<p>I am a beginner when it comes to telescopes and have been doing research online for a week with which one to buy. At the moment I’m interested in a pre-owned telescope. My priority is planets but also gaze to Andromeda if possible. I read that refractives are better for planets but I’m not finding them in my area maybe. Here are some that are available in my area:</p>
<ol>
<li>Celestron 114LCM (114 mm aperture, f/8.77 Newtonian) Computerised: I like that it has a motor that can automatically pin point to an object so will help me. But it’s a bit easy to locate the Moon, Jupiter and Saturn so do I even need it?</li>
<li>Celestron Astromaster 130 EQ (114 mm aperture (not 130) f/8.7 Newtonian): it has better clarity I guess? But problem is, it is all manual and bulky. Means I have to adjust it every time I have to watch something new or to show to people. Also, it comes with heavy weight to might be difficult to carry around?</li>
<li>Celestron Star Sense Explorer LT 127AZ (127 mm aperture, f/7.87 Newtonian)</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>I'm not asking a &quot;shopping question&quot; so don't tell me what to buy.</strong> But I would like some input about what criteria I can use to choose between these; are they all basically equivalent? Are there some types of features (in this class of telescope) that may be more important than others from the point of view of a beginning observer?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T11:08:16.150Z
Product recommendations don't really work well.  Generally you pay for what you get.  We can't answer questions like "Do I need it"  - obviously. You have to read the product descriptions and make a decision.  If there is something in the product descriptions that you don't understand  (like "what does 130 mean?" or "Why does it come with a heavy weight") Those questions can be answered.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T12:18:43.313Z
*Welcome to Stack Exchange!* @Suyash Dixit I've edited your post so that it doesn't look like a "Which one should I buy" question, those are pretty much off-topic in Stack Exchange and will get closed quickly. Please feel free to edit further if you like.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T15:31:42.590Z
@uhoh I think you're edits makes it seem the OP knows more about telescopes than they do.  When I saw the aperture, f ratio, and type, I was pretty convinced they had already learned most of what they needed to.
Greg Miller
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T15:39:24.807Z
Any of the three listed are descent telescopes.  The best advice before buying a telescope is to attend a star party by a local club and look through different scopes.  If you're planning to buy something before xmas, that might not be possible.  I recently gave a "How to Buy A Telescope" talk for our local club, I cut out everything I didn't think was absolutely necessary, and it still took about an hour, followed by some telescope time.  So it's not really feasible to summarize all of the key points in an answer here.  There are many Youtube videos on the topic, I recommend you start there.
Greg Miller
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T20:02:42.790Z
This is closely related to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/17846/suggestions-for-a-beginner-friendly-telescope/24898#24898 and might be a duplicate.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T20:36:04.520Z
Be aware that the high focal length/short tube reflectors like the 114LCM are 'bird jones' reflectors.  These telescopes use a spherical instead of parabolic mirror that's cheaper to make,  and then they add a corrector lens to the focusing tube to make it work.   These telescopes are very hard to collimate,  which Newtonian reflectors need on a fairly regular basis.  Also,  a long focal length telescope on a cheap mount is a recipe for frustration.
Dan Hanson
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T20:48:34.213Z
You can tell a Bird-Jones reflector from a standard one by looking at the ratio of focal length to tube length.  Bird-Jones designs have much shorter tubes.   For example,  the 130EQ you mentioned has a 630" focal length, and a tube length of 610mm - close to the same, so not Bird Jones (The 130 EQ is an F/5 telescope, not F/8.7, and a 130mm primary, not 114).  The 114 LCM on the other hand, has a focal length of 1000mm, and a tube length of roughly 500mm.  It is a Bird-Jones design.  This will be true of all 'Newtonian Reflectors'.  If the focal length is 2X the tube length, it's Bird-Jones.
Dan Hanson
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T21:55:03.980Z
@GregMiller the goal of Stack Exchange is the generation of good answers to on-topic questions. We don't need to focus 100% on exactly what the OP does and does not know. But in this case I don't see how my "edits makes it seem the OP knows more about telescopes than they do." First of all, what makes you believe you know what the OP does and does not know!? Let's keep our eyes on the prize, which in the case of Stack Exchange is the generation of good answers.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-27T21:59:04.360Z
@DanHanson yikes! I just copied the word "Newtonian" from the specification page of each telescope maker's website for my edit. I'd never heard of a [Bird-Jones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_telescope#Jones%E2%80%93Bird) before, cool! Google gives me [What is a Bird-Jones Telescope, and Why Do People Hate Them?](https://telescopeboss.com/what-is-a-bird-jones-telescope-and-why-do-people-hate-them/) at the top of my search. Good catch!
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-11-28T22:54:08.020Z
Get an 8" (200mm) Dobsonian (a Newtonian reflector on a Dobsonian mount). It's a great all-rounder. It'll show more detail on planets than the three listed in the question, and it'll gather more light to make Andromeda easier to see. I recommend getting a computerised telescope later, once you know what you're doing.
Aaron F
CC BY-SA 4.0
2022-12-01T13:32:51.813Z
Question number 1 - how much do you want to spend?
Dave Gremlin
<telescope><newtonian-telescope>
Need help in choosing a used telescope for a beginning observer
Suyash Dixit
# Need help in choosing a used telescope for a beginning observer

(Asked by: username_0 on 2022-11-27)

I am a beginner when it comes to telescopes and have been doing research online for a week with which one to buy. At the moment I’m interested in a pre-owned telescope. My priority is planets but also gaze to Andromeda if possible. I read that refractives are better for planets but I’m not finding them in my area maybe. Here are some that are available in my area:

1. Celestron 114LCM (114 mm aperture, f/8.77 Newtonian) Computerised: I like that it has a motor that can automatically pin point to an object so will help me. But it’s a bit easy to locate the Moon, Jupiter and Saturn so do I even need it?
2. Celestron Astromaster 130 EQ (114 mm aperture (not 130) f/8.7 Newtonian): it has better clarity I guess? But problem is, it is all manual and bulky. Means I have to adjust it every time I have to watch something new or to show to people. Also, it comes with heavy weight to might be difficult to carry around?
3. Celestron Star Sense Explorer LT 127AZ (127 mm aperture, f/7.87 Newtonian)

**I'm not asking a "shopping question" so don't tell me what to buy.** But I would like some input about what criteria I can use to choose between these; are they all basically equivalent? Are there some types of features (in this class of telescope) that may be more important than others from the point of view of a beginning observer?

**Tags:** telescope, newtonian-telescope
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Product recommendations don't really work well.  Generally you pay for what you get.  We can't answer questions like "Do I need it"  - obviously. You have to read the product descriptions and make a decision.  If there is something in the product descriptions that you don't understand  (like "what does 130 mean?" or "Why does it come with a heavy weight") Those questions can be answered.  
> **username_2**: *Welcome to Stack Exchange!* @Suyash Dixit I've edited your post so that it doesn't look like a "Which one should I buy" question, those are pretty much off-topic in Stack Exchange and will get closed quickly. Please feel free to edit further if you like.  
> **username_3**: @uhoh I think you're edits makes it seem the OP knows more about telescopes than they do.  When I saw the aperture, f ratio, and type, I was pretty convinced they had already learned most of what they needed to.  
> **username_3**: Any of the three listed are descent telescopes.  The best advice before buying a telescope is to attend a star party by a local club and look through different scopes.  If you're planning to buy something before xmas, that might not be possible.  I recently gave a "How to Buy A Telescope" talk for our local club, I cut out everything I didn't think was absolutely necessary, and it still took about an hour, followed by some telescope time.  So it's not really feasible to summarize all of the key points in an answer here.  There are many Youtube videos on the topic, I recommend you start there.  
> **username_1**: This is closely related to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/17846/suggestions-for-a-beginner-friendly-telescope/24898#24898 and might be a duplicate.  
> **username_4**: Be aware that the high focal length/short tube reflectors like the 114LCM are 'bird jones' reflectors.  These telescopes use a spherical instead of parabolic mirror that's cheaper to make,  and then they add a corrector lens to the focusing tube to make it work.   These telescopes are very hard to collimate,  which Newtonian reflectors need on a fairly regular basis.  Also,  a long focal length telescope on a cheap mount is a recipe for frustration.  
> **username_4**: You can tell a Bird-Jones reflector from a standard one by looking at the ratio of focal length to tube length.  Bird-Jones designs have much shorter tubes.   For example,  the 130EQ you mentioned has a 630" focal length, and a tube length of 610mm - close to the same, so not Bird Jones (The 130 EQ is an F/5 telescope, not F/8.7, and a 130mm primary, not 114).  The 114 LCM on the other hand, has a focal length of 1000mm, and a tube length of roughly 500mm.  It is a Bird-Jones design.  This will be true of all 'Newtonian Reflectors'.  If the focal length is 2X the tube length, it's Bird-Jones.  
> **username_2**: @GregMiller the goal of Stack Exchange is the generation of good answers to on-topic questions. We don't need to focus 100% on exactly what the OP does and does not know. But in this case I don't see how my "edits makes it seem the OP knows more about telescopes than they do." First of all, what makes you believe you know what the OP does and does not know!? Let's keep our eyes on the prize, which in the case of Stack Exchange is the generation of good answers.  
> **username_2**: @DanHanson yikes! I just copied the word "Newtonian" from the specification page of each telescope maker's website for my edit. I'd never heard of a [Bird-Jones](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_telescope#Jones%E2%80%93Bird) before, cool! Google gives me [What is a Bird-Jones Telescope, and Why Do People Hate Them?](https://telescopeboss.com/what-is-a-bird-jones-telescope-and-why-do-people-hate-them/) at the top of my search. Good catch!  
> **username_5**: Get an 8" (200mm) Dobsonian (a Newtonian reflector on a Dobsonian mount). It's a great all-rounder. It'll show more detail on planets than the three listed in the question, and it'll gather more light to make Andromeda easier to see. I recommend getting a computerised telescope later, once you know what you're doing.  
> **username_6**: Question number 1 - how much do you want to spend?  

---

## 0 answers

