Oberwerk 11x70s or 15x70s or not?

[jcj380]

I have a pair of Celestron Skymaster 15x70s which I managed to collimate reasonably well and seem decent now.

Having just sold some surplus equipment, I have some cash to play with. I've been thinking about trying a pair of LW 70s since I've read such good reviews. However, I'm not sure it makes sense to basically duplicate the C-trons.

So what thinks the collective mind? Get a pair of 11x70s? 15x70s? Nothing? Something totally different? Sell the Skymasters? (I also have a pair of Nikon Aculon 10x50s and a pair of no-name 7x35s that are basically junk.)


Thanks!

[Caddman]

I have the Oberwerk LW 11 X 70s. They are a great set of binoculars. I can make out globular clusters such as M13, M3, and M5 with very little difficulty from a Bortle 4.5 area.
The 11 X 70s will give you a little wider field of view than your 15 X 70s. However, the biggest advantage to the LW series is the weight. They are light enough to hand hold without a tripod, or mono pod. I can step out my back door and scan the sky with little effort. That being said, I do suggest using a mono pod or tripod to stabilize the image.
Good luck with which ever you choose.

[Bigzmey]

Well collimated Skymaster 15x70 deliver pretty much the same image quality as Oberwerk LW, no point of getting 15x70.

Since you already covered 10x50 and 15x70, you may want to consider 20x80 or 25x100.

[Ozman13]

I would sell the Skymasters and get these. https://oberwerk.com/product/oberwerk-15x70mm-deluxe/

Excellent optics and the eyepieces are threaded to accept 1.25" filters (NICE!) which certainly helps with many nebulae. Also comes with a hard case and a good (not cheap plastic) tripod adapter.

[Arctic]

In any case I would go with 15X70 over the 11X70 because of the smaller exit pupil. Many people--and everyone in brighter skies--don't have pupils that get big enough to take in all the light from the 11X70s.

[Bigzmey]

In any case I would go with 15X70 over the 11X70 because of the smaller exit pupil. Many people--and everyone in brighter skies--don't have pupils that get big enough to take in all the light from the 11X70s.

This is my preference as well in fact I would even prefer 20x70, because 3.5mm EP works better for my skies. But many folks swear by 11x70, so didn't want to discourage.

[refractordude]

jcj380:

Why are your Nikon Aculons junk?

[jcj380]

Sorry, I wasn't clear - the 7x35s are junk. The Aculons are great.

Re: filters - could I just screw in something like my 1.25-in Lumicon nebula filter for example? (Obviously I 'd need two.)

[jcj380]

However, the biggest advantage to the LW series is the weight. They are light enough to hand hold without a tripod, or mono pod. I can step out my back door and scan the sky with little effort. That being said, I do suggest using a mono pod or tripod to stabilize the image.

I have a monopod and a tripod with a pan head for my binos. Haven't quite decided which I like using best yet.

[Ozman13]

Re: filters - could I just screw in something like my 1.25-in Lumicon nebula filter for example? (Obviously I 'd need two.)

Yes you can use your Lumicon filter IF the binocular eyepieces are threaded for filters. You do not HAVE to have two filters (although it makes viewing much easier if you do use two filters) and the filters do not have to be the same. I most commonly use a DGM NPB filter on one side and a Celestron UHC filter on the other.