What is the difference between the Celestron Omni XLT 150 R and the Celestron Omni XLT 150 (other than the R is more money)?
794157
The R is the refractor version and the other version is a Newtonian Reflector which is less expensive. Each have their own advantages and disadvantages. The refractor does not use mirrors like a reflector. Refractors use a lens at the front instead which is more expensive to make.
7401
There is no difference between the two as I have ordered both before. The MR stands for mini Reflector some of the reflector surface have facets others do not. They are all halogen bulbs...but some are not made with as good quality materials as others...the name brands you find at home depot or other big box sellers are top notch...the others are knock offs and could be made with inferior materials...
53823
I did a search at Amazon for the 44302-B and it appears to be a new model listed for $105.09!! As opposed to $40 for the other one. Not a lot of details,though. Look at the Celestron web site.
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.
2138739
When I purchased this telescope, it came with a 1.25" diagonal, and a 1.25" 40mm Plossel eyepiece. I strongly recommend you at least get the Celestron 2" eyepiece kit like I did. It is a great starter kit. I would advise against 1.25" eyepieces. With a telescope of this size and light gathering power, those are to small. You will also need to power it. To do this, you either need to get the AC power adapter from Celestron if you are going to be near an AC outlet, or the Celestron Power Tank like I did, for use in the field. Hope this helps. It is a fantastic telescope! I also got the new Celestron StarSense Auto Align camera, so the telescope is automatically aligned by it. When I purchased this telescope, it came with a 1.25" diagonal, and a 1.25" 40mm Plossel eyepiece. I strongly recommend you at least get the Celestron 2" eyepiece kit like I did. It is a great starter kit. I would advise against 1.25" eyepieces. With a telescope of this size and light gathering power, those are to small. You will also need to power it. To do this, you either need to get the AC power adapter from Celestron if you are going to be near an AC outlet, or the Celestron Power Tank like I did, for use in the field. Hope this helps. It is a fantastic telescope! I... » Read More When I purchased this telescope, it came with a 1.25" diagonal, and a 1.25" 40mm Plossel eyepiece. I strongly recommend you at least get the Celestron 2" eyepiece kit like I did. It is a great starter kit. I would advise against 1.25" eyepieces. With a telescope of this size and light gathering power, those are to small. You will also need to power it. To do this, you either need to get the AC power adapter from Celestron if you are going to be near an AC outlet, or the Celestron Power Tank like I did, for use in the field. Hope this helps. It is a fantastic telescope! I also got the new Celestron StarSense Auto Align camera, so the telescope is automatically aligned by it. « Show Less
2116943
Don't know but I would strongly recommend the Celestron 10X42 Outland binoculars instead of the 8X42. The extra magnification with the wide 42 field of view is worth.
76761
I use this bag for my Celestron Omni XLT 150. The ota, tripod and weights fit quite well. I have another bag for the cg-4 mount. The powerseeker has a smaller tripod and mount and your ota will be smaller, so you may be able to fit all of it in. My main problem is the weight. My equipment weights approx. 45 lbs. It looks like yours is only approx. 17. This bag should work for you.
2116944
Don't know but I would strongly recommend the Celestron 10X42 Outland binoculars instead of the 8X42. The extra magnification with the wide 42° field of view is worth.
1079892
the major difference between HDVR-150 and HDVR-180 is the resolution. HDVR-150 is FHD 15 frames by software, HD 30 frames. 1 Mega pixel. HDVR-180 is FHD 30 frames by hardware, HD 60 frames. 5 Mega pixel. That is why HDVR-180 is much clear than HDVR-150. Depends on user, HDVR-150 is quite good enough for the general use. If you prefer a very clear videos, HDVR-180 has it. thanks Marie
451025
Hi, the maglite xl100 is 83 lumes the xl200 is 173 lumes so if you are looking for a brighter light xl200 would be better the controls are the same I like the controls but they will be hard to use unless you use it a lot for a tactical you need speed the xl50 or better has less controls look for some thing for speed I like the maglites because they use standard batteries you don't want to fuss with controls in a situation.
2175267
Get the celestron powertank (dont forget to charge it once a month), i also bought the celestron eyepiece set, great set and a good case with it. Also use the two star align, three atar doesnt work, and google for how to set it up as you must put the alignment stars in the middle of the eyepiece then move it left down up right (as the star looks in the eye piece), then click to set it as an alignment star. It will then track all night usually after one quick up movement once aligned. It is a brilliant scope, good luck!
