GrumpiusMaximus

Thank you very much for this. Cassiopeia is very prominent in my view. The double cluster through 80x20s is stunning but just scanning you barely move and there's something else of interest. As a novice, it's really helpful to see guides like this as I might have some sort of clue as to what I'm looking at.

Great video and good to see a genuinely objective review of a scope like this. No hype, accepts the limitations, discusses the positives and suggestions for good upgrades. Quite an impressive little scope really given the price - even with the eyepiece nonsense.

Give it a go, by all means. A small bean bag really helps because the binoculars settle in. See also, car roof! I've done the broom before. Take a broom, stick it bristles-up, stick a tea towel on it and the binoculars are supported there. Works quite well in a pinch! Great page here: https://binocularsky.com/binoc_mount.php

I will also just put it out there that the linked tripod has a maximum stated weight limit of 1.4Kg. My 80x20s are over 2Kg on their own so if you ever wanted some ridiculous binoculars, you're over the stated limit on that tripod.

I would say that is on the shorter side. Tripods generally are and 60" would be a real pain. At 6'2", I do have problems using tripods in a reasonable way. If you're crouching to use a tripod, you won't want to use it for long and trying to use a tripod sitting down is very uncomfortable and I wouldn't recommend it personally (although I'm sure there are more experienced people with different views). I bought a stool like this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/DOPGL-Upgraded-Lightweight-Collapsible-Retractable/dp/B0899RYZVN/ref=dp_prsubs_1?pd_rd_i=B0899RYZVN&psc=1 And a cheap tripod head for my monopod in the end. The stool seems to take my ample (and it is ample, I'm nearly 20 Stone thanks to Lockdown Chocolate (TM)) frame and provided you've got somewhere relatively level to sit, you can get under a 72" monopod easily enough when it's at full extension. Not ideal for long sessions (which is where the p-gram comes in) but the fact you can pull it in tight at an angle and hold it there really helps and it's more stable than you would first think. Monopods are relatively inexpsive too - so buy a 72" one (or the tallest you can) and you should be ok. Never underestimate the amount of crouching you'll do with a setup that's too short. My p-gram goes to about 7 feet at full height (I'm yet to fully measure it) but even then I don't tend to look at the zenith too much. Different if you're reclined or on a stool, of course. I'm a ham-fisted, dyspraxic (literally) twit that barely knows a drill from a hammer from a set of ratcheting sockets but I did manage to build my p-mount in a couple of days. Using a double-braced cymbal stand made it really, really easy. Something like this: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Pearl-C830-Straight-Double-Braced/dp/B00BP3MGQ2/ref=sr_1_9?dchild=1&keywords=double+braced+cymbal+stand&qid=1618771520&sr=8-9 (Other unethical retailers are available) Is as cheap as chips on eBay. I'd recommend 80s Pearl stands if possible as they weigh a ton (and are sold cheap for exactly that reason) - hair metal was a thing, after all... and if you hammer the roll pin that holds the head to the stem (to end up with a plain tube), then you can slightly under-drill a hole in a wooden stem and hammer it in straight to get a really solid attachment to the bottom of a parallelogram that gives you an easy way to rotate around the top, plus you can adjust the friction. I really should get a picture. That's what I've done and it seems to work - although I've only had my parallelogram up-and-running for about a monht (so about ten uses or so). TLDR: I wouldn't use a short tripod. They're a sub-optimal experience and you'll stop using it almost immediately. Monopods are better, cheaper and easier to use with a tripod head. Parallelograms are actually pretty easy to make and you can use a second-hand cymbal stand to do the difficult engineering if you want.

The Double Cluster and M81/M82 currently. I have a great view of Cassiopeia from my back garden and there's a lot in there to just scan. It's marvellous. M42 is great too but obscured for me now and low.

I have a pair of Celestron Skymaster 20x80s and monopod them (converted Manfrotto tripod, so heavy duty) and they're quite decent on the monopod. Don't expect the same kind of stability you would get from a tripod - although a monopod is a lot more comfortable for me. For 15x70s, you're on the verge of what I'd consider reasonable on a monopod with decent stability. In my brief post history here, I've recommended a parallelogram already! I built mine for less than £50 but I used some old cymbal stand hardware (I'm a drummer) in the base. It takes less than five minutes to set up and works really well with a tripod head, so that could be something you might consider?

I have a slight astymastism too and it does sometimes cause issues, especially seeing as I find viewing with glasses on very uncomfortable. I frequently find the diopeter adjustment maxed out as well due to the different prescription of each eye, which are a few steps out from each other (short-sighted). I need to do some experimenting but I think a bino hood is in order so that I can keep my glasses on, roll up the eyecups and get everything focussed properly without any extra light coming in...

I use a home-made parallelogram after finding that most tripods wouldn't work comfortably for me standing up (I'm 6'2") but with a small stool to sit on and a monopod with a ball head, the viewing experience is really quite good. I have an old Manfrotto aluminium tripod that I've converted into a full-height, 72" monopod for this use. The advantage of a monopod over a tripod for me is that when sitting down, I can pull the monopod towards me and angle the head to get a comfortable view of objects near the zenith with the monopod comfortably between my legs. With a tripod, I would have to lean a lot further forward because I can't pull it towards me - which is very, very uncomfortable. In all honesty, a parallelogram is my favourite way of using my big binoculars but the monopod comes close and I can just pack it down into a bag, take my folding stool and go anywhere. Whereas the parallelogram needs a bit of setting up and is bulkier.

I have a pair of Skymasters 20x80s and they are in collimation (had them a couple of months) and they do have a small amount of CA when lunar observing but nothing serious. They give very good views through my newbie eyes. I'd definitely send your pair back if you're not satisfied!

I have a pair of Celestron 20x80s and have a few other pairs of binoculars knocking about. The second pair that I go to are a pair of 10x50s (Zenith branded) that I picked up from a charity shop over a decade ago. 10x50 is a lovely compromise with enough aperture to get a good quantity of light in and not too much magnification that you can comfortably hand-hold for a long time without too many issues. I did get a chance to try out an older pair of Opticron 10x50s last week that belonged to my late Grandfather (who really knew his stuff about optics, a story for another time) and I have to say, I was absolutely blown away with them in a Bortle Class IV sky. I had the 20x80s on my parallelogram but was happy to just use the 10x50s for a while and didn't feel like I was particularly missing out; plus being able to handhold is a distinct advantage. They had the 'screw in' style eyecups and the eye relief was absolutely superb and made them incredibly easy, plus the glass was clear and the image sharp as a razor. I believe the modern equivalent is the Opticron Imagic TGA WP (RRP £199) and if I wasn't saving for other purchases, would buy them in a heartbeat. They also make a 7x50 which would be worth considering, too.