I've found a few that took great, astonishing photos of nebulae and planets from the 127EQ for a 5 inch reflector. They were disappointed at first. But made it work for them as they were on a tight budget. It's the worst ever reviewed. Determination is a hell of a thing. And this is in a Bortle 8 sky. Some people don't have a big budget to start. A few of them ended upgrading. But they all still use the 127EQ. To each their own. I'm using a Starsense Explorer LT127 AZ. First telescope. Got it as a gift. With problems shipping, and high prices, it was a steal of a deal. Similar to the 127EQ, the coatings are different. Still a Bird Jones. The mount is super easy to use. The tripod is sturdy, lightweight, not the best but it works very well. With the crappy eyepieces, still able to see some nebulae, saturn, it's ring, Jupiter in colorful detail with its four moons, the ISS, the moon in superb detail, all under being surrounded by six very bright streetlights, bortle 8 skies. You gotta start somewhere if your pocket is limited. I've impressed people with my own, given the type of telescope, the worst eyepieces ever that was included in the box, bortle 8 skies with light clouds. It performed. For a first timer, I'm happy with my results. I will buy better eyepieces and do some mods to make it better eventually. Ain't gonna give up.

@fatitankeris6327

Жыл бұрын

Clear nights to you! I was looking for an upgrade from my 70mm Sky-Watcher, and thought that Celestron 130 EQ-MD might be good.

@DP-qb1zw

Жыл бұрын

@@fatitankeris6327 Much better telescope than the 127mm.

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

that is very surprising news from powerseeker 127eq

@id_Usher

11 ай бұрын

Better buy SW BKP 13065 EQ 3 or SW 130 PDF or SW BKP15075 EQ5 they're better at everything.

Thanku sir jiii😍😍 The first satisfactory video found on telescope after a lots of search🥵🥵

@TheAlienTechs

Жыл бұрын

Glad it helped

Thank you!!!

127 is big trouble because has Bird Jones very bad as same 114 for AstroMaster has connecter like a barlow into an focus

@alanmedeiros1011

2 жыл бұрын

Does the 130eq AstroMaster telescope have a focuser barlow?

@robertsonsid

2 жыл бұрын

@@alanmedeiros1011 130Eq doesn't have built in barlow.

I suggest to search for Ed Tings review of the PowerSeeker 127 EQ. The Bird Jones design is troublesome, to say the least, the EQ-1 mount is way to flimsy for the optical tube assembly. If I had a choice between the PowerSeeker 127 EQ and a 70 mm refractor, guess what i would get.

@fatitankeris6327

Жыл бұрын

My first telescope is a 70mm, and the images with this powerseeker can be expected to be the same?

@DP-qb1zw

11 ай бұрын

@@fatitankeris6327 Dimmer but sharper.

Excellent Comparison.

@A0111.

Жыл бұрын

No, it's misleading. 127EQ is good on paper, but it's optics isn't sharp because of a spherical mirror, and a short focal length extended with a cheap barlow lense installed in a focuser. Avoid.

Woah a focal length of 1000 meters- incredible!

@bill5982

7 ай бұрын

Not what you want with a spherical mirror as it just magnifies the issues.

@stripes7214

7 ай бұрын

@@bill5982 haha yeah I know, I was just joking about the fact that he said meters instead of millimeters x)

Hi Pls can someone tell me the difference between powerseeker as Astromaster Lt looking at getting a beginner reflector 76AZ Cheers in advance for any advice given

amazing video. Excellent information!

Can you purchase or/and add 3xBarlow lens for the Astro ?

@Murcha

2 жыл бұрын

Yes

hi by the way i am a big fan. i have a question that how much power will the 10 mm eyepiece in the celetstron astromaster 130 eq

@chaniboi2757

2 жыл бұрын

if u mean by power is magnification, you simply divide the focal length of the telescope by the focal length of the eyepiece. in your case, since the focal length of the 130eq is 650mm an the eyepiece is 10mm. the you have 650/10 = 65x magnification. I hope this helps.

@sudhanshuraj1661

Жыл бұрын

Tnx ....😊😊😊

Hello, First of all, I want to buy myself a good telescope. I just have a question for you? Which of these two telescopes is better for images of Saturn and Jupiter?

@TheAlienTechs

2 жыл бұрын

Astromaster have better optics than Powerseeker. 🤗

@johnmarler6735

2 жыл бұрын

Get a Dobsonian

@hasanbaraki3247

2 жыл бұрын

@@johnmarler6735 fr

@denizkorkmaz8023

Жыл бұрын

Thank you. I am still researching. If I'm lucky, I can have a nice telescope. :)

@hasanbaraki3247

Жыл бұрын

@@denizkorkmaz8023 i might be able to help you with that

What series has the best tripod ?

@DP-qb1zw

Жыл бұрын

Astromaster

What is the best for see deep sky???

