make.

Although, as you can see from the table above all the binoculars listed have BaK-4 glass so what is the difference here? Well rather confusingly, not all BaK-4 glass is created equal and that Chinese made BaK-4 prism glass is slightly different and considered inferior to the Schott made BaK-4 ones, but it is cheaper!

The problem is manufacturers very rarely tell us which is used, but as a good rule of thumb, cheaper instruments made in China usually use the Chinese glass, whilst more expensive devices and especially those manufactured in Japan or Europe will use the higher quality Schott glass.

You will also notice that the lenses used in the Celestron Echelon are advertised as being made in Japan. Here you can be certain that the quality is far greater than those used on their other instruments where they make no mention of where they are made.

Also the optics on the higher end products are Fully Multi-Coated, whilst the SkyMaster’s are only Multi-Coated. The difference here is it means that every single air to glass surface on a full multi-coated device has had multiple coatings of an anti-reflection coating added to it, whilst the cheaper Multicoated ones have only had this applied to some of them. Usually, only the exterior lens surfaces and thus does not deliver anywhere near the same quality or brightness of view. I find that the difference this makes is often substantial and well worth keeping in mind.

Build Quality & Quality Control
Celestron also highlight that their Echelon’s are assembled in the USA as opposed to the others which are put together in their Asian factories. Here I assume they are implying that the level of care and quality control is better.

Diminishing Returns
As with most things: In the beginning, it costs a relatively small amount to make large differences, whilst the closer you get to perfection, the more you have to pay for smaller and smaller improvements. So whilst there is no doubt the more expensive products are better, as to if it is worth it depends on your personal position and what you want to get out of your hobby.

Astronomy Award Winners

You are correct in saying that the Celestron Echelon 20x70 won my award two years running and that in 2016 I did not have an Astronomy winner.

This is just because I am at the mercy as to which binoculars the manufacturers offer up for me to review and last year I did not get the chance to review any long-range / Astro binoculars that I thought were worthy of the award and thus none was given.

I guess I could have re-awarded it to the Echelon but thought that after two years, a third may start to look a little strange!

However I will say that this in no way means that the Echelon is not as relevant today as it was back then. Binoculars evolve far more slowly than electrical devices for example and as such most high quality instruments built 10 years (and definitely 5 years ago) ago are still very much as good and competitive now as they were back then. As a consumer this is great news as it means as long as we choose wisely and get a good quality instrument, they can easily last you a lifetime and which is why I almost always recommend getting the best that you can afford as it most often pays off in the long run.

My Thoughts & Recommendations:

Based on the table above, below are the instruments that I would consider. You will notice that I have made

Tripod Setup

Update: Please note that the info below is a brief summary, for more comprehensive advice, take a look at My Personal Best Tripod for Binoculars (Astro and Terrestrial uses) which includes advice on all the gear I use and why.

A tripod setup for astronomy and long distance terrestrial observation needs to be flexible and very stable. This is because when you are observing the night sky, the angles are often awkward and because you are observing really distant and sometimes tiny (in the view) objects for longer periods of time any tiny movement does negatively affect the view.

So whilst I have not used a huge selection of tripods as this is not my specialty, I have had quite a few over the years. The Vanguard ABEO Pro 283CGH tripod kit is excellent and I highly recommend it. The kit includes the Abeo Pro 283CT Carbon Tripod and their GH-300T Pistol Grip Ball Head that work very well together.

However if as I assume you are not moving about, rather keeping it on your porch, then a lightweight tripod may not be essential and you can save some money and or make your setup just little more robust by going for an aluminium tripod.

Here I can highly recommend the Bresser BX-5 PRO Video Tripod kit that comes with a pan-handle video fluid head on-top and the integrated ball head under it giving you a lot of flexibility as well as ease of use. It also easily converts to a monopod which is another very handy feature that I like and which may interest you.

Another option is the Vanguard Alta Pro 263AT Tripod that is just about as sturdy and adjustable, but costs less.

It may also may be worth taking a look at the older Vanguard GH-100 Pistol Grip Ball Head which once again has most of the functionality of the GH-300, but without the remote shutter release on the trigger, which unless you are using it for photography is not of any use anyway.

Tripod Adapters

For some ideas and options take a look at my article on Tripod Adapters.

Of those listed on this page, I use the Vanguard BA-185 Adapter that is inexpensive and has served me well through the years.

Answer

Hi Brett, you most certainly do have a choice, take a look at the Vanguard Alta Pro 263AT Tripod that I also suggested above. It is pretty much the same as the carbon 283CGH tripod from Vanguard, but is metallic so heavier, but just as (probably more) stable.

On Sites like Adorama, B&H and Amazon.com it is for sale at $129 by itself or $178 as a kit with the pistol grip head unit: Where to Buy: Vanguard Alta Pro 263AT Tripod Kit

Further Reading

• Binoculars for Astronomy
• My Personal Best Tripod for Binoculars (Astro and Terrestrial uses) which includes advice on all the gear I use and why.
• Best 10x50 Binoculars for Astronomy
• Space.com’s Best Astronomy Binoculars 2015
• Cheap vs Expensive Binoculars