Is the Celestron 52252 100 worth the extra money over the Celestron 52250 80?
791366
Dito on Breaux's answer. More light, heavier, bigger. The 80 works fine for me.
791367
I use this scope primarily for observing the sun (with solar filter of course) and also for viewing gun targets from a distance....if you are using the scope for viewing in low light the 100mm is definitely worth it....it is not that heavy....and a regular camera tripod supports it easily....I am quite happy with the performance of the scope....Jim
2108827
In fact i return this model back and got the B490B model form the same manufacturer. It worth the +$65. You get a better illumination "halogen" and a better controllers. The quality is much better in the B490B. The bulb heat in the B490B is much less than the one in the B100B, since it uses halogen vs tungsten.
1587272
Celestron has a list on their site. Check the mount you have, not the telescope.
2121602
Check this link out http://www.astronomyforum.net/celestron-nexstar-telescope-forum/134708-nexstar-slt-127-vs-5se-6se.html
1384887
That looks like a nice telescope! According to the literature, the SkySync GPS works with all nexstar computerized, non-gps telescopes, which should include the 127. You could contact Celestron via their website and ask them, or just order this from Amazon and give it a try. I am sure you can return it if there is a problem.
1058013
The Dob will definitely give you more deep space objects than the refractor. I got my son one of those last Christmas. It is rather large in comparison to the refractor, but rotates well on its base. His is not computerized and he has gotten very adept at finding nebulae and Messier objects. I think the refractor is more for planets and moons in our close by system. Visual tracking is okay, remember that the image is reversed in the Dob.
1579847
I have both and the 85mm has a much better build quality, longer focal length, and more robust colors and image quality is significantly better. I rarely use my 50mm anymore. I keep it because of its low price and the resale value isn't worth it.
1664770
The primary benefit of the upgrade will be a brighter image and a modest increase in resolution. The 80mm Celestron won't give you an "oh wow" difference, but it will be an improvement. For a dramatic difference in image quality, you would have to go to one of the ED scopes like the Regal series, but at a much higher price point.I hope this helps.
869548
I've never tried the 21061, so cannot say how big the difference is. But with more than 1.6x the light gathering power of 21061, 21063 should be able to see more dark sky objects, like nebulae and galaxies. For terrestrial viewing and bright planets, there should be no big difference.
1384028
Sorry, I don't know the answer to your question. I suggest calling Celestron. They have been most helpful to us in the past.
1203672
I can't answer for the Meade version, but I was so pleased with my Celestron 8-24 mm zoom eyepiece I asked the Denver Museum of Nature and Science to also purchase one for their solar telescope. The volunteers who operate this telescope think its performance, reliability and ease of use are great.
72106
I just ordered the Celestron Nexstar SLT 130, as recommended by a friend who has been into astronomy for years..as a beginner myself I would definitely recommend this telescope...I've used it every night since I've gotten it...the computer makes it really easy to set up and find planets and stars right away!
1206351
They both come with eyepieces great for terrestrial and planetary observation the Mount option is up to you. Equatorial is more accurate for the night sky and the altazimuth is more versatile
1664769
I have not seen the Simmons. I am very pleased with my Celestron up thru 40X or maybe 45X. Above that, the optics are not as clear, and detail is not much more visible, even though the image is larger. Most of my useage is 1.5-2 miles looting at wildlife. At shorter ranges, the higher magnification would probably be adequate as well, that's just not what I use it for. Moon shots are impressive!
1496890
Absolutely and you will love the difference. My first telescope was the Walmart 70az and this was very worth the money.
2121603
Being the same size scope, the mount is driving the price and the 5se appears sturdier then the slt (I own the 5se that I got on Amazon). The 5se can also be set up as Equatorial using the built-in wedge (which is useful for astrophotography). If you don't need or want the wedge feature, bump up to the 6se if it fits within your budget. Also, Celestron lists the slt series as beginner telescopes and the se series as intermediate. I quick search on youtube will find several before-you-buy videos. Hope that helps.
1150128
Optically both are very very good. Advantages of 135 f2 is a shorter focal length and 1-stop of light. Advantages of 200 f2.8 is the cheaper price. See which focal length you use the most and decide based on that.