1866547
Just a thought. During the Hawk watch in Cape May there were many friendly birders with many types of different scopes. I looked though many brands including all the top brands that ran over 2,000 bucks. I saw the Celestron and was curious to look through it because I considered Celestron more of a astronomy company. Well I was really surprised how crisp the view was and when I was told the price tag I was sold. I have enjoyed this (I have the 80 objective lens) scope for many months and have to desire to upgrade because the optical difference in the models over two grand is not worth it. You will be happy with the Celestron. Good luck with your decision. Just a thought. During the Hawk watch in Cape May there were many friendly birders with many types of different scopes. I looked though many brands including all the top brands that ran over 2,000 bucks. I saw the Celestron and was curious to look through it because I considered Celestron more of a astronomy company. Well I was really surprised how crisp the view was and when I was told the price tag I was sold. I have enjoyed this (I have the 80 objective lens) scope for many months and have to desire to upgrade because the optical difference in the models over two grand is not worth it.... » Read More Just a thought. During the Hawk watch in Cape May there were many friendly birders with many types of different scopes. I looked though many brands including all the top brands that ran over 2,000 bucks. I saw the Celestron and was curious to look through it because I considered Celestron more of a astronomy company. Well I was really surprised how crisp the view was and when I was told the price tag I was sold. I have enjoyed this (I have the 80 objective lens) scope for many months and have to desire to upgrade because the optical difference in the models over two grand is not worth it. You will be happy with the Celestron. Good luck with your decision. « Show Less
204298
the 200 is made for treestand and groundblind applications, I think it has a boost mode. the 150 is for groundblind use only.
1906608
Really the only difference is the frequencies, (and the antenna is tuned for those frequencies). As to why, I bought the 2m/1.25m (144/220) because there is almost no activity in my area on the 70cm band (440) but there is a 1.25m repeater nearby that we (my wife is also a Ham, and also has a UV82x) can talk to each other on from just about anywhere in our area. So the one you want depends on the bands commonly used in your area. And in case you didn't know, this is a FCC Part 97 Ham Radio, as well as a Commercial FCC part 90 radio, both uses requires a FCC license to legally use. This radio is NOT part 95 legal (MURS and FRS/GMRS) Really the only difference is the frequencies, (and the antenna is tuned for those frequencies). As to why, I bought the 2m/1.25m (144/220) because there is almost no activity in my area on the 70cm band (440) but there is a 1.25m repeater nearby that we (my wife is also a Ham, and also has a UV82x) can talk to each other on from just about anywhere in our area. So the one you want depends on the bands commonly used in your area. And in case you didn't know, this is a FCC Part 97 Ham Radio, as well as a Commercial FCC part 90 radio, both uses requires a FCC license to legally use.... » Read More Really the only difference is the frequencies, (and the antenna is tuned for those frequencies). As to why, I bought the 2m/1.25m (144/220) because there is almost no activity in my area on the 70cm band (440) but there is a 1.25m repeater nearby that we (my wife is also a Ham, and also has a UV82x) can talk to each other on from just about anywhere in our area. So the one you want depends on the bands commonly used in your area. And in case you didn't know, this is a FCC Part 97 Ham Radio, as well as a Commercial FCC part 90 radio, both uses requires a FCC license to legally use. This radio is NOT part 95 legal (MURS and FRS/GMRS) « Show Less
1656474
I don't personally find I experience better visibility from the Silverstar, and in addition to extra money, remember as well that the Silverstar has a shorter design life. You'll not only pay more for them, you'll replace them a lot more often. Last year I was able to find the design life data on Osram Sylvania's site, but I couldn't find it just now. However, you can expect to replace XtraVisions more often than standard halogens, and Silverstars more frequently than XtraVisions. If I recall correctly, the difference in design life can come out to years for many drivers. The brighter bulbs achieve the extra "brightness" by burning a smaller filament at a higher temperature, so life suffers heavily. I don't personally find I experience better visibility from the Silverstar, and in addition to extra money, remember as well that the Silverstar has a shorter design life. You'll not only pay more for them, you'll replace them a lot more often. Last year I was able to find the design life data on Osram Sylvania's site, but I couldn't find it just now. However, you can expect to replace XtraVisions more often than standard halogens, and Silverstars more frequently than XtraVisions. If I recall correctly, the difference in design life can come out to years for many drivers. The brighter bulbs... » Read More I don't personally find I experience better visibility from the Silverstar, and in addition to extra money, remember as well that the Silverstar has a shorter design life. You'll not only pay more for them, you'll replace them a lot more often. Last year I was able to find the design life data on Osram Sylvania's site, but I couldn't find it just now. However, you can expect to replace XtraVisions more often than standard halogens, and Silverstars more frequently than XtraVisions. If I recall correctly, the difference in design life can come out to years for many drivers. The brighter bulbs achieve the extra "brightness" by burning a smaller filament at a higher temperature, so life suffers heavily. « Show Less
1250582
Yes it's a much better lens than the one that comes with the telescope. I have the power seeker reflector. I have 4 X-cel lenses. I always seem to use the same one (8mm-24mm zoom). That way I don't have to change once I have something centered.
1251585
Don't know, for your reference, I used it for a Celestron Omni XLT 150 with mount and tripod.