BinocularSky

A fine choice!

I have a dozen of them that I use for outreach with youngsters. The beauty of them is that youngsters can use them with minimum instruction (on how to set the IPD, focus correctly, and point accurately at a desired object) and , thereafter, completely independently. Also, they are great for other pursuits if the interest in astronomy wanes. However, if you have time to teach them how to hold the thing properly, a 10x50 will show more. When my lad was a bit younger than the OP's nephew, we were in the garden one evening and he said, "Dad, I've found something." He devised a star-hop so he could show me, whereupon I could tell him that he'd made an entirely independent discovery of M34 🙂 . Now, obviously I have no idea how steadily he was able to hold them, but that episode suggests to me that a 10-yr old can use 10x50s effectively if s/he is shown how.

You're right about most fluid heads. If you can lay your hands on a Manfrotto 504X, it'll take the weight, but you'll need to tighten the tension increasingly with elevation (because of the increasing turning moment from the weight of the binos). You could try advertising in "Wanteds" - maybe you'll find someone who has mounted one on an alternative and has an unused fork taking up space. Or, if you really want to get fancy, APM do a fork with encoders 🙂 (at a price, of course). Or make a wooden one - you could use the existing trunnion bolts and have a "pinch" system to control friction. I notice you use a Rigel Quikfinder - great, aren't they!

Not so. Conditional alignment is the case when the optical axes are parallel at a particular IPD but are not parallel to the hinge, so do not remain parallel if you alter the IPD. The Q5.2 does not have a hinge, therefore there is no hinge to which you can get the optical axes parallel. In that format of binocular, the eccentric ring convention is usually the only way of collimating it. In general, the eccentric ring convention is more reliable than the prism-tilt convention (especially the "through the body" prism tilt seen on most low-cost binoculars). For more detail, read Bill Cook's "Understanding and Attaining 3-Axis Binocular Collimation" (it was Bill who coined the term "conditional alignment").

Frankly, I think even an HA 15x70 is slightly too much for it; mine (a very early incarnation of the mount) wouldn't stay put unless I tightened up the fulcrums or added a bit of lead flashing to the counterweight end. However, I have an Opticron 20x80 that is lighter than the HA, and is absolutely fine.

Short answer: I'm not sure; haven't actually had my grubby mitts on one of these. Long answer: Most binoculars of this type are collimated with eccentric rings on the objectives. you usually need to undo a retaining ring to get access to the eccentrics. You will need a lens tool (sometimes aka adjustable peg spanner) - beware, the common ones are just slightly too small for a 100mm objective. The way I do it is to use Polaris and defocus one side so it's a blob, then tweak the rings until the pinpoint star from one side is in the centre of the blob from the other. BUT Given that they've been dropped damaging the eyepieces, it is likely that the cause of miscollimation is not the objective lenses, but a prism. This is much less easy to remedy. If you decide to get it done professionally, the place I'd go to is OptRep https://www.opticalrepairs.com/ I hope that helps.

"Here's one I made earlier." 🙂 https://astrogeartoday.com/review-orion-paragon-plus-parallelogram-mount/

The Ravelli is identical in every respect ,except the printing of the brand name, to the Amazon Basics. It's worth checking the prices of both, as they both fluctuate enormously, and either can be cheaper at any given time.

Depends on the monopod and depends on how/where you obtain the head. Some Manfrotto monopods, for example, have a spring-loaded 3/8" sleeve over the 1/4" stud. If you buy the head as a stand-alone (as opposed to with, say, the Amazon Basics tripod), it sometimes comes with a thread adaptor. Aren't standards wonderful -- so many from which to choose!

The November edition of the Binocular Sky Newsletter is ready. As well as the usual overview of DSOs, variable and double stars, this month we have: Ceres traverses the Hyades The ice giants are well placed Five potential lunar occultations I hope this helps you to enjoy these late autumn nights with your binoculars or small telescopes. To pick up your free copy, just head over to http://binocularsky.com and click on the Newsletter tab, where you can subscribe (also free, of course) to have it emailed each month, and get archived copies.

The monopod with the trigger grip mount suggested by @Ricochet and @Philip R (it's the same one) is serviceable; the (now discontinued) Manfrotto 222 is better; good used ones normally fetch about £60. Tripods are a pain for anything higher than about 45° unless you use a parallelogram to offset you from it - your legs and its always manage to get into a tangle, and you chin yourself on the column. A monopod does not need to be vertical to work, so it's useful when you are seated or reclined. HTH

Not a lot of leeway on the very common RDFs (branded Orion EZ Finder II, Celestron Starpointer, etc.), because the clamp has also to grip a dovetail on the RDF itself, and it is only properly non-wobbly when the sides of the clamp are parallel. The dovetail on the mounting stem is 14mm wide at the top, tapering to approx 10mm (difficult to measure precisely) with a depth of approx 3mm. HTH

The problem with these is they are very difficult to aim at a night sky. They are fine for terrestrial, because you have lots of visual clues that aid targetting but, for astronomy you've just got a load of stars, which look pretty much the same to beginners, for reference. I doubt most would get more than the Moon.

