Test Report: GPO Passion ED 10×42 Binoculars vs. Celestron TrailSeeker ED 10X42 Binoculars (2 Viewers)

[ads]

I spent 10+ hours over 6 sessions in a superb testing environment comparing the
GPO Passion ED 10×42
Celestron TrailSeeker ED 10X42
binoculars side-to-side.

Disclaimer: I paid for both models myself and have no affiliation with any manufacturers or dealers.

Both models are very similar in size. The GPO's are heavier at 773 g with objective and eyepiece covers, versus 713 g for the Celestron's.

The focus wheel was of the GPO was smooth and very light, which may be a good thing, but it is so light that the lightest brush against it will cause it to turn.

The focus wheel of the Celestron was stiff and somewhat uneven in feel, but I did not detect any backlash in focusing. The binoculars had been returned, so perhaps I received a bad sample that had been returned for that reason.

Both binoculars focus counterclockwise-to-infinity.

Optically the binoculars are very similar, but not identical. I did not detect any difference in their FOV.

During my final test session, I finally concluded that the GPO does have slightly more center resolution, but it would rarely be detectable.

With both binoculars, there is a significant drop off in resolution as you move out of the center of the field of view. Towards the very edge of the field of view, the GPO has the advantage as in the center, but I think the Celestron has more resolution from say 10% to 50% out from center, so there is not a clear winner.

Both binoculars have significant chromatic aberration off center when viewing a severe test target, with the Celestron having similar, but maybe just slightly stronger CA.

Performance-wise, I would classify both models as mid-range binoculars. As I already mentioned, optically they are very similar. I feel they are using the same optical technology.

Neil English wrote about the GPO Passion ED 10×32 "It is bright and very sharp across the entire field". I can't make sense of his statement based upon my evaluation of the 10×42. I don't believe the 10×42 use field flattener elements, so "very sharp across the entire field" is just not a feature of this model.

 

[adhoc]

Surprised the OP does not mention, indeed stress, the price difference, GPO $600, Celestron $315.

Also worth pointing out perhaps is that they're not near as bright as the best. Have myself viewed thru. the Celestron, and I assume the GPO is not contrasted with it here in this regard because it's not very different. But again, this is only in overall brightness of the image, vs, e.g., the better Zeiss, for, the pre-ED Trailseeker 10x42 - still marketed - pulled in detail from dimly lit places better than, e.g., the then Leupold ProGuide 10x42, the model just before the current - maybe due to some selective "spectrum tuning."

I've been recommending this exact Celestron to many birdwatchers with USD~300 budgets, since the time of the Trailseeker upgrade to ED, on reading reviews. Two such people got the 10x42 down thru. a lengthy process needed here (I live in Anon., as you see on the left, sorry!) from the UK and US. They're very happy with them.

Puzzling to me why the model does not get more attention on this forum.

 

[ads]

I was surprised how similar the performance of the two models was, given the price difference. As I don't own other current mid-tier models, I don't know if the Celestron punches above its price point, or if the GPO punches below its price point, but I don't feel the price difference is justified. I would like to know if the unevenness in feel of the focus wheel on the Celestron was just due to it being defective.

And I would have liked to thrown other mid-range 10x42 models into the comparison, such as the Celestron Regal ED, Athlon Cronus G2, and Hawke Frontier ED X, but as I am purchasing these myself, it would be expensive and/or wasteful.

It might be good if I got a phone mount so I could share my findings. I think the off-center CA on the severe test target that I mentioned would be clearly evident in images. (I'm not complaining about the CA... just noting it.)

 

[adhoc]

Ads, I think the unevenness in the Celestron TrailSeeker-ED 10x42 focus wheel is a problem with the individual instrument and not the model.

One of the two friends who has the model had the non-ED 10x42 and now his wife uses it. (It's from the time when they made only non-ED: currently they make both Trailskr. and Trailskr.-ED.) He says of the smoothness of the focus wheel of the ED, when compared with the non-ED, what you say of the GPO Passion-ED, that he sometimes feels it's too easy to turn!

You could also check that in its reviews.

Your mention of Hawke, etc. made me reconsider what I said above that less expensive binoculars are reviewed a lot less on the forum today and I think I over-reacted! Corrected my last paragraph in edit by deleting those comments.