While it’s not on your list, I recommend the Celestron 130SLT. It’s a complete amateur telescope package with computerized tracking for celestial objects. You can often find it at a reasonable price, close to your initial budget.
Thank you for the comment. I’ve seen that telescope, but it’s not cheap here in Canada—the lowest price I found was $829 CAD. Unfortunately, these are my only options for now.
The first option is superior, but still overpriced. I wasn’t impressed even when it was $250.
The second one has no redeeming qualities.
If your budget is around $300, consider a Sky-Watcher Heritage 130 or 150 instead. Either would be significantly better than the two you’re considering.
I’m getting the first one from Marketplace, but it’s not the XLT version—it’s the Celestron 102 AZ. I still think it would be worth it. Unfortunately, my budget is under $300 since I’m an international student, and I really want to start somewhere in astronomy. I believe the Celestron 102 AZ will be a good telescope for starting out. Let me know what you think.
The mount is actually more important than the telescope itself. The XLT AZ mount is sturdy enough to properly support the 102mm telescope tube, which is quite heavy. In contrast, the Celestron 102 AZ uses what is essentially a camera tripod head with no slow-motion control.
While both telescopes can theoretically reach 200x magnification, the XLT AZ version can handle around 120x to 150x effectively. The Celestron 102 AZ, however, likely struggles beyond 50x without compromising the viewing experience.
If the Celestron 102 AZ is priced under $100 on the marketplace, it might be acceptable for low-power use. You can save up for a better mount later to fully utilize the telescope’s potential.
For better telescope mounts, I recommend researching reputable astronomy equipment retailers. Consider upgrading to a more stable mount if you notice wobbling during use.
You can often find the Omni 102 AZ on the used market. In my area, there are usually two or three available for around $100 USD. It’s an okay scope—not great, but not terrible.
I should note that the ad’s title doesn’t match the description. It says Omni XLT 102, but the photo shows the regular Omni 102, not the XLT version.
If you can get the Omni 102 for $200 CAD, that’s not a bad deal. It’s significantly better than the Astromaster 114, which is a poor-quality telescope.
Between the two, the Omni XLT is the better option since the Astromaster has poor optics. However, I’d recommend considering a 130 or 150 mm tabletop Dobsonian instead.
If you look at the aperture, it’s 102mm, and with a focal length of 1000mm, the resulting f-ratio is 9.8. This is excellent for contrast on the Moon and planets. For deep-sky objects, I’d recommend the other one due to its faster f-stop and wider field, but the Omni is still a better choice overall.
While it’s not on your list, I recommend the Celestron 130SLT. It’s a complete amateur telescope package with computerized tracking for celestial objects. You can often find it at a reasonable price, close to your initial budget.
Thank you for the comment. I’ve seen that telescope, but it’s not cheap here in Canada—the lowest price I found was $829 CAD. Unfortunately, these are my only options for now.
The first option is superior, but still overpriced. I wasn’t impressed even when it was $250.
The second one has no redeeming qualities.
If your budget is around $300, consider a Sky-Watcher Heritage 130 or 150 instead. Either would be significantly better than the two you’re considering.
I’m getting the first one from Marketplace, but it’s not the XLT version—it’s the Celestron 102 AZ. I still think it would be worth it. Unfortunately, my budget is under $300 since I’m an international student, and I really want to start somewhere in astronomy. I believe the Celestron 102 AZ will be a good telescope for starting out. Let me know what you think.
The mount is actually more important than the telescope itself. The XLT AZ mount is sturdy enough to properly support the 102mm telescope tube, which is quite heavy. In contrast, the Celestron 102 AZ uses what is essentially a camera tripod head with no slow-motion control.
While both telescopes can theoretically reach 200x magnification, the XLT AZ version can handle around 120x to 150x effectively. The Celestron 102 AZ, however, likely struggles beyond 50x without compromising the viewing experience.
If the Celestron 102 AZ is priced under $100 on the marketplace, it might be acceptable for low-power use. You can save up for a better mount later to fully utilize the telescope’s potential.
For better telescope mounts, I recommend researching reputable astronomy equipment retailers. Consider upgrading to a more stable mount if you notice wobbling during use.
You might also consider the f/9.8 version of the XLT, which I found available at High Point Scientific.
That would exceed my budget.
You can often find the Omni 102 AZ on the used market. In my area, there are usually two or three available for around $100 USD. It’s an okay scope—not great, but not terrible.
I should note that the ad’s title doesn’t match the description. It says Omni XLT 102, but the photo shows the regular Omni 102, not the XLT version.
What is your budget in Canadian dollars?
For around $200, you could consider the following options.
If you can get the Omni 102 for $200 CAD, that’s not a bad deal. It’s significantly better than the Astromaster 114, which is a poor-quality telescope.
I own the Omni 120 XLT. It’s a large scope with an excellent equatorial mount, and I’ve had a great experience using it.
I’m not sure why, but many people advise against getting an EQ mount as a beginner.
Between the two, the Omni XLT is the better option since the Astromaster has poor optics. However, I’d recommend considering a 130 or 150 mm tabletop Dobsonian instead.
I’m also considering the Omni since I can get it for less.
If you look at the aperture, it’s 102mm, and with a focal length of 1000mm, the resulting f-ratio is 9.8. This is excellent for contrast on the Moon and planets. For deep-sky objects, I’d recommend the other one due to its faster f-stop and wider field, but the Omni is still a better choice overall.