My day job is Dark Sky Advisor to the Cranborne Chase International Dark Sky Reserve. As part of my job, I advise potential astro-tourism hospitality businesses on what sort of observing kit to get. As others have already advised, keep it simple! Up-down/left-right (i.e Altaz) - avoid equatorials like the plague! * A couple of basic 8x42 or 10x50. Easy to use, don't require much instruction. * Something like a 16x80 or 20x80, preferably on a simple parallelogram. Again, easy to use when it's set up, because the parallelogram allows the eyepiece height to change, therefore family friendly. * Something like a ST102 on an AZ5. Minimal instruction required. * 6" Dob. Minimal instruction required. Anything bigger gets a bit heavy. You could also consider providing: * A bespoke observing platform. * Folder of info, including seasonal stargazing guides and instructional hints. * Stellarium and app suggestions. * Red torches. * Reclining chairs and blankets.

For hand-held-only observing, I oscillate among three binos (well, four if you count the 2.1x42, but that's a bit different): * Opticron BGA 10x42 - had these for a very long time; they are my walking/birding/travelling binos; get astro use when I'm away from home. * Lunt Magnesium 10x50 - brightest 10x50 I've used, and I see more through these than any other hand-held, despite the slight wobble. When I can no longer hold them sufficiently steadily for my liking, I'll probably go for an IS option. * Vixen 6.5x32 - certainly the nicest to use, and give a wide, steady field with excellent colour rendition (but show me less than the others). I've used Vortex Crossfires and Diamondbacks; the latter in particular are extremely nice mid-price-range binos. I think there were two incarnations of those; Mk1 black-covered, and Mk2 grey-covered with a mounting point on the underside of one of the objective tubes. The "little brother" of the Swift Newport 10x50s. In the early '90s made the silly mistake of selling my Mk1 Newports to fund a modern lightweight bino; didn't get on with it (what you said about being like shoes 🙂 ), but couldn't find another Mk1 Newport in good nick, so compounded my silly mistake by getting the Mk 2 - wider FoV. Absolutely awful!

I have one of those - a very fine eyepiece!

The October edition of the Binocular Sky Newsletter is ready. As well as the usual overview of DSOs, variable and double stars, this month we have: "Observing season proper" begins Ceres is back A couple of Mira stars near maximum A dozen potential occultations I hope this helps you to enjoy these autumnal nights with your binoculars or small telescopes. To pick up your free copy, just head over to http://binocularsky.com and click on the Newsletter tab, where you can subscribe (also free, of course) to have it emailed each month, and get archived copies.

The Pentax is lighter and has a much smaller field of view, although the size of the very sharp sweet spot is about the same. The Pentax also has locking focus, which can be useful. Review at https://binocularsky.com/binoc_reviews.php

We're back! After last month's hiatus, the September edition of the Binocular Sky Newsletter is ready. As well as the usual overview of DSOs, variable and double stars, this month we have: Two Mira stars near maximum The ice giants are back Nine potential occultations I hope this helps you to enjoy these rapidly lengthening nights with your binoculars or small telescopes. To pick up your free copy, just head over to http://binocularsky.com and click on the Newsletter tab, where you can subscribe (also free, of course) to have it emailed each month, and get archived copies.

I reviewed it for S@N last year: https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/reviews/binoculars/bresser-spezial-astro-sf-15x70-binoculars-review/

@ScouseSpaceCadet has mentioned my recommendation of the Opticron T WP - astonishingly good value, and waterproof! However, the Lunt/APM/LightQuest 10x50 is noticeably brighter - but over-budget. Another contender is the Nikon Action Extreme which, I think, just falls within your budget.

I find the easiest way to get it close is to focus on Polaris, then defocus the right eyepiece. This prevents your brain from trying to merge the images, which it can do if they are slightly out, but this can introduce headaches or nausea). (Other brain-fooling methods include anaglyph glasses - or different coloured cellophane sweet wrappers - and crossed Bahtinov masks.) Then tweak the collimation screws until the focused point is in the middle of the defocused blob. Note that (as with the other advice above), this does not result in full collimation, but in conditional alignment, the condition being the interpupllary distance - if you change it, you can introduce a double image again. This is because you are making the optical axes of the tubes parallel, but they will almost certainly not be parallel to the hinge.

Got the PCR result yesterday - negative. (But thanks for the suggestion; always good to find out, I guess 🙂 )

Thanks; I'll do that.

Nope, very different. Those were the first of the 15x70s, before the Kunming/United Optics lot got in on the act; came out back in the '90s. Retailed for abut £140, if I recall correctly. Were better than the budget Kunming/United stuff (eg the Celestron Skymaster, Oberwerk,, etc). Nicely made. Main downside is that there is almost no "past infinity" focus, so you can't focus out even mild myopia but, if that's not an issue for you, worth a look, but I think £100 is too much to pay.