Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

New Vortex Diamondback 15x56

  • Please log in to reply
41 replies to this topic

#1 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 05 June 2020 - 10:01 AM

I received an email advertisement from Sport Optics yesterday saying that a new Vortex Diamondback 15x56 will be for sale, although a notice on their website page for the new model indicates that there may be some COVID-19 related delays in availability:

 

https://www.sportopt...lar-db-218.aspx

 

I think this is an interesting model at a very affordable price point.   I recently purchased the Diamondback 12x50 and have been very satisfied with it because it allowed me to check out the 12x50 configuration for a very reasonable price.

 

Weight is not bad at just under 35 ounces (my Nikon M5 8x56 tips in at just over 40 ounces) and at just under 4.4 degrees the FOV is competitive (although the quality of that FOV remains to be evaluated).  The eye relief specification of the 15x56 is 15.6 mm, but if the eye cup design is similar to my 12x50 the effective eye relief is likely to be in the 13.5 - 14.0 mm range.  That's getting a bit tight for us eyeglasses wearers but still not too bad.

 

If this model is similar in quality to the Diamondback 10x50 and 12x50, i.e., a well-made binocular with decent performance and an excellent warranty, I think at about $350 this new 15x56 will offer a good value proposition for those of us who are not yet ready to invest in a more expensive model.

 


  • Jon Isaacs and Milos1977 like this

#2 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 05 June 2020 - 10:12 AM

Now that looks interesting. I know I said I would not buy another pair of binoculars this year, but...


  • djeber2 likes this

#3 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 05 June 2020 - 11:04 AM

I just couldn't resist placing an order.  It is back-ordered though, but promotions are available if you call in.

 

Just a couple of side notes.  The representative said that these units are manufactured in the Philippines and that the shipping delays are a result of the typical supply-related problems many manufacturers are having these days.  The rep did say they are excited to get the first shipment in house and are expecting the model to be popular for hunting and target shooting, as alternative to using a spotting scope.

 

Of course, we astronomy-centric observers may benefit from the product as well...    smile.gif


  • djeber2 and cupton like this

#4 djeber2

djeber2

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,487
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2004
  • Loc: Cloudy Midwest

Posted 05 June 2020 - 08:29 PM

Now that looks interesting. I know I said I would not buy another pair of binoculars this year, but...

Same for me.   I look forward to reading the reviews on these.



#5 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 09 June 2020 - 11:40 AM

I gave in. I broke my New Year's resolution. I ordered it today. I'm a bad person.


  • HoundDog, Corcaroli78, SMark and 2 others like this

#6 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 09 June 2020 - 06:08 PM

I received an update from Sport Optics today, they said they are getting in a shipment of 10 units tomorrow and will ship one out to me.

 

I'm excited to be getting them sooner rather than later of course, but I'm a little apprehensive of how much effective eye relief they will have.  I really like the 12x50 DBs that I have even though the ER prevents me from seeing the entire field with my glasses on.  I was using them today for general bird watching in my yard and to follow a fairly high altitude parachute jump down to a nearby airport.  A reduced FOV wasn't a big problem and I could make out the steps on the plane's wing struts and watch the jumpers push off.  I'd like to use the 15x56s for daytime use occasionally and hope the FOV isn't overly restricted with my glasses on.

 

And Cestus, I'm sorry if I have served as the instrument of your temptation.  If you purchased them from Sport Optics fear not, you'll have 30 days to resolve any buyer's remorse and return them.   wink.gif



#7 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 10 June 2020 - 09:54 AM

I received an update from Sport Optics today, they said they are getting in a shipment of 10 units tomorrow and will ship one out to me.

 

I'm excited to be getting them sooner rather than later of course, but I'm a little apprehensive of how much effective eye relief they will have.  I really like the 12x50 DBs that I have even though the ER prevents me from seeing the entire field with my glasses on.  I was using them today for general bird watching in my yard and to follow a fairly high altitude parachute jump down to a nearby airport.  A reduced FOV wasn't a big problem and I could make out the steps on the plane's wing struts and watch the jumpers push off.  I'd like to use the 15x56s for daytime use occasionally and hope the FOV isn't overly restricted with my glasses on.

 

And Cestus, I'm sorry if I have served as the instrument of your temptation.  If you purchased them from Sport Optics fear not, you'll have 30 days to resolve any buyer's remorse and return them.   wink.gif

My sin is purely my own. I would have seen them advertised eventually and ended up doing the same thing.