@ronniemask5921

2 ай бұрын

Two things needed... a dark sky and a good pair of wide-field binoculars. Good luck!

As someone who owns the 130eq I wouldn’t recommend it. This is my first telescope and perhaps it’s me that has made my viewings difficult. I’ve read a fair amount in hopes I could improve my skills. Anyways. Here’s what I don’t like… The base is not very study. Every time you adjust the focuser or move the scope to follow the object expect the imagine to really shake around. This isn’t a big deal when looking at the moon but is frustrating when looking at smaller objects like Saturn. I’m constantly moving the scope just past Saturn in hopes that it stops shaking by the time Saturn returns into view. The manual controls used to follow an object are not great. Sometimes they work great sometimes they slip or stop moving all together. I’ve attempted to tightened the set screws but it’s still an ongoing issue. My telescope came with the motor. I could never get it to track an object well. I would start my evenings trying to use it and always gave up. Again this could all be me. Maybe someone else has had great success with this model. What I like. It’s light and quick to set up. Using the EQ mount Has taught me a lot. Manually finding objects has also been more enjoyable then expected. My first view of Saturn, Jupiter and Orion was through this scope. It’s quiet amazing seeing the rings of Saturn. I had read many times how important a good sturdy base is but who wants to spend their tight budget on a good base leaving less funds for your telescope. The reality is a shaky imagine sucks and a good base is worth a lot.

@hu5531n

2 жыл бұрын

Completely agree with what you've said as I have had my astromaster 130 for almost 1yr now.

@shazen2572

2 жыл бұрын

It’s your bad I guess I have Celestron 70 and I watched Jupiter Saturn and Mars and moon even I was a kid I’m 13 years old it’s your bad

@mustang5132

2 жыл бұрын

If you had around €300 in your budget, what would you get then now instead?

@gutluckbro9802

2 жыл бұрын

​@@shazen2572 Could u give some tips? My parents will be buying one for me in a few months. I am 13 too btw

@shazen2572

2 жыл бұрын

@@gutluckbro9802 it’s not much hard to fix I mean after buying it … I fixed it by watching a KZread video…

Which telescope is best magnification?

@TheAlienTechs

2 жыл бұрын

Astromaster is overall better in optics

The Bird Jones 127mm powerseeker is one of the worst telescopes made. I've had over 50 years experience in amateur astronomy and bought a used one for a very cheap price out of curiosity sake. I have many other Celestron refractors and reflectors to compare it to. I had to completely rebuild the alignment mechanism with longer bolts and springs since the factory one didn't offer enough adjustment with the rubber washer design. I finally got it aligned after considerable effort but the views are only sharp in the center of the field . A 90mm refractor from the same manufacturer has much nicer star images. I would only give one of these type of telescopes to someone I don't like so as to frustrate and disappointment them .

@lipinskirl

Жыл бұрын

I have to 100% disagree. My son and I have only about 2 years of experience and the 127EQ is what we started with. It’s an awesome scope to start with. We have captured incredible images of the planets, moon, and even some ok images of star clusters. We got a few better eye pieces and a red dot finder along with an SV105 camera. We have seen and used many scopes since we started and have been very happy with our purchase of the 127EQ. In total we have about $320 into it for everything and you can’t beat that price for the images we are getting.

@A0111.

Жыл бұрын

Totally agree. I have a few even cheaper scopes at home, and 127EQ is the least sharp out of them all. It just can't be sharp because it's rather big, but spherical mirror is combined with a SHORT focal length tube of 500mm, magnified with a cheap not very well made 2x barlow lens in a focuser. Mine has no problems with collimation though.

@id_Usher

11 ай бұрын

These two telescopes can be thrown in the trash.

@DP-qb1zw

11 ай бұрын

@lipinskirl Im glad you are enjoying your telescope and aren't frustrated by it. You do get a bright image because of the 127mm diameter, and I said, I got a sharp image in the center, but that rapidly deteriorates from there. How much experience do you have using other telescopes? I compared this one to my experience with using at least 20 other telescopes, both larger and smaller. This one was the hardest to get aligned well of any reflector I've ever used and the blurriest of all off centre too. The advantages are a short tube and bright images for the physical size. Even though the images weren't as bright, I enjoyed testing and using a 76mm Celestron reflector more. The images in it were very sharp in a much wider field and the scope feather weight to carry. My largest telescope is a 17.5" Discovery dobsonian with remarkable images, but I also enjoy using smaller ones due to the ease of setup.

@DP-qb1zw

11 ай бұрын

@A0111. You were lucky with the quality control to get one able to be collimated out of the box. I got mine as a returned item from Amazon for a fraction of the list price. I'm sure because the person couldn't figure out how to get it working. I wanted one because of all the negative publicity with it and wanted to see for myself 😄 . I'm an experienced amateur and have built my own 16" dobsonian, so I am very familiar with reflectors. This was my honest assessment of my hands on use of one. I couldn't even get fully sharp images using Nagler eyepieces, that are made for short F ratio telescopes, which I'm sure the average person buying one doesn't have.

