The views are certainly excellent, with sharp and intense pictures of a range of night sky items, however the tough, uneasy twist-up eyecups made us not wish to grab them.
Pros
+
Trendy style
+
Quality feel
+
Optics are sharp and brilliant
Cons
–
Much of the additional expense appears to enter into the devices
–
Eyecups are difficult and uneasy
–
The heavy weight put us off
Why you can rely on Live Science
Our specialist customers invest hours screening and comparing services and products so you can pick the very best ones for you. Learn more about how we check.
Astronomy field glasses require to have effective zoom and big unbiased lenses to let in great deals of faint starlight. After liking and examining the basic Celestron SkyMaster 15×70 field glasses, we were thrilled to check out the Pro ED variation and eagerly anticipated comparing the 2 side-by-side in order to see whether it’s worth sprinkling out on the updated glass.
Zoom: 15x Goal lens size: 70 mm Angular Field of View: 4.4-degrees Exit student: 4.4 mm Eye relief: 15.7 mm Close focus range: 42.7 feet (13 m) Weight: 4 pounds 10 oz (2,089 g) Waterproof: Yes (IPX7) Nitrogen filled: Yes Measurements (in): 10.2 x 8.7 x 3.4 Measurements (mm): 258 x 220 x 85
Being around 3 times more costly, the Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70 has great optics with really little chromatic aberration and a premium, premium feel to both the field glasses themselves and the devices. We were dealt with to spectacular views of the moon, planetary parades and far-off nebulas and galaxies. In this evaluation, we’ll be putting them to the test to see if they’re worth the additional money or whether you need to conserve your cash.
Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70 evaluationStyle & & Comfort
The construct quality feels premium. (Image credit: Kimberley Lane )
Elegant and appealing
Really heavy, even when on a tripod
Eyecups are not enjoyable
We’ll begin with the great. They look fantastic– you can quickly inform they’re a lot more superior than the less expensive designs in the SkyMaster variety.
The textured accents and Celestron and ED logo designs on the side of the field glasses are a good touch. Even to the smaller sized information like orange accents on the focus wheel and the eyepiece and unbiased covers having Celestron branding, which isn’t the case with the basic 15x70s in the variety. Not to discuss, the unbiased covers are connected to avoid them from getting lost.
We likewise liked the bring bag they featured– it felt a lot more protective than the bag provided with the basic 15×70 field glasses, and it likewise consists of a comfy neck strap.
Regretfully, that’s where the positives end for us. Our primary problem with these field glasses is that they actually aren’t extremely comfy to utilize, even when installed on a tripod (which advises us– they didn’t even feature a tripod adapter). When we initially pulled them out of package, we believed they had actually been glued in location, as they were exceptionally stiff when we attempted to change the main hinge.
The twist-up eyecups felt tough and uneasy, not leaving much space for the nose in between them.(Image credit: Kimberley Lane)
When we lastly handled to change the interpupillary range, the next problem was the eyecups. In the listing, Celestron states the “long lasting twist-up eyecups are comfy for everybody,” however we in fact discovered them to be extremely uncomfy, despite whether the eyecups were twisted in or out.
They do not mold to the face like soft fold-up eyecups do, so if you have a little face, your eyes are close together or are deep-set, there isn’t sufficient space to fit the bridge of your nose in between the eyecups. Not just does this impact their convenience
, however it implies we could not get our eyes close enough to the glass in order to get as excellent a consider as we ‘d like(evenwith the eyecups twisted out), and it was even more difficult to get a good view while using glasses.
We understood these field glasses weren’t going to be light-weight, however we discovered them to be annoyingly heavy even when we had them installed on a tripod. Weighing 4.6 pounds (2.1 kg)compared to the 3.28 pounds(1.49 kg)of the basic variation, it wasn’t long before our arms began to injure while we were scanning the horizon for Saturn throughout February’s planetary parade, and we needed to take routine breaks. If, nevertheless, you understand you can easily handle the 4.6 pound weight, then this will not be a problem for you.
Optics
The image was sharp in the center of the frame. (Image credit: Kimberley Lane)
Optics are somewhat sharper and brighter than the non-Pro set
Still a percentage of chromatic aberration
Sharp image in the center of the frame
The huge draw of these field glasses is the Extra Dispersion (ED) glass to avoid optical problems like color fringing, which was a concern we discovered to be rather visible in the basic SkyMaster 15×70 when we examined them.
We compared the 2 sets side-by-side so we might straight see the distinction in between the 2, and while the optics in the Pro ED set are certainly much better, they’re just somewhat much better. There was still an extremely percentage of chromatic aberration when taking a look at a really intense Venus and the moon, and their image wasn’t sharp towards the edges of the frame.
While we were taking a look at the stars, the Pleiades and Orion looked ever so somewhat sharper than in the non-Pro variation, however, due to
the concern with the eyecups, despite the fact that the optics are technically much better in this set, the folding eyecups of the basicset provided us a much better view.
Basically, do you desire a much better view of good-but-not-without-defects optics, or a not-so-good view of a little much better optics?
What we saw
The complete Worm Moon through the Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70. (Image credit: Kimberley Lane)
Venus was shining happily
The moon was remarkably brilliant
All 4 Galilean moons of Jupiter showed up
We took the Pro ED binos to the dark skies of Bannau Brycheiniog National Park in South Wales throughout a brand-new moon to observe the planetary parade in February 2025, where we might see Mars, all 4 of Jupiter’s moons, Uranus and Mercury.
Regretfully, Saturn and Neptune were too near to the horizon to be able to find them, however they’ll definitely be viewable through these field glasses when they’re noticeable in the night sky. Still, we took pleasure in taking a look at the Pleiades, Andromeda and making our method around the Orion constellation. A number of weeks later on, we observed the complete Worm Moon in all its magnificence, and we were blown away.
While you will not get the very same deem you would with among the very best telescopes, these field glasses are fantastic for seeing all the normal night sky suspects.
Decision
Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70 have a premium feel, however do not have convenience. (Image credit: Kimberley Lane )
Purchase it if:
✅ You desire a fogproof set: They’re nitrogen-purged to avoid fogging when moving in between environments.
Do not purchase it if:
❌ You use glasses or have a little face: The basic variation has 20 mm eye relief compared to the 15.7 mm of the Pro ED set.
❌ You wish to do long stargazing sessions: We discovered them uneasy to utilize, even for a brief time.
The optics are certainly excellent, if your top priority is convenience, we ‘d suggest you conserve your cash and get the basic Celestron SkyMaster 15×70, or pay a bit more and get a telescope for more comprehensive views.
Throughout our time with both sets of field glasses, we discovered ourselves gravitating towards the non-Pro set for their lighter weight and more comfy user experience. Considering we purchased the non-Pro variation with our own cash, even if the Pro ED design was the precise very same rate, we ‘d still choose the basic version.
Eventually, they might have the very best optics worldwide, however if they aren’t enjoyable or great to utilize, then it’s going to put us off utilizing them. We rank Celestron extremely as a brand name and more than happy to suggest their items on the whole, however these specific field glasses didn’t do it for us.
What we liked
Appealing, elegant style
Connected eyepiece covers and unbiased lens caps
Sharp, brilliant optics
Very little chromatic aberration
Great quality bag and neckstrap provided
Suitable with huge filters
What we didn’t like
Extremely heavy (common for ED glass)
The twist-up eyecups are tough and uneasy
Focus wheel and diopter were a little stiff
Main hinge was unbelievably stiff
Optics not that better than the non-Pro variation (offered the rate distinction)
Didn’t included a tripod adapter
If the Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70 binocular isn’t for you
If you desire something less expensive
Celestron SkyMaster 15×70
Offered the rate distinction, we ‘d advise conserving your cash and opting for the basic variation of the SkyMaster 15×70. The primary optical distinction is a small boost in chromatic aberration, however we discovered their convenience level far better.
How we checked the Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70
We utilized them to see the planetary parade in February 2025.(Image credit: Kimberley Lane)
Having actually purchased the basic SkyMaster 15x70s ourselves in 2015, we had the ability to straight compare the Celestron SkyMaster Pro ED 15×70 field glasses with our own non-ED set to observe the distinctions in between the 2. We assessed their optical efficiency, evaluating how sharp the image was throughout the entire frame, the brightness of the image, whether we might see anything with the Pro ED set that we could not with the basic variation, and their general feel and convenience levels.
We utilized them for several stargazing sessions under various light contamination levels and moon stages to get an extensive photo of their efficiency. We took them to the Bannau Brycheiniog National Park in Wales and utilized them in our back garden near to a city, under both a brand-new moon and an intense moon. We observed a range of celestial topics both far and wide, to see what items we might see with them, keeping in mind how simple they were to utilize compared to the basic variation, to think about whether the additional expense was understandable.
Kimberley Lane, E-commerce author for Live Science, has actually checked a vast array of optics devices evaluating video cameras, lenses and tripods, and getting hands-on observations with field glasses and more.
A landscape & seascape professional photographer living in South Wales, she intends to depict a sensation of calm and tranquil minutes through her images. Her work has actually likewise been included in a variety of nationwide photography publications and she frequently adds to our sis website Space.com.
You need to validate your show and tell name before commenting
Please logout and after that login once again, you will then be triggered to enter your screen name.
Find out more
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