#8 djeber2

djeber2

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,487
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2004
  • Loc: Cloudy Midwest

Posted 10 June 2020 - 06:40 PM

 I am glad that you both decided to get these binoculars looking forward to hearing all about them after you get the chance to try them out.     These could possibly fill the huge gap in my binocular line up between 12 x 50 and 16 x 60 


Edited by djeber2, 10 June 2020 - 06:41 PM.


#9 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 37,150
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 11 June 2020 - 03:19 AM

djeber2,

 

It's surprising enough that you consider the difference between 12x50 and 16x60 to be a "huge gap", but even more so that you think a 15x56 would be a perfect "gap filler". smile.gif

 

It reminds me of when I had four 10x50s, with TFOVs of 5.0, 5.5, 6.0 and 7.0 degrees respectively, and developed an itch for one with a 6.5 degree TFOV to fill that gap. lol.gif

 

Kenny


  • Rich V., Albie, Mark9473 and 3 others like this

#10 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 11 June 2020 - 02:46 PM

Same for me.   I look forward to reading the reviews on these.

Having read the reviews here I don't think I know enough to write one.



#11 djeber2

djeber2

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,487
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2004
  • Loc: Cloudy Midwest

Posted 12 June 2020 - 09:21 PM

djeber2,

 

It's surprising enough that you consider the difference between 12x50 and 16x60 to be a "huge gap", but even more so that you think a 15x56 would be a perfect "gap filler". smile.gif

 

It reminds me of when I had four 10x50s, with TFOVs of 5.0, 5.5, 6.0 and 7.0 degrees respectively, and developed an itch for one with a 6.5 degree TFOV to fill that gap. lol.gif

 

Kenny

Kenny I was mostly being sarcastic, but I do like to collect these things, especially the moderately priced items.  I really like my 16x60 Pentax except for the relatively small FOV, so I would expect these 15x56 Diamondback to be a bit of an upgrade over the Pentax. 



#12 djeber2

djeber2

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,487
  • Joined: 02 Jul 2004
  • Loc: Cloudy Midwest

Posted 12 June 2020 - 09:23 PM

Having read the reviews here I don't think I know enough to write one.

Just sharing your impressions and how you feel they compare to your other binocs would be very helpful information.


  • Pinac and Lofapco like this

#13 KennyJ

KennyJ

    The British Flash

  • *****
  • Posts: 37,150
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2003
  • Loc: Lancashire UK

Posted 13 June 2020 - 01:44 AM

<<< "Having read the reviews on here I don't think I know enough to write one." >>>

 

That never stopped me from at least trying! lol.gif 

 

After all, variety is the spice of life, as they say, and some readers only want to know a bit about the binoculars, not necessarily about every sky object ever seen through them! smile.gif

 

Kenny


  • hallelujah and Lofapco like this

#14 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:18 AM

Okay. I will give it a try when it arrives and when the clouds finally dissipate.


  • Lofapco likes this

#15 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 16 June 2020 - 07:11 PM

The Vortex 15x56s arrived today in good condition.  I had a few minutes at the office to take a first look at and through them.  Folks at the office usually poke fun at me whenever I get a new pair of binoculars in, so I kept the first look brief (I'm still getting chuckles about the Orion 2x54s I tried recently).

 

First impression is of a solid unit similar in construction and feel to the Diamondback 12x50s I have, only a little larger.  They have good fit and finish, a smoothly working hinge, the focuser a bit stiff to start but smoothed out quickly.  They feel surprisingly light in the hand.  At about 35 ounces they are more than 5 ounces lighter than my Nikon M5 8x56s.  Initial impressions are that the weight damps out some of the shakes due to the high magnification, but it doesn't feel too heavy.  Really, these are only 4 ounces heavier than my 12x50s.  Hm...maybe I've found a new companion for my evening walks...hmm.gif

 

Looking through the office window at license plates in the parking lot and foliage about 50-60 yards away, I liked the view.  In particular the focus snap seems better than the 12x50s, where I sometimes have to zero in on sharp focus by going back and forth a few times.  Not with these.  Also, some bare branches against a partly cloudy sky do show a hit of CA but not much.

 

If the skies are clear tonight I'll take a look around handheld, and if I have time put them on a tripod.



#16 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 17 June 2020 - 12:07 AM

I don't know what's going on with the tremendous night sky conditions during the past week.  We're almost at a new moon and the air tonight was calm and clear.  When new optics arrive it's supposed to be cloudy for weeks, but last night was another great night out on the back deck.  I guess I'll just have to keep buying more binoculars so the skies stay clear.