Hi. Astromaster 130 EQ have 2 oculars and barlow lens absent in this telescope. Than how this telescope has 307x magnification ?!

@kerryedavis

Жыл бұрын

That's the highest good-quality magnification for the rest of the optics, but you need extra accessories to get there.

I using Astromaster 130EQ , it good for deep sky object but I don't like when use for planet

@panthergaming732

Жыл бұрын

What's wrong with it when you use it on a planet?

@SciFireChannel

Жыл бұрын

@@panthergaming732 it too bright ! When I look at Jupiter, Venus and Mars I cannot see any details

@panthergaming732

Жыл бұрын

@@SciFireChannel Did you try using filter?

@SciFireChannel

Жыл бұрын

@@panthergaming732 I dont have filter

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

​@@SciFireChannel You'll need higher power eyepieces

What's this music called?

@TheAlienTechs

2 жыл бұрын

Eternal Garden by Dan Henig

@TheAlienTechs

Ай бұрын

"Eternal Garden" by Dan Henig in youtube library

How many inches is your telescope 130eq

@tuunaes

3 ай бұрын

Aperture is 5 inches of bad quality optics. It uses cheap random shape mirrors and unless you're lucky, it's incapably to magnifications aperture should give.

you should tell us how the 127eq has a bird jones style and how wobbly the mounts are 💀💀💀

@nucleardoom7649

Жыл бұрын

What do you mean by bird Jones style? And is there any way to fix the wobbly mounts?

@cl6x533

Жыл бұрын

@@nucleardoom7649 for the mount, get a whole another mount, the birds jones though means that it has a way higher focal length, look at the OTA, does it look a meter?

@tuunaes

2 ай бұрын

@@nucleardoom7649 It isn't even Bird-Jones, which would be kind of OK decent but expensive design. It's Barlowed blur generator with cheap ass fast focal ratio spherical mirror incapable to focusing light properly and equally cheap ass Barlow in focuser tube to further degrade the image and make collimation lot harder.

@nucleardoom7649

2 ай бұрын

@tuunaes so adding that piece of equipment generates an awful quality image then without it? Is that what hr trying to say?

@tuunaes

2 ай бұрын

@@nucleardoom7649 Every extra piece of glass in light's path causes some degradation of wave front. Question is only about amount: For high quality optics effect is meaningless, while every bad quality optical part causes significant image degradation. And Barlow used in these scam telescopes is propably from same rejects dumpster as blurry main mirror.

The mirrors : The "PowerSeeker" is sferic, the "Astromaster" is parabolic : "Astromaster" WIN ever !!!!!!!!!!!

@evgeni-nabokov

2 жыл бұрын

What does this mean? Could you explain please?

@fatitankeris6327

Жыл бұрын

@@evgeni-nabokov Better optics. Sphereical optics don't focus light properly, parabolics do better.

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

astromaster uses spherical mirrors sir.

I actually find it odd that many telescope companies make two versions of their scopes that are only ever separated by $20-50 dollars. Which isn't that expensive, might as well buy the slightly more expensive one and get better optics and mirror then the lesser

@gabrielrobles5288

Жыл бұрын

These 2 are very different.

@Struggle.Snuggles

Жыл бұрын

@@gabrielrobles5288 odd. I don't remember saying anything about these particular scopes

@jameshoffa7085

Жыл бұрын

@@Struggle.Snuggles odd. You made a comment on a video about these particular scopes. Dunce.

@Struggle.Snuggles

Жыл бұрын

@@jameshoffa7085 i see someone loves to be the antagonist. Good job

@id_Usher

11 ай бұрын

@@gabrielrobles5288 These two telescopes can be thrown in the trash.

Powerseeker come with 4mm eyepiece but you told 10mm

@mustang5132

2 жыл бұрын

Depending on the set you get they can come with different pieces. Mine came with 20mm, 12mm, and 3.8mm for example

hangisi daha iyi?

@TheAlienTechs

Жыл бұрын

From these two AM 130 EQ

The 127 is absolute rubbish, the 130 is a good scope.

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

bot are absolutely rubbish

@marioboladze9497

Жыл бұрын

@@SaneGuyFr which one do you recommend?

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

@@marioboladze9497 A small tabletop dobsonian will be alot better.

@Dann-md9eq

Жыл бұрын

@@SaneGuyFr but very expensive

@SaneGuyFr

Жыл бұрын

@@Dann-md9eq but really worth it

did he say 1000 meters? XD

127 is the most useless scope 130 is awesome but would be better with a Barlow lens