Hiddenpalm

So the Celestron f/6.3 focal reducer finally came in. It looks pristine and brand new. Lesson here, if you're shopping for a Focal Reducer on Amazon, stay away from Meade, Astromania and Alstar and just get the Celestron. Or else you have a pretty good chance at getting a really sloppy job of a refurbished product even though they're claiming it's new. Oh yeah ... and Celestron won this contest and even beat some surprise opponents, Street Fighter style. ?

Right? I'm getting the feeling that some manufacturer bought or took all of Celestron's defects and then refurbished them and then resold them to Meade, Astromania and Alstar. They do all look alike. But who really knows. I think we can safely conclude, Celestron won this one. Oh by the way, Celestron sneaks a $10 tax at the end, so on Amazon, the Celestron f/6.3 is actually selling for $122.

Yeah definitely returning. Already set up the refund through Amazon. I'm getting the Celestron version for $112. This is Astromania's F/6.3 focal reducer, right out of the box, labeled "new". The lens looks ok, it might work, maybe. But I'm not accepting this for $90. You can see the glue, a mystery substance and what appears to be a metal tool scratch on the threading. It looks like it's been refurbished by a guy who really hates his job. Is that mystery white substance even safe for humans? It was also seen in the Meade version, but on the actual lens. What confidence should a customer have in a company selling a product like this at such a high price? ? Someone call Ralph Nader!

Yeah, I'll probably do that.

I just wanted to update folks. Pay the extra money for the Celestron f/6.3. People haven't complained about it. I was trying to save some money which is why I found the Meade price appealing, but the customer reviews with pictures showed it to be cheaply made. So I went for the Astromania f/6.3 for $90. It just arrived. Besides the delivery service being atrocious with an actual bootprint on the package .... it looks cheap. There was no glue on the lens (thank the Gods), but you can still see a bit of the glue on the inner side. The threading looks cheap too. It attached well, the lens looks fine but I haven't field tested it yet. The Alstar is probably the same too. If you look at both them on Amazon, they have the same exact pictures, with the logos photoshopped on them. That right there should of been my alarm. I'm just starting out, and I want to do this right. I'm not really happy adding a cheap looking item to my baby. I'm hoping it works fine. It should. I learned a valuable lesson here. If something is priced cheap, it's probably for an undesirable reason. In a world where it all feels overpriced, you still can't cut corners. Anyways, thank you everyone for contributing to this thread. I really like it here. You guys are cool.

Yeah it would be nice to see a test done with images and videos. But it doesn't seem like Celestron8g8 and his boy took any pictures of the differences back in 2004.

JeremyS, I'm a new guy, so I don't really have any evidence, except consumer reviews on Amazon. Go to this link Meade f/6.3 Focal Reducer and scroll down to the customer reviews and click on "see all customer images". Read all the one star and two star reviews and even the 3 star reviews. It's pretty bad. People say Meade makes quality products, yet they are currently selling an item that is defective half the time for $80 which really makes the entire company's reputation pretty questionable. Some of the bad reviews are very recent. A responsible company is supposed to make a recall and pull the item off the shelves. One of the reviews suspects Meade is selling returned items that are defective. Is it true? I am not sure. But I do know, it's not cool. $80 may not seem allot in the world of Astronomy, but it is allot. Most people don't just throw $80 out there to gamble. And when people do gamble, they know they are gambling for the chance to win something rather than to get what is being marketed. Allot of people who have been doing astronomy for decades see Meade as a trusted company. But then there is this going on. In the end I went for the $90 Astromania f/6.3. Even though the Meade is selling for $80, they charge a $7 tax, so its actually $87. Yet the other companies (Celestron, AlStar, Astromania) selling the same product aren't charging a tax. Another peculiar business practice from Meade that makes you go hmmmm. Keep in mind, I am a new guy, who just looked at his very first Meade product online and saw a significant amount of bad reviews as my first impression. What are the odds?

The Alstar and the Astromania f/6.3 are both going for $90. They both appear to be exactly the same, except for the logo. I guess this what MarsG76 was talking about the same manufactures. No one is complaining about low quality production in the reviews either. I might go with one of these unless Celestron has the better quality product. Not sure yet. They have the same sample pictures on their amazon pages too .... just with different logos. Hmmmmmm .....

Reading those reviews on Amazon for the Meade f/6.3 is pushing me to get the Celestron. Some people had no issues but a few did and posted pictures of glue still being on the lense and it falling apart right out of the box, etc. I find that suprising being that Meade is a trusted company according to Telescope Talk. I'll probably put in the extra dollars for the Celestron. Really sad. Had I heard that they made a recall and handled the problem, I would go with Meade, but I dont have $80 to gamble. If this sport was more affordable, I honestly believe we wouldnt be suffering from a rise of flat Earthers. Here's to getting a second job. Cheers.

The Celestron f/63 is selling for $113 and the Meade f/6.3 is selling for $80. Anyone know if there is any difference in quality between the two? I'm looking for a focal reducer for my Nexstar 8SE, but I dont want to waste extra money if I don't need to. I assume they both fit the 8SE.

Thanks everyone! I love how when I asked for more detail in the information you all came through, even with example images, like a professor I never had. Im new here, and this thread shows how extremeley helpful this community is. My 8SE should be coming in the mail any day now. I won't waste my time with a 5x barlow, though I might check out the 3x and or test the cheap ones to get the learning experience. In the mean time there is plenty of information on this thread alone for someone at my level to review a few times over. Thanks. Oh and dont pay any mind that I live in NYC. We may have the most diverse selection of food in the world and some of the coolest scientists ever, but we don't have the stars. So Ive been using "Dark Sky Map" for android to find the perfect place in my region. Its about a 3 hour ride to the West Catskills. Something Im willing to do about once a week, given clear skies.

Thanks for all the insight. The astrophotography isnt really that deep for me. Im just going to be messing around with a 12mp smartphone with FV-5 mounted on an adapter. Im more interested in stargazing while Im camping right now. According to the FOV Calculator there is a visual difference between the 2x and the 5x Barlow lens. According to those pictures, that's a pretty significant significance if your checking out some planets. Im aware that it won't be that clear. But that's not really what Im trying to figure out. I just want to know, is there a noticeable visual difference between the $16 5x Barlow and the $150 5x Barlow? Im sure one is better made with better quality material. But what does that really mean?

So apparently knowing that you want a 5x 1.25 Barlow lens isn't enough. Can anyone constructively explain to an inexperienced amateur what is the difference between a $16 5x 1.25 Barlow lens and a $150 5x 1.25 Barlow lens, so I know what to look for when shopping for a 5x Barlow lens for my Nexstar 8SE? $15 SVBONY Barlow Lens 5x 1.25" Fully Metal Multi Coated Optical Glass with T adapter M42 0.75 Thread for 1.25" 31.7mm Telescopes Eyepiece $150 Orion 8715 High-Power 1.25-Inch 5x 4-Element Barlow Lens