Meade Polaris 130EQ Vs Celestron Astromaster 130EQ Vs Meade Polaris 127EQ

[Astronomy is kewl]

Hello All,

 

I recently upgraded from a department store 50mm refractor and got the Celestron Powerseeker 127Eq, but after researching a bit more, I have found out that there are problems in the design of this reflector (Barlow lens built-in). I am currently comparing the Meade Polaris 130EQ, Celestron Astromaster 130EQ and Meade Polaris 127EQ. I just need to know any important details about all 3 of them and know which is the best choice (mount, its setting circles, optics, EPs, etc). I want to know if there are any design problems that come with it (like the C P 127EQ). I would be also be glad to know about how well these telescopes can track celestial objects and if their setting circles are accurate. I know these are a wholesome amount of question, but this will be my first "real" telescope and I hope on using it for the next couple of years,

 

Thanks a lot!!

[Knighty2112]

Can't vouch for the Meade telescopes, but the Celestron Astromaster telescope would not be much better than the Powerseeker I'm afraid. The mount is still pretty wobbly, and there is no real gain in optical quality or light gathering from the 127mm primary mirror to the 130mm mirror in the Astromaster. I bought one just over a year ago, and never use the scope at all now, although I do occasionally use the mount with another scope until I can afford a more stable  mount to use. 

[Astronomy is kewl]

I understand that, but just need to know a few more details like if the design is better in these 3 other telescopes. Some one else who owns the meade(s). Thanks Knighty2112

 

[Astronomy is kewl]

Here are the links for the telescopes I am looking for review(s) for, 

http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/meade-meade-polaris-130mm-reflecting-telescope-polaris-130/10404911.aspx?path=1f728adfcccd24fb6baa5b80fb200f86en02

http://www.bestbuy.ca/en-CA/product/celestron-celestron-astromaster-130eq-md-telescope-31051/10382472.aspx?path=4264beb18051b92a95847f9e5beaa8e8en02

^also is the motor drive accurate on the Celestron Astromaster as shown in the link^ Also could I do astrophotography with the MD (about 30 or more seconds?) Thanks

[Cornelius Varley]

Both the Celestron Powerseeker 127 and Meade Polaris 127 are Bird-Jones telescopes (built in corrector lens) . 

[Astronomy is kewl]

Thanks, does any one know about the Astromaster 130EQ MD and Meade Polaris 130EQ?

 

[Dave In Vermont]

I am not personally aware if the Astromaster or Meade Polaris are also Bird-Jones telescopes. I would suggest asking the dealer you are thinking of buying from to research this for you. If the dealer hesitates to do so - find another dealer. A good seller of telescopes is one that takes good care of their customers - both before the sale and after. For reasons to avaoid a Bird-Jones, use the search-engine for these forums.

It would help if you told us what you plan to use the telescope for. Then we could help to find you a very good telescope for your purposes - one's which we are familiar with. And your personal location, so we might give a few good dealers to work with.

Oh - here's a pdf. manual for the Meade Polaris -

polaris_series_manual.pdf

We're here to help -

Dave

[Ricochet]

The 130's are not Jones-Bird but as stated above don't really offer that much over the Powerseeker. Did you return the Powerseeker when you found out about the design? If you didn't I don't see there is much point in spending another few hundred dollars on another scope that might only be marginally better. If you've still got the Powerseeker then I suggest that for now you just continue to use that to learn what your interests are and until you can afford to upgrade to a significantly better scope.

If you have returned it and now need a replacement how serious are you about astrophotography? You might be able to get some afocal shots of bright objects like the moon and planets by holding a camera up to the eyepiece but I doubt either the mounts or motors on these scopes are up to the task of anything requiring long exposures. If you really want to get into astrophotography you'll need a much bigger budget than these options suggest you have. 

If on the other hand you're actually mostly interested in making visual observations then perhaps a 6" Dobsonian would suit you better, giving you a bit more light gathering and resolving power and also a more stable base than the cheap tripods can give you. Canadian Telescopes (I assume that is where you are from the links provided) offer the Orion SkyQuest XT6 for $415, if you can stretch your budget that far.

[Astronomy is kewl]

Ok, thanks a lot guys, and I am looking for other telescopes.