 

I took the new DB 15x56s out with my DB 12x50s and plunked down in a deck chair.  I took in some very nice views of Cygnus, Cassiopeia, M13 and Scorpio.  By midnight, Jupiter and Saturn were coming out from behind the trees.  Then I looked south and panned through the Lagoon and Trifid nebulae, the Small Sagittarius Star Cloud, and very faint but distinct you could make out the Omega and Eagle nebulae.  Boy the old adage is true:  there's no substitute for dark, clear skies.

 

The DB 15x56s put up some very nice views of all the targets I looked at.  This was a handheld-only session with both binoculars.  Where the 12x50s are decidedly objective-heavy, the new 15x56s are very well balanced and easy to hold for longer periods, especially if you're sitting in a chair.  A minor observation is that the rubber armor on the 15x56 has a rougher, grippier texture than on the 12x50s and is easier to hold as a result.

 

Although I couldn't see the entire FOV with my eyeglasses on, I could see maybe 70-75% of it.  Turning my head until I could see part of the field stop I didn't see a lot of "star-smearing", but it's hard to tell without putting it on a tripod.  The part of the FOV I could see with my glasses on was nice and sharp.  Jupiter's moons were nice pinpricks and there wasn't too much flare on the planet itself.  Saturn was smaller and a little tougher to see clearly.

 

Handheld from a sitting position, the 15x56s are a very easy binocular to use and look through, even wearing my eyeglasses.  There's something about their reasonably light weight and balance that makes them easy to manipulate and pan around.  Tomorrow, I'll try to use them sitting and standing for bird watching and plane spotting from my back yard.


  • KennyJ, djeber2, Mark9473 and 1 other like this

#17 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 17 June 2020 - 11:42 AM

Daytime viewing update.  I was able to spend about 20 minutes on the back deck this morning, with conditions continuing to be near perfect:  cloudless sky, sliver of a waning crescent moon high overhead, lots of foliage, textured rocks, tree branches, a few birds, and one high-altitude jet to focus on.

 

A little bit about the 15x56 focuser.  I find it a tad on the heavy side, but not unpleasantly so.  At times it feels like there's a little "rubber banding".  What I mean by that is that there's no play in the focuser movement, but you can turn it a bit in either direction just a tad without changing focus and it feels like it returns to the starting position.  This is something you feel more than see.  Maybe it will loosen up a bit with use.  I don't find that this is a problem, though, even in daytime use.  Looking down the barrels, you can see that the focuser turns a somewhat lengthy assembly that includes not only the focusing lens cell but a ribbed inner barrel.  Perhaps the focuser screw mechanism just doesn't deliver enough force to the assembly?  Otherwise, the focuser works fine and seems fairly quick.

 

I had a chance to take a good look at the interior of the barrels and the only thing I saw out of place were two tiny dust specs on one of the prisms.  The rest of the barrel interiors were spotless.  There's more ribbing inside the barrels than in the 12x50s, including more on the long focuser assembly barrel.  And, on the 15x56 the edges of the objective lenses are blackened, whereas on the 12x50 they are not.  I think this may reduce sky glare, which was noticeably less with the 15x56s than with the 12x50s.

 

It was an extraordinarily clear day today and the views were just great.  It was easy to find sharp focus and the 15x56s appear to have  large sweet spot.  Whether looking at trees or their trunks, branches, leaves, the roofs of houses, the views were very nice.  I spotted a high flying twin-engine jet, no contrails in the bright blue sky, and could clearly see the blue and white livery and lots of details on the wings, etc.

 

You could reasonably think that hand holding 15x56s would provide a very shaky view, and yes there are shakes of course.  But I'll return again to the weight and balance of the 15x56s.  With just my thumbs under each barrel you can balance the binoculars at a point about halfway down the barrels, a point just a smidgen forward of the tripod adapter blanking cover.  This puts your full grip right around the center of gravity and makes for a very comfortable hold with the focuser an easy reach.  So yes, the view has some shakes but I don't think it's that bad.

 

I'm going to continue to try and use the 15x56s daily and keep an eye on how the focuser feels after a week or two.  I'll also try to get some photos uploaded, but that's a bit of a minor project and at this time of year the Yard Work Sirens beckon...  fingertap.gif

 

Cestus, please let us know what you think of your pair when they arrive.  The units we've ordered are likely among the first production run so it's interesting to see how they do!



#18 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 17 June 2020 - 02:19 PM

I'm now really looking forward to getting them. I will put them on a tripod first thing. O felix culpa. I'm thinking I will be glad I broke my New Year's resolution.



#19 DrJ1

DrJ1

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 125
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2020

Posted 17 June 2020 - 02:51 PM

Kenny I was mostly being sarcastic, but I do like to collect these things, especially the moderately priced items.  I really like my 16x60 Pentax except for the relatively small FOV, so I would expect these 15x56 Diamondback to be a bit of an upgrade over the Pentax. 

I have Pentax 16x60 binocs made in China and I like them.  I would like to see someone critically compare these Pentax binocs with the 15x56 Vortex Diamondbacks.  DrJ1


  • hallelujah and Grimnir like this

#20 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 18 June 2020 - 02:05 PM

A few small updates.

 

This morning I was in my back yard checking out the close focus point.  I noticed that when the focuser is a the end of its travel for near-focus, it's a little "stickier" than when moving along the rest of its travel, and it takes a little extra pressure to get it moving again the other way.  It's a minor issue for me, as I see these being used mostly for distance nature viewing and astronomy.  The focuser moves with even pressure over the rest of its travel and takes about one turn to go from farthest to nearest focus.  I also had a short computer chat with a technical representative from Vortex on this issue.  He said that he hadn't heard of it yet, but if I wanted I could send them in for a look.  But with a three-week turnaround time, I said I would pass.  He also said that if there's ever a problem in the future, just send them in under the VIP warranty.

 

Also, a sticker on the binoculars proclaims that they are "Made in China," not the Philippines as I was told earlier.  There is a model designation printed on one of the barrels under the bridge, but no serial number.

 

I tried to get a better handle on what the view looks like near the field stop, but I think I'll have to wait until I can put them on a tripod.  I tried them with and without my glasses on but I need a steadier view and maybe a brick wall I can look at.  BTW, the eye cups on the 15x56s have a total of four positions, all the way in and out, plus two intermediate positions.  The positions appear to be equally spaced.  The eye cups have positive click-stops, with a feel very much on par with my Nikon Monarch HG 10x42s.

 

So far, I have to say I'm very pleased with the product, the focuser issue notwithstanding.  And at about $305 USD with discounts, I think they are a great deal.


  • KennyJ likes this

#21 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 19 June 2020 - 12:20 PM

Sorry to post this review material piecemeal, but I figure I'd better do it while I can.

 

Took a few minutes this morning, a bright summer day with fluffy white clouds as the summer solstice approaches, to look closely for CA.  I have an easement running through my property with some high voltage electrical wires.  These are not giant metal gantries but 30-foot high wooden, dual-pole supports and there are a number of wires to observe, both thick and thin.  The comments below are again using the 15x56s handheld.

 

Focusing on the thicker stranded wires to confirm good focus, with bright white clouds as a backdrop, the CA center field is really pretty low to virtually none.  Moving the binoculars slowly so that the wires, which are running horizontally through the FOV, get closer to the field stop, CA appears and is pretty significant from about 60-70% of the FOV.  Some of this may be due to the eyepieces, given the high magnification.  Viewing a much thinner wire in the same manner, CA is slight but visible center field and is significant as you move to the field stop, so much so that the bands of purple and (a nice shade of lime) green are about the width of the thin wire.

 

Does this spoil the view?  Doesn't seem to when looking at green tree foliage against bright white clouds or birds perched in the yard.  Panning around the tree line, looking at bare branches, etc. doesn't inject CA into the view to any great degree.  Using the 15x56s handheld for astronomy a few nights ago, CA was noticeable only when viewing Jupiter's disk and I think part of the problem was that the inevitable shakes at that magnification make it easier to see.

 

Again, I haven't done any viewing mounted on a tripod, just haven't had the time.  I'm hoping Cestus will provide us with some tripod-related comments after his unit arrives.  I forgot to mention that the DB 15x56s do come with a tripod mounting attachment.  However, it seems to be made for largely viewing a zero or low elevation angles, using gravity to keep the binos mounted.  I'll put it together eventually to take a closer look, but I think I'll stick to my conventional tripod mount.  The 15x56's barrels are very close together when adjusted for my IPD, so the thicker adapters I have for my Obies likely will not fit.  I have one thinner adapter that I use with my 8x56s, and I think that will hold these fine as they are even lighter than the 8x56s.


  • djeber2 likes this

#22 Cestus

Cestus

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 239
  • Joined: 30 Jul 2019

Posted 19 June 2020 - 12:38 PM

I'm still waiting for it to arrive, with bated breath. I bought a adapter from Vortex since my 12's are similar. I wish I had these binos last night when it was clear.



#23 pat in los angeles basin

pat in los angeles basin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 510
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2015

Posted 19 June 2020 - 12:54 PM

tmichaelbanks; 

 I found that the cheaper prescription lenses (if you happen to be wearing corrective glasses) adds to the CA. You didn't mention in the last post whether you were wearing  glasses so I thought I'd inquire.    Regards, Pat



#24 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 19 June 2020 - 02:22 PM

Hi Pat,

 

The "test" was done wearing my glasses.  It's a good point you raise and it's easy enough to try the test again without wearing them.

 

I have to use straight plastic lenses, not polycarbonate which doesn't seem to work well with my strong prescription.

 

And of course, how do we factor in the light-dispersing effects of the lenses in our own eyes?  Thank goodness for objective, instrument-based measurements!  smile.gif 



#25 tmichaelbanks

tmichaelbanks

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posted 20 June 2020 - 12:23 PM

Goodness, I've now had three extraordinarily calm, clear nights to observe in the span of two weeks.  Perhaps the lower levels of particulate pollution due to the greatly reduced road and air traffic have contributed, but I haven't seen clear skies like these in months.  Now that my state is reopening, the road traffic has increased so we'll see what the rest of the summer brings.  Last night was one of those nights when I struggled to end the session and go to bed.

 

I used my OB 5000 tripod and alternated viewing with the DB 15x56s and a Pentax 20x60, with 8x56s handheld for spotting.  Some minor notes:  the tripod blanking cover was extraordinarily difficult to remove and required needle-nosed pliers to unscrew; and the IPD I need puts the barrels very close together, requiring me to remove the objective caps to slip the tripod adapter through.  I used the thinner adapter I have, not the heavy-duty adapters that came with the OB tripod.

 

Jupiter and Saturn were out and nicely spaced near each other.  Jupiter's moons were sharp, little pinpricks in the 15x56s but the bright planet had some bloat, minor CA, and I thought I could see a couple of very faint spikes.  The view was much the same in the 20x60, aside from the larger image scale.  Saturn showed a clearly elongated shape in both higher mag binoculars and a little bloat.  Even in the 20x60s you could not make out any gap between the rings and the planet.

 

Panning through Cygnus on this clear night was a feast of sights.  Aesthetically, the 15x56 had better "framing" than the 20x60 but both showed star formations and star clouds equally well. Viewing Cygnus, I also had confirmation that picking up the 8x56 was worthwhile because the star clouds and dark veins in the MW were easy to see.  Looking at the sights between Cassiopeia and Cygnus, the 15x56 put up sharp stars throughout.

 

Swinging to the south to look at the Lagoon and Trifid nebulae and the Sagittarius star cloud, I thought the wider FOV of the 15x56 better framed the objects and allowed a better appreciation of the stars and nebulae together than the higher magnification of the 20x56.  The smaller exit pupils of the two higher mag binoculars also helped improve the contrast.  The light pollution looking south toward the city of Providence makes the skies appear gray to the naked eye.  These same objects in the 8x56 were faint and ghosty.

 

I spotted the the Double Cluster low in the northern sky.  Here, the 20x60 did a better job of framing and bringing out details, but the 15x56 did fine, bringing out the details but just at a smaller image scale.  Although both high mag binoculars showed the DC well, the 15x56 showed the star cloud the DC is in just a little better and brighter.  Also low in the sky was M31, but it was just an fuzzy, elliptical blur in all the binos.  I spotted numerous satellites crossing every which way through Cygnus during the evening, some seeming to be much faster than others (maybe members of Elon Musk's "constellation"?).

 

As a lot of the more interesting objects moved to positions directly overhead, I switched to the zero-g chair and used the binos handheld for a while. This led to a thought about using the 15x56s on a tripod, with regard to eye relief as compared to the 20x60, which has eye relief in abundance.  Wearing my glasses and with the 15x56s on a tripod, I found the eye position needed to get a sharp view a little fussier to find and hold.  This is not the case when using the 15x56s handheld, although of course the views are shakier.  Once centered properly views through the 15x56 were very good, but it can be a little fatiguing to have to adjust eye position frequently.  With the 20x60s and their 22 mm of ER I view with the eye cups out one stop and as a result the views are more comfortable, despite their very restrictive TFOV and AFOV.  You may not have this problem if you don't wear eyeglasses while viewing or if you have a prescription that's weaker than mine.  But it is a factor you should consider when evaluating these DB 15x56s as you may find yourself using them on a tripod more often than not.  As always, YMMV and it pays to buy from a vendor with a good return policy.

 

I'm having a lot of fun with these new DB 15x56s, especially with the exceptionally (for my location anyway) clear, dry, and calm night skies lately.  I still have to take and post some pics and try some daytime viewing on a tripod, and I'd like to try and get some views of the local red-tailed hawks soaring around to see what the CA looks like.  Based on what I've seen so far though, I think Vortex has a winner on their hands.


  • KennyJ and Milos1977 like this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics