• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Comparison: Leupold Yosemite 6x30 and Celestron Cypress 7x30 (1 Viewer)

drabina

Member
This is my very non-scientific comparison of two binoculars: Leupold Yosemite 6x30 (natural color version; owned for about a year now) and Celestron Cypress 7x30 (green colored version owned for two days).

Leupold Yosemite 6x30 and Celestron Cypress 7x30

While reading this, please remember that I have little to no experience with binoculars. I am basically presenting my observations as a very casual user. I am basing this review on 2 hours spent with both binoculars around my neck while bird watching at one of the local nature reserve spots. So lets start.

Build and external quality:
Yosemites are a lot softer with their rubbery coating. Cypress' body is a lot more like a non-slippery plastic. I do prefer Yosemite's feel but I have noticed that the rubber skin is already separating from the body in one place.
Another difference in in the eyecups. Both binocs have eyecups that you can twist to extend. Cypress has a couple of "clicks" between closed and fully opened position. Yosemites do not. While I would think that the "clicks" that Cypress is providing should be a default feature, the constantly closing eyecups of Yosemites just drive me crazy.
Objective lens caps are better in Yosemites since they are somewhat attached to the barrels (they can still slide off but at least there is some protection against that). Cypress' lens caps are just thin rubber caps that you slip on and off. I am giving myself about 1-2 weeks before I lose them for good.
Strap is better and more comfortable in Yosemites. Cypress binocs are a bit lighter. Because of that, my kid actually prefers to hold and use the Cypress. I guess for an eight year old even one ounce makes difference. For me, a 200 lbs guy, I can't really tell that they are different weight-wise.
Cases for both binoculars are similar in shape but Yosemite's case is a lot softer. While better in feel, I think that stiffer material used for Cypress' case provides a slightly better protection. Yosemite's case has a belt loop and Cypress' case has a neck strap.
Another thing worth mentioning is that the focusing ring on Yosemite's gets very stiff. I have to work it couple of times thru the whole movement circle to loosen up. No problem with that in Cypress binocs. This creates a problem for kids when trying to focus. No way my 6 years old would be able to turn the stiff focusing ring.
Winner: Celestron Cypress

Celestron Cypress 7x30

Leupold Yosemite 6x30

Cases (fronts)

Cases (back)

Optics:
One thing I have noticed right away is that Yosemites are a bit brighter binoculars. Cypress is darker but it has more contrast. Now, there is a possibility that the contrast is better because of the Cypress being darker but like I said in the beginning, I am not an expert. Another difference that a noob like me noticed is that Yosemite has better depth of field. I did have to refocus the Cypress a lot more often.
As to the 6x vs 7x, I can't tell a difference. Believe me, I have tried. In the specs, Celestron lists wider field-of-view and has higher magnification. To my untrained eye, both binoculars provide the same magnification and FOV. So there is a small difference in the optics but both binoculars provide a very good image. It is possible that if I had the Cypress first, I would be thrown off by Yosemite's a bit washed out picture.
I am not going to try to determine softness at the edges, chromatic aberration, etc because I am not skilled enough to do so. Remember that those are sub-$100 binoculars that I have purchased to use by kids on a trips and for bird watching. Honestly, both binoculars provide nice and clear picture with Yosemite's taking the edge because I think they would be brighter in less optimal lighting conditions.
Winner: Leupold Yosemite

Final word:
I have to be honest that in the beginning (first 5-10 minutes with both binocs), I wasn't crazy about Cypress. Mostly due to the slightly darker image and those cheap objective lens covers. But, at the end of the 2-hour long bird watching trip, I have totally changed my mind. While I have to say that there is something really cool about Yosemites and their bright image, the Cypress is not far behind. Actually, I really got used to the more contrast image presented by Cypress and at the end of my trip, I was reaching for them more often than for the Yosemites. I am still torn between deciding if Cypress is a darker binocular or Yosemite being a bit washed out. The "clicking" (locking) eye cups and smooth focusing ring of Celestron's made a positive impression on me. So since I like the Cypress and my kid approved them, they are staying. They are also a bit cheaper than Yosemites which is a good thing if you are on a budget and planning to give the binoculars to the kids. You know that they are going to be bumped a lot more.

That's it. If I have omitted something that I should write about, please just ask and I will post an update.

Forgot to add that this is sort of a continuation of this thread: Need recommendation for budget binoculars for kids
 
Last edited:
Very nice review Drabina. I enjoyed your perspective on both binoculars.

Just a comment to add....

The difference in contrast/apparent brightness is most likely the result of the different choice of coatings utilized on both models. I have little doubt that these are the same binoculars rebadged under different labels. The individual companies can request certain "customizations" from the manufacturer in China. Leupold chose one set of coatings while Celestron chose another. That would account for the differences in apparent brightness and contrast.

Once again, a good comparison.
 
..............The "clicking" (locking) eye cups and smooth focusing ring of Celestron's made a positive impression on me. So since I like the Cypress and my kid approved them, they are staying. They are also a bit cheaper than Yosemites which is a good thing if you are on a budget and planning to give the binoculars to the kids. You know that they are going to be bumped a lot more.

That's it. If I have omitted something that I should write about, please just ask and I will post an update.

Forgot to add that this is sort of a continuation of this thread: Need recommendation for budget binoculars for kids

drabina,

Thank you very much for this fine comparison! I hope you will be able to post updates in the future. Most of all, the durability issue will be of interest.

I should add that my Yosemites have very distinct locking at the end. And from other posts, it seems that there is some variation that can even mean having one barrel with locking and the other without.
 
Another clone is the 8x30 Barska Crossover.
Compared to the same 8x30 in the Yosemite, is basically
has easier mechanical movements, is the same brightness,
is a little softer at the edges, but has much easier eye placement,
esp. with glasses. I end up taking that out, so I can look
quick and leave glasses on. I think the difference mainly
amounts to moving the field lens for a different trade-off.

The Barska is a strong 8x though...it would be nice if they had a 6x.
 
Last edited:
Another clone is the 8x30 Barska Crossover.
Compared to the same 8x30 in the Yosemite, is basically
has easier mechanical movements, ............

I am a bit puzzled by the fact that the Barska model is around 100 grams heavier than the other two. That's quite a bit. Could that be due to the optimized mechanics?
 
Thanks drabina for sharing your impression of these two binoculars!

I wonder about following: while you say that Bushnell is brighter than Celestron(which could be a result of a lower magnification) you also say that you can't tell any difference in as well magnification and field of view.

While a small difference of magnification may be hard to notice you should notice a difference in FOV. According to the specs Yosemite 6x30 has 48deg AFOV and Cypress 7x30 57,4deg. You can't miss such a big difference. If you can't see any difference of neither magnification, apparant FOV or true FOV these are exactly the same optics but with different coatings. If so, Cypress 7x30 is 6x30.

By the way: nice pictures. But could you add a comparison picture of the eyepiece lenses?

Regards, Patric
 
I wonder about following: while you say that Bushnell is brighter than Celestron(which could be a result of a lower magnification) you also say that you can't tell any difference in as well magnification and field of view.

While a small difference of magnification may be hard to notice you should notice a difference in FOV. According to the specs Yosemite 6x30 has 48deg AFOV and Cypress 7x30 57,4deg. You can't miss such a big difference. If you can't see any difference of neither magnification, apparant FOV or true FOV these are exactly the same optics but with different coatings. If so, Cypress 7x30 is 6x30.
I know that I am posting this on a public forum and somebody one day is going to held me responsible but to the best of my ability, the FOV and magnification on both binoculars is the same. I have no proof for this but I have really tried to point the binoculars on something in the distance and see if one provides wider view (i.e. from the red tree to the left to the power pole on the right) but in few tries I have come to the conclusion that they provide the same FOV. Though there is a possibility that I am missing something obvious here.

By the way: nice pictures. But could you add a comparison picture of the eyepiece lenses?
I will take the pictures today when I get back from work.

I hope you will be able to post updates in the future. Most of all, the durability issue will be of interest.
Well, I do own the Leupolds for about a year now. I think I bought them early Summer 2014. I have used them last Summer and now in the spring. They were just sitting in the closet thru the Winter. The rubber coating is fine as it pretty much wraps around the binoculars but in one spot (about 0.5x0.5") there is a noticeable bubble. Looks like the skin separated from what's underneath. Kinda like a bubble on your new phone screen protector. This one is bigger though and you can feel the air inside as you press in this particular location. Kinda annoying. We'll see how the Celestrons hold up. So far they are winning with smoother focusing ring and lockable eye cups.
 
Some of these same binoculars were discussed on this thread about five years ago.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=177768&highlight=Celestron+Nature

My experiences with the Celestron Nature 8x30 (almost certainly the same binocular as the relabeled Cypress 7x30) start with post #38. Everything I said about that binocular applies to the largely identical Barska Crossover (still incorrectly labeled as an 8x30) except that the Barska is less bright because it's not fully multi-coated. In my opinion none of these cheaper imitations of the Yosemite are made well enough to be recommendable. The three samples I've tried (one Celestron and two Barskas) were all poorly collimated right out of the box or blister wrap and could not hold a diopter adjustment or collimation due to squishy, wobbly eyepiece bridges. My impression is that when you go from the Leupold/Kowa/Vortex/Eagle clones to the Celestron/Barska imitations a threshold is crossed between pretty decent inexpensive binoculars worth the price to flimsy toys that are likely to be a waste of money.
 
Last edited:
I am a bit puzzled by the fact that the Barska model is around 100 grams heavier than the other two. That's quite a bit. Could that be due to the optimized mechanics?

Could be an error in the number...
I'm hefting them and the Barska feels the same as the Celestrons,

I just slung the two of them over a pvc pipe end on the table
(comparison/roll). They are nearly identical in weight, but the
Celestrons are a tad heavier. Sometimes weight is quoted with or
without the box, etc...
 
I understand the 'flimsy eyepiece bridge' bit.
I actually repaired it in 2 of the 4 Celestrons I bought at buydig.
Both the design and assembly were off.

It might have been a transient problem....there are fewer 1 and 2 star reviews now than in 2012-2013.

I'm looking through the Barskas and tugging the focuser arms now, and the Celestron too...
they don't feel chintzsy to me...
Granted, the Leupold is a bit more solid. Very tight to move, sometimes.
I have a hard time noticing a few percent less light.

It all comes from China, so there are ups and downs.
The stiction and blackouts on the 6x30 Yosemites bugged me so I let them go.
Same issues in the 8x30s, but not as bad. As mentioned, stiff focusing is a bigger
issue for kids.
 
Last edited:
My impression is that when you go from the Leupold/Kowa/Vortex/Eagle clones to the Celestron/Barska imitations a threshold is crossed between pretty decent inexpensive binoculars worth the price to flimsy toys that are likely to be a waste of money.
I value your opinion but how do you explain the poor QC of Yosemites if they are supposed to be superior to Cypress? It looks like I am not first to notice problems with the eye cups and the focusing ring is notoriously stiff (to the point that it is unusable by smaller kids for which everybody claims that the binoculars were designed for). I am not trying to say that Celestron makes better product but comparing those two inexpensive binoculars, Cypress is more user friendly than Yosemite (lighter, smooth focusing, lockable eye cups and similar optical quality). Because of the collapsing eye cups, I have missed a lot of bird views with Yosemites. Also, I will not always remember to work the focuser few times too smooth out the action, every time I want to give the binocs to the kids.
 
drabina,

One bit of info missing from the discussion that might explain the difference of opinion between yours and Henry's experiences is the fact that Leupold changed the production facility between where the original Yosemites were produced and the current ones are produced. I have not tried any of the recent units (recent meaning since they switched the armoring) but the earlier units were exactly as Henry noted. I have read here on the forum that quality control went down after they made the switchover.

Several of the current "Yosemite clones" utilize the original Yosemite source for production. I can't say that Barska, Celestron, etc... are using those facilities but I know one or two of the others are.
 
The individual companies can request certain "customizations" from the manufacturer in China. Leupold chose one set of coatings while Celestron chose another.

At this level it is highly likely that the importer buys what he is sold rather than what he requests to be made on demand. That happens a bit further up the food chain than the ten bucks a box shelf fillers.

Nice review and followup, drabina, stick with it :t:
 
I value your opinion but how do you explain the poor QC of Yosemites if they are supposed to be superior to Cypress? It looks like I am not first to notice problems with the eye cups and the focusing ring is notoriously stiff (to the point that it is unusable by smaller kids for which everybody claims that the binoculars were designed for). I am not trying to say that Celestron makes better product but comparing those two inexpensive binoculars, Cypress is more user friendly than Yosemite (lighter, smooth focusing, lockable eye cups and similar optical quality). Because of the collapsing eye cups, I have missed a lot of bird views with Yosemites. Also, I will not always remember to work the focuser few times too smooth out the action, every time I want to give the binocs to the kids.

My experiences are with the original and current Yosemite 8x30, the Eagle optics 8.5x32 clone of the current Yosemite, the old Celestron 8x30 (really 7x30) Nature and the Barska 8x30 (really 7x30) Crossover.

IMO the original Yosemite was the best made of the lot and was clearly a different binocular from the current one. The Eagle optics clone appears to be essentially the same binocular from the same factory as the current Yosemite. The Barska and Celestrons, while designed to look similar to the current Yosemite, are different enough in their details to indicate a different maker. I wouldn't expect QC to be great in any of these, but I think there is a lower risk of the kinds of defects, like wobbly eyepiece bridges or poor collimation, that render a binocular unusable in the slightly more expensive Yosemite clones. All three of the Barska/Celestrons I tried were defective to the point of being useless. I just couldn't recommend them to anyone looking for an entry level binocular after that experience.
 
Out of curiosity- which one (manufacturer) of the Leupold Yosemite clones are making them where the original Yo's were made?

I have one of the original Yosemites and it is still holding up pretty well- not bad, esp. for a $79 binocular.
 
Out of curiosity- which one (manufacturer) of the Leupold Yosemite clones are making them where the original Yo's were made?

I have one of the original Yosemites and it is still holding up pretty well- not bad, esp. for a $79 binocular.

I have an example of both the original Yosemite and the newer version,
in the 6x30. The optics seem identical to me. I think either one is a
good choice, and should not be of concern.

Jerry
 
I have an example of both the original Yosemite and the newer version,
in the 6x30. The optics seem identical to me. I think either one is a
good choice, and should not be of concern.

Jerry

I tried both also, and could tell no difference.
 
I am not sure it is necessarily the optical performance exactly that comes into question with the newer version but rather the quality control.....which, in turn, can affect the optical performance if it is a wobbly eyepiece bridge or a collimation issue.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 8